Olá meu caro amigo, VASCO "por aqui",

pois, eu também me "estiquei" ontem à noite, não tive "forças" para editar quando cheguei :( Belo trabalho, os meus parabéns, só corrigi o começo de CLUB CAREER (segundo o LINK#2, parece que jogou pela primeira equipa do Porto) e pus os anos de U-21 na caixa.

Continuando: é verdade grande confusão de "box", onde é que este compadre não terá jogado?! Ufff.....O tempo: ainda a semana passada a gente se queixava do calor, agora "toma lá", chuva da boa, em Lisboa e também em Beja, pelo menos!

Abraços e boa semana - -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 17:07, 1 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your patience. I would like to move toward closure. Do you have a recommendation as to what you would to like to finalize before closing? Sunray ( talk) 07:21, 4 May 2011 (UTC) reply

No problem Sunray. I´m not sure about the wishes of other participants, but on my behalve I could propose to you to present you by weekend a series of sources that we could work along with Tomasevich and others already listed, so at the end we can find balance between them. Would that be convenient? FkpCascais ( talk) 08:32, 4 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Some reliable sources would be excellent. I will contact the other participants as well. However, as you and Nuujinn have been most active in recent weeks, I thought I would contact each of you first. Sunray ( talk) 16:12, 4 May 2011 (UTC) reply

You were one of only three mediation participants who commented on what to do before closing the mediation. As there is not much energy to do further work on the mediation page, I am making a new proposal on wrapping it up here. If several participants agree on this approach, the mediation will have more force than an individual's actions. We could then move to the article talk page and continue the discussion on sources there. What do you think? Sunray ( talk) 15:00, 13 May 2011 (UTC) reply

I apologise Sunray but I was suddently involved in much work these days, so I had really very few free time, I only now menaged to respond. Yes, I think is OK, although some parts about early life and some others that have been worked by some esditors in the current article could perhaps be usefull, but we can allways bring them back, so no problem. FkpCascais ( talk) 12:45, 14 May 2011 (UTC) reply

I think one of most readable modern analyses of the situation is Stevan K.Pavlowitch, Hitler's new disorder : the Second World War in Yugoslavia, Columbia University Press, New York, 2007. A most interesting read. It's here on google books. Fainites ^barley scribs 21:56, 10 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Yeap, I passed trough Walter Roberts already (unfortunately only a minor part is open online), and I´ll start Pavlowitch definitely tonight or tomorow. FkpCascais ( talk) 22:01, 10 May 2011 (UTC) reply

I ordered Tomasevich and a few others on Amazon, Pavlowitch is there too. I actually found a copy of Pavlowitch the public library, and if there's one in Split's library, there's certainly one in Belgrade National (should you happen to be in the neighborhood). Pavlowitch is a renowned scholar, specializing in the field, and his publications are of course high-quality. As far as I'm concerned they are also a top-notch source.

The reasoon I picked Tomasevich as the "flagship source" is that Pavlowitch himself uses Tomasevich as a source in some of his work and has in general given War and Revolution in Yugoslavia very positive reviews. Indeed Tomasevich is in essence a boring detailed lis of facts directly derived from primary evidence, very little opinion or speculation included. Pavlowitch weaves the whole mess into a far more readable book.

I will make another note here, however: in past discussions you have used instances of Chetnik anti-Axis activity and presented them as an argument that somehow "negates" the collaboration. As I have said several times, this is a straw man argument. Nobody is disputing that the Chetniks did, at times, attack Axis forces, however: this has nothing to do with the question of their collaboration.

And as the sources explicity say, thanks to Draža Mihailović's very public and well documented policy of conflict evasion, these instances are (after 1941) "not to be compared" with the extent of Chetnik aid to the Axis (in the form of hunderds of thousands of men). -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 00:02, 11 May 2011 (UTC) reply

I was born in Belgrade and I have a house there, but I actually live in Cascais (3,000 km away) for more than 20 years by now. Regarding the rest, I am not discussing mediation related issues outside mediaion. FkpCascais ( talk) 00:09, 11 May 2011 (UTC) reply

I was pleased to learn about Cascais - I had wondered about your user name. Sunray ( talk) 01:15, 14 May 2011 (UTC) reply

:) Well, it is consdered the nicest place in Portugal to live. Actually, most people do their best to live in Cascais-Estoril area, with sea access, beaches, golf, etc., and work in Lisbon, a 2 million capital city, which is just 20 minutes away by highway (I actually hold the dangerous stupid record of making it there in just 13 minutes - I was late to a flight). Most foreigners living and working in Lisbon area live here, just as the richest and most "interesting" Portuguese people (actors, nobility, TV people, all sorts of domestic celebrities). It´s really considered a priviledged area of the country. I live here since young, when my parents came to live here.

My username was really done in rush, without much thinking (I had some silly usernames earlier, as well). Since I intended to involve only with football stuff, as hobbie, and as way to avoid any controversial "headachy" stuff, I combined Fkp (the initials of my favourite football club: FK Partizan) with Cascais, so unfortunately there is not much mistery around it... With time I continued using it (I actually menaged not to forget my password with this one), and here we are! FkpCascais ( talk) 12:55, 14 May 2011 (UTC) reply

[1] Partizan fans at their best, I love this clip xD

A ovo je u nas bilo nedavno, cirkus neviđeni.. Partizan i Hajduk su stari prijatelji iz juge, to znaš :) -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 13:01, 14 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Yes, the Hajduk video is very nice! You choosed one very poor for Partizan, that song was about the time when they wanted to overtrough the club President. They did it, but the new guy is much worste... This video is just a goal celebration in a recent match. Basket matches are also fun in Belgrade. Hooligans are stupid, but I respect the fenomenom from the social perspective. In Serbia they actually have much political strenght, and they are far from being allways wrong (they were basically the ones that overtrough Milosevic, for exemple). But, don´t you dislike football? You know Torcida comes from a Portuguese word Torcedor, which means fan, and came to Split from Dalmatian sailors that saw football in Brazil? FkpCascais ( talk) 13:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Please guys. Seriously. Nobody serious or worth responding to is denying Mihailovic/Chetniks collaborated. That is not the argument. Please don't just start again with the old TLDR exchanges. The articles need to cover the complexities of the situation and present a full picture, from good sources and without OR. I think you will both enjoy reading Pavlowitch. Fainites ^barley scribs 12:29, 11 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Hey great work on the Sándor Nemes article. It was one of those moments again as I was just about to write something about the guy. He kept bugging me ever since I created the league-winning managers list and I just ran into the RSSSF article the day before you created the article on wiki. It seems there's a lot of text about him on the German and Hungarian wikis so if you haven't already you might want to see if something more could be added. I'll look into it myself. But there also seem to be some inconsistencies. All the Yugoslav sources say "Antal Nemeš" won four titles as manager with BSK ( 1931, 1933, 1936 and 1939 - apparently Josef Uridil was in charge in 1935 although he is credited as "E. Uridil" in Yugoslav sources). This would mean that he was at BSK little before or little after his managing spell with Hasmonea in 1931 and that Uridil was at BSK in 1935 while Nemes was at Hapoel Hatzair. It also seems that he had left Borovo in 1939 at the earliest so he couldn't have coached Borovo in 1938. There's also another thing to consider - FK Vojvodina lists a certain "Karlo Nemeš" as having coached the team in 1933 and 1939 so it is possible that some sources mixed up these two guys (and I guess it is also possible that they are one and the same). I can't find any information on Karlo. Also, I happen to have a scanned copy of the book Večiti rivali (Ljubomir Vukadinović, 1943) which talks in detail about the history of derbies between BSK and SK Jugoslavija. The book is in Cyrillic. I flipped through it looking for some mention of Nemeš but didn't see any although it's possible that I missed it. It's a bit difficult for me to read long texts in Cyrillic so if you're interested I can mail it to you, maybe you can find something interesting in it. The book was written in 1943 so if there is something on Nemes it should be relatively reliable. On the other hand Nemes was a Jew and I don't know how likely it is for a writer writing in 1943 Belgrade to talk about a Jewish manager. Also, not a single Yugoslav source mentions Nemes having played for BSK in any of these seasons.

On an unrelated note - I'm missing full names of a handful of managers who reached the Yugoslav Cup final. The only winning manager I can't find is "D. Milić" who won the 1966 cup with OFK. I found one interview where he was referred to as "Dunja Milić" but I'm suspecting it is a nickname which stands for "Duško" or something similar. Your help would be appreciated if you could track down him or any others I'm missing.

On another unrelated note :) - check out Ozren Nedoklan. He's one of the missing Hajduk managers I was planning to write an article about but User:Jolicnikola stole the stuff I prepared in my sandbox on 11 May and then created the article on 13 May with exactly the same content (only an infobox and a few links). I only realised this yesterday. Is there some policy banning users to swipe stuff from other editors' sandboxes? I've left him a message on his talk page but he does not seem to ever reply to anything and he mostly makes small edits to third and fourt level barely notable Croatian clubs. Timbouctou ( talk) 05:38, 19 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your kind words about the article, although many doubts are cruising my mind on relation to it. I see everything is clear to you :) I found the RSSSF article, and then I linked his other name to find more on him. I basically used the German wiki text and translated it, including some stuff from RSSSF and Hungarian wiki. It all came out nicely, but as you well noteced there are some inconsistences and doubts left unsolved. One thing leaves me more calm, that Antal is the Hungarian equivalent of Alexander, I beleave. Another one is that data from that period is allways somehow missmenaged by +/- years... However, you are right, I forgot about his earlier titles with BSK. Anyway, it doesn´t seem to be a problem, since he returned from New York in 1930. I didn´t knew about Josef Uridil, but that seems to flow well, with one replacing the other in meantime... Anyway, I´ll have to fix those years definitelly. Regarding his playing role, I still didn´t searched for a list that I made of foreign names that played in Yugoslav clubs pre-1945, but I am 100% I was looking for a Nemes, however the surname is not uncommun so didn´t lead me nowhere back then, so that is why I suposed Playerhistory data could be right about him having played as well, and he wasn´t that much old at all (but needs double-checking). About Bata Borovo, you´re right, seems he had 2 spells, first one in 1938-39, then another after the war. I also didn´t checked his Galatasaray or Maccabi coaching spells anywhere yet.

About the derbies book, I already read it and used it as source for some articles. I found some players there, but it focuses more on the Yugoslav NT ones. It lists many line-ups, but far from all. It rarely talks on anything beside crude play, so there is not much about foreign coaches or players. However, the fact that it was written in 1943 may help a bit for the author to skip the Jewish coach part, so it even makes sence... but you´re right, as far as I remember, there isn´t a single word about Nemes in the entire book.

About D.Milić, I´ll see if I can find something in OFKa´s websites.

About the stolen article, I am not sure about how that is treated by wiki policies, but I suspect that once we have something on pages (including our own sandboxes) it is public domain, so all we have in this situation is a better knolledge about the caracter of certain individuals... :(

I´m going to check a few things and I´ll come to you hopefully with some answers. FkpCascais ( talk) 08:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC) reply

About Milic he is stubbornly allways displayed everywhere as D.Milic grrrr... I already read a few interviews and allways mention him simly as Milic. I tried google searches with [Milic - Skoblar - Samardzic] also nothing... I need a pause and I´ll have to continue later.

About Uridil, it is everywhere said he coached BSK in 1935, so I´m starting to guess that he may coached BSK in the first half of 1935-36 season, while Nemes was in Israel, and Memes returned by winter thus taking the credits for the title in summer. Does this makes sence?

Also, seems that Uridil coached HAŠK earlier, ad that info is missing in his article. I´ll try to find the exact seasons, for now I only found this: [2] where HASK is mentioned, but without the exact year. FkpCascais ( talk) 10:06, 19 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi! First, thanks for reverting vandalism in the article. Since I couldn't find "BIOMOS" on wikipedia I'm wondering why you removed some of the birth information from the article? As Mehmeti was born in what was at the time an autonomous province of Yugoslavia I think it is relevant to point that fact out, especially since Yugoslavia has since that time been split up into many different nations. I believe that these facts belong in the infobox and in the lead, not in the "club career" section where you have put it. Thanks! -- Reckless182 ( talk) 22:43, 19 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi Reckless, OK, just don´t forget that Kosovo was not an autonomous republic of Yugoslavia, but of Serbia (within Yugoslavia, big difference), so if you want to have it correct, you should put, exemple: Podujevo, SAP Kosovo, SR Serbia, SFR Yugoslavia... FkpCascais ( talk) 22:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC) reply

My mistake, of course it was, Nevertheless I think we should put this information back in the lead and infobox. -- Reckless182 ( talk) 23:06, 19 May 2011 (UTC) reply

OK, put it as you want, cause I ended up notecing that all other club players have it done in that way. Just remember, some, mostly anglo-saxon editors have been insisting in skipping nationality complications from the lead, and to try to simplify it to just city+country, with no regions, provinces, etc. But, there is still a great number of biographies done the way you prefer (I also prefered it that way before) and a number of editors, so it is a debate to do in near future.

Here are the important links to this: specifically point 3.2 of WP:OPENPARA (this was what I meant, since it is under MOSBIO; and here was the last discussion on WikiProject Football: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Archive_53#.22of_X_descent.22. Note that I was defending the inclusion, and also note that Chris (the proponent of exclusion) is an admin. The discussion was about a kind of different stuff, but it all came up about ethnicity and mixed nationalities that is generally annoying many people, they want to simplify it to "Plays for Sweden, he a Swedish footballer, all the rest isn´t really important" I disagreed, but as you see, many are convinced that puting those countries/nationalities mentioning out, is better. I beleave we talked about this, and I also proposed to you to actively participate next time in such discussion, to see what best solution we can find out. FkpCascais ( talk) 23:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC) reply

OK, I hope you're alright with my changes. Now I remember that we talked about these issues in the Dejan Garača article, sorry for that. I didn't notice your reply until I made the most recent changes, you're free to revert my edit if you'd like. -- Reckless182 ( talk) 12:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC) reply

I wan´t even check, cause I know you are a good dedicated editor and I´ll remember in future that all Malmö players are allways checked by you, but I hope in some near future to open a discussion for finding a universal formula on wikipedia on how to treat the cases of footballers with mixed nationalities, or different birthplaces, and I´ll poke you hoping you´ll participate and defend your points of view, cause having some articles in one way, and others on another isn´t a good thing. Until then I wish you good editing and send you redards! :) FkpCascais ( talk) 19:37, 20 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Many thanks for your kind words! I do agree that a standard should be set for what should be mentioned in the lead and infobox. After my my final exams I'll have more time and I'll investigate to see if there is any way to start a discussion on setting such a standard. If you happen to stumble upon a similar discussion I'll be happy to participate when I have time. Regards -- Reckless182 ( talk) 08:38, 21 May 2011 (UTC) reply

I saw some great articles you created, realy nice job. Could you please create these articles (I would do it personaly, but I do not have the knowlage on subjects). Those are the only articles which are red i.e un-edited in two templates which are related to Serbia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Communications_media_in_Serbia&action=edit&redlink=1 http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Law_of_Serbia&action=edit&redlink=1

respect.

Mm.srb ( talk) 16:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC) reply

It allways feels good to receve nice words, thank you Mm.srb, but are you sure I am the right person for creating those articles? I mean, I really hate to dissapoint you, but I haven´t created any articles in the field of communications or law in Serbia, or any other place, at all, and I just ocasionally intervened in same related articles such as Serbian TV, propaganda during wars, or such, but it were just minor corrections, or vandalism revert... Law is someting I do and appreciate, but I have no knolledge whatsoever about the situation in Serbia, as I don´t live there for long time now, and communications media are a very interesting but wide subject. I mean, I wouldn´t know where to start. I could eventually translate some articles, or if there were related articles in sr.wiki it would be a easy starting point. However, between the Draža Mihailović mediation in which I am participant, and all historical football articles I am dedicated, I wan´t really have much time in following weeks.

I remember now, we met on the airports article you created. Great article! caught my attention right away, since airlines was something I was allways passionate however I haven´t edited anything about it on wiki. I hope you understood my edit about Kosovo back then, and as you saw, it didn´t took long for some Kosovar editor to come and demand things... :) I just tried to antecipate it...

Regarding the articles you want to create, do we have those articles in sr.wiki? FkpCascais ( talk) 19:20, 20 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Ok mate. I just did not know who to ask, and I saw you had a lot of edits. If you know someone who is knowlagable in that field, I would appreciate that you ask. Please check Serbs discussion about infobox which I started recentrly.

regards

Mm.srb ( talk) 20:20, 22 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi FkpC, yes I have no doubt in Timbouctou's wisdom and he is certainly a fine editor. It is also good that the two of you have reached agreements of such issues as you both edit passionately on soccer matters; your combined knowledge is an asset to the site. I'm more than happy to add my name to your list for simplicity and present Kingdom of for the 1918-WWII period and SFRY for the ensuing period up to 1991/92 but I take it that this will apply only to footballers. To have to deploy this term on every political figure or actor may be a difficult task. Evlekis (Евлекис) 01:40, 21 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Timbouctou and FkpCascais. I don't think it is important who headed the post-1992 Yugoslavia campaign. It's true that Yugoslavia to most people in and out of the region pertains to the vast territory from Slovenia to Macedonia, but I don't believe we should submit false information to compensate for people's general ignorance. I for example always - if discussing the Milošević country - say Federal Republic of or if talking to people in Croatia or Bosnia, "Savezna Republika". Naturally for the locals this causes no ambiguity but for persons outside of the former YU and especially in Western Europe, they just think FRY means the whole outfit. But I say again, one's ignorance is his own fault and the world is full of it. To give you both an example, you will be shocked by the number of people who believe that Yugoslavia was nothing more than a Soviet invention, created by Moscow in the aftermath of WWII as one of its sattelites and the end of Communism spelt the end for the country. I mean, these people have some knowledge, they know WWII happened and they know of the Iron Curtain and the Soviet influence; they also know YU was a communist country. A former friend of mine with whom I went to school (English, no surprise) believed Tito was a Russian who had been installed by the Kremlin to administer YU and when I invited him to Montenegro in March 2009, he even asked me there "are there still Russian troops here from the old days?". Where do you begin when trying to set people straight!! I've mentioned to some "Kingdom of Yugoslavia" for the pre-WWII period and they stare blankly. "Eh? Kingdom? Are you sure? How come? Communist wasn't it?? Sorry, after WWI did you say? Eh? I'm lost!!" But just to get back onto biographies of footballers. You two edit heavily on players in and around the former territory so I cannot see anyone getting away with disturbing the status quo. I'm happy to have Kingdom of YU (not SCS) for 1918-WWII and SFRY for the time after up to the 1990s. Evlekis (Евлекис) 11:43, 21 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Haha vidim one new message i kažem mora da je FkpKaškaiš i bi u pravu. Našao sam celu kutiju raznoraznih Tempa iz kasnijih osamdesetih i ranijih devedesetih.

Tempo21 ( talk) 18:44, 22 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Haahaha živeo Tempo. Koji sastavi ti trebaju konkretno?

PS.

MNOGO ti hvala što si napravio članak o Slađanu Šćepoviću. Listam net i mislim se da li je moguće da nema ništa o njemu.

Kako da ti pošaljem poruku bez da stavim new section???

VELIKI POZ.

Tempo21 ( talk) 18:59, 22 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Secam se da je jedan broj imao sve timove za tu sezonu!

Tempo21 ( talk) 19:16, 22 May 2011 (UTC) reply

E, izvini, samo sam slučajno znao za Mileta Kosa da je bio njihov trener ( [3]), ako negde nađem detaljnije podatke, dodajem. Imam samo skeniranu monografiju "BSK 1945-55", ne sećam se odakle sam je skinuo, ako hoćeš, mogu da je zipujem, pa da ti pošaljem. Pozdrav, izvini što nisam od neke koristi.-- Vitriden ( talk) 21:42, 24 May 2011 (UTC) reply

What brought this mood on so suddenly? I have never encountered problems with Antidiskriminator and I was unaware that you may have; it is not my intention to form a block with any one user against another and besides, the examples within the userpage you cite are all fictional. There is nothing to know about anyone because none of it is real. I thought you knew this because you pointed it out a very long time ago when you spotted the Portuguese expletive. I don't know what else to say. Evlekis (Евлекис) 07:38, 25 May 2011 (UTC) reply

I touth you knew mw well to know that I was totaly joking, your user page is one of my favourite pages into entire WP. It should be named to GA status! FkpCascais ( talk) 17:27, 25 May 2011 (UTC) reply

What a relief!!

You had me going there! Not having seen your recent edits I feared you and Antidiskriminator may have had some edit wars. I even thought you assigned the fictional characters to real people. You can do something similar, make up a joke football story about a player costing half the Earth and then not delivering the goods; have a manager who has been a spy for the rival team and all that nonsense!! One season things get so bad that the manager comes out of retirement to play on the pitch and the young 16 year old takes over as caretaker...any silly thing! Just make it look like an article, if you struggle with the language, I'll go over it for you, I'm sure you'll give me permission if recent change officers notice me editing. I really didn't know whether to take you seriously!!! :) Evlekis (Евлекис) 18:45, 25 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks a lot! It caused an outrage an first when one user took offence of the expletives; I'm still here though! :) Evlekis (Евлекис) 20:23, 25 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Well if you're interested, there is this actual parody website that allows all users to be stupid. It is more or less impossible to vandalise but I think it's just too much. One's user page is his own on here and I prefer to appeal to the genuine user. See what you think of this site. Evlekis (Евлекис) 20:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Cool, I didn´t knew about it... it´s an entire new world! Thanks! FkpCascais ( talk) 21:07, 25 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello, Fkp! :) Can you help with Belgrade Zone League i just created? Clubs presented there are from 1 Belgrade League, and i dont quite know entire Serbian football league system, but i want you to help me, and create those few remaining lists. As you may see in the Sfls article, we dont have 4 level articles, but i need those soo much! Belgarde leage have 2 or 3 levels also, but you must know that far better then me... :) Can you help? -- WhiteWriter ^speaks 21:46, 26 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Woow, bravo! It looks very cool, i didnt know that it was you! :) But how may be other? :) P.S. I fixed my, how i can say, well, favorite one! :) :) :) -- WhiteWriter ^speaks 22:44, 26 May 2011 (UTC) reply

P.P.S. I am sorry, but i must! -- WhiteWriter ^speaks 22:47, 26 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Whenever, don't worry! I am going to sleep! :) All best! .. WhiteWriter ^speaks 23:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC) reply

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For fantastic and overwhelming contribution regarding football! Keep up the good work! WhiteWriter speaks 22:48, 26 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Hey man, it was not necessary, but feels good, yes it does. This one is rotating and all! Cool. Many many thanks! FkpCascais ( talk) 03:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC) reply

I don't think it is wise for you to edit the Yugo article while the mediation is still ongoing. I had reverted changes to the info box because I thought that consensus in the talk page should be sought first, considering the immense negative attention this article and warring over it had received in the past. But then you reverted my revert and proceeded to edit the article. In your next edit, which you described as "removing unsourced text", you removed the sentence

• "Chetnik units attacked the Partisans in November 1941, while increasingly receiving supplies and cooperating with the Germans and Italians in this." - the statement which was later in the article text followed by this source (which you did not remove). And that very source contains the following sentence:
• "Cetnik units attacked Partisans in November 1941 and began cooperating with the Germans and Italians to prevent a communist victory."

Timbouctou ( talk) 05:56, 28 May 2011 (UTC) reply

I see it now, however I still fail to see supplies anywhere. I have sources for this "collaboration" in the early period, and is all but fair to simplify it like that. One says this, the other says how all negotiations failed because Chetniks were murdering Germans... Feel free to restore that part with more precise meaning. I don´t intend to edit the article, but the article was quite stable even after my infobox edit for many days now. FkpCascais ( talk) 06:14, 28 May 2011 (UTC) reply

However, the source seems like just an unprecise resume... I say unprecise because he says a bit afterwords that Partisans attacked Chetniks, while I think that Chetniks attacked Partisans (thus Partisans acusing them of unloyalty). That is quite a serious acusation (collaborating with Germans) and source seems questionable, for such a hard acusation... WP:REDFLAG FkpCascais ( talk) 06:20, 28 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Just one question and I have to leave, isn´t the infobox much better? The way it was before it looked like the entire united nations were fighting there... FkpCascais ( talk) 06:48, 28 May 2011 (UTC) reply

FkpCascais - you know very well the infobox is as it is after long discussion on the talkpage in January of this year. To simply unilaterally alter it now without seeking consensus on the talkpage is merely disruptive. You may or may not be right about the infobox but you know vey well that attempts to change it like this will most likely get reverted and lead to edit wars. You say you have been reading sources. Good. Please set them out on the YugoFront page. (We are still awaiting the final mediated version of the Mihailovic page.) Fainites ^barley scribs 14:36, 28 May 2011 (UTC) reply

D'you like how I fixed up the poster? :) before - after -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 21:26, 30 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Yes, looks good, however the most important thing it what is says... PS: Feel free to sign your comments on my page :) FkpCascais ( talk) 19:08, 30 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Let me clarify my thoughts on old Draža.

Nobody claims that Draža Mihailović wasn't opposed to the Axis. The man hated the Germans. Nothing he did was really "wrong", and frankly, I would have probably done the same things had I been in his shoes. He correctly asserted that the greatest threat to the Kingdom of Yugoslavia were the Partisans and not the Axis. The Axis would either lose the war eventually, or simply crush him and the Partisans after they won - and he could not influence that in any significant way. Chiang Kai-shek, just like Draža, was also actually correct in his assertions that the communists were the greater threat than the Japanese, even when they occupied half the country.

Where did he make a mistake?

• From a strategic, military standpoint - nowhere. He HAD TO try and get Axis help if he was to destroy the Partisans, which he correctly saw as the primary threat. He simply did not have the miilitary power to do so otehrwise, and even with Axis cooperation he was not able to do so. His decisions and plans were militarily sound, he just did not manage to execute them properly. Many sources state that he was a popular but rather incapable commander, facing "one of the most ingenious guerrilla leaders of all time".
• From a legal standpoint, he made a mistake when he allowed and condoned his commanders cooperating with the enemies of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. This was a good military decision, because the Partisans were the mor important problem, but a bad legal/political one. A commander of the Royal Yugoslav Army who sends a message to the enemies of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia in which he offers to "place himself at their disposal" is guilty of treason to the King during wartime, and is supposed to be arrested and shot by law. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 21:26, 30 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Kad smo već na temi "what do you think?" - kako ti se čini ova stvar, portugalac? :) [4] -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 10:51, 1 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello, FkpCascais. You have new messages at Kebeta's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mozes da otvoris ? Znam da rok pocinje 20 juna, ali je vec interesantno na trzistu(povlacenja, dogovoreni transferi...), da imamo evidenciju. Bora83ns ( talk) 11:07, 31 May 2011 (UTC) reply

tu conosci la vera storia della Iugoslavia sotto dittatura comunista! Last award is by me, ciao-- Tiblocco ( talk) 11:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Molte grazie Tiblocco! Il problema qui e complicatto, e lo piu importante e fare tutto di accordo con gle WP:POLICY. Con pazienza, laboro e attenzione la veritta vencerá. Saluti! FkpCascais ( talk) 20:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Thats not NPOV wording and you know it, Fkp. The consensus is that we do not use "dictator" and "dictatorship" on Wiki, being politically charged, non-encyclopedic terms. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 19:05, 1 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Tiblocco is not talking about edit content, but a way of approach and discussion. Please, avoid implicating when I am approached by other editors on my talk page. You are disturbing and I have already asked you once to not post comments on my talk page. Since then, you are allowed now, but don´t abuse. FkpCascais ( talk) 20:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC) reply

How am I abusing anything? Please explain so I can avoid doing so in the future?

Well I'm glad we're in agreement about such wording at least. Not even Nazi Germany or the USSR are described as "communist dictatorship!" or "fascist dictatorship!".. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 07:44, 2 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Because of your revert-warring and tendentious conduct on the Yugoslav Front article ( [5] [6] [7] [8]), and in light of your recent warning by another administrator [9], I am placing you on a general 1 reverts per 48 hours restriction on all Yugoslavia-related articles, for a period of six months. This will be logged as an arbitration enforcement sanction at WP:ARBMAC. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:24, 2 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The thread is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#What to do? Regards, Giant Snowman 21:04, 2 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Many, many thanks. It is outragious that no one notified me about it since yeasterday, and that precipitated action against me was taken in that situation, basically having only in account the words of a highly problematic editor involved in a long standing hate against me, who basically missinformed every word on that report (probably the reason why I wasn´t notified until now), and without me breaking any whatsoever rule. From what I know in the past Future Perfet in Sunrise is a good administrator, however we don´t know eachother and he seems to have been driven into a totaly manipulated and precipitated decition. I was taking much in those discussions, and I was being extremely patient and allways doing everything by WP:POLICIES, basically insisting to finish discussions first and reverting disputed edits. I also asked for admin help to Fainites much earlier, however he is on hollidays. The user complaining against me thougth that it would be easier to push me away from the article (now that the familiarised admin on the subject was abscent) and that way to push his POV edits. That user even told me that he has a "genious IQ" (see here) I mean, how silier can the situation be? I wrongly assumed much good-faith, however I really hope this situation will be rectified. Thanks again :) FkpCascais ( talk) 22:49, 2 June 2011 (UTC) reply

No problems at all; I fully agree that some of the actions here regarding you have indeed been questionable, especially the lack of notification & sudden, almost impulsive admin action. If I get some time over the weekend - quite busy in real life at the moment, sorry - I'll review the whole situation as best I can and weigh in with some help/advice. Regards, Giant Snowman 23:06, 2 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Many thanks. Best regards! FkpCascais ( talk) 23:31, 2 June 2011 (UTC) reply

What is all this about? The "whatsoever rule" you broke was WP:3RR. You received a very light sanction for persistent edit-warring [10] [11] [12] [13] (against several users) to remove a long-standing, related image from the article, in spite of clear opposition, and without any semblance of a talkpage consensus. The only justification you posted is that this image is somehow the "same" as this image and that "clearly" therefore one of those two should be removed, to me that simply makes no sense at all. This strange "list of grievances", against me, admins, and the world in general, really has no connection to the reasoning behind the sanction you received. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 23:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Would you read the WP:3RR? I did reverted, but I didn´t breaked the rule. About the rest, I will not discuss anything with you out of the discussion talk pages, or without supervision. Please don´t post more comments on this issue here. You failed to notify me about the ANI thread (a must), but you want to talk now? I hope FPS will give me a chance to explain myself (to him), and you will certainly have your chance to respond, so please don´t bother me in the meantime on my conversations with other users on my talk page, ok? Thank you. FkpCascais ( talk) 00:06, 3 June 2011 (UTC) reply

WP:3RR: "An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period."

• revert 4 02:49, 2 June 2011 (Rv, image situation is clear. About source, I don´t see where that is said. Rv to Timbouctou version.)
• revert 3 20:07, 1 June 2011 (Rv vandalism and purpose missplacing edit with intention of deniying resistance rights to Chetnik movement. This was rightfully here.)
• revert 2 20:03, 1 June 2011 (Undid revision 432008958 by DIREKTOR (talk) Choose one out! You may just adore having them posing together, but one picture is enough. Stop your insulting POV!);
• revert 1 07:04, 1 June 2011 (Undid revision 431950596 by DIREKTOR (talk) 2 eaqual pictures want stay. Choose one out!)

You were also warned. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 00:31, 3 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Look at article´s edit history and you´ll actually see that 2 reverts (at 20h) are actually one, is just that I made several edits (3 to be precise) and instead of using preview, I made 3 separate edits using Rv edit summary in two of them. I also did it that way as way to explain each, not like you making several controversial edits in one purpously so to make it harder to separate them. Now, it was 3 reverts, not 4. You are just using the excuse of 4 because I stupidely used 4 edit summaries saying Rv. If you notece, there is no other user edits in betwen two of them (those at 20h) so the second could only be a real revert if I was reverting myself (?!). Seing the edit history is clear. FkpCascais ( talk) 01:12, 3 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Editing seperately actually depicts more accurately the number of reverts than WP:gaming the system and being careful to include all edit wars in one post. In the end "which is worse" is not really significant: there is certainly no "clause" in WP:3RR that allows you to make more than three reverts so long as they are all done in succession (see 3RR exemptions). -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 02:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Hm, then you actually broke the WP:3RR rule:

• Revert 1 (1/6 5:22) "Rv non-consensus removal of relevant image"
• Revert 2 (1/6 14:52) "Rv non-consensus removal of content. The pictures you are talking about are not "equal" in any way, shape, or form"
• Revert 3 (1/6 23:43) "Adding sourced information, sources cited. No source(s) presented in contradiction" Where you don´t say it, but you actually revert a solution found by other users (Timbouctou) returning your one side concentrated "collaboration" description lead. "No sources presented in contradiction" so why are we debating this for so long in the mediation to present it fairly?
• Revert 4 (2/6 00:24) "Rv vandalism. POV no-consensus removal of long-standing, related image"
• Revert 5 and 6 (2/6 07:33) "All right, used the exact same words as the source, and added another source (using the exact same words), complete with relevant quotes.)" DOUBLE REVERT (reverting image, and reverting lead change with discussion still not finished!)

Actually, you did 5 reverts in 24 hours, 6 in 26 hours! And if I had so much bad faith as you I could also reverted your map additions untill we don´t finish the images at article discussions... So you basically revert all my attempts to edit the article, even if backed by sources or at agreement with others over images, but I don´t revert everything yours, just the issues that need to have consensus first, and I get punished. I´ll present this reverts of yours to FPS. FkpCascais ( talk) 02:14, 3 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Even if we give you a good-faith chance, and not consider your 3th revert as revert, but an edit (which is questionable because you are reverting the meantime solution found by Timbouctou a few days earlier), you were revrted by me because we haven´t finished the discussion, we must consider it a revert when you again insist on it in your last (thus double) revert, where along that, you also revert the image as well, so again, at least 4 reverts in less then 24 hours. FkpCascais ( talk) 02:22, 3 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Heh nice try. Sigh.. yes if we count all your successive reverts as one revert, and count my one revert as fifteen - I should be sanctioned and you "acquitted" with honors.. :) One revert counts as one revert, regardless of whether its done in succession or not. And one revert cannot somehow constitute twenty reverts.

• "Revert 3" is, of course, not a revert. Posted completely new, sourced text, and did not alter anyone's work.
• Same case as "Revert 3". The single edit you call "Reverts 5 and 6" does not constitute a single revert. I am not reverting anyone's work, I am adding a completely new piece of text into the article (that caters to your demands, I might add). And, of course, you do not get to proclaim that one source "counts" as two..

I did 3 reverts, and I hasten to add that all three were in restoring the consensus version of the text. You can be sure I am at all times very careful not to violate WP:3RR. Once again, though, you're talking about me for some reason. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 02:41, 3 June 2011 (UTC) reply

No, you actually made at least 4. Count them. FkpCascais ( talk) 02:47, 3 June 2011 (UTC) Sourcing it doesn´t change facts, you was actually restoring your "collaboration" lead and replacing the "meantime solution" found until we don´t finish the discussion. Changing sources or a few words doesn´t change the fact that you were replacing an accepted version while discussing. Even if we consider your 3th as edit, the last one is a revert because you was reverted and you insist again on it. Seems that it was you wanting to game the system by using another source, or changing a few words, so it want count as same edit. FkpCascais ( talk) 02:50, 3 June 2011 (UTC) reply

I just did. As I said, the last edit constitutes the addition of a completely new piece of text, and does not undo or replace anyone's work. Now please, this subject seems very childish. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 02:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Keep on gaming the system. Don´t add posts here no more, I´ll remove them. You´ll explain yourself, if when necessary, when asked to. FkpCascais ( talk) 02:59, 3 June 2011 (UTC) reply

• Guys, I would advise you both to keep the discussion in one place - WP:ANI. Regards, Giant Snowman 09:46, 3 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello, FkpCascais. You have new messages at Kebeta's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

you can open ANI case on angry guy: look here-- Tiblocco ( talk) 11:01, 7 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi there, the appropriate guideline is at WP:NAMESORT. Also, I have just discovered an e-mail from you in my inbox, apologies at never getting back to you, I am applying for jobs so my inbox is extremely overcrowded at the minute! Regards, Giant Snowman 11:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Olá amigo, VASCO "por aqui",

lembras-te disto (ver aqui http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:82.237.75.230)? Pois é, o gajo continua...Vamos mas é ver se o bloqueamos, grande imbecil!!

Abraços - -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 13:44, 15 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Onde é que ele tem editado? FkpCascais ( talk) 17:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Ultimas "coisas" dia 12, quase só futebol Sérvio mas também outros (ver aqui http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/82.237.75.230). -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 18:54, 15 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Obrigado pelo aviso Vasco. O gajo é mesmo chato e estúpido e é para reverter completamente. Se o conseguissemos bloquear era ótimo, más parece que é uma conta "shared" da Free. Ele ja foi bloqueado por isso, vamos vêr se o conseguimos fazer outra vez, porque o gajo é mesmo tótó! FkpCascais ( talk) 05:26, 16 June 2011 (UTC) reply

On the Draža_Mihailović article talk page you said: "Regarding of which, I can´t resist not showing my disapointmend about the strict scrutiny that my comments go trough..." I don't think this way of personalizing the discussion is productive. Also, I wonder if you are really considering this objectively. I can only take responsibility for what I see. I often do tell other participants to remove remarks that I consider in violation of WP:NPA, as I did here. However, frankly, I do not always read posts that I find too long. At the time you were referring to, I was not moderating. Several observations were made about TLDR. My reaction was that we needed some terms for discussion. I didn't start moderating on the talk page until June 14. Since then, I have tried to ensure that discussion is civil. There are two actions that I think would help to move toward a more constructive discussion: 1) For starters, I will refactor your post into a collapse box. 2) Would you be able to make a constructive comment about the terms? You could agree with suggestions made by Nuujinn or Direktor, or add your own suggestions. Sunray ( talk) 18:37, 15 June 2011 (UTC) reply

I will give you Sunray an answer on this as soon as I find a peacefull 5 minutes later today. I need to focus in order to explain myself in best way and I want to do it properly here. I am saying this just so you wan´t missinterpret a few edits of mine I do in meantime on other issues which are unrelated with the mediation :) Best regards, FkpCascais ( talk) 21:54, 15 June 2011 (UTC) reply

After further thought, I removed that comment your referred to, as it was a fairly blatant example of a personal attack. I have also refactored your comments on the article talk page. In the future, would you be willing to discuss such personal concerns in another forum? In a moderated discussion, that could be on a moderator's talk page. That way discussion is less likely to be disrupted (and your issue is more likely to be addressed). Thank you, in advance, for your cooperation. Sunray ( talk) 22:43, 15 June 2011 (UTC) reply

I also thank you for adressing this issues. I have some questions:

1 - After all difficulties I faced at the discussion Talk:Draža_Mihailović#An_arbitrary_break, seems we have an agreement to use the quoted text I proposed as consensus. However, since then, all my questions regarding this, or its inclusion in the draft have been left unaswered. Some attention on this is needed.

2 - I made some questions to Nuujinn regarding the draft that were also left unanswered, or more precisely, were answered with unrelated content. You already said that you don´t opose the expansion of those sections, and I will like to ask to include in the draft the sourced parts of those sections that have nothing to do with the disputed areas.

3 - Would it be possible, please, to replace the sentence about direktor that you removed from my first collapsable comment with a simple version saying: I am also concerned about the already expressed intention of direktor to add the disputed edits after the mediation ends. I beleave it want make much difference and it is not offensive to anyone, but if anyone decides to read it, at least he would know what I was refering to because the way it is left now it doesn´t make much sense.

With regard to the mediation, I allways agreed with your terms, civility and the correct use of sources. I beleave that my recent behavior at the discussion about "passive resistance" has been very much what I beleave it is suposed to be. The problem you found in my other latest comments has to do with the problem I had been facing, and I just couldn´t not protest against it. For me, it is obvious that lately it become completely impossible to participate without you, or some other form of mediation intervening, since I can have all the sources and reasons, but my inoportune requests seem to be dealt either by attacks or by ignorance. This may sound a bit hard, but it is what I am actually going trough in practice. I hope I clarified some of my concerns. Thank you very much for hearing me. FkpCascais ( talk) 04:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC) reply

With respect to your first two points: Consensus is consensus. I wouldn't worry about it. Right now the priority is to get some sort of agreement on terms of discussion. All content issues will be dealt with once we get started. If the moderator(s) forget something that has been part of a working consensus, please remind them.

Regarding your third point, here's what I suggest: Remove the existing text in the collapsible box and replace it with the text you have above. Be sure to provide a diff to the exact comment made by Direktor. Sunray ( talk) 15:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC) reply

There is no consensus on your interpretation of the source you quoted from that blog, it is out of context and even so does not say what you claim it states. How you got that idea is beyond me, tbh, since there is virutally universal opposition.

• @"I can have all the sources and reasons, but my inoportune requests seem to be dealt either by attacks or by ignorance."
  • I beg to differ. You have posted a grand total of one (1) source in this discussion in the past four to six months (and you got it from a Serbian nationalist blog which took it completely out of context and then you pushed the blog's interpretation of the source.) The most frequent sentence addressed to you is the vain request "please post your sources". In fact, none of the sources support any of your claims. Months ago now, you requested time to (quote) "gather sources" and it was granted you - none of these alleged sources have yet even been mentioned by name.
    

Throughout this discussion the only method I've seen is admin sweet-talking, which seems necessary as a substitute to sourced facts. "consensus" vs sources is the name of the game. It is because of this that, unless adherence to the sources is finally strictly enforced, this issue will not end in the forseeable future. Its time to discuss what the sources say, not what you say. This I have been repeating for months now. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 16:32, 16 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Direktor, statements such as "admin sweet-talking" are also personal remarks. I hope that in the next phase of the discussion you will cease making this sort of remark. Would you be able to do that? Sunray ( talk) 21:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Come now Sunray, wouldn't you say you're being just a tad too rigorous? I mean I certainly did not insult the man.. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 06:06, 17 June 2011 (UTC) reply

The essence of the policy is "comment on content, not the contributor." When personal comments and attacks have been the hallmark of a mediation, I don't think it too rigorous to follow the policy to the letter. Sunray ( talk) 16:48, 17 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Hm, that's a nice way of puting WP:NPA in a nutshell ("essence"?) but its not to be taken literally. I mean, what if I were to compliment Nuujin on his dilligence? Would you warn me against "commenting on the contributor"? I'm not exactly new to Wiki policy and the point I'm making is that the phrase you quote cannot really be followed "to the letter" - an arbitrary criteria simply has to be imposed one way or the other. In this case for example, I am not really "commenting on the contributor" himself, I am commenting on the contributor's mode of discussion - a subject which directly concerns how we discuss content. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 19:52, 17 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Saying that someone is "sweet-talking admins" is a (negative) comment on the contributor and falls within the scope of WP:NPA. It's the difference between saying that someone's data is incorrect and saying that that someone is a liar. Sunray is right and you might want to consider weighing your words more carefully. Timbouctou ( talk) 22:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC) reply

So one cannot point out a negative aspect of a user's methods of dicsussion? -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 22:22, 17 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Of course one can and negative aspects of your own methods of discussion have indeed been pointed out to you more than once in the past. It's the way these comments are said. Criticism which itself does not exactly constitute the desirable method of discussion is unlikely to be taken seriously and is generally more likely to be read as a comment on the remark's author, not its subject. Timbouctou ( talk) 22:49, 17 June 2011 (UTC) reply

I apologise to everyone for my abscence but I have been a bit bussy these days. I see more unecessary discussions here. @Direktor, how can you argue with people over this? How can you consider me sweet-talking admins? If anyone here has been quite hard on others, sometimes almost taking the situation with admins to the limit, I beleave it was me. What I beleave you consider sweet-talking is something different, something that comes naturally from me, and that is simply being kind, and "normal" I guess, something I simply don´t know how not to be, when I have no reasons to act otherwise. I mean, you recently said something similar on bottom of this conversation, where I simply wished "nice hollidays" to Fainites... Anyway, I beleave everyone here can be witness how I am not a "sweet-talker" and how I often don´t give up by no means until I am finally convinced, right the oposite. I honestly think I never said or did anything just to please someone, I dare you to find even one exemple where I was inconsistent of myself and did or said something to "please" someone. Direktor, I usualy say thanks when I have to, and I also excuse myself when I think appropriate, but that is how I am, and that is my education, I can´t possibly see what´s bothering you about it? If we had different educations, and if you are sometimes rude and uncivil, I can´t understand how can you complain on me for not being like you? I really hope that is the worste complain someone can have on me!

@Sunray, I am OK with any sugestions about discussion policies you have. I allways favoured and signed all your requests in the past, and my only remark goes about the fact that you never applied any punishment or penalties to the ones that break them. I would also like to point out to one very annoying situation that is a bit hard to explain, but I beleave it is a very important reason why the discussions go wrong. It has to do with propaganda and missinformation in discussions (!?). For exemple, I see Direktor has opened a thread, Talk:Draža_Mihailović#Collaboration_in_the_lead where already in his opening comment he makes a series of false statements about me. I mean, now what? Should I enter into the discussion explaining everything wrong that he (intentionally?) said? And we´ll loose 10-20 comments just on that... I´m not sure if that is covered by the policies, but direktor has done it knowing that it is not trouth, and it is pure propaganda and provocation. This enervates oponents so much, that from what I was told it has been the main reason why many good editors have simply left this discussions. It is a serios issue, and I´ll really like to adress it at highest possible level as the most obstructing way for healthy discussions. FkpCascais ( talk) 00:46, 18 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Fkp, I reverted an edit that an IP made to your userpage, it appeared to me to be vandalism. Just 'fessing up in case it wasn't a vandal. -- Nuujinn ( talk) 21:40, 17 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Yes, it was vandalism indeed. Seems that some new users don´t understand that in infoboxes we use the country of birth at time the person was born, and he seems to think that we should use the current existing countries. I beleave the case he seems to be involved in is Xherdan Shaqiri where I probably reverted him to SFR Yugoslavia, as that was the name of the country in October 1991, however he thinks that we are reverting his replacing of it by Kosova because of nationalism... Anyway, he seems to have been more involved in disputes with another user, and I´m not sure why he picked me, but who knows... Thank you Nuujinn. FkpCascais ( talk) 00:20, 18 June 2011 (UTC) reply

No problem, glad to help. -- Nuujinn ( talk) 00:22, 18 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Nuujinn, it was only now that I saw what you said to me at the discussion at M talk page. With regard to your points directed to me, the first about DIREKTOR, I beleave it has been solved since the comment is not there any more. I was a bit jumpy back then because of it, but after a minor wiki-break and with that solved it is time to move on. With regard on the "agreement" it really seems that it was a missunderstanding on my behalve. I thought that your last post about it was saying that we had to use the exact words from the source ("coincided initially") to what I agreed, and I even asked you to confirm it just next, and as you didn´t unswered me no more on that I thought everything was clear. I never intended to missinform, obviously knowing that you were present on the discussions I mentioned it, where I was really hoping to get a feedback from you on that. I had no bad intention, on the contrary, I wanted to finish it and confirm it. FkpCascais ( talk) 03:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Fkp, I am not willing to discuss anything about the M article except on the mediation or article talk page. There are some active proposals I made regarding how to continue discussions, if you would like to discuss those there, I am willing to do that. Aside from that, I'm very unlikely to do anything even there until we get guidance from Sunray. -- Nuujinn ( talk) 10:33, 18 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Oh, no Nuujinn, I didn´t intended at all to discuss that here, I was just telling you why I said that. Nevermind. Regards, FkpCascais ( talk) 17:53, 18 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Izvinjavam se stvarno zbog nekulture ali sam skroz u gužvi zbog selidbe. Što se tiče Pešikana, oduvek sam hteo da napravim članak o njemu ali nemam dovoljno informacija o njemu. On živi na pet minuta od mene i nekoliko puta sam se sreo s njim. Veoma fin čovek.

Što se Maria Ostojića tiče, on je okončao igračku karijeru i trenutno je sportski direktor FK Srpski beli orlovi. Redovan sam posetilac njihovih utakmica i takođe ga znam lično. Nekada mi dođe da ih intervjuišem zbog članaka hehe.

Što se Tempa tiče, još uvek nisam imao priliku da ih pregledam ali pregledaću ih. I mene živo interesuje koji su to stranci igrali kod nas. Zavidim ti što nađeš toliko vremena da izdvojiš Vikipediji. Ja izdvojim vreme ali često to i radim kada bih trebao biti posvećen nećem drugom npr. škola itd.

PS.

Kakav je život u Kaškaišu? Otkud tebe tamo? Verovatno te često pitaju ali eto haha moram da pitam. Jel imaš neki hotmejl gde bi mogli da lakše komuniciramo?

Veliki pozdrav!

PPS.

Još jedno pitanje. Da li te ima i na srpskoj vikipediji?

Tempo21 ( talk) 04:11, 21 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Kao sto vidis i meni se desi da me nema neko vreme (komp mi se nesto pokverio bio, a i bio sam na odmoru desetak dana), pa ti zato tek sad odgovaram. Nema problema, ne brini uopste zbog toga, znam ja po mom watchlist da te nema sa vremena na vreme pa ne moras uopste da se brines da ne pomislim da si ne kulturan ili tako nesto, nema uopste frke. Ako hoces mozes da odes na opcije u koloni levi gde ces naci "E-mail this user" pa mozemo preko mejla da budemo u kontaktu.

Uspem da izdvojim vremena jer radim preko komjutera (na srecu cesto kod kuce), pa kao pravi juzno evropljanin usput lencarim i editujem ovde gluposti, hehe.

U Kaskais sam dosao jos kao klinac krajem osamdesetih sa roditeljima koji su otvorili kliniku ovde. Pre toga sam ziveo nekoliko godina u Meksiku pa mi nije bilo tesko da naucim portugalski posto je relativno slican spanskom koji sam vec znao. Mesto je fino, to je u stvari deo Lisabona koji je isturen na moru (jer je Lisabon inace 20 km unutra, na reci). Ovde zivi vecina stranaca koji zive i rade u Lisabonu, kao i vecina domacih koji imaju malo bolje mogucnosti, pa svako ko moze izbegava da zivi u gradu i gleda da se nastani u ovom lepsem delu: Cascais, Estoril ili Sintra. Ovde su za razliku od Lisabona kuce, plaze, golf i tenis klubovi, a sve ovo je samo 20-tak minuta udaljeno od Lisabona autoputem. Ovde sam odrastao, ali kad god mogu dodjem kod nas u Beograd gde imam stan. U Portugalu inace nema puno nasih, pa sem nekoliko nasih sa kojima se druzim, ostali prijatelji su mi vecinom portugalci (ukljucujuci i devojku) i drugi stranci koji ovde zive i sa kojima sam odrastao. Posto sam kao mlad ucio u spanskoj gimnaziji druzili smo se puno sa drugim strancima iz drugih stranih skola (americka, engleska, francuska i nemacka) pa mi je zato drustvo mesano i navikao sam da budem predstavnik Srbije u mom drustvu. Ziveti u Portugalu se jedino isplati ako se zivi u mom kraju, ili eventualno na turistickom jugu ( Algarve ili na Madeiiri), ostalo nije toliko lepo. U zadnjim godinama se situacija pogorsala sa krizom (verovatno znas preko vesti), pa se povecala razlika izmedju bogatih i siromasnih, sto nije dobro... Elem, ako ova kriza nastavi (jer su im politicari isto lopovi kao kod nas), moze da se desi da se preselim u Madrid gde mi zive isto prijatelji, mada je i tamo kriza...

Sto se tice nase vikipedije, ne editujem puno tamo (da ne kazem uopste). Mozda zbog nacina kako sam odrastao, prirodnije mi je da editujem teme o nama namenjene strancima, a ne nasima, pa zato editujem englesku viki, koja je najvise medjunarodna od svih. Iskreno, od vremena od kada sam ostisao iz Srbije, mentalitet se kod nas dosta promenio (mislim, nije ni cudo imajuci u vidu sta nam se sve desilo), pa se cesto razocaravam i iznerviram kada diskutujem neke stvari sa nasima... Imamo puno pametnih ljudi koji su rasprseni po inostranstvu koji nazalost ne zele da se petljaju sa problemima kod nas i sa novokomponovanim mentalitetom koji hara kod nas, sto je steta. Eto recimo i u fudbalu pametni ljudi kao Anta ili Bora Milutinovic ne mogu da dodju jer ne odgovaraju novokomponovanim budalama koji vladaju nasim fudbalom, pa tako vidim da je ista situacija i u drugim oblastima.

U kom si ti delu Kanade?

Srdacan pozdrav Tempo! FkpCascais ( talk) 16:42, 16 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Hvala na lepim rečima, živo me interesovalo otkud nekog našeg u Portugalu. Rođen sam u Torontu i ceo život sam ovde ali znam vrlo dobro o toj promeni mentaliteta o kojem pričaš. Istina je, nažalost. Velika šteta. Čak mi je i depresivno kad mislim o tome. Ovo mi dođe kao sjajan hobi pre svega, mogu da isključim kad hoću i da izbacim kreativnu energiju hehe.

Drug i ja smo napravili članak o Blaži Pešikanu i danas vidim da je neko ispravio datum rođenja, dodako neke klubove i info! Sjajno! Zato kažem, živela Vikipedija! Mogao sam ja da ga pitam ali mi je nekako glupo jer ga ne znam sad baš toliko dobro.

Brate, ako edituješ na španskoj ili portugalskoj Vikipediji, jel bih mogao molim te da napraviš ovaj članak?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prvoslav_Vuj%C4%8Di%C4%87

i na srpskom:

http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2_%D0%92%D1%83%D1%98%D1%87%D0%B8%D1%9B

Baš bih ti bio zahvalan, da znaš! Još uvek prelistavam ove Tempo časopise. Najlepše je kad nađeš neke skandale poput toga da su Bata Đora i Džajić kumovi ili neku bombastičnu izjavu poput "Miroslav Đukić - Partizan je mali klub" ili "Saša Ćurčić - u Zvezdu da, u Partizan nikako!" hehe.

Drago mi je što se ispričasmo.

Veliki pozdrav!

Tempo21 ( talk) 19:02, 16 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Jo jebote.. neće ovo nikad završit. Trebali smo ja i ti popričat i dogovorit se kao ljudi. Sad su opet počeli. Odakle si ti izvorno, usput? -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 12:27, 23 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Kako mislis "izvorno", tipa, odakle sam? Rodjen sam u BG-u, i otac i majka su mi iz BG-a, a od strane caleta imam neke korene iz Praga, a od majcine strane iz Bosne i Crne Gore... si na to mislio? FkpCascais ( talk) 16:47, 16 July 2011 (UTC) reply

To make deals? Is he trying to bribe you to stop editing, or vice versa? ( LAz17 ( talk) 21:22, 27 June 2011 (UTC)). reply

My cp crshed ad it is on repair, but today I´m gouing on hollidays so I wan´t be around here for some 1/2 weeks. Apologies to everyone. With regard to the mediation, I beleave everyone knows what I defend and I trust you all to do a good job in the meantime. Best regards to all. FkpCascais ( talk) 16:41, 24 June 2011 (UTC) reply

The draft article has now been moved to replace the former article. Discussion is proceeding on the article talk page. Sunray ( talk) 06:18, 27 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Could you summarize real quick what has been going on with the DM stuff? By dm i mean draza mihajlovic, not death-match. ( LAz17 ( talk) 21:25, 27 June 2011 (UTC)). reply

Since Fkp's gone for a bit, I hope you don't mind if I butt in here. We took the draft which is a combination of three editors work with some polishing and just moved it into main space. See the talk page for some guidelines we agreed on for continuing discussions, and feel free to join us. -- Nuujinn ( talk) 21:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC) reply

A familiar face has returned, removing references for no reason, and he has brought a friend with him. I notice that you're still away so I'll do the honours. Argyle 4 Life ^talk 19:26, 10 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Many thanks. FkpCascais ( talk) 23:41, 14 July 2011 (UTC) reply

No problem. I noticed that Novi Pazar have been promoted through the back door, so I'm sure that he is ecstatic about re-creating poorly formatted articles should some of their current squad play in the SuperLiga. Argyle 4 Life ^talk 07:16, 16 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Yes, you have been following the recent events. The club finished 3th, and only the first 2 club were suposed to be promoted, but since the champions BASK don´t have conditions to play in top league the spot was atributed to them. The league will begin in mid August, so only then many of the players will have their first top league appereance thus making them notable. My cp had been giving me some problems and I was also on hollydays for a while so I hope I´ll progressively catch up everything that happend recently. FkpCascais ( talk) 16:13, 16 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Izvini ali kako to mislis da ovaj clanak nema kvalitet? Pozdrav drug. -- User:Nightwolf87

I saw your note on the Mihailović talk page recently. I am trying to shift the discussion away from Karchmar (it has become a sidelight and no one is producing any new arguments or sources). I've suggested we now tackle the question of collaboration here. Are you coming back? Sunray ( talk) 16:15, 19 July 2011 (UTC) reply

I really apologise for being more abscent and I hope you notece I have been having sme problems with my cp even before my hollidays, so only wen I returned recently I got him back. I can allways use my girlfriends one, but this editing of wp is smething personal of mine and I prefer to keep it that way, so I waited until I could have my privacy on my cp again. The problem is that I have been quite bussy off-wiki these weeks, and beside some minor edits unrelated to the mediation I haven´t really had the desired time to catch up everything happening there and I don´t want to make unnecesary precipitated interventions. I really can´t make predictions about how are going to be my following days and weeks, even more because I may make a short travell again next week, however I expect to be on-line on daily basys and pleae feel free to ask me for any help or clarification that I may provide. FkpCascais ( talk) 03:55, 20 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Thank you for the update. Sunray ( talk) 05:19, 20 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Thie article is not eligible for any CSD and not eligible for BLP PROD as it is referenced. Also, once a PROD is removed, you should NOT restore it; please take it to AfD instead. Regards, Giant Snowman 18:10, 19 July 2011 (UTC) reply

I assumed that you had actually checked the notability claims in the article, and knew which leagues were fully-pro or not... Giant Snowman 19:49, 19 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Sorry about the "drive-by-revert". I don't edit the Nikola Tesla article and, frankly, participating in the discussion there is about the last thing I'd want to do. (And if it involves Serbo-Croatian vs Serbian or Croatian, then ever more so.) My revert should not be construed as my support for the "Serbo-Croatian" version of the article. (I have general reservations on the use of "Serbo-Croatian" as opposed to either Serbian or Croatian, although in this particular case it may seem like a good compromise.) It's just that your rationale was based on claims that are strictly speaking not true. I've made the revert strictly based on that, without prejudice as to which version is "better". (I'm not sure myself.) Edit summary is too short to explain that. I might still drop a note on the article's talk page if I find it useful for the discussion. GregorB ( talk) 07:37, 22 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Pozdrav brate. Gledao sam utakmicu! Nisam nešto zadovoljan. Nešto ne štima. Možda se popravi ako dođe Kežman, ko zna. Skinuo sam Kizita jer nije više sa Partizanom. Ne znam još za Edua, kao što si rekao.

Da te pitam. Jel si gledao utakmicu Partizan-Braga u Portugaliji ili protiv Sportinga 2002? Ili možda utakmice reprezentacije Portugal-Srbija?

Tempo21 ( talk) 18:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Nisam znao! Zaista dojajno!

Tempo21 ( talk) 21:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Daj nemoj počinjati.. kad završimo na glavnom članku imat ćemo nekakav konsenzus pa ćemo ga moći aplicirati na druge članke. Ja ne dodajem Dražu na nikakve "liste fašista" ili što već, nemoj ga ti dodavati na liste "antifašista". -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 14:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Cetnici i Draza su bili anti-fasisti. A ti si vec dodao i napravio sve mogu "collaboration" template i to...

To je bilo debelo prije nego šta je uopšte ovo počelo. Znaš već kako ide, sve se ostavi na status quo ante bellum inače nema kraja gluparijama.

Cetnici i Draža su bili antifašisti.. tu i tamo. Šta su oni tvrdili o sebi, tj. kakva je bila propaganda, nije pretjerano bitno. A s obzirom na to da su im najbolji prijatelji u cijeloj okupiranoj Jugoslaviji bili upravo talijanski - fašisti, uvjeravam te da tu ima materijala za debatu. Ostavimo to za poslije. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 23:11, 28 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Actually this isn't quite a fair "deal" as the Ravna Gora movement (AKA Chetniks) is already in the list of fascist organisations. Odd really as I would have thought there was more to being a fascist organisation than merely being murderous, right-wing nationalists, as they are so often portrayed. Anyway - I would agree that it is probably best to leave discussion on this point until some consensus is reached on the DM and probably the Chetniks articles. Fainites ^barley scribs 14:20, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Fainites, I did not imply the Chetniks were fascists. They were not. In Yugoslavia those were the ZBOR, aka the " Ljotićevci". I'm merely saying that their status as "anti-fascists" is debateable due to the fact that their most steadfast allies in the whole conflict were, well - the Italian fascists. And we're talking best of pals.

Anyway, whatever was the original state of affairs - I'm for restoring it. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 14:33, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Yeah I can see that. You guys may not have realised that they are already here. Fainites ^barley scribs 14:40, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Wow, there actually is a "lista fašista".. :P Well Fkp, I don't think I can object to you removing the movement from that list. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 15:18, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Yes, I supose it is expecting too much from you to be fair and to remove it yourself. FkpCascais ( talk) 18:42, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Yes, and expecting you might not take everything as a "insult" would too much as well. How would that be "fair", exactly? Did I add it there? I could not possibly care less for that article and any problems you might have with its content. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 19:14, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

I just gave you the chance to show yourself as capable of edit neutraly. For instance, if I saw Partisans, or Ustase, ar whoever in some wrong list, I would remove them without a problem. That was what I meant. FkpCascais ( talk) 20:18, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

I can only think Fkp that you must have completely misunderstood the tone of this conversation. I read Direktor as making a mild joke. Fainites ^barley scribs 20:24, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Yes, but jokes aren't always taken well. Please see rule 5. -- Nuujinn ( talk) 20:27, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

No problem. He seems to have missunderstood me as well. Anyway, the edit was added by this IP at March 16th this year ( [14]). The qualit of the edit is poor, some facts are grosl mistaken, and is completely unsourced. The Chetniks were never fascist movement, so we have no issues about this I think. FkpCascais ( talk) 20:31, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Fkp, you regularly interpret my posts with far more hostility than was intended, and I've pointed this out numerous times. You treat my actions at all times with, in my opinion, extreme paranoia. The source of any strong feelings I may have with regard to this issue is certainly not any hostility towards Serbs or Draža or the Chetniks (in fact I used to date a gal from Belgrade a couple years back ;)), at this point its mostly that this has lasted so damn long its getting on my nerves. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 21:22, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Come on DIREKTOR, you don´t need to victimize yourself, I was ironic, and maybe coldly honest, but that is the least what you can expect to a person that insists to have the movement equally mentioned along Ustase at every collaboration template, infobox or article. Seems you don´t understand how insulting that is, and then you expect others to be cool with you? Chetniks did some bad things back then, and no one is deniying that neither painting them as angels, but you were deniying them troughout all the process all their "positive" aspects, and you expect everyone in the world to associate Chetniks same way many people in Croatia do, honestly, it is like expecting everyone in the world to accept Palestinian view on Israeli´s, and even Palestinians would mostly be aware that they have a biased view on the issue. Direktor, I am aware that many people from our region tend to exagerate and fight one day and drink and eat the next one, but I am not that way, and I hope ou wan´t mind if I limit myself to disagree when ou are wrong and to agree with you when you are right, in my view. Best regards. P.S. : The irony I epressed has to do with the fact that you promptly revert all changes when you feel like, but when the edit is other way around you say you "could´t care less". If you edit one subject and you have real interess, you wouldn´t act this way, because this seems more like editing with the purpose of expanding and diseminating your POV, rather then a real interess in improving the subject. FkpCascais ( talk) 21:48, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

You see what I'm talking about, Fkp? You interpreted the above as some evil plan of mine to turn people against you by "victimizing" myself. I'm not victimizing myself: I've been saying this for months. And I've been saying it because its annoying. And since its annoying I'm trying to put a stop to it. In other words, my real plan here is to keep pointing this out so that you might stop and think about the possibility that my post is perhaps not a hidden insult and/or part of some mysterious "plan" of mine you've got to figure out. I'm actually a very straightforward, even blunt, individual - in fact it is frequently evident I'm having trouble keeping my "bluntness" in check :).

As for the rest, I don't see how you were insulted. Even if the Chetniks did not collaborate (and they did en masse), how is it you yourself feel personally insulted by what you perceive as their "wrongful" placement in some infobox? I can't imagine any Wikipedia content edit has the capacity to actually "insult" me. I find that personally incomprehensible but not all that surprising. If you actually get insulted when you think people have wronged the Chetniks, how can we discuss this issue calmly?

Finally, I never denied any "positive aspects" of the Chetniks. From the very start I could not understand why you were posting their "positive aspects" in a discussion on how to cover their "negative aspects", as if they cancel each-other out or something. I dare say I know exactly where when and in what number the movement conducted anti-Axis activity. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 23:54, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Don´t wary direktor, as I said, I´ll allways point out en masse when you do something wrong just as I will point out when you do something good. You already told me recently how you have an extremely high IQ so you don´t have to warry with me then (although , speaking of, I am sure there was some mensa rule that says something like "...if you say to some 3th person that your IQ is extremely high, you automatically loose 20 points", I´ll try to find it one of these days). If our goal is to have a balanced article, from what I see we seem to be on the right direction, although I still think the article focuses much more on the, so called, negative aspects of his life, while the, so called, positive ones are much resumed, so I think you don´t have much reasons to feel unhappy. I am still not convinced of your capability of treating this polemical subject objectively, and you also lost a good chance to at least try it on the recent ocasion where you said that you "couldn´t care less". So, hey, please don´t call me a conspiracist, I even gave you a chance. Anyway, as I said, don´t warry, just please don´t come here asking me to postpone a correction in some article and leave the movement unfairly presented as fascist, oposing to that is not being a conspiracist. FkpCascais ( talk) 01:03, 30 July 2011 (UTC) reply

As a matter of fact I only lose 20 points if I mention it to someone with a low IQ. Are you at all capable of writing a post without hostile comments? -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 14:10, 30 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Enough. This is a side show. The point of Rule 5 is to prevent this kind of hostile, accusatory and futile exchange between participants which may then bleed back onto the work pages. Fainites ^barley scribs 14:15, 30 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Very well Fainites, the conversation was over anyway. -- DIREKTOR ^{( TALK)} 14:17, 30 July 2011 (UTC) reply

No - you may think it's over because you had the last word. Unfortunately - other people like to have the last word too. That's how it happens! Fainites ^barley scribs 14:30, 30 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Go here before the page gets deleted. Ludanoc talks! Argyle 4 Life ^talk 20:58, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

But, wait a sec. I can´t do much, the player really never played professionally, athough he may soon play as the club was promoted to the Serbian SuperLiga, but until he plays the page can be deleted... Oh, you meant he spoke to us for first time! Yes, a real archivement! :) FkpCascais ( talk) 21:04, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply