User talk:WikiEditor2004: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:17, 31 August 2006

Old talks

Post new comments or questions here

Hi PANONIAN. I had no bad intention when deleting your articles about Svans, Mingrelians and Adjarians. They cannot be classified as separate ethnic groups, because they share the same ethnic and national identity as other Georgians despite Mingrelians and Svans speaking also their own languages, and part of Adjarians being Muslim. Current definitions seem acceptable to me, but I'm afraid these articles essentially duplicate info in the corresponding articles on regions. Thanks, --Kober 04:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

South slavic languages

I noticed you reverted my linguistic map becasue it didn't include all five "serbo-croatian" languages. Now let me ask you, what are the other two? Bosnian, croatian and serbian are the only three official languages as I recall. But to call them "serbo-croatian languages" is really stupid, wrong and kind of laughable - considering that Bosnian language is older than both serbian and croatian. But anyhow what are the other two? Finally I couldn't help to see that you support the aim of the palestines at the same time as you support the aim of serbs in bosnia, funny how you support justice and goodness (palestines) on one side when you support eavil and injustice (serb politics in bosnia) on the other. At least that's my opinion Bosoni

Some Help Needed

Hi Pannonian. I see you natively speak Serbian and I'm wondering if you could do a word by word translation of the Uros Predic article from the Serbian Wikipedia into English. Here's the linke sr:Урош Предић. It doesn't have to be perfect English - just a rought translation I can use to organize into an article. I'll handle the grammar and spelling. :D Thank you so much. Antidote 19:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sockpuppet??????????

HOW DARE U ACCUSE ME OF THAT? WHERE AND WHO?? POLITIS THE MILJAKINATOR 00:37, 18 August 2006 (UTC)??[reply]

00:22, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

What proof

What hard core evidence.

And thats some Serb school book. Not wat others believe THE MILJAKINATOR 00:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Request

Hey PANONIAN,

In the Rusyns article, the link for Rusyns in Serbia in the infobox leads to Ethnic groups of Vojvodina#Rusyns. The article itself appears to be unreferenced, are all of the stats from the 2002 Census? If so, that should be cited in the Rusyns article instead of the Wikipedia article per WP:ASR. —Khoikhoi 20:19, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's great. —Khoikhoi 20:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I noticed. :p I'll delete it just because I'm just reinforcing the rule that permabanned users can't edit. —Khoikhoi 20:51, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting! :) According to the Atlas and Gazetteer of Historic Hungary 1914 by Talma Kiadó, Slovak is "Szlovák" in Hungarian. I guess "Tót" is derogatory today? —Khoikhoi 21:09, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Do you know anything about Slovakization? I recently created the article but it got nominated for deletion. It used to have information in the "Hungarians" section, but Juro deleted it. :( —Khoikhoi 21:14, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. As for the various peoples of the world, I checked that whole list, and unfortunately couldn't find any redirects. Perhaps I'll create one of the pages someday, but I have other stuff to do at the moment. I love the idea of the list, however. Sorry I couldn't help. :( —Khoikhoi 21:33, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, good luck then! —Khoikhoi 21:39, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gone Quiet

Gone quiet havent you????

THE MILJAKINATOR 04:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disregard that comment, just debate properly and dont accuse me of sockpuppetry. I still have no idea who is the sockpuppet u accused me of the first time.

THE MILJAKINATOR 07:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Veeeery sneaky

If you want to change the name of the article Croatian War of Independence, be bold, propose it the others, don't change links in the backgrouns like coward!

--Ante Perkovic 00:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, you could be right or wrong!

If you are right, then the article name will be changed and then you can chenge the links.

If you are wrong, the article will stay the same and you have no reason to change the links.

I just can see logic in changing the links while article stays the same. And if something is going to change, it has to start with the article name. You behave exactly like person who knows he's wrong and without arguments!

--Ante Perkovic 00:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! This is vandalism. You are not a newbie here!!! You know how wrong and against the rules is this what you have just done! There is a procedure for this! man, what's wrong with you? Stop behaving like a spoiled kid! If you are wrong, just learn to live with that!

--Ante Perkovic 00:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Srbi na Wiki

Neznam di su Hrvati na Wikipedia. Sigurno nije ih briga..a bolje jer mene pece kad neko mota laz na Wiki. Kako ja vidim Wiki je pustio mnogo Srba da minjaju stranice kako oni oce. Nazalost mnogo sto oni minjaju nije istina nego samo njihovo misljenje. Sto je jos gore neki Englez ili bilo koji stranac ce procitat i milsit da je Wikipedia istina. Gluposti da je Boscovich Srb itd.......... Kako mogu spavat kad tako lazu??????????? JOJ Jagoda 1 04:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Da ti kazem pravo ja nemam nista protiv Srba..za mene su vecina dorbi ljudi...samo mrzim kad neko gura svoju politiki kao neki purger na Wikipedia. Vidio sam svasta naprimjer, Dalmatinci su Srbi, Dubrovcani su Srbi, Andric je Srb, Boka njie imala Hrvate nego to su Srpski katolici, Bosanci su Srpski Mulsimani a ne Hrvatski muslimani itd....sve je njihova verzija ..sve sto onaj Vuk je mislio i govorio Srbima neki vjeruju ...da smo svi Srbi, pa nemoj... Ja znam da smo misani jedni i drugi i da smo Slaveni po imenima...ali glupo je samo gurat da su Hrvati Srbi..Pa moguce je da su Srbi svi Hrvati isto tako. Mrzim ovaj topic ali kad citas laz tesko se ne uzbunit malo. Boje meni ne citat ovaj Wiki.

-- Sto spavas Javi se ... Jagoda 1 04:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ti bi trebao napista na svoj user page"Interested in Croatian people and history" jer vidim da se i tamo nalzis pod discussion...Nista protiv ..ali to je istina. Vidim da te intersira Hrvatska isto kao i Srbija. Nista protiv. Drago mi je cuti jer povezana je nasa povjest sa vason ali nazalost nemozemo se nikako slagati ko od nas govori istinu a ko laze. To je politika i crkva kriva i oni kao Vuk.

Opet nista protiv..dragi moj susjed sa Balkana Jagoda 1 05:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

I find edits like this one to be disruption of Wikipedia. Therefore I have posted a note on on WP:ANI and hereby I warn you that I will block you for 24 hours if you do something like that again. --Dijxtra 11:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Austria Hungary

My solution is that the category:Maps of Austria-Hungary will appear as a sub-category of [[:Category::Maps of the history of Austria]] etc. I think that will solve your problem. Electionworld Talk? 21:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK Electionworld Talk? 21:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The second was just to bring it in line with the Commons Wikimedia Electionworld Talk? 21:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am busy doing that, but that costs some time. Electionworld Talk? 21:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am an administrator but do not have a Internet bot. Electionworld Talk? 22:02, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know how I can run a Internet bot. Electionworld Talk? 22:06, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crişana

From what I know, it roughly corresponds to Partium. I cannot really tell to what measure myself, but I know they override each other for a portion of their respective territories (a big one? a smaller one? can't really tell, since Crişana was never defined objectively). Dahn 22:09, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Add to this that Romanian sources tend not to care enough to expalin a concept. They just refer to it :). Dahn 22:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the Partium map is stretched to cover regions that are not considered Partium-proper. I think that the change occured when Banat added an ambiguity (since no one was speaking of the Banat at the time when Partium was an actual province of Hungary, and the Hungarian meaning became reduced to a portion of it). I have little knowledge of distinctions of sovereignty under Hungarian medieval laws, and they may be the cause for the ambiguity. Dahn 22:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Izvini

Ja sam direktiro moje misljenje na samo neke Srbe na Wikipidia (manjina), ne bas samo tebe, izvini. Ja ih neznam po imenu samo vidim da na Wikipedia cesto se minja informacija na Srpsku verziju. Ja znam da si ti posten i skolovan Srbin i zato bi zamolio da ako znas te Srbe koji minjaju historiju bezeve, treba njima reci da pristanu. Na kraju sve ta misljenja su verzije and ne istine. Trebamo ostavit informaciju kako je bila prije a ne minjat jer se nekom nesvida. Molim te ko brata treba se to pristat..jer u oci drugih vani Balkana opte ce oni vidit da se Srbi i Hrvati ne slazu..za ovu glupost ispadamo budale jedni i drugi. Ima i nasih koji nisu Fair...ali kako vidim neki Srbi su vise se ugrijali da minjaju sto god mogu da zvuci na Srpsku verziju. Nije Fair. Pozdrav Javi se Jagoda 1 23:03, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old maps

Before you get surprised. In making it in accordance to the Commons at Wikimedia, I am recategorizing Ancient and Facsimile maps to Old maps. Now we have three categories, this will be one with subcategories. Electionworld Talk? 12:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Serbs: Caucasian origin?

Could you please take a look at Talk:Serbs#Caucasian origin? section? I figure you will have a clue what is going on here. - Jmabel | Talk 00:32, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this addition to Serbs article is a copy from one web site that I recently saw. However, it is only one theory about the origin of Serbs, and much of things from that edit are already mentioned in this article: Theories on the origin of Serbs. Since there are more than one theories about this, the proper place for all of them is that article, not Serbs article. PANONIAN (talk) 00:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Looks like someone has now reverted. - Jmabel | Talk 04:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Industrija

Само да кажем да фабрика намештаја "Жарко Зрењанин" више не постоји, а пивара је обуставила производњу. ИПК "Серво Михаљ" не постоји још од 1992. Alexzr88 18:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good man

upravu si....bojle se nama svima ne brinuti puno od onim Srbima koji pise i minjaju historiju na Wiki ...jer na kraju lupas glavu od zid...a to ti neki Srbi i hoce.... Te ljude nemozes zaustavit jer su toliko ugrijani protiv Hrvatske da moraju sto vise izmislit protiv nje da je unistu..zao mi je da ima takvih ljudi i jos danas. Na kraju Truth will come out ..it always does... Ja nebi nikom preporucio citat Wiki jer bilo ko moze da minja clanke i mnogo Srba jesu vec napravili ih u Srb POV. Na primjer u vezi Rudjera Boscovoicha uvjek se spominjalo da je on bio pola Hrvat i pola Talijan a sad od jedan put (zadjih 10-15 godina)neki Srbin tumaci da je Boscovich Srbin...pa glupost. Ja samo imam jedno pitanje ZASTO? Zasto treba to sad minjati? Zasto u zadnji recimo 10 godina sve i svi koji imaju link sa Croatia moraju imati link sa Srbima? Sto sa otim ocete? Sto ocete reci da su svi Hrvati po pravu Srpske krvi? Ja nerazumin. Ja bi samo rekao da ja mislim da ima nekih Srba koji su puno jelos od Hrvata pa zato idu okolo minjat informaciju i povjest. Neznam sto drugo da mislim kad vidim ovo. Zao mi jer milsim da je vrime novo i danas je 2006...kad se moze oprostit Njemcu moze se oprostit izmedu nas. Jel tako?

Jagoda 1 03:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Srijemska mitrovica

Da, Srijemska mitrovica je prema hrv. povijesnim zemljovidima (i još par knjiga koje su tiskane u razdoblju poslije raspada Jugoslavije) prikazana kao dio Drinske banovine (skupa s Županjom, Vinkovcima i Vukovarom) u razdoblju 1929 -1931, čak je i jedan geopolitičar (Mladen Klemenčić) imao par zanimljivih izlaganja na tu temu. Ova karta prikazuje stanje iz 1931 (ako bolje promotriš na karti nigdje ne piše iz koje je godine). Nažalost ništa od tih podataka nisam mogao naći na webu.

Ceha 01:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Serbia01.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Serbia01.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your work at Maps of Serbia Electionworld Talk? 14:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question ????

Tesko mi je razumit ono sto si pisao na moj talk. Ali vidim di ides sa tin comentima, pa nema problema. "Can't judge a book by its cover" tako nesto.

MOLIM ODGOVOR NA OVO

Uvezi "Theories on origin of Serbs" na wiki Nigdi ne pise da je moguce da su Hrvati i Srbi siti narod...kad gledas obo dvoje imaju price da su iz Irana, Perisa...obo dvoje imaju kontakt sa Alans Celts Avars Romans Illyrians itd..... obo dvoje su postali Slaveni i uzeli novi jezik i vjeru. dolsi su sesto-sedmo stoljece u Europe, isto vrjeme Sto ti mislis jer ako smo isti onda je glupo se pripirati sto je bio Tesla i Andric...

Interesantno je da jos postoji ta mrznja izmedu nasih kad neki "historians" otvoreno govore da su Hrvati i Srbi isti narod...

Mozda bi ti moga napravit jedan novi page za ovaj topic ...jer stvarno imamo mi puni in Common..volili ili ne..to je istina i nemoze se kriti.

Croatian and Serbian link...moglo bi to se metit na page "Theories on Serb origin" kad vec spomijes druge verzije, mogli bi i ovu.

javi se

PS Dobar je page...jako mi se svida..bilo bi dorbro kad bi Hrvati isto tako napravili jedan page od ORIGIN.

Jagoda 1 03:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Panonian???

Zasto se Srbin zove Panonian? Objasni meni molim te, ja neznam puno o tome ...kako Srbi imaju link sa Pannonia kad je Pannonia bila prije nego Srbija i Srbi u Evropi..Panonci su bili narod slicni Ilirima a ne Srbi...moguce da su misani sa tadasnjin Dalmatincima i kasnje Hrvatima pa i mozda Srbima. Neznam....mozda ti znas link za to. Izvini ali meni zvuci to ime za Srba smisno kao da ja Hrvat zoven sebe Kosovo..ista stvar. logika kaze meni da se tebi samo to ime svida pa zato si ga uzeo.

Jagoda 1 06:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration request on Kosovo

Dear Editor, since you have been involved in editing the Kosovo article in the last months, and that article has been the subject of long ongoing edit wars, your name is listed in the Request for Arbitration on this matter. You can make a statement here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Kosovo. Due to the large number of editors involved, however, I would to ask you to keep your statement concise and to the point. If you feel you have not been substantially involved in the disputes surrounding the Kosovo article, please do not remove your name from the Arbitration request, but rather make a short statement there explaining why you feel you have not been involved enough to be part it. To understand my reasons for requesting Arbitration, please read my statement on the Requests for Arbitration page. Best regards, Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 10:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 216: / Line 216: @@
 [[User:Jagoda 1|Jagoda 1]] 06:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
+== Arbitration request on Kosovo ==
+Dear Editor, since you have been involved in editing the [[Kosovo]] article in the last months, and that article has been the subject of long ongoing edit wars, your name is listed in the [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration|Request for Arbitration]] on this matter. You can make a statement here: [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Kosovo]]. Due to the large number of editors involved, however, I would to ask you to keep your statement concise and to the point. If you feel you have not been substantially involved in the disputes surrounding the [[Kosovo]] article, please do not remove your name from the Arbitration request, but rather make a short statement there explaining why you feel you have not been involved enough to be part it. To understand my reasons for requesting Arbitration, please read my statement on the Requests for Arbitration page. Best regards, [[User:Reinoutr|Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr)]] 10:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)