User talk:Critikal1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Critikal1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --PaxEquilibrium 09:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please do not

....remove parts of articles. It is considered vandalism as per WP:VAND. Cheers. --PaxEquilibrium 10:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Please do not commit personal attacks against users. Wikipedia has a zero tolerance policy.

Also, please read carefully the following: WP:NPA, WP:VAND (to understand the meaning of vandalism) and especially WP:NOT. Thank you.

The up is the reason why I reverted your edits. --PaxEquilibrium 23:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Please stop making personal attacks like you did here. It is prohibited and may result in prevention from editing.

Personal attacks and racist remarks (ethnic slurs, derogatory terms) are strictly banned. Consider this your last warning. --PaxEquilibrium 21:52, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk

As per your requests, I have given details over at Talk:House of Balšić and Talk:House of Crnojević.

Cheers! --PaxEquilibrium 12:35, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Block

You have been blocked for 24 hours constantly disregarding WP:NPA and WP:CIV. Please understand that such behaviour is not tolerated in wikipedia, and when the block expires you are invited to avoid the breaches of policy that brought you to being blocked.--Aldux 23:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Continuous personal attacks

Please do not make edits such as these. Such derogatory terms are ethnic slurs or racist remarks, and making them is strictly prohibited on Wikipedia. This is exactly why you were temporary blocked from editing the Wikipedia. In order to evade such problems, please refer to WP:NPA & WP:CIVIL. Cheers. --PaxEquilibrium 19:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Montenegrins

Would you please stop replying to ages old posts on Talk:Montenegrins? See the talk page guidelines — those are supposed for discussion on the improvement of the article, not an exchange of political opinions. WP:NOT#FORUM. And, please, sign your comments using ~~~~. And, kindly stop referring to other editors as "greater serbian nationalists" per WP:NPA. Thanks. Duja► 10:02, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Montenegrins111.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Montenegrins111.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Montenegrins. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Duja► 12:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

You've been blocked for 48 hours for violating the WP:3RR at Montenegrins. After the block expires you may return, but avoid the behaviour that has brought to your block.--Aldux 14:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

You're not behaving wisely, Critikal. I had told you expressly that you could restart editing after the block expires, and not a moment before: sockpuppetry by blocked editors is not tolerated. Thus your is brought to 96 hours. And keep this in mind: further sockpuppetry will only obtain longer blocks.--Aldux 18:51, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please not and please stop

here you have falsely accused that my edit is vandalism and that you were reverting it.

To understand what is vandalism, please see WP:VAND.

Please stop the meaningless edit war and head to the corresponding talk page and discus. --PaxEquilibrium 18:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

To understand the concept of vandalism, please see WP:VAND.

I was not attempting to downgrade anything, but was reverting to an age-old neutral version, because many of your edits are an insertion of heavy POV. Please see WP:NPOV. I ask you nicely again to go to the talk page and discuss, because most of your changes do not reflect the point of Wikipedian neutrality; I don't mind some of your sourced edits - but most are highly controversial, and your silence seems like you're "secretly" pushing them (you don't want us to think that, do you?). Also, don't expect other users to clean up your edits to keep but a few constructive and exclude loads of controversial - expect to be outright reverted in such cases. --PaxEquilibrium 19:11, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

My article is neutral, you don't see me putting on there that we montenegrins came from Crvena Hrvatska or that we're racially illyrian, you don't see me deleting the controversy topics and the list of montenegrin serbs and everything else. Its just that it is what it is, and that is an ethnic group, nothing more, nothing less, anything else is POV.

However, you're deleting Serbs from everywhere. --PaxEquilibrium 17:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

You have been blocked for violating the three-revert rule on Montenegrin cap, coming off a recent block for a period of forty-eight hours. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. -- tariqabjotu 14:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More edit-warring

I see you're back to revert-warring at articles related to Montenegro. You don't need to revert four times within a period of twenty-four hours to be considered disruptive (and blocked). Please stop. -- tariqabjotu 02:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

You have been blocked for persistent edit-warring on articles related to Montenegro for a period of forty-eight hours. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. -- tariqabjotu 11:02, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Montenegrins better than Serbs?

Could you please stop spreading this parole?

A thing written by an ethnic Montenegrin is not necessarily more important and/or correct than a thing written by a Serb.

You seem to think that Montenegrin websites cannot be wrong, but that all Serbian ones are. Please see Revisionism and Irredentism. --PaxEquilibrium 12:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Bold text==Hey==

If You want to help us with WikiProject Montenegro, and Montenegro-related articles in general, you have to cool off, realise this is not a battlefield, and search for truth rather than adapting it to your own beliefs. Trust me, if it has come to this (me having to warn you), you have crossed the line multiple times... Cheers. Sideshow Bob 14:30, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Montenegrins picture

Well, I just think that there were many more inmportant Montenegrins throughout our history who deserved to be on that picture instead of those 3 semi-anonimous men... Some of my suggestions would be Petar I Petrovic Njegos, Krsto Zrnov Popović, King Nicholas I, and one contemporary person. I might make a new one if I have time. Btw, remember to sign your comments on talk pages... Sideshow Bob 03:21, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism (again)

Critika1, please start paying attention to your own talk page when I warn you (for numerous times) what vandalism is. See WP:VAND. You are removing content based on bad faith, which means that you are conducting vandalism. Cheers. --PaxEquilibrium

[edit] License tagging for Image:Montenegrins112.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Montenegrins112.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Montenegrins111.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Montenegrins111.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 03:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Debate on the correct adjective for Kosovo

Hi! Based on your interest in the Balkans, you may be interested in the currently ongoing debate on whether we should be using Kosovo or Kosovar/Kosovan as the adjective for Kosovo. —Nightstallion 15:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lompar

Will you be adding entries for Petar Lompar and Andrija Lompar? Otherwise Lompar is an unecessary page. --NeilN 23:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I will if he won't. --Prevalis 01:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Critikal1 has retired, people. --PaxEquilibrium 19:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Language

No one denies that the Constitution of Montenegro says Montenegrin is official - however, also, political acts should not influence the Wikipedia itself. --PaxEquilibrium 09:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

That is true - this new Constitution contains an essentially fictive to express myself, language that doesn't actually exist. I have nothing against the language - and when it's formed/standardized and stabilized, I will have nothing against applying it to the Wikipedia.

I am not promoting my version - I'm just keeping NPOV by not relying on the version that is just limited to a tiny political elite that is in power in a small country. I oppose that. As for other reasons, I am using the Wikipedian standard for this matter - Moldovan is the official language of Romania for 63 years, and even is a lot more stabilized that Montenegrin - but it's not used on Wikipedia anywhere and Romanian is, rather.

Bully? Could you please show me whom exactly am I bullying? By anyone who has a different opinion than me - I see only you. You have a different opinion from everyone else. :) Might I remind you, that you went into conflict with all Montenegrin users on Wikipedia (and you yourself are Montenegrin). One Montenegrin Wikipedian, who has a different opinion from me and yet we get along - suggested banning you (User:Sideshow Bob). :))) --PaxEquilibrium 23:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

By the way...how's Illinois? :) --PaxEquilibrium 23:23, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Sako and Dado Polumenta

Finally we meet Critikal1. Yes, Šako and Dado are Montenegrins, but aren't ethnic, even if the name "Šako" is historically Montenegrin. Šako even declares himself as a Bosniak as Bijelo Polje and Bihor (even Gusinje, Plav and Rožaje are considered as cradles of Bosniakhood in Montenegro, Bihor being the true cradle of Bosniakhood) They even say that Bosniaks from Bihor are the true Bosniaks. If you would like, go ask him yourself if he declares as a Bosniak or a Montenegrin. For Dado, I'm not sure. I think he generally declares himself as a Bosniak but I'm not entirely sure. --Prevalis 19:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of List of Montenegrin hip hop musicians

I have nominated List of Montenegrin hip hop musicians, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Montenegrin hip hop musicians. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Bananaqueen (talk) 00:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)