User talk:Mike Babic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First, a welcome:

Welcome!

Hello, Mike Babic, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username 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}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

Now I must tell you reason for my revert in article Serbs of Croatia. In our writing we must always be neutral without support to any side. In article you have writen 1 misleading and 1 false fact so article has been revert. Misleading facts are words about Croatian constitution changes of 1991. This changes has happened in december 1991 but Log revolution has started on 17 August 1991. Because of time-line it is not possible to blame constitution changes for Serb revolt which has happened earlier.

False statement in article is: "In 1995, there was a close to 99% reduction in 700,000 Serbs" It is not possible to say how much this statement is false. --Rjecina (talk) 19:56, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] War in Croatia

Because you are new editor interested in War in Croatia I will write you here must important data/sources which you can find on wiki. In end of article Croatian War of Independence you are having internationally accepted sources which are speaking about number of displaced person during Operation Storm (200,000-300,000). In article Serbs of Croatia consensus has been reached that there has not been ethnic cleansing but mass-flight during Operation Storm. This consensus reached between Croatian and Serbian editors is ulmost not possible to defeat so all edits against consensus are deleted. All in all in different controversial articles we are having many neutral sources and many agreements between editors which are made to stop nationalistic edit warring.--Rjecina (talk) 23:07, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Controversial changes

When editor make changes in controversial articles he must explain on talk page reason for his changes. If this is not done he is not taken very seriously by other other users or members of Counter-Vandalism unit. SPA accounts are never taken seriously. Maybe you do not know or maybe do not care but during last months there has been agreement that Croats users will not edit Serbia related articles and Serbian users will not edit Croatian related articles. In that way we have stoped many editorial wars... With that I want to say if I do not revert your POV changes in Croatian related articles somebody else will and you will not been suported. You must explain your changes in talk page. If you make good point changes in article will be accepted !

Because in my personal thinking you are puppet of other user (your editorial style) I must warn you that it is not allowed to use multiple accounts for editing 1 article. Users which break this rule are first blocked then banned for editing wikipedia. Wikipedia rulers clearly state that you must recieve this warning --Rjecina (talk) 19:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Why are you think that I am Croat ? You must look my user page !--Rjecina (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
I have not reverted because of 3RR rule. Editor is having right to revert article 3 time in 24 hours. If he revert fourth time he will be blocked. All in all this is new warning. If you revert any article 4 times in 24 hours you will be blocked. Rules of wikipedia are saying that you must be warned so I have done my job. --Rjecina (talk) 18:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
My welcome is warm for any editors who want to contribute on wikipedia with neutral statements and sources. My welcome is not warm for SPA accounts created for edit warring and POV pushing because this sort of edits are against wikipedia rules. I am vandal police on Croatia related articles :)--Rjecina (talk) 18:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ba)serb.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Ba)serb.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 12:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 22:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ba)serb.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ba)serb.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:55, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:THE ONLY REMAINING SERBS, MR. AND MRS. UZELAC, MADE THEMSELF CONFFINS AND DECITED TO DIE IN THEIR OWN HOME.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:THE ONLY REMAINING SERBS, MR. AND MRS. UZELAC, MADE THEMSELF CONFFINS AND DECITED TO DIE IN THEIR OWN HOME.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 01:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:NPOV

Hi! Welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed that some of your edits appear to violate the neutral point of view policy; you seem to be working to promote a specific point of view. Be cautious; the articles related to Serbia and Croatia have experienced so many people trying to use Wikipedia to promote a point of view or right some historical wrong that administrators are very quick to block people who edit in a biased way on these articles. I'd hate to see that happen to you while you're learning your way around Wikipedia. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:49, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Death threat.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Death threat.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 01:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Ne pali.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Ne pali.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. Additionally, if you continue uploading bad images, you may be blocked from uploading. STBotI (talk) 01:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Krajisnikbrkonja20040bv.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Krajisnikbrkonja20040bv.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Cuvar hristovog groba.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Cuvar hristovog groba.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. Additionally, if you continue uploading bad images, you may be blocked from uploading. STBotI (talk) 16:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Cuvari hristovog groba.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Cuvari hristovog groba.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 01:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3RR violation

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)


This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "Two editors are trying to undermine my efforts by undoing the my work. I see it as unfair since i have opened up a discussion to reason with them and explain to them that they need to cite their information. They are failing to do so. Thus i was forced to undo their work."

Decline reason: "That's never a reason to edit war. You could have also requested page protection or reported them at AN/I. — Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.


This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "I'm new I didn't know. How can i requested page protection or reported people at AN/I? Thanks"

Decline reason: "Your block is valid, and I suggest you use the time to read up on the applicable policies you seem to have run-in to regarding NPOV and 3RR. Also, if you have further questions please use {{helpme}} instead of another unblock request. You can request page protection at WP:RFPP and following the instructions. You can also make reports about incidents at WP:AN/I. -MBK004 04:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

[edit] Blocked again

It seems you have gone right back to the same edit war after coming off your block. Moreover, you used anonymous IPs for block evasion during that time, and you made very aggressive ethnic personal attacks against another contributor even while block-evading. I'm therefore blocking you again, for three days this time, and asking you to thoroughly re-think your attitude towards editing in this project.

In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If you engage in further inappropriate behaviour in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban. Thank you.

Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "Hello. I have made this account to contribute to the article that concern my heritage, Serbs of Croatia. I'm a Serb from Croatia. Although i have told a user directly that the article, Serbs of Croatia, should be less biased since i have personally seen how seriously people take the wrong information. For example, on Youtube people constantly refer to Wikipedia to racially attack Serbs from Croatia. Calling us "genocidal killers and murders of children". This is why, I have took over 8 hours last night to make a great article that was fully cited by the most reputable sources, such as the government of Croatia. Also, i did not change any information that was already on it and my additional information was minimal. I feel like my work was great. I made sure that my article had a NPOV. Thus, I'm disappointed that my contributions were undone and labeled as "vandalism". What am I doing wrong? Why are my contributions being undermined? I'm in no way looking to be disruptive and have an "edit war". My account should be unblocked since I did nothing wrong and i have no intention of being disruptive."

Decline reason: "I see that since your previous block, you have made no attempt to discuss your edits with other users involved with the article. In stead, you used the phrase ASSUME GOOD FAITH (cap.in the original) in two consecutive edits (to see how that tends to be interpreted, please see WP:AAGF). You then ask an outsider (again, no communication with the other editors of the article!) how to stop the vandals (meaning good-faith users who do edits like this - even if they're POV pushers, they aren't vandals) - in stead of talking to them. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:54, 16 March 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.


This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "Hello, when I asked another user to help me combat "Vandalism", i was referring him to tell me procedure that wikipedia has against edit wars. "Vandalism", ironically, was referring to another user who undoes my work citing vandalism, without giving any other reason. I could not reply to his claim of vandalism since I was blocked right after he cited vandalism, ironic funny. I was blocked the first time because 3RR which was automatic. Not because my information was flawed. This one user keeps undoing my work citing Vandalism without listing reasons why. I must admit it was a mix of ignorance and passion that got me banned the first time. Passion, came from the fact that the term Vlah was a racist term and a user kept putting it up saying that it "was an umbrella term for Serb", highly provocative. I have removed the sentence, and explained on the talk page to other editor, why its racist, citing my sources that confirmed my claims, and told the user that i wont undo his claim if he gets sources. But the user kept undoing the work with one of his friend (warring). Unknowingly, due to ignorance and amature status, i hit undo once too many. Now I'm sitting here. I have always been moderate, and i have always talked in the discussion page with other users. This is why I feel like i should be let back to undo his false "vandalism" claims and discuss what part of my edit constituted the label vandalism. AAGF, is a term, that I have learned about during my first block. I have used the acronym AAGF because the user kept labeling my work Vandalism without explaining on the discussion page or giving any reason. I was hoping that he would not continue his warring (undoing my work without a reason) because i used the term. Once again, the first block was automatic, not because my information was flawed. I dont see the reason for the second block since my information was just. I feel like the second block was unjust. I'm not making excuses, im giving you my word that I'm not in any way looking to be disruptive. I do expect people to believe me since I'm telling the truth. I do understand that you probably get a million of excuses a day from SPA account that want to keep warring, but please realize that I'm different. If you have looked at my contributions you will realize that."

Decline reason: "Your request is too long and does not appear, on brief review, to address Od Mishehu's point above. Please be more careful once the block expires. — Sandstein (talk) 20:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

Hello again. Blocking admin here. I've looked a bit more into the situation. I can partly understand your stance. Some parts of your edits are certainly improvements, as the previous version that the other editor was reverting to was rather tendendtious. In other parts, however, it was your edits that were introducing new tendentious material. So, what I see here is a situation where both sides are partly at fault. I've given the other person a severe warning against revert-warring and placed them under a restriction limiting their reverts for the next few months. What I'd like to see now is a serious attempt on your part to get into a constructive dialog. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:35, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


To reply, I have tried to keep a NPOV. I'm not a "nationalistic account" like the editor claims. I honestly appreciate that you took the time to understand the situation. My problem now, is that i have put a lot of effort into making the article better, Serbs of Croatia. And i feel like i might get blocked again if i implement the changes. Why does my work get "undone" by other users. What should i do? I'm only looking at ethical and "wikipedia legal" way to develop the article. Could i get unblocked, since i honestly was not starting an edit war. Please take a look at my last edit. It was not vandalism in any sense of the definition so i shouldnt be banned because of it. I do need a wikipedia mentor since I'm new. Could we exchange emails? I need a mentor to tell me how to respond to my problems because i want to make, Serbs of Croatia, the best article on wikipedia. I dont mind spending time working on it because there are few Croatian Serbs in the world and we are dispersed.

What was the vandalism on the page that i created http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Serbs_of_Croatia&oldid=198582584 that got me banned the 2nd time?

It wasn't vandalism, of course. (And Rjcina was very wrong to present it as such.) It was just revert-warring. I notice that the Serbs of Croatia article has been protected in the meantime, therefore I think I can safely unblock you for the moment. I ask you to stay away from contentious reverts (on other articles too) for the moment. My recommendation is you re-evaluate your edits again, think hard about every bit whether it really is the best you can come up with in terms of neutrality, and then for those bits you find really important, present your reasoning calmly on the talkpage once more. If you feel you are countered with irrational or unconstructive opposition, let me know. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:02, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your Recent Editing of the Kosovo Article

Hello and Good Evening,

I am posting to your talk page regarding your recent editing of the Kosovo Article:

In the "Ethnic and cultural diversity section"
Kosovo and Metohija comprises a relatively small geographical area but is nevertheless densly covered by numerous Serb Orthodox churches and monasteries. The map to the right contains the most important holy sites which either exist today or are preserved in ruins. The greatest concentration of the Orthodox Christian sites is in the western part of the Province known as Metohija - the land of Monasteries.

I have added a [citation needed] designation following your addition because you failed to cite reliable sources for this information. However, as I state in the Kosovo Talk Page, I feel that it is a good addition to the section of the article, and I wish to see it stay. So please cite sources for this paragraph, so I don't have delete your addition in a couple of days. Thanks. And thank you very much for positively contributing to the Kosovo article. Consider yourself encouraged to make more contributions, just be sure to cite them! Beam 01:10, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the kind words Beamathan. I'm in the middle of studying for risk managment exams so im short on time. I will add the citation as soon as possible.

Mike Babic (talk) 06:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Last warning

Again I am giving you last warning. You are not allowed to use multiple accounts in editing 1 article !!!You have done this again on 20 April !--Rjecina (talk) 08:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Listen buddy. Stop your racist based attacks on me and other Serbian editors. I'm 100% sure that i can edit with my IP or my account "Mike Babich" since they are on the same computer and the same IP. I forgot to log in that one time. That is why it said my IP. Your editorials on Serbs of Croatia are questionable at best. I will seek to have you banned from some articles since I find a large portion of your information questionable.

Mike Babic (talk) 14:02, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your question

Hi Mike!

The answer to your question is here. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Serbs/Croatia

Yes, indeed an unfortunate outcome. But Tuđman really couldn't have engineered it openly. Whether he did it covertly or not is unknown, but it is certain that most of the fears that caused the Serb's departure were unfounded. If Krajina Serbs had stayed put, Tuđman could not have forced them out. That would have been the best way to "defeat" Tuđman.
I dare say he was hoping that the Serbs would leave out of mostly unfounded fear, since he new that he could not perform ethnic cleansing and remain in power. Americans would simply use sanctions, he would lose popular support, and an American-funded political opposition would take over (that's what happened to a lot of leaders, for example: Milošević). In the event Tuđman got what he wanted. The Americans also wanted the Krajina Serbs to stay, but since only limited violence took place, they were mostly content. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 00:52, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Valid points. Being in Krajina during the Storm I can tell you that a lot of people left before the storm but a lot more stayed. Also, the morning of the Storm was normal. Normal in a sense that the warning sirens went off. Not normal in the sense that planes where flying overhead and that the first contact with danger came to Knin. By contact I personally mean, that the first artillery shell fell on my street and broke all the windows in the basement. Trust me that was what made the Serbs leave. Because we all would have stayed if there was not shelling since we seemed to be immune to the warning sirens. The reason my family left was because a young guy came down to the basement and said Croatian army is on the "Red Hill". Meaning tanks were 5KM of our house. Then we all go into the car and got the hell out of Knin. Also, I would like to point out that we had no idea that Krajina was about to fall on the morning. I guess it was denial. On a different topic, I'm 100% willing to accept all facts about what happened. Please help me develop the article into a NPOV. I'm haveing problems with people labeling my work as nationalistic, etc.
Mike Babic (talk) 11:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand, a traumatic experience no doubt. Shells also fell on Split a few years earlier, windows broke, people ran to shelters. I assure you that not all Croats are glad you guys left, I personally feel we have been robbed of a part of Croatia (as well as the last honest police officers this country will probably ever see ;). My point is that your exodus was a tragedy, and that the HDZ probably wanted it, but also that there was no real ethnic cleansing in Operation Storm, that shelling in itself is not ethnic cleansing and that the US could not have allowed Tuđman to forcibly remove anyone.
Also, you cannot deny that the Krajina propaganda played its part. It is understandable that people at war will try to depict their enemies as monsters, this time, however, this had a horrible side effect: irrational terror. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 22:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Out of respect for the moderate Croatians I will not work to brand the exodus of Serbs in the article as ethnic cleaning. I think that there should be a statement of a population shift to a Croatian majority in the Krajina region.
I just want to point out that i don't mind the Croatian side at all in the article. It doesn't trouble me one bit.
Mike Babic (talk) 00:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Mutual nationalist hatred was the worst plague of both our people's during recent history. Literally millions of Serbs and Croats died at the hands of each other over what amounts to little more than minor religious differences, one of the most tragic stories to be found, especially since there aren't that many millions of us to go around. It is disgusting to see two people's so throughly similar that foreigners can't tell them apart, slaughtering each other with sickening delight. The worst part is that this hatred does not seem to be dying down... --DIREKTOR (TALK) 00:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully the hatred is dieing down. I would like to see Serbs and Croatians doing business together to grow the overall standard of living (but Serbia and Croatia should never be a same country). It is crazy what happened in the alst 80 years in that area. If you look around the world, countries and nations are getting stronger, while we can't even agree on the history. We cant even move on. Truly, we are in danger of dissapearing. Especially, Croatia since its such a nice looking country (oceans, lakes, rivers, etc). I can see the Chinese saying we want to live here and there are 1.3 billion of us.

Mike Babic (talk) 14:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you'd like to see the stuff this guy's been posting here: [1] just so you can see the difference between two "types" of Croats. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 20:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

That was interesting to read. The guy seems hardcore. He does "interviews" and conducts "DNA analysis" on people according to his words.

Mike Babic (talk) 23:09, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

He's moderate compared to others I've had the (dis)pleasure of reverting. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 23:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your question

Hi Mike!

The reply to your question is here.

Peace! SWik78 (talk • contribs) 13:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright problems

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Image:Manastiri u Kosovu i Metohiji.jpg, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.kosovo.net/manastiri.jpg. As a copyright violation, Image:Manastiri u Kosovu i Metohiji.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Image:Manastiri u Kosovu i Metohiji.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

  • If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Image:Manastiri u Kosovu i Metohiji.jpg and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
  • If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Image:Manastiri u Kosovu i Metohiji.jpg with a link to where we can find that note.
  • If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Image:Manastiri u Kosovu i Metohiji.jpg.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you. bogdan (talk) 15:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Crs199501l.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Crs199501l.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. bogdan (talk) 15:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Heritagelist.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Heritagelist.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Polly (Parrot) 22:54, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Serbs of Croatia timeline

In my thinking it will be best that you start writing this timeline... I do not want to be attacked if I start to write this timeline during summer because article Serbs of Croatia is having many problems. I do not know if you have noticed that article is having 68 lines which are speaking about time period 9 century - 1990, timeline 1990-95 is having 69 lines and 38 lines 1995-2007. If timeline is moved article will become more or less normal because now is not normal (68 lines are speaking about 1100 years of Serbs history and 107 lines are speaking about 17 years !!!) --Rjecina (talk) 09:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes I agree, the timeline should be moved. I'm not sure how to start a new article, could you explain to me or direct me on how I could find this information out?Mike Babic (talk) 15:40, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
To make a new article, first check to make sure there isn't an existing article even if by a different name. If there isn't, than you simply goto http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewArticle1 where "NewArticle1" is the name of your new article. If there isn't an article there, you can add it.


I'd recommend reading those before you make your new article, I know they helped me out. Good luck Mike. Beam 03:11, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

To create article you need only to click on Serbs of Croatia timeline and start writing. If you want I can create table similar to "my" timeline ?--Rjecina (talk) 15:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kosovo Intrio

Hello Mike. Your edit here has been reverted by me. The reason I reverted it is because we have discussed the intro previously and decided that there won't be a mention of which countries support or oppose the DOI in the intro. The consensus was that we don't want to clutter it up needlessly. I also wanted to apologize for saying "stay away". I was just a little frustrated because others have had to revert your repeated additions to the intro as well as I have. If you really want to try to have that stuff in the intro, I reccomend starting a new talk page section. Because, as it stands, the existing consensus is against it. That isn't to say that a new consensus can't be reached! Good luck, and again by "stay away", I didn't mean any offense, and if it was taken like that, my bad. Beam 03:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Image you added to the Kosovo Article

I looked at copyright status. It says that you, the uploader, are the copyright holder. That makes it Original Research, since you made it. I'd also recommend that you upload an image that covers all the religious facilities, not jut churches. What about mosques or synagogues? The section is called "Ethnic and cultural diversity" not "Serbian Orthodox Churches in Kosovo." If you have some sort of image that is from a reputable source, that would be great. And seriously, no need to push your Serbian POV with this image space. Use an image that represents the whole of "Ethnic and cultural diversity."

If you want to include this image, after you find a source for it that isn't you (with correct copyright status), than you'd still have to discuss it with all the other editors. I remember the last time you or someone else tried to include an image with just Serbian churches in it. It did not gain consensus.

To summarize the reasons I will revert you again: dubious copyright status/OR, undue weight/doesn't represent the section, the consensus was NOT to include an image regarding Serbian Churches in Kosovo and with that being so you'd need to go get consensus PRIOR to including this image (or images about Serbian Orthodox Churches in general) in the article.

Thank you! Beam 20:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

1st. Serbian churches are a huge part of Kosovo's culture thus they should be illustrated with this picture. 2nd. The picture is made by me, but the information that is shown will be cited when I reedit the page per your requiest. Concensus is unfair and unwikipedia friendly in Kosovos' case, since this issues is emotional and a lot of Albanians will most likely go against it even tho it perfectly reflects the culture of KosovoMike Babic (talk) 22:03, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm sorry if you don't find "consensus" fair, but that's how this place works. Like I suggested above, try adding ALL of the religious establishments there. Add some synagogues and some mosques and some roman catholic churches.

Your edits will continue to be reverted if they are of this type. However, rest assured that if you gain consensus I will defend it. Beam 22:31, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

List of Ortadox Churches fits well in the section "religions in kosovo". I hope that admins flag your account for removing an image that illustrates the locations of churches in Kosovo.24.36.19.38 (talk) 02:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
24.36.19.38 is me (I forgot to log in).Mike Babic (talk) 02:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

You are talking about Image:Manastiri.jpg, right? Mike, your claim is self-contradictory. You can't both cite a website that hosts the exact same image as a source, and claim you are the creator and copyright holder. Please be aware there's a thread about your image uploads now at WP:ANI#User:Mike Babic. This looks like you are going to be banned from making any further image uploads. Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, having found yet another instance of blatant copyright fraud (this image), I am now formally banning you, until further notice, from making any further image uploads. This ban pertains both to uploading here on en-wiki, and to uploading on commons and then using the image here. If you breach this ban you will be blocked. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)