User talk:Zmaj
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Archive 1 (November 2005 - February 2006)
- Archive 2 (February 2006 - March 2006)
- Archive 3 (March 2006 - June 2006)
[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 17:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] HRE RfA
As someone who has a reputation for making bad jokes, I must congratulate you for making a very bad joke :P [1] Tintin (talk) 15:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Maps of Bosnia
Hi,
user:Dado has created some new Bosnia locator maps, but without entities marked (except badly visible inter-entity line). I think this is a bad idea, so I created my own maps, with separate colors for each entity (we have that already, but those maps are in low resolution and small).
I couldn't reach a compromise with Dado, and I believe we need third opinion.
Please, see:
- Image talk:BHMunicipalities.png (talk page of Dado's map)
- Image talk:BH municipality location.gif (talk page of my map)
Could you please find some spare time to comment this. --Ante Perkovic 23:08, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- I have commented the issue on Image talk:BHMunicipalities.png. --Zmaj 07:03, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thank you!
Thank you for posting my picture. It's a great pleasure! ;) Well... if you're going there on vacation this summer I'm sure you're going to enjoy it. I think I'm going to Dubrovnik and Crna Gora this summer! I'm looking forward to... Enjoy your stay at Kornati!! --Ivana 10:39, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Welcome!
I know you're an experienced user by now - but what the heck, here's a welcome (you've never been welcomed before, and that's just not fair!:):
Welcome!
Hello, Zmaj, 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:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
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 place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --PaxEquilibrium 00:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vukovar
Hi there. I have a query that you might be able to help me with. I was looking at the Vukovar page and I notice that it's mentioned that there's a university there. This is news to me. Is it new? I found this website, but don't understand much of it. Cordless Larry 04:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your recent edits to Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/PaxEquilibrium
With regards to your comments on Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/PaxEquilibrium: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Will (is it can be time for messages now plz?) 20:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Good edit in Ante Starčević article
That was a good edit in the Ante Starčević, removing the uncited POV and strangely-worded text. If your edit is reverted, I suggest leaving a vandalism warning on the person's talk page. As I'm sure you've noticed, there are a few people (or one person using sock puppets) who have a severe bias in articles related to Croatian history, and almost no grasp of basic English grammar. If they (or he) continue their pattern of destructive edits, they (or he) should be reported to Wikipedia administration, because they are clearly not following Wikipedia guidelines. I have requested an IP check to see if they are posting from the same city.Spylab 14:37, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Mikalja
Zmaj, do not push idea that he is Croat, because you will again give them arguments. He is from K. of Naples, he is of Croatian origin, but he described himself as Slavic speaking Italian. All other is speculation, just like G.G. and G.O. are doing all the time. Do not be exclusive, he is both. BR, --Plantago 13:40, 30 June 2007 (UTC) Will add that sentence. Sunny in Agram, isn't it?:-)--Plantago 14:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re:
Thanks for the thought. I never realized that there could be a link between Rimbaud and Aivazovsky. If I come accross one, I'll let you know. I'm very much interested in European history and lately I've been into checking out the former Yugoslavia, hence my involvement in articles regarding Croatia, Serbia, Macedonia, and the SFRY.
I hope that all of the Western Balkans become part of EU - and it looks like Croatia might be second after Slovenia. All the best, Aivazovsky 14:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] pomozi
Alo, vidim da zivis u Zagrebu, i ako mozes, napisi za nas koliko znas o Zadru na stranici o Zadru na wiki (znam da ti je lakse dobiti knjige u Hrvatskoj--ja zivim u americi). Mi Hrvati tribamo pomoc jedni drugima u svim prilikama. --Jesuislafete 02:28, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Edit warring
Please be aware that a RFC discussion is going on at Zadar's talk, and potentially controversial changes to the article will cause a delay in the dispute. If you wish to make controversial changes to the article, please be aware that all changes should be discussed on the talk page first, and that they should gain community approval. Thank you. --Dark Falls talk 22:38, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Murder
It can certainly be spontaneous! (But your change is better.) Kirker 11:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
GA Review
Dear Zmaj, I am sorry to inform you that I have failed Ivan Kukuljević Sakcinski for GA status because of several issues, which are detailed on the article's talk page. If there are any comments you would like to make, or any questions you have about the failing of this article, then please forward them to my talk page. Good luck for a future candidacy. Regards,
-- Anonymous DissidentTalk 21:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- Also note: I am sorry for closing this so soon after you submitted it, but I noticed it on a whim only minutes after you did. Thanks, -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 21:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ivan Kukuljević Sakcinski GA
Hi Zmaj, thanks for taking the failing so well and with such a great attitude. I wish you luck in improvingthe article, and I will even commit myself to reviewing it immediately when you think that it meets GA standard, should you leave a message on my talk page. Thanks, and cheers, -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Yeah, my frequent faux pas
Sorry about that, I usually write pretty good English (if I do say so myself), but I have a couple of "trademark" mistakes I just can't seem to shake, even though I am quite aware of them :). They include it's, allso (instead of also) and so forth. Thank you for correcting this particular one... DIREKTOR 17:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Castell de Veliki Tabor
Hi! Of course, no problem. I make use to say you than you have a very beautiful country. Greetings!. Lohen11.--80.29.228.6 11:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] János Vitéz
I noticed that you recently moved an article, János Vitéz, to János Vitéz (poem), to make room for an article on an individual by the name of János Vitéz. I'm not certain this is the best course of action. While the poem is indeed a work of fiction, and the bishop was indeed a real person, the poem is much, much more famous; take a look at Google results [2]. Though the third hit is for the bishop, the first two and all the rest are the poem/musical/film adaptations. Shouldn't maybe [[[János Vitéz]] direct to the poem and there be another article, like János Vitéz (bishop) or the like for the clergyman? Any comments would be appreciated! Korossyl 12:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- I believe popular culture shouldn't be the judge of a person's importance. It's only natural that a work of fiction that has been adapted into a film and a musical should get more Google hits than a Renaissance archbishop who was the second most influential man in Hungary in his time. I think we should ask an experienced administrator for a third opinion. Is that OK with you? --Zmaj 12:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- Absolutely! Have one in mind?
- János Vitéz is a bit more than just a work of fiction, though; it's the work of one of Hungary's greatest poets (if not THE greatest), and became a part of Hungarian culture long before even the 20th century. I don't mean to lessen the achievements of János Vitéz the man; I'd never heard of him until your article (thanks!!). But in terms of long-term influence on the nation, I'd argue that the poem has had more, and that a large majority of people typing János Vitéz into Wiki will be looking for the poem.
- So, I look forward to any suggestions. Thanks for writing that article, though! Korossyl 00:53, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I've checked WP:NAME. It says: "Names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists." So I guess you're right; the more popular name should have precedence. I'll change the links to point to the poem again and rename the man into János Vitéz (archbishop). Keep up the good work! --Zmaj 07:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- NOTE: I first need someone to delete the page János Vitéz. I asked an admin to do it. Then I'll change everything else. --Zmaj 10:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- Finished. --Zmaj 23:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Thank you so much! And keep up the great work!! Korossyl 13:48, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Former Towns of RSK 1991-1995
Yet again, Serbs are trying to resurrect the "Former Towns of RSK 1991-1995" category. If you have time, check out the category here and then vote at this link. Thanks. --Jesuislafete 01:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- I read the discussion. I agree with Duja and others who object to the category on the grounds of WP:OCAT. Since there's nothing for me to add, I won't provide a comment which could be interpreted as vote stacking (although I don't see that discussion as a vote and I hope the admins don't see it like that either). Thanks for letting me know, though. --Zmaj 07:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re:A request
Dear Zmaj, I would be very obliged to see to your request, but I am actually not an admin. As such, i am afraid you will have to forward your request to someone who is. Cheers, and good luck -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 10:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- No worries. And yes, I will soon try to become an admin. Cheers, -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 10:46, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] János Vitéz
No problem - done. -- ChrisO 22:24, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Mediation of Zadar
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Zadar, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. --Dark Falls talk 07:02, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Getty
Not as such, but this issue has been discussed at the Visual Arts project talk (probably archived now) & the Getty got general acceptance as the best from most people. Johnbod 10:41, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Request for Mediation
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
[edit] History of Croatia
You're a bit sensetive on this issue arn't you? I was only trying to improve the article you know. Atleast make it clearer; I was going by what most editors do, most take every opportunity to expose certain things and blame the other party. About the Bleiburg numbers, it doesn't bother me a great deal that they are not displayed there you know. Evlekis 15:23, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- Definitely no hard feelings Zmaj. Thank you too for your honesty. May I just clear one small thing: if you look at the history of that page we edited, it wasn't I who wrote the "excuse for the action". Without looking at it, my guess is that the paragraph ended at the Bleiburg massacre; then maybe some pro-partizan later added "...for such and such a reason", and then maybe a non-sympathiser of some kind added "so-called" before the reasoning. Now I just looked at it as it stood. The term "so-called" is often inadequate for a number of reasons, so I thought I'd change that small part to, "said by the Partizans to be for..." - and the rest was already placed. So, with this information already present, I felt it necessary to develop the opening and mention a number, which you rightly say, is heavily disputed; I only gave the lowest number - you yourself know how high that number can be, but you're also correct in that the whole section was heading way-off topic. The History of Croatia is about Croatia's territory/previous territories. That is why I did not revert back. Please forgive me if you feel that my recent edits on Croatian based articles look as though they are opening old wounds, that really is not my aim. I suppose all of us seasoned editors spend our time POV-hunting sometimes, and this we do everywhere, not just on specific topics. Anyhow, thanks for not fully reverting me; of course, some of my edits are simply standardising the grammar. I think you've done quite well so I am happy to leave that page as it is. Thanks. Evlekis 02:00, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- My user page! Oh that's just a parody of the articles themselves, I joke a lot you see. Curiously enough, A,B and C was nobody in particular, and I made a joke that "ink" was a precious substance, rather like today's oil. You could say that I was only thinking of the collective incidents which have taken place throughout the world as we know it. To be honest, I wasn't thinking a great deal of the Balkans when I wrote that section: I thought a little about Iran in the 1930s, when the "international community" removed a democraticly elected government and replaced them with the Shah; he and his son ruled for 50 years, they supressed opposition until 1979 when the nation deposed the regime, in come the Ayatollahs - with their strict Sharia system - but atleast there is some form of democracy (choosing head of government), but the country has fallen foul to the "internatiuonal community" etc. Then you look at places across Africa (Sudan, Ethiopia, Sierra Leone), maybe Haïti across the Atlantic, South American countries etc. and let's not forget the middle-east (namely Israel and its activities) and that inspires this picture I get of how the world is, especially with America's attititude to each case. But if you want a classic example in the Balkans: take the Albanians; well their clerics make no secret of the fact that they believe in a unified Albania, and these architects originate from every corner of Albanian settlement; its republic, the former Yugoslavia and Greece (only the Italian-Albanians are currently outside this sphere). In addition, there is their diaspora all over the developed world. Now in Kosovo, they were viewed as innocent civilians subjected to atrocity from a president unpopular among the "international community". In come the big countries, out go the old authorities. Then comes the spread, firstly in Serbia outside Kosovo, but only this time, the old regime has fallen and been replaced with a more agreeable administration; so the events attract less attention. Then to Macedonia, where they did attract international attention. Macedonia in 2001 reached the stage that Kosovo was at in maybe 1996, only with world attention. But the news networks and their governments were labelling the very same fighters with the very same intentions "terrorists". It's a shame Milosevic went, because then Zekir Zekiri (fictional name) could have stood on one side of the frontier and said, "now I am a freedom fighter", and stepping over the other side he could have said "now I am a terrorist, it is not what I fight for, it is whom I fight against!", and indeed, our Macedonian government's tongues have been so far up the American's rectums, they had to call the fire-brigade to get them out! My very own relatives took part in anti-Albanian atrocities in Macedonia, perhaps they were low-key, but it's a collection of these low-key occurences which paint the bigger picture. Anyhow Zmaj, this is not for the encyclopaedia, it is just my own experiences with international affairs.
- So just going back briefly to the Yugoslavs section: I suppose it is difficult to avoid conjecture here. The entire page on Yugoslavs is based on that; if we remove personal research, we are left with a skeleton paragraph, and outsiders will be puzzled "how can someone be Yugoslav?" But don't worry about what you've removed, it wasn't essential: if you want to put Yugoslav, you can wikify it so readers can consult the page and do what they want there. Anyhow. Pozdrav. Evlekis 14:41, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- Definitely no hard feelings Zmaj. Thank you too for your honesty. May I just clear one small thing: if you look at the history of that page we edited, it wasn't I who wrote the "excuse for the action". Without looking at it, my guess is that the paragraph ended at the Bleiburg massacre; then maybe some pro-partizan later added "...for such and such a reason", and then maybe a non-sympathiser of some kind added "so-called" before the reasoning. Now I just looked at it as it stood. The term "so-called" is often inadequate for a number of reasons, so I thought I'd change that small part to, "said by the Partizans to be for..." - and the rest was already placed. So, with this information already present, I felt it necessary to develop the opening and mention a number, which you rightly say, is heavily disputed; I only gave the lowest number - you yourself know how high that number can be, but you're also correct in that the whole section was heading way-off topic. The History of Croatia is about Croatia's territory/previous territories. That is why I did not revert back. Please forgive me if you feel that my recent edits on Croatian based articles look as though they are opening old wounds, that really is not my aim. I suppose all of us seasoned editors spend our time POV-hunting sometimes, and this we do everywhere, not just on specific topics. Anyhow, thanks for not fully reverting me; of course, some of my edits are simply standardising the grammar. I think you've done quite well so I am happy to leave that page as it is. Thanks. Evlekis 02:00, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] A note about speculations
I agree, but it is as legitamate to speculate that those Yugoslavs might be Croats. It is extremely meaningless to write two contradicting speculations. There is nothing that indicates Yugoslavs are more likely to be Serbs than Croats. It gives the reader that incorrect impression. As far as I'm concerned you may include the information, but only if it says that they might have been Croats as well. I believe the whole thing is not necessary as it does not say anything, so I removed it. It also may be well to include the naked fact that there were 106,041 Yugoslavs according to the census, and not add any speculation afterwards. DIREKTOR 20:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] your new reverts
So contact a moderator, but do not start a further edit war!--Giovanni Giove 14:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
- Stop to bother me and contact a moderator!!!!!--Giovanni Giove 16:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image source problem with Image:PILAR-SVJ-RAT.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:PILAR-SVJ-RAT.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 18:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Your usual reverts
I strongly suggest you to avoid a politic of edit war in Mavro Orbini article. You have neither evidences to present him person as 'Croat' nor to use modern Croatian names in the article. I suggest you to discuss you each single edits, avoiding usual destructive mass reverts, performed togheter the usual Croatian users. The limit is reached for this tecnique.--Giovanni Giove 11:56, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Your English is terrible as usual. I suggest you to discuss you each single edits. As far as I can see, you didn't make any attempt to explain your edit to Mavro Orbini, which is original research, by the way. Come to the Croatian Istria some time and I'll teach you English and history. For a modest fee, of course. --Zmaj 19:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice. Actually, I like Giove, as he really believes his delusions. I will keep removing any incorrect data he posts in the future, of course. --Zmaj 21:03, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Just to let you know...
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussioni_utente:Giovanni_Giove/personale
AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 23:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)