User talk:WikiEditor2004: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 16:59, 30 November 2006

Old talks

Post new comments or questions here

Old Banat Maps

I have some old Banat maps at http://www.banatul.com/info/maps.shtml Can you help me identify some of these? Regards, Todor http://www.banatul.com/formmail/formmail.shtml

I know that site and maps. What exactly you want me to identify? PANONIAN (talk) 14:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PANONIAN

Hi PANONIAN. I am the one who added "ultra-nationalist" to describe the FIDESZ. I admit I tend to favor the MSZP and SZDSZ, but only because there is not real centrist party in Hungary. But the FIDESZ are definitely not what they want foreigners to believe they are and their leader is a serious menace who has caused great damage to the Hungarian economy and society. Thank you for defending that statement. That said, I have long since given up on Wikipedia being a balanced source of information of current events... And even some historical events are highly POVd. I am a philosopher, albeit self-educated, and you may enjoy my small NGO's web-site at www.infinitysociety.org . Hope to hear from you some day... Best, JP. --User: NOT LISTED 04:19 EST, October 7, 2006 (Washington, DC).

Sorry, but I do not know much about FIDESZ party. I simply reverted edits of known anonymous vandal because I assumed that his edits are fake. However, I do not have opinion which one of the two versions of the article is better. PANONIAN (talk) 15:27, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

CheckUser

Dear PANONIAN, I wonder if you can help me. There are several IPs from Hungary that either vandalize articles about Slovakia or work in collusion while editing them. User:Juro accused them to be sockpuppets of User:Árpád and User:HunTomy. I believe that these charges not unfounded. However, an admin perceives them as disruptive behavior. Before the situation escalates further, it would be definitely good to clarify whether there is sockpuppetry involved in this case. Since you have much more experience with Wikipedia than I do, perhaps you can advise me where and how I can initiate the formal procedure of checking whether some users and IPs are just sockpuppets. Thank you very much in advance. Tankred 19:47, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. You are right, it does not seem to be very helpful. But this practice (use of sockpuppets while editing sensitive articles) should be dealt with. Well, thank you anyway. Tankred 00:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SFRYugoslaviaetno.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SFRYugoslaviaetno2.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SFRYugoslaviaetno3.jpg

Meni licno sumnjivo izgledaju - jesi li siguran da su tacne ove slike? HolyRomanEmperor 16:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, pa pogledaj http://www.rastko.org.yu/istorija/srbi-balkan/img/fry4b.jpg --HolyRomanEmperor 11:31, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why

And why doesn't this user support the aims of People in Kosovo?

The decision about status of Kosovo is already made, so it is only a technical question now, thus there is no reason to support people that already achieved their goal. PANONIAN (talk) 12:27, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

E,

...pogledaj Serbian lands. Sto mislis o Medieval Ages? --HolyRomanEmperor 12:32, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Da, jesu. Brankovic je bio Gospodar Kosova, i to potpuno nezavisan. O Mrnjavcevicima znas - Gospodar svoj srpskoj, i grckoj makedoniji (za ovo drugo nisam siguran). To je vise nego dovoljno da ih svrstamo u nezavsne srpske zemlje. Nisam nijednu zemlju izbacio osim Serske drzave, koju bismo mogli da vratimo. Ovako kako je bilo do sada, moglo bi i "Drzava kralja Stefana Radoslava", "Drzava kralja Urosa", itd. kapiras? --HolyRomanEmperor 13:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uhh, boga ti imas pravo - nisam mogao da se setim imena njihovih drzava (pogledacu titule, po tome mogu da odredim). --HolyRomanEmperor 14:26, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DNA

Ćudo je da niko nije probao vidit jeli imaju Srbi i Hvati isti dna. A moguče je da se zna ali nije popularno to znati i govorit ljudima...nije u interes političara hahaha. Ako nešto saznaš javi se ok/// Mene baš interesira U vezi Bosanaca isto tako bi bilo intersantno vidit....mismim da mora biti link izmedu sva 3 barem 60% krvi.

Javi se OK

PS I like you for your unbias view on all things Balkan, you're a legend...Panonian for President of Wiki

Jagoda 1 23:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 16:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okruzi

Mislim da okruge ne treba stavljati u kategoriju "Geografija Vojvodine". Kapiram da u geografiju idu neke geografske celine/reke/planine/regije i sl., a ne političke podele. --Goran.Smith2 13:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

mislim da nije potrebno. Ne znam da li si video tu granicu, ali granica više ide na Bačku stranu, nego na Baranjsku... samo jedna mala ada ide na deo Baranje. --Goran.Smith2 14:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa mislim da ne bi trebalo, pošto su to jako mali delovi koji pripadaju Srbiji, tj Hrvatskoj.

...i još nešto. Tebi ovo kažem pošto najviše i puniš te kategorije, koliko sam primetio. Ovo sam samo uglavnom primetio u tekstovima o Srbiji, dok je u državama Amerike, UKa i sličnih država sa regijama to lepo podeljeno po regijama. Mislim da imamo tekstove u previše kategorija stavljeno. Treba izbaciti "Geografija Srbije", "Naseljena mesta u Srbiji", "Istorija Srbije" i sl. kategorije na tekstovima koji su već svrstani u kategoriju "Geografija Vojvodine", "Naseljena mesta u Vojvodini" i sl. Zato što sve kategorije o Vojvodini su podkategorije Srbije, pa se vec svrstava pod kategoriju o Srbiji, nekako bi bilo preglednije. Na srpskoj vikipediji su se svi složili samnom, pa sam sredio takve kategorije tamo. --Goran.Smith2 15:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, razumemo se, samo bi sve mesta trebalo podeliti u tri kategorije, naseljena mesta Vojvodine, Srbije i Kosova. Albanci su baš lepo sva mesta na Kosovu stavili samo u kategoriju o Kosovu :lol: :)

Samo bi trebalo nešto razdvojiti, ne znam tko bi to mogao uraditi. Kategoriju "Cities, towns and villages in Serbia", trebalo bi podeliti u dve kategorije: "Cities in Serbia" i "Towns and villages in Serbia", kao i Vojvodine. To je jedna veća greška, pošto status grada ima samo Bgd, NS, Niš, Priština i Kg, sve ostalo je "Towns and villages". Znam da takve promene na srpskoj wiki radi bot, pa znas li kako bi se to moglo promeniti? --Goran.Smith2 18:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sigurno je da se neće menjati Vojvodina, samo ce se valja praviti neke regije u centralnoj Srbiji, a pošto najviše ima članaka o naseljima u Vojvodini... nikad nije kasno da se iz gradova i naselja Vojvodine izbaci kategorija "nasljena mesta Srbije", zar ne? ... a onda što je ostalo u cities, towns and villages in Serbia podeliti na novu situaciju kako god bude u nekoj budućnosti. --Goran.Smith2 19:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

u pravu si, jbg :) --Goran.Smith2 20:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Hi. Perhaps you will be interested in this because VinceB threatened you as well there. Tankred 15:31, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Križevci (former county) move proposal

You might want to discuss move proposals at Talk:Križevci (former county). I am not specifically advocating a change but think these type of moves should be discussed first. - AjaxSmack 18:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

editing

come take a look

hey panonian--

i've recently made a policy proposal change for 3RR. i noticed you were accused of 3RR a short time ago though i can't tell if you were blocked. i'm not sure my suggested changes would have helped in your case, but the idea is spell things out more clearly so people aren't blocked unexpectedly or unfairly and don't end up bitter about wikipedia. you might have suggestions of your own that would help the policy.

here are the proposals

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Three-revert_rule#Proposed_policy_changes

comments are welcome.

thanks! Justforasecond 19:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NS

Pa nije mi to namera, ali bi trebalo napraviti šablon za gradska i prigradska naselja NSa, kao na sr wiki. Hteo sam na proleće, ali sam ipak to ostavio za jesen (kad mi prođe novembarski ispitni rok) da odem do informativnog centra NSa, da mi daju neku literaturu o gradu. Posto na sajtu grada NEMA NIŠTA korisnoga, a i da ukapiramo kako funkcioniraju te naše mistesriozne gradske opštine NS i Petrovaradin (kako sad izgleda, kao da to postoji na papiru) i neke kulturne informacije pa da ubacim na sr i en wiki. Mislim da ovaj tekst može biti izabrani na sr, a na en wiki makar neka B kategorija, samo da imamo prave informacije o gradu (što je teško iskopati).

To mi je nekako plan ove jeseni ili zime da kuckam na wikipediji, samo nabavim prave informacije, pa ako imas ti neke informacije ubacuj u tekst. --Goran.Smith2 21:06, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Od NSa mi treba sve, od kvartova do kulture, sporta, do gradskih opština (o kojima nitko ne zna ništa) ... ma sve. Tekst o NSa na engleskoj wiki je manje-više samo nabrajanje, sem istorije gde ima teksta. Ako imas istorija Rotkvarije, to mi treba :)

Ja sam to radio na srpskoj vikipediji, mogu nešto da prebacim, ali ne mogu ti mogu garantovati pošto je na sr wiki BAŠ bilo naporno sređivati to. Ali nemoj ništa prebacivati u centalnu srbiju, ostavi ta mesta u Srbija kategoriji, samo za Vojvodinu prebaci. Centralna Srbija će se menjati sigurno u sledećih 6 mes/ do godinu dana, pa da ne menjeas sto puta. Jer centralna Srbija i nije nikakva politička celina, regija to je samo Srbija bez pokrajina, pa onda i nije potrena posebna kategorija, po nekom gledanju na stvari. U bivšoj Jugi je postojala Uža Srbija, to je nešto drugo. --Göran Smith 21:27, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa mislim da grešiš, pošto centralna Srbija ne postoji kao region, niti kao politička celina i vlast u centralnoj Srbiji ide direktno od vrha, dok u pokrajnama ima neka regionalna vlast, pa ne vidim da imamo takvu kategoriju.

Kad sam ja prebaciovao na sr wiki, 80% je prebačeno u nasljena mesta Vojvodine, tako da će i ovde ispasti da bi više radio. Ja sada jurim da upišem drugu godinu, pa sam u frci.. ne mogu toliko posla uzeti.

Napravite red u Tesla article

Jebeni hrvati uvek promene da je bio croatian kad je bio srbin. Jebem jim mamu

RED!!!!

Barnstar

U r welcome;-)... Luka Jačov 20:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Serbian lands

OK, there wasn't only one, Duke of Saint Sava... HolyRomanEmperor 13:55, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I heard, the Moslem Gorans lost majority in any municipality after the UN draw new borders. However, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SFRYugoslaviaetno.jpg from 2004 shows not only that, but 5 mysterious Serbian municipalities. HolyRomanEmperor 14:06, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for instance, there is a "Serbia" mentioned from the 9th century and then next to it the state of Caslav Klonimirovic. That very state was called Serbia, and I have no idea what the previous meant (better put just 10th century, because the founding dates are changing - 927/931).

Stefan Vukcic wasn't the only Duke of Saint Sava - this way that is incinuated. Additionally, why did you delete the year of the fall of Herzegovina to the Ottomans (the end of Saint Sava's Duchy). And the Hum link is linking to an Ukrainian site in Poland.

The Nemanjic's state was founded in 1166/1168 and it's called "Serbian land". The Empire of Stefan Dusan should be called "Serbian Empire" - he wasn't its only Emperor. The Kingdom of Doclea ("and Dalmatia") existed even in the Nemanyiden period - Vukan was a King of Doclea & Dalmatia. Thus, its 13th century when the title's finally lost (actually, it lived through to the 14th century; but it must be noted the gap of the 12th century, in Doclea's darkest times, when it returned to a form of a Principality).

The exact beginning of the Bosnian Kingdom is known, and thereby is also the end of the Banate. It should be noted that it was the dual "Kingdom of Bosnia and Serbia". The "kingdom of Syrmia" is very ridiculous to me; the "Srem Kingdom" or "Kingdom of Srem" seems much better. Anyway, if that's a new name, and if you're interested, I can tell you how was it really called: Kingdom of "Serbia"; to differ from the Kingdom of "Rascia". Also, Stefan Dragutin wasn't its only Monarch - it implies that way. The same is with the Epirian Empire (it had two Emperors/Despots - it could be also noted that it was only nominally an Empire; and a Despotate in reality).

Simeon_Uroš was the Emperor of Epirus - but after, his son's Epirian Empire was actually Thessaly; as Thomas II Preljubović became Epirus' Despot. So, the Empire of Epirus was founded in 1359, and it was ruined in 1373; however, the "Despotate of Epirus" existed in 1367-1384. See also John Uroš. Also, there is no "State of Lazar Hrebeljanovic"; it was the Principality of Serbia, which became the Despotate of Serbia in... I can't remember the year, but it was when Stefan Lazarevic was passing through Constantinople, reuturning from the Battle on Ancyra.

Jovan Nenad's state should be (Serbian Empire), and the Serbian Despotate's founding is well known. We could note it's real fall in 1459 (and temporary in 1439), however, it continued to live to the 16th century as a major political faction. Was Habsburg Serbia actually an entity? Also, could you think of a better name for Karadjordje's Serbia? And we have to deal with those "State of", since those were mostly dynasties. Kosovo was factually a political entity under the Brankovics. The titulary "Kingdom of Serbia" that was carried through to the Mrnjavcevics from the Nemanjics could be notes as well.

There. I hope I wasn't boring. :) --HolyRomanEmperor 16:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about a Nemanjic WikiProject? Also, take a look at Stefan Nemanja. --HolyRomanEmperor 16:33, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The land of the Mrnjavcevics and Dejanovic-Dragases is Macedonia, or simply "Serbia" (hence, "Old Serbia"). --HolyRomanEmperor 16:38, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Despotate of Epirus was actually the Despotate of Ioannina. The Desotate of Voryo-Epirus is that which you call of Jovan Asen - and there were other rulers of it. Only what remains to be added is the Empire/Despotate of Seres (that's Despot Jovan Ugljesa and Empress Jelena). I have no idea what should we do for the House of Vojinovic's domain (not simply Vojislav's) and I have no idea who are Vlatko, Hlapen and Voihna. --HolyRomanEmperor 16:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Slovenian names.

Yes. Podravina is sl:Podravje and Posavina is sl:Posavje. --Mihael Simonič 18:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anštajn

Bio sam danas u Kisackoj 20, pa da ti javim :))) Jeste stara kuća sa lepom fasadom. Vidi se da je pored ulaza bila neka ploča, ima nekih rupa od neke table, ali ta tabla nije stajala tamo siguno nekih 10tak, a možda i više godina. --Göran Smith 18:37, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa ja citam vizantijske izvore (u originalu), radove Vladimira Corovica i Zeljka Fajfrica. Kakve to sad veze ima s atlasom? :D (ja ponekad koristim jedan skolski Istorijski Atlas). --HolyRomanEmperor 20:27, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smile

The RSJ - ^SPEAK has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

I'm giving these messages to everyone I know, and it's not the wrong kind of WikiLove (lol)... Cheers!

CG?

Hmm... zasto nema nista o izborima na wikipediji? Ja nadjoh samo RTCG. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Hungarian migration03.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Hungarian migration03.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. 13:06, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom of Hungary

There's an unfinished discussion abt this. Its needless.

By the way, its full of these kind of gems: "The state (aka Kingdom of Hungary) was ruled by the kings of Hungary". :-) --VinceB 16:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, I'm using this as source. Anything I change, or contribute according to these articles are almost entirely based on this encyclopedia( Encyclopaedia Humana Hungarica ). I hope, you don't have any excepts against it, if you have, please let me know. --VinceB 18:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. I'm using an encyclopedia, and I hope you don't have any excepts against it. And you, where are your statements come from? --VinceB 21:26, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again: see this map. It is in an ecyclopedia. Are you playing? Searching for yugra in hungarian pages: 13 matches. And the history teaching in Hungary does not mention Yugra!??!? Please, don't be that. --VinceB 21:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've already told you at an other map. Such incorretions occur in some of your other maps also. I'm just correcting them. And remember, in wikipedia, there is no "mine". --VinceB 21:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you are correct, home of the ugric people. Denying them and calling it only hungarian is incorrect. Yes, you are absolutely right, but there was simply no room for Yugra after "Ugric homeland". --VinceB 21:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you take such a thing as something like a personal attack. Nope it isn't. Maybe i'm a bit harsh, sorry for that. Wikipedia is voluntary, so I saw it easier to correct them myself, instead of giving you work :) --VinceB 21:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I draw one, based on yours wich was free to use. Wikipedia is an ecylcopedia. My map is from an encíclopedia, it was also published in that. In NPOV stuff and factually correct stuff, an encyclopedia is the most dependable, overwrites the other stuff. Your's come from where? As I see in recent changes, you deleted mine from all the articles where I put in. In yugra all the finno-ugric peole lived together. That's the point were they split. Magna Hungaria was the first only hungarian place. Your's denies this and blures all finno-ugric ppl with magyars. --VinceB 22:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Yes

I already wrote that. Did you have enough time to read my (rather long) speech to the up? The Empire/Despotate of Serres was ruled by Empress Jelena and Despot Jovan Ugljesa. However, the situation with Jovan Asen might be increasingly confusing, as he was and/or Despot of Albania, Epirus or a certain city... The Realm of the Vojinovic dynasty is the Hum (Zachlumia), while the Realm of the Dejanovic-Dragases dynasty is the valley of Presevo, which later became the eastern half of what I was refering to as "Macedonia". You might return them, but with full dynastic namings. Additionally, Is "State of Vojislav Vojinovic" a good name for the state of his nephew successos, Nikola Altomanovic (the next Prince of the Hum and the Coastland?). --HolyRomanEmperor 20:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Well, if you refer to Project Medieval Lands - Bosnia and some other factors - you'll see that the hereditary House of Vojin was a Zachlumian dynasty. They had the very same titles as the rulers of the Chelm. The Rascian realm too was a lot larger than it itself - Brankovic's and Mrnjavcevic's borders don't really geographicly shape Kosovo or Macedonia - the fact that you rule a territory doesn't mean that you won't expand further your personal domain... Also, what is Serbia in the 9th century?

And, am I going totally mad or I slightly pissed you off regarding this article? :S --HolyRomanEmperor 17:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I never said their official naming - such a thing never had existed. According to World, that was only simply and plainly "Kingdom of Serbia". However, most historians (Zeljko Fajfric, Vladimir Corovic, Andrija Veselinovic, Rados Ljusiv, Ferdo Sisic, even Klaic, or the Ottoman and Byzantine historians) reffered to those "statelets" as "Macedonia" or "Kosovo" plainly (and such is the situation in the education in Serbia). However, I mostly took the names of the states Medieval figures ruled from their personal titles. Vojislav Vojinovic was the Lord of the Hum (Chelm is the anglicised, latinized for of "Hum"), Buk Brankovic indeed was the "Lord of Kossovo", etc.

I also have to note this: that Constantine's "Serbia" (see Srbi izmedju Hrvatske, Vizantije i Bugarske) is Ceslav's Principality. That "Serbia" is from the 10th century. This is what I am particularely 100% not-a-drop-of-a-doubt certain. The "Serbia in the proper sence" referred to Bosnia with Soli and Usora itself (the heartland, center of Ceslav's realm). --HolyRomanEmperor 19:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support

You should support this. Cheers --TheFEARgod (listening) 12:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Odgovor

Actually, I won't debate with the Branko's, Mrnjav's or Vojin's - that's actually a controversal subject, as those were semi-independents realms of the Medieval Ages. However, you'll notice that Rascia (with Zachlumia and/or Zeta and Bosnia) is called "Srbija" by many modern historians from the age of the 630s up to the Ottoman invasions - regardless of the statelets. This, however, is a fact. That Vladimir's "Srbija" is only refering actually to the Grand Principality of Rascia... --HolyRomanEmperor 14:37, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Nemci

Možeš šminkati istoriju koliko god hoćeš ali će istina ostati istina. Šta kažeš na primer za ovo: ... as a consequence of the war events, Serb population fled from the village together with occupant Serb army before the village was liberated, and Croat families from Bosnia came to the settlement. Je li ovo POV ili NPOV po tebi ? Je li da drugačije zvuči nego kod Nakova. Samo su tri reči promenjene i koja nepravda. Da li ti veruješ da su ti koji su izbegli iz Hrvatske 1995 ratni zločinci? Da li misliš da su oni koji su ostali ratni zločinci? Imaš li pojma da li su ti starci koji su pobijeni posle Oluje ratni zločinci?

Što se logora tiče malo je teže razlikovati fašističke i "antifašističke". Možda po brojnosti i efikasnosti ne ali po metodama da. Nemačku stranu je "krasila" temeljitost, a ovu sitna pohlepa i zavist za bogatstvom komšija. To se i dogodilo tokom i krajem WWII u Vojvodini. Nemci su proglašeni krivcima i Vasa je mogao da obriše blatnjavu čizmu o njima i usput da se najede već jednom ljudski šunke i kobasica. ..al je Vasa hteo mnogo više. Ako ti Nemce i dan-danas žigošeš kolektivnom krivicom, zašto se osećaš nelagodno kad ti se to vraća. Inače Kulturbund je bio nešto na nivou Socsaveza samo su sponzori bili različiti. Nema ni stranicu (još) na Wikipediji. A etiketiranjem kao fašističko ili nacističko ćeš stići dovdeili čak dovde.

Što se tiče nemačke imovine u Vojvodini, njena vrednost je u današnjim novcima oko 13 milijardi eura. Da, nemačka pedantnost je to izračunala. Znaš zbog čega? Da se ne zaboravi. Tu su kuće, fabrike, konji, marve, stolovi, stolice, šunke, kobasice, kokoške sve što je ostavljeno. Stanovati u tuđoj kući nije mala stvar. Upućeni kažu da se šumovi, glasovi bivših vlasnika neke kuće daju čuti i posle stotinjak godina. Iz tih kuća verovatno zbog toga trešti turbo-folk i danju i noću - da priguši te zwanzig šumove.

U srpskom postoje poslovice "Oteto-prokleto" i "Tuđa muka ne hrani unuka". A svetla budućnost je građena na tuđoj muci i zato smo stigli dovde ili čak dovde . Ko se ne seća priča o kolonama kamiona s ratišta devedesetih punih belom tehnikom, elektronikom, naftom, slavonskim hrastom. Ko se ne seća dobrovoljaca punih para i sebe kako pijani mašu s pištoljima i pričaju dogodovštine s ratišta po kafanama. To se zato dogodilo što niko nije odgovarao za zločin iz 44.-45. nad tada slabijima između ostalog i mahom nevinih Vojvođanskih Švaba. Mislim pred sudom, jer je Božja pravda neke već sustigla. Kako reče Marko Miljanov: "Čojstvo je braniti slabijeg od sebe".

Ovde niko ne čita Bibliju inače bi morao nabasati na rečenicu: Koji čuva milost hiljadama, prašta bezakonja i nepravde i grehe, koji ne pravda krivoga, i pohodi grehe otačke na sinovima i na unucima do trećeg i četvrtog kolena. ili na engleskom Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation. ( Exodus 34:7 King James Version). E ovde Božja pravda sustiže Sinove i Unuke.

I eto konobar je stigao s računom. Hoće li ko da plati? Muk. Konobar cupka pored stola. Gospodo hoće li ovde neko da plati? A haški konobar tek je seo na voz, ali se očekuje u skorije vreme.

Još nešto o privređivanju i ponašanju. Možda si već primetio, jer kako vidim debelo si se zgrešio o istoriju, da je na ovim prostorima maksimalno najvažniji segment jednog rata ekonomski, i to ne samo u aspektu države već i malog čoveka. To je ekonomija hajdučije-nemam, nemam ali ako uspem, otmem pa imam.

I to se ponavlja na Balkanu svakih 40-50 godina ili što bi rekao Milošević To što smo dobili u ratu izgubili smo u miru ili već spominjani Ako ne znamo raditi bar znamo ratovati. Jer ovde je i rad, ne samo Haški Tribunal deveta rupa na svirali da parafraziram Koštunicu.

Biti srednjeevropejac nije stvar rođenja ili mesta stanovanja već ponašanja. Ti možeš biti balkanac u Srednjoj Evropi i obrnuto. A veoma je oštra distinkcija između ta dva pojma, barem kod mene.Bendeguz 19:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ne, u krivu si ja sam te ljude hteo da predstavim kao žrtve politike jedne umišljene države koja je htela da jednim udarcem ubije dve muve, da se otarasi Vojvođanskih Švaba (Ethnic cleansing) i da udomi te nesrećnike (Colonization) po zamislima nekih manje komunista kao Čubrilović ili Kirilović. Znam za neke kojima je kuća srušena od strane komunista, samo da bi ih prisilili na doseljavanje.

I mojoj porodici su vlasti (pošto su ih isterali iz svojih kuća, konfiskovali im sve, i sa jednim zavežljajem donjeg rublja i odeće udomili u bačkojaračkom koncentracionom logoru) dali 2 opcije - ili da crknu ili da prežive. Jeste da su njihovi stražari insistirali na ovoj prvoj ali su se ipak (srećom) opredelili za ovu drugu opciju i malo su se mučili i potucavali po salašima do pedeset i koje.

Ne znam da li si čuo da su za vreme NATO intervencije (ili NATO agresije kako ti drago), neka od tih kolonističkih sela svoje dragocenosti spakovali u auta i na traktorske prikolice i čekali...Šta misliš zbog čega?

No ne verujem da si čuo jer mi deluješ odsutan od stvarnosti (zatvoren u svoju sobuna n-tom spratu Novog Naselja) i bar toliko neobavešten kao premijer Koštunica.

Ja sam spojio ono što je u članku sa onim što si pisao kao objašnjenje u zagradi jer i to su tvoje misli i naravno tvoje reči. Rečenice koje su na nakovo.org (...Leta 1944. veći broj nemaca napušta Nakovo i beži zajedno sa nemačkom vojskom. 5.oktobra 1944.godine Nakovo je oslobođeno a u njemu je ostalo oko 1000 stanovnika....Oni koji su sarađivli sa fašističkim snagama su odvedeni u logore a manji deo je ostao u Nakovu. ) deluju kao da ih je pisao Sveti Jovan Zlatousti ali ti si onda stvarno stavio jednu uštrojenu ali bar "neutralnu" rečenicu da pukneš od smeha i još tvrdiš da je to NPOV.

Kao što sam ti već pisao ja ispred tebe i tebi sličnih stavljam ogledalo da se ponekad pogledaš i zapitaš se (sad deluje grubo ali ima istine): Ko mi se usr'o u moje gaće?. Dolaze presudni trenuci za ovu državu, The D-Day i računi se podvlače i to žutom. Istinsko suočavanje sa istorijom, stvarnošću, delima i nedelima proizvodi efekat preko potrebne katarze u društvu i u pojedincima, posle koje bi se moglo krenuti napred ako uopšte postoji napred na ovim prostorima. Inače će Srbija biti jedna crna rupa.Bendeguz 11:12, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Da budem precizniji ja te ljude nisam predstavljao ni kao uzurpatore ni kao žrtve. Ako bih trebao da ih predstavim ja bi ih predstavio kao žrtve. Ja sam samo reagovao na jednu rečenicu za koju smatram da je too much POV, too much biased da koristim tvoj omiljeni izraz.

Te kritike što sam izneo na račun nekih institucija nisam izneo na Talk:Nakovo nego na User_talk:PANONIAN na kojoj mogu da pišem i o preko potrebnoj katarzi posle optuživanja tipa da koristim svaku priliku da pokažem da su Srbi lopovi i ubice. Bendeguz 21:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well...

No idea - many maps call the regions of Rascia, Bosnia and/or the coastline simply "Serbia" as I previously said (it's actually a foreign, latinic synomnyme of "Rascia"). However, searching any sources, going through all, from biased articles to historical facts, I could find no "Serbia" in the 9th century, sadly. --HolyRomanEmperor 12:11, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary injunction in the Kosovo arbitration

For the duration of this case, any of the named parties may be banned by an uninvolved administrator from Kosovo or related pages for disruptive edits.

You are receiving this message because you are one of those covered by this injunction.

For the arbitration committee. --Tony Sidaway 18:03, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's up?

Excuse me if you want this kind of attitude. I try to be fair, but apparently it is not possible. Bosnia is NOT a country of three nations. Please define nation before using the word. Bosnia and Herzegovina has been a nation for more than 1500 years. Through history different ethnicities have come and changed the population. Bosnia is a country of three ethnicities with the majority of Bosniaks around 50%, Serbs 37%, 14% Croats, etc. Big difference my friend.

Check this out:

Bosnian (as referring to language) comes first alphabetically and there is a majority of Bosniaks in Bosnia, why should Serbian comes?

Thanks and don't think I'm trying to cause problems; I am only imitating your attitude.Kseferovic 19:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

E!

Pa ispada kao da sam ja sad "NE VJERUJEM TI; NE VJERUJEM TI!!! DOKAZI!!!". Uopste nije bilo tako... :( Sto je to od Milosa Blagojevica? Gde/kako mogu da dodjem do toga (niti mi je poznato djelo ni pisac). --HolyRomanEmperor 00:28, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bos. Dubica

Listen by tonight or maybe tomorrow I'll give you a pictue from my official Bosnian and Herzegovinian Resident ID Photo.

On that web site it states the town and municipality names. For Bos. Kostajnica and Bos. Brod the town names and municipality names are the same (ex: Bosanska Kostajnica is the town name ans the muncipality name and the same goes for Bosanski Brod).

However, for Bosanska Dubica the name was changed during the war. The town name is still Kozarska Dubica, but the municiaplity name has remained Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica. (Even though you can still refer to the town as Bosanska Dubica since internationally it has still kept its old name due to Zepter International being based in Dubica, but that is different topic).

Using the government website of Republika Srpska, in its title it states the town and municipality name, so technically they refer ot it as Koz. Dubica since it is the town name but not the municipality name by itself.

I am sending you a picture of my Resident ID Card and I will send you BiH voting papers where the names are stated as Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica.

So, I ask of you to be patient, there is no need to change anything by today or tonight. Kseferovic 00:31, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The same goes for Voting and government papers.

I'll try to get that picture as soon as possible, making me go through a lot of trobule.

Kingdom of Hungary

Hi Panonian – One thing this anon editor on the Kingdom of Hungary article was right about is that English-speaking readers will not be interested in the actual names given for the KoH versus Hungary, since the general reader is unlikely to know any of these languages anyway; the fact that different names exist is sufficient. You seem to think otherwise – why? K issL (don't forget to vote!) 14:39, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm... Another frustrated day? I was only asking. K issL (don't forget to vote!) 20:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dubica issue

Kad si toliko pametan onda mi reci kako na licnoj karti ne pise samo Kozarska Dubica. Ne mogu za Licnu Kartu da trazim na bosanskom, hrvatskom, i srpskom. Jedna je licna karta. Ja sam vam rekao da je opstina Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica a za grad je vec diskutabilno zato sto srbi koristi pretezno Kozarska Dubica a hrvati i muslimani Bosanska Dubica. I na bosanskim i srpskim dokumentima pise Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica za opstinu.

Ako hoces da nastavimo, onda ce mo napisati pismo (e-mailom) Ustavnom Sudu, mada sumljam da bi iko odgovorio.

Ja bi mogao da trazim informaciju preko Bosanskohercegovakog consula ovdje u Cikagu.

Hvala, diskusija jos nije zavrsena Kseferovic 15:56, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa kako ce biti isti slucaj sa Srbima i Madarima. Mozes da poredis Poljake i Njemce ali ne Srbe i Bosance.

Hvala, Kseferovic 16:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I kakav dokaz imas za BiH o sistemu imena (za bosance jedno a za srbe drugo). Ja, ne da guram moju stranu, ne znam za takav slucaj. Za to se koriste oba dva imena, po tvojoj logici bi se koristilo samo Bosanska Dubica za bosance a Kozarska Dubica za Srbe. Kseferovic 16:02, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zamolio bih te da mi ne dajes pretpostavke. Daj mi konkretnu informaciju. Vi ste jedini korsinik koji lomi svoje kosti za drugu drzavu bez dokaza. Kseferovic 16:05, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Banat category

Hi. The Category:Banat is rather chaotic and unmanagable now, and I think we need to do what we do for regions in general: include localities into counties et al, and let the counties et al function as subcategories of "Banat". It's an annoying job, and I plan to postpone it, but perhaps you can help me when I get the urge. Unless you have an objection, that is. Thanks. Dahn 22:39, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have several reasons for opposing your proposal. The category Banat itself is history and geography, and we may mess up criteria to Kingdom Come (it would be inappropriate to do that for a historical and geographical region). The category "Places in Banat" would be, to my knowledge, unprecedented, awkward in comparison with the simple and informative solution of grouping them, as we have done elsewhere, into present-day administrative divisions, and would simlpy move the problem elsewhere (a large grouping of scattered places that make searches harder). Also, it would be redundant to the categories for places in Romania, for one (subcategorizing into former regions would be unorthodox, given that the Romanian state does not function that way), and the categories for counties (which we always should use for grouping localities per county) would be redundant on two levels. Banat should, I believe, group topics subcategorized into administrative divisions and other topics, and articles dealing with general stuff and history (like the regions on the Military Frontier or the Klisura) should simply be categorized in "Banat". I also don't know if the present category includes all parts of Serbia and Hungary relevant to that topic - we should also subcategorize the present-day administrative units of county-level into Banat, even if the topics may overlap with other area (I can't think of a particular case in Banat, but maybe you do - if there is an administrative region in Serbia that is partly in the historical Banat, one could only help the reader if he were to include all of it, as the difference can be covered in articles). What do you think? Dahn 00:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I admit I was not aware of the complications within Serbia. I have a much simpler solution: simply leave those places inSerbia that belong in Banat as well into the category "Banat", and subcategorize all the Romanian (and perhaps Hungarian as well) places into counties. Dahn 00:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I have said, I disagree with having "Places in..." categories in the first place - it is awkward, and not really necessary (consider that most of the articles present there are for places). To subcat them by "Romanian"/"Serbian"/"Hungarian" would disregard the fact that there is a single article for the three (which would add to the reader's confusion) and, sice the category Banat itself is a subcategory of three national topics, it would create a ribbon in categorizing (grouping a topic on one level, and then splitting it apart). We really do not need a "Places in..." category: that is, to my knowledge, done only for countries on a country-level basis (and, in the case of, say, the Places in the Serbian Banat cat, it would immediately lead others to include it as a subcat of Places in dSerbia - removing all articles in Serbian Banat from Places in Serbia as a "double-level category"... which I'm sure you would not find appropriate). Consider my point: if administrative divisions in Serbia only partly overlap with the Banat, then we have a reason to include in Banat only those places within the regions that include themselves (to the highest level possible: if it is only a locality, include only that locality; if it is an entire district, include that district etc); if traditional regions fall partly into the Banat and partly elsewhere, include them in categories for both; however, all the counties in Romania already in the category fall inside the Banat, so there is no reason to be sending places in them to a category just nextdoor. What I aim for is subcategorizing that would be least subjective and least open to interpretations - it is what I have done for Category:Transylvania in the past -, as well as eastiest on the eyes (and most helpful). Dahn 00:41, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my full point was not to place them in any subcategory. We will simply not subcategorize Banat for them. My mention of administrative divisions was that, in the case where an entire administrative divison is already present as a category somewhere, and that category in its majority or entirety falls under the Banat level, instead of categorizing localities in it into the Banat individually, we could just send all of it to the Banat category; if not, no exception will be made to my previous point.My main concern is that we now have localities in, say, Caras-Severin, included into Banat when Caras-Severin itself is included in Banat. If no such Occam's razor can be imposed for Serbia, we simply leave Serbian localities as is. Is this ok? Dahn 01:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I find this type of categorizing extremely awkward, but if you think it is this necessary and does not go against criteria used in Serbia, go ahead. Dahn 01:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

milanmm

so, Milan, you are one meatpuppet, right? First pretending to be Slovak, but now you proved who you are. Nice try...

What??? I am not, but give me a reason why you think so... Milanmm 13:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know any Bardwell being or not being a vandal, but the same text is same because I copied it from a previous version, because I like it better. Sorry for not mentioning it. I do not agree with "regulated the situation of the new Hungarian state" because it did not. In all the contributions I try to make clear, that "modern" Hungary is not a continuing state after the Kingdom of Hungary, what most of the Hungarians would like to make a generally accepted fact. Milanmm 15:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jagoda 1 05:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Afrika paprika

Mozes li, molim te; pogledati Talk:Pagania i User_talk:Afrika paprika. Po mom licnom misljenju (a mozda grijesim), Afrika paprika pretjeruje. Tebe koristi kao argument protiv mene. Mozes li doci i bar dati komentar. Hvala unaprijed! --HolyRomanEmperor 10:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ehh, what's wrong? --HolyRomanEmperor 18:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well - that's the main issue (he keeps using you as an arguenemt against me). Anyway, as far as you see how arguement has been going - it's not even regarding Pagania, but simply Afrika paprika's civility. P. S. Sorry to hear about your adminship at the Serbian Wikipedia - I state that you should re-run and be more active. --HolyRomanEmperor 21:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, switch to the English wikipedia! :) --HolyRomanEmperor 07:38, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Novi Saaaaaaad :)

Sigurno si video da sam počeo da sređujem Novi Sad text, ajd samo General References što si stavio, da ih rasporeliš po text kao footnotes, da se zna koje si delove u textu uzeo iz te literature. --Göran Smith 16:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moram da te obavestim da opština Petrovaradin NE POSTOJI :))) Ja sam upočetku čitao status grada iz 2004 gde se to ne spominje, a i pre nedelju dana sam išao u informativni centra grada gde nisu ništa znali o tome, pa sam na kraju pisao zavodu za statistiku i dobio reply:

Sanja Aksentijevic za mene Više mogućnosti 18. 9. (prije 1 dan) Postovani,Grad Novi sad nema gradske opstine jer Statutom grada jos nisu formirane. Srdacno, Sanja Aksentijević Odsek za informisanje,diseminaciju i marketing Republički zavod za statistiku Srbije Milana Rakića 5, Beograd, Srbija ^{[personal info removed by Duja]}

Tako da treba brisati te informacije :))))))))))))) --Göran Smith 17:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa ne postoje opštine, da postoje trebalo bi to negde pisati, zar ne? na zavodu za statistiku Srbije, na sajtu grada, u statutu grada, na sajtu cesida BILO GDE. ... pa kad su bili izbori 2004, mi smo samo birali gradske odbornike, a ne i za gradsku opštinu (kao što su to radili u Nišu, Kragujevcu i Beogradu). Ja znam da se pričalo za opštine u to vreme, pa čak su govorili da je moguće da i Futog bude opština, ali mora pisati na bilokom službenom sajtu grada ili republike. Ja sam bio u informativnom centru grada, oni isto ne znaju da postoje gradske opštine. A ne možemo mi ovde na wikipediji da pišemo da postoje opštine kad nigde to piše (ni najednom državnom sajtu), zar ne? Ima status grada, ali nema opština, nije prvi put da se zakoni ne slažu sa praksom u ovoj državi, lol --Göran Smith 20:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ma znam da ovde nitko ne lupa, ali gde piše??? imaš li link sa nekog državnog sajta ili grada? Možeš na netu naći statut grada iz 2004, pregledao sam ga.. gde piše o svim gradskim funkcijama i ovlašćenjima, ali ih nema nigde i nigde se ni ne spominju. Znam da poreska uprava tretira grad kao dve opštine. Ja ću sutra, pošto prolazim pored gradkse kuće, otići u gradsku upravu pa da mi kažu iz prve ruke. Pa da sredimo poglavlje o politici grada. Ovo je stvarno komedija, kakav nam je grad. Ti si glasao za radikale? (ako nije tajna) ... :))) --Göran Smith 20:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zašto stavljaš slike sta tri mosta? Ja planiram da u skoroj budućnosti sredim ceo text, tj. da ima više texta, ali da ima i slika o svakom poglavlju, a da ne ispadne da imamo milion slika u textu, dosta je jedna slika po poglavlju. Most slobode je baš lepa slika, ove 2 i nisu neke (ništa lično), a ona sa vozom pokriva oblast železnica i slike mosta. --Göran Smith 20:17, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Prepravio. Rekao si mi preda imaš neku literaturu. Da li imaš broj stanovnika u NS i okolici na popisima stanovništva? 1991, 81, 71, 61,... ? :) --Göran Smith 22:41, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa treba mi za tabelu od 1880 pa do 2006, samo broj stanovnika.. da se vidi porast tijekom 20-og veka :) --Göran Smith 23:16, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Demografija B.Broda i Doboja

Hej! Podatke sam skinuo sa [1] naselja koja su gradska su označena sa g, a seoska sa s. Nakon što zbrojiš podatke za sva gradska naselja dobiti će ove postotke koje su označeni na kartama u [[2]]. Po tim podacima ispada da je u gradovima B.Brodu i Doboju bilo za 2% više srpskog pučanstva od sljedećeg naroda po brojnosti, tj. da je u gradu B.Brodu bilo 31% Srba, 29% Hrvata i 16% Bošnjaka, dok je u gradu Doboju bilo 34% Srba, 32% Bošnjaka i 11% Hrvata. U cijeloj općini Bosanski Brod su prije rata Hrvati imali većinu (41% Hrvati, 33.76% Srbi i 12.19% Bošnjaci), a u cijeloj općini Doboj su Bošnjaci prije rata imali većinu (40.23% Bošnjaka, 39.04% Srba i 12.96% Hrvata). Ima dosta zanimljivih podataka na tom popisu, a općenito su najkorisnije stvari da se može vidjeti demografija za svako naselje, poglavito za gradove.

U Bosanskom Brodu ti je bilo; Naselje: g Bosnjaci Srbi Hrvati Jugos Ostali Ukupno B% S% H% J% O% Brodsko Polje g 196 2438 596 466 110 3806 5% 64% 16% 12% 3% Centar g 528 477 843 684 93 2625 20% 18% 32% 26% 4% Mahala Skele g 712 345 427 474 88 2046 35% 17% 21% 23% 4% Rit g 707 860 1502 736 194 3999 18% 22% 38% 18% 5% Tulek g 141 289 729 351 59 1569 9% 18% 46% 22% 4% Sveukupno 2284 Bošnjaka, 4409 Srba, 4097 Hrvata, 2711 Jugoslavena i 544 ostalih. Sveukupno; 14045. Od toga su Bošnjaci činili 16.26%, Srbi 31.39%, Hrvati 29.17%, Jugoslaveni 19.3% i ostali ostatak.

U Doboju ti je bilo; Naselje: g Bosnjaci Srbi Hrvati Jugos Ostali Ukupno B% S% H% J% O% Bare g 112 732 135 153 53 1185 9% 62% 11% 13% 4% Centar g 3365 3720 1236 1982 432 10735 31% 35% 12% 18% 4% Carsija g 3561 303 195 594 273 4926 72% 6% 4% 12% 6% Doboj Novi g 358 237 7 39 108 749 48% 32% 1% 5% 14% Donji Grad g 1547 1879 569 844 196 5035 31% 37% 11% 17% 4% Orasje g 1411 293 111 231 90 2136 66% 14% 5% 11% 4% Usora g 779 924 502 491 117 2813 28% 33% 18% 17% 4% Sveukupno 11133 Bošnjaka, 8088 Srba, 2755 Hrvata, 4334 Jugoslavena i 1269 ostalih. Dakle tu sam pogriješio kod izrade karata! Dobro da si mi poslao mail, inače to ne bi ni skužio... Dakle bilo je sveukupno; 27579. Od toga su Bošnjaci činili 40.36%, Srbi 29.32%, Hrvati 9.98%, Jugoslaveni 15.75% i ostatak su ostali. Ne kužim kako mi se uopće potkrala ova greška, to sam radio u excelu.... Ništa, tenks. --Ceha 21:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC) Nažalost nisam. Imaš pravo. Podaci se odnose na gradska naselja u tim općinama, a ne na sam grad... Trebalo bi kontaktirati nekoga tko živi u tim gradovima i provjeriti. --Ceha 00:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Category:Politics of Kosovo

Your recent edit to Category:Politics of Kosovo (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 00:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Category:Politics of Kosovo

Your recent edit to Category:Politics of Kosovo (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot4 01:06, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Subdivisions of Serbia

Pokušavam da napravim reda na Subdivisions of Serbia ali izgleda bez uspjeha... User:Tobias Conradi izgleda ima svoju ideju kako to treba da izgleda. Ja stvarno ne vidim smisao tri ili četiri članka sa istim informacijama, koje se već sve (trenutno) sadrže u Municipalities of Serbia, a "zaokružena verzija" je u ovom diff-u, ali izgleda da se borim protiv vjetrenjača... Spreman sam da potegnem i WP:RFC i WP:AFD ako treba, ali ajd' prvo da čujem šta misliš o tome. Duja 08:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC) (Molim te odgovori ovdje).[reply]

Pa izgleda da svako ima drugačiju ideju kako to treba da izgleda. Ja sam lepo sve to skinuo sa watch liste, pa vas dvojica rešite to bez mene. :) Meni je stvarno svejedno da li će biti 1 ili 4 članka o Subdivisions of Serbia, pa ne bih da ulazim u raspravu oko toga. PANONIAN (talk) 10:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uuu al' si pomog'o... Jesi li razmišlj'o da odeš u političare? :-) Duja 14:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Lesser" Serbo-Croat peoples

You might notice if you read the Bunyevs' official site the article on the Croatdom of Bunyevs. What is odd, if you see some other articles - they consider that they have been rather aggressivly assimilated into Croats - and actually share a pro-Serb POV at many points.

I see how nice are the articles on Shokatzs, Bunyevs and Janyevs written (they're mostly pro-Croat - as they should be); but I hate the sight of the Bokelji (which has been vandalized a moment ago), Krashovans and Gorans.

See Matija Antun Relković - a prominent Shokac (Croatian) writer. Mir deleted the citations of his "Serbian tale". He could be mentioned at the Shokci article.

There - I added info on the Bunyevci from their official site. I mean that Bokelji is a complelty achronological article, poorly written and has been recently full of pro-Croat editing. I've found Croat claims on Boka ahistorical and in truth ridiculous (at least those presented there). For instance, Stjepan Mitrov Ljubisa - a Boka Catholic - was a Serbian nationalist and signed as Stevan at more times (or rarely, Stefan - though I can't find a signature like that) and he is claimed to be Croatian. Additionally, the constant claim that Boka had a Croat majority (or at least Catholic) - going even as far as LPD from the 12th century speaking about the year of 753 to support the claim! The majority were always Orthodox Serbs - and of the Catholic minority a significant portion of the population had a Serbian national affilation. See this, for instance. Matej Zmajevic is another occasion. I also noticed the book of "Svetozar Borak" - "Serbs Catholics".

The Krashovans - well, have a look at their history at Serbs of Romania. Krashovans have a lot more common with Serbs than the article presents. A lot more. --HolyRomanEmperor 22:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Je**te, gledao sam neke njihove forume - i sve se svodi kako se pojavljuju neki hrvatski korisnici i govore da su izdajice a Bunjevci ih cak nazivaju i ustasama... A i jedan od njih je srpski nacionalist (!) I Boris Malagurski kaze da je Bunjevac (a i s jednim Bunjevcem sam se sprijateljio). Nisam ni sudio da ce Srbija toliko uticati na njih... --HolyRomanEmperor 22:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I izgleda da su neki Bunjevci bili pravoslavni... --HolyRomanEmperor 22:31, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Croatian counties in Kingdom of Hungary

So, what's up with those counties? Has the discussion reached any type of consensus? --Dijxtra 14:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bokelji

Prosirio sam znatno, ali nisam bas imao strpljenja da napisem strava clanak - mozes li baciti pogled i brobati da ga "pocistis"? --HolyRomanEmperor 14:46, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Socks

I'm not sockpuppet of Bonaparte. I'm just Danutz from ro.wiki. And even if you don't want it so, Vojvodina is a Romanian speaking terittory as Romanian is official there and Moldova is a Romanian speaking country. --Danutz

But Hungarian is not official in Romania at any level. I didn't listed Ukraine or Timok Valey for example in that template, where there is a larger Romanian minority than in Vojvodina. --Danutz

If I may intrude:

"But Hungarian is not official in Romania at any level."

Neither is Romanian in Moldova. Dahn 11:40, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Romanian in Moldova, Hungarian in Romania

Yes, Romanian is official in Moldova. It is called Moldovan, that is according to the constitution of Moldova and to the law on languages of 1989 identical to Romanian:

Quote from Romanian language article:

The constitution of the Republic of Moldova refers to the country's language as Moldovan rather than Romanian, though in practice it is often called "Romanian". The introduction of the law concerning the functioning of the languages (September 1989), still effective in Moldova according to the Constitution [3], asserts the linguistic identity between the Romanian language and the Moldovan language. [4] For more information, see Romanian language#Legal status in Moldova and Moldovan language - both very good refferenced when written, so we can close the mouth of people like you.

Hungarian is not official in Romania: see Language on public administration. Some rights are granted to the minority if it compromises more than 20% of the population of the comunity. But you cant find anything about the languages of the minority being official. Basicaly this law says that the authorities are obliged to use the language of the minority (if requested) in their raports with members of the minority (but not with general public). --Danutz

I will ask you again. Beyond interpretation: where does it say that Romanian is the official language of Moldova? Dahn 12:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moldovan and Romanian are sinonyms acording to the law on languages and according to most linguists. It is just like Valencian and Catalan. I'm sorry, but after your cirteria Dahn, Spanish is not the official language of Spain and some other Spain-speaking countries, but Castillian. And we both know the terms are synonims. --Danutz 12:43, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your point about Castilian would only make sense in the context were the people you are referring to, whose criteria you have to bear in mind, will indicate that Castilian and Spanish are different. If such a group does exist, you cannot draw a[ny] conclusion in its name. So, I will ask you again. Beyond interpretation: where does it say that Romanian is the official language of Moldova? Dahn 12:49, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PANNONIAN, stop reverting the template. It is very NPOV now, just like you wanted. I put also a explanation there. So stop editing your POV. Romanian is official in Vojvodina, either if you want or if you don't. Now it just says Nations, territories and organisations with Romanian (or Moldovan) as an official language". Clearly some items in the template can also have other official languages. --Danutz

But ok, I'll had created myself all the templates if I was not to have this stupid discussion. --Danutz

Oh, by all means, go and add Transnistria (it has Moldovan as an official language). I'm sure you'll find the limitations and POV-inducing of "Romanian (or Moldovan) as an official language" as soon as you do that. Dahn 13:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's because there are romanians to accept the lies there: Moldovan/Romanian is not written in Cyrillic as it is there. But nevermind we all know who is or is not anti-romanian.--168.167.253.97 13:29, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then writing in Cyrillic must make a language completely different! How ironic... Dahn 13:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know perfectly well that's only an articial make-up. It will not change the language. If you go there you'll be very well understood.--168.167.253.97 13:37, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do. So? Dahn 13:45, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transnistria is officialy part of Moldova and is not subject to international law. So there is no need to insert Transnistria, as we have Moldova. --Danutz

You two do not have your own talk pages or what? :) PANONIAN (talk) 13:33, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is 4, well and I don't have a sock :)))

Šablon za srbijanske gradove

Pozdrav, Panonian. Možeš li mi reći zašto ipak ovaj sivi šablon za srbijanske gradove umjesto onog plavog? Onaj plavi mi je bio mnogo ljepši. :) I sadrži više podataka, bolje raspoređenih. --Djordje D. Bozovic 17:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Епархије

На карти Image:Eparhije.png побрк'о си епархију жичку и шумадијску :) --estavisti 19:00, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where...

...do you get your population censi, oh mighty Emperor of Censuses (pre-1918). I am especially interested in the population censi of the Military Frontier, Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia. --HolyRomanEmperor 21:27, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I noticed that you have send a message on 11th January of 2006 tyo my friend Aozan about the name of eyalet of temesvar. Unfortunately he don't use wikipedia, he is "retired" from wikipedia as he said :-) because of some ideological problems. but I look sometimes his account he told me his password. whatever. now you can ask questions to me about turkey and ottoman empire too.

the turkish name of eyalet of Temesvar is "Temeşvar Eyaleti" its pronounciation is like the english pronounciation of these words: "témésh-war a-ull-é-tea" :-)

have a nice day , see you later user:krasnoya--Anıl Tuna 10:28, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bokelji

Afrika paprika is blocked, and is has/is disobeying the blocking policy by editing as an anon. He has also opened a sockpuppet. You're completly free to work on the Bokezi - Afrika has gotten too far. --HolyRomanEmperor 14:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About Socialism and Socialist Economy

I am studying on socialist economists and socialist system. And former socialist states too. if you want to discuss about it I am here and I will enjoy. I do not think that the former ussr and former Yugaslavia collapsed because of socialist economy models errors. I think different things about it. if you get interested to talk and discuss I am always around here. do svidaniya --Anıl Tuna 17:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinates

When fixing links to kvaleberg.com that used to provide the mapsource page, I came across a few Serbian infoboxes with direct links to the site. In order to make the links work, a template should be used. At Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates_and_numbers)#Geographical_coordinates and WikiProject Geographical coordinates#Implementation_details, there are a few samples on how to implement coordinates. I fixed one of [5] to make them work. -- User:Docu

Well, there is a technical problem with these infoboxes: if all lines are not eked with something, the table looks broken, so I replaced empty space that you left there with "?". I do not have time now to search for coordinates for all Serbian cities, but in the future, if you want to remove this link to mapsource page from another infoboxes which possess it, just leave there "?" sign instead of the empty space, ok? PANONIAN (talk) 13:49, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's debatable which makes it more likely that they are filled in. BTW of the remaining infoboxes, many have coordinates that display, but don't link to the corresponding coordinates. Unfortunatly, I don't have time either to fix all of them. User:Docu

Komšija...

Hvala za podršku...

and until now I did not know that he live in the same city as I do. LOL

A što bih te (povremeno) oslovljavao sa "komšija"... Ja živim na bul. Kneza Miloša... Ko je ovde Bosanac... :-) ? (Obojica, rekao bih). Duja 07:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Treaty of Trianon - Line 31

I felt it necessary originally to state "today's" Croatia because the pronominal paragraph states that Hungary would be left without access to the sea as it had before 1918 via Croatia's coastline. By that I was referring to the fact that Croatia only existed as an Austrian crownland within Austria-Hungary as a dual province with Slavonia and even then, it only touched a part of the Adriatic; Dalmatia's access was probably more significant. Even then, if we are immediately before 1918, the maritime benefits were most likely of greater interest to the Austrian authorities as Hungary's internal kingdom was landlocked and remote from the Adriatic. Evlekis 09:55, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

У реду. Знао сам то само ја сам мислио тачно пре г.1918!, нема проблема. Evlekis 11:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Flags and Cotes of Armes

I read that the Constitutional Court ruled on March 31 2006 that the both entites flags where discriminating and that the flags and coat of arms must be changed within a time period of six months after the ruling. I have followd the pages closly after since but not seen any new or proposed flags and cotes of arms. I wonder if you have heard or seen any new proposed flags and cotes of armes for the Federation of Bosnia and Hercegovina and Republika Srpska? Thanks - Litany 13:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information.

I would also say that it was alot better of you adding "several thousand people" in the section of history of Vojvodina. Also the complete removing of the numbers in the intro of the 1944-1945 Killings in Backa. It's good not playing with numbers. Cheers - Litany 17:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PITANJE - Brisanje Historije

Dobar dan,

Ja bi zelio izbrisat neke postove na Wiki sto sam ja pisao davno. Ali ti stari postovi se opet mogu nac pod History. Jeli se moze to izbristat nekako? Jeli ja mogu to nekako napravit jer ja sam to pisao? Sigurno bi ja trebao imat pravo da brisem sto sam ja pisao.

Znam da mogu izbrisat na Discussion sto hocu ali i to ostane na History.

Ajde molim te javi se pa odo ja vise vani oveg Wikija.

Javit cu se i HREu...

God Speed Jagoda 1 22:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GOD SPEED

DI TO PITANJE MOGU POSTAVIT...UNDER HELP... IMALI ADMINISATOR EMAIL..AKO ZNAS NAPIS MI, HVALA

Jagoda 1 03:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Treaty of Trianon

I do not think that three new users (Bardwell, Branston Pickle, Hunor-Koppany) are sockpuppets of HunTommy. HunTommy's English was not that good. But they are obviously behaving in collusion and the record of their edits indicates that it may be one person. If it is really a case of sockpuppetry, such a collusion on a talk page is definitely unfair and should be dealt with. It is a pity that the CheckUser procedure is so complicated. I am becoming fed up with the users without a clear and consistent identity (likes of HunTommy, who seems to change identity three times a year). I will be happy to support you if these guys choose the path of HunTommy, Enigma1, and Arpad. But I still hope this new user (or users) will remain reasonable and civil. Tankred 05:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Razlog

Pana i HRE,

Ja bi volio dignuti sve moje discussions jer tek sad vidim da je sve to glupo. Ko je Hrvat? Koje Srb? Sto pripada nama sto vama itd........ Gluposti.

Pogledaj ovo...u jednom Hrvatskom selu zivi jedna familja prezime Mihaljevic, preko 500 godina su tu, prominli su vjeru kad su dosli iz Bosne. Danas ta familja ne kazu da su bili Srbi nego kazu da su Hrvati. Kad vidis to onda tek znas kako glupi ispadamo i mi u razgovoru o koje sta. Cjela bivsa Jugoslavija je misana...Tesko je reci pravu statistiku koliko ima Hrvata i Srba. To bi trebalo izvadit DNA da se vidi koje ko a samo pitat ko si? Isto tako cisto se vidi da je Ivica Kralj Hrvat iz Boke barem po imenu ali on kaze da je Srbin, Crnogorac i ponosan je na to. Kad su ga novinari pitali "vi ste Hrvat iz Tivat" on je rekao "Ne nisam".

Kako ja vidim i ti ces reci da sam u pravu...ovo je sve glupo...ispadamo glupi kad Englezi citaju. Smiju se nama svjet da se pripiramo. Trebamo pristat jer samo Hrvai i Srbi se jos pripiraju preko gluposti.

Svi smo isti....kad moze neko bito ponosan latino zasto ne biti ponosan Slav

Jagoda 1 04:04, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

North Kosovo

I know you evade Kosovo - but you can surely help with North Kosovo. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:08, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh - but North Kosovo maintains its own government and is to Kosovo what Kosovo is to Serbia. It's composed out of three municipalities (Leposavic, Zubin Potok, Zvecan) and the City of Kosovska Mitrovica. It's really rather different than the other Serb enclaves in Kosovo. --HolyRomanEmperor 11:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John Mal

hvala... Nesto drugo.. Po cemu Srbi misle da je Americki glumac John Malkovich Srbin. Ja ga pratim cjeli zivot. Prvi put cujem da je Srbin i to sam vidio na Wiki.de in na BBC. Mora biti neka greska. Ja samo znam da su njegovi roditelji stigli is danasnje Hrvatske i otvoreno kazu da su Hrvati po krvi. John ide svake godine u Hrvatsku...nerazumin kako moze biti Srbin on.

Ako neznas pitaj nekog...jer kako ja vidin on nema nista sa Srbima jedino je on bio jednom pod Yugoslav origin kao svi nasi i vasi.

PS Molise Italy...tu ima Hrvata preko 500 godina ali tu neko se javio da su to Srbi a ne Hrvati...

Treba neki red ovde...dosta je bad edits...

Sto vise gledam ovaj Wiki vise vidim nepravde

God Speed

Jagoda 1 01:47, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About Killings Bácska

"They killed 40 000 persons only from the Hungarians" that is writen there! HunTheGoaT 17:12, 29 September 2006 (CEST)

My source was the same article in the Hungarian Wikpedia. Read it!:D(if you can). HunTheGoaT 17:44, 29 September 2006 (CEST)

Write an article about the Serbian victims, but don't attack the article about the Magyar ones. Less than 5 percent of them was realy collaborants with Nazis. Listen! I know that there are Serb victims but we should read about them in another article, what is just about them. Can you aggree with me? HunTheGoaT 19:04, 29 September 2006 (CEST)

I totaly aggree with you. Your great-grandfather was not a Communist and my great-granfather was not a Nazi. They were just innoncent victims of the cruel WWII. That 40000 people weren't war criminals so please don't write that. I want to make a memorial page for my great-grandfather. I know that there were and there still are irratonaly, extremly and sentimentaly chauvinist people. You had written me before that if all Serbs would be cannibals and all of them begans to eat Hungarians for dinner, nobody will care about it. That's sad and true. I think. I have a feeling that you hate me because of my No Trianon statement but if you were a me you would know what I'm talking about. P.S.: Everybody knows that the WWII Hungary government is guilty but knowbody knows that the Yugoslav partisans have the same sins. HunTheGoaT 20:04, 29 September 2006 (CEST)

What I said is that "if Serbs become canibals and start to eat its minorities" (not only Hungarians) and I said that as a joke, so do not pull it out of context. PANONIAN (talk) 11:17, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even your sources aren't from the Holy Bilbe. And I have at least 3 source vvhere is vvriten that the number of the victims are around 40000. Do you think you are neutral enough. You are continueing a pro-Titoist and the recent Serbian propaganda in the article. Your freedomfighters were communists. Please recognise that the Hungarian victims vvere mostly innocent civilians and their number is beetvveen 35,000 and 50,000. And don't say that the partisans have enough reason to kill any civilians. Don't say that the partisan terror vvas more torelable then any other terrors. P.s: sorry about the VV letter but my keyboard is not functioning vvell. HunTheGoaT 13:35, 30 September 2006 (CEST)

My answer

Hi again!Listen I am not a fascist! I am aggainst both fascism and communism! I don't like the Nazi's, the Chetniks, the partisans. etc. They vvere all murderers. I knovv that there vvere Hungarian partisans to. I have the book about the communits of Zenta. My great-grandfather vvas killed by the partisans. I think both the Nazi's and both the communists vvere responsable for his death. I vvrote this article because I vvant to shovv that neither the Nazis neither the partisans vvere good. The only thing vvhat I hate is hatred itself. I knovv that my article vvasn't good at the begining but right novv it is more biased than before. I understand your grandfather's sentiment. He supported the killers because of the VVVVII's cruelties. He believed in the same that you believes novv. Both of us knovv that the chetniks vvere the royalist freedomfighters and the partisans vvere the communist one. VVe should compromise my friend. VVe have opposing ideology's but vvhat both of us hate is hatred itself. VVar is a guilty thing you knovv.And both sides have a lot of sin. VVe should end our interpersonal vvar because both of us vvant to defend ourselves from these sins. I have an idea hovv to make our article neutral. You'll see it. Farevvell my friend!

HunTheGoaT 17:16, 30 September 2006 (CEST)

Панониан, опет имаш забаву, знам да ћете се нагодити. Поздрав ----László (talk) 20:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Поздрав поново, јесте ХунТхеГоат ме је контактирао. Већ сам се у прошлости уверио у твоју колико, толико могућу непристрасност у разним случајевима, тако да верујем да ћеш и у овом случају наћи право решење. Познати су ми неки од извора које си навео и које је он наводио, бројеви су такви какве сте наводили и по неким мојим сазнањима бројка је око 25.000, што опет ја не могу да потврдим па ни она се не може узети као тачна. Сличан проблем сам имао када сам писао о броју Секеља у Румунији, у околним земљама и свету, па мислим да сам нашао компромисно решење. Румуни су навели једну бројку, Мађари другу, ја сам обе бројке ставио у текст па је на неки начин то испало добро, зато што ми се нико није јавио или исправљао моје податке. Наравно дао сам објашњење и за Мађарске и за Румунске изворе. Ту је негде и одговор за овој текст. Енциклопедија треба да је непристрасна и у случају конфликтних информација бројки и година, а нарочито субјективног мишљења, и не може се наћи компромиснорешење, треба их избацити до даљњег и мислим да енциклопедија може преживати и без тога. ----László (talk) 22:21, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ево неки подаци само да би потврдио моје бројке за овај чланак, по попису из 1941. године било је 456.770 Мађара, а 1948. године 418.180 Мађара у Војводини. Разлика је 38.590, што су Мађарски извори , вероватно, заокружили на 40 хиљада, па ја мислим да одатле и потиче та тврдња. Такође ми је познато да су се многи Немци после рата изјашњавали као Мађари, зато што су мислили да су тако сигурнији, да их неће дирати. То знам зато што сам познавао неке од њих, тако да је број од 418.180 Мађара мало, кажем мало, варљив. Имам још много тога али некад је доста и сабрати 2+2 и не правити проблем око тога. Ако хоћеш стави бројку од 20 до 25.000 у чланак и мирно спавај, мада као што ја имам обичај да кажем и један невин је превише, са које стране да је.Űdvőzlet (Поздрав) :o) ----László (talk) 00:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ratkovo

Your edits to Ratkovo have recently involved adding a number of photographs to the page. While photographs which illustrate content are encouraged on Wikipedia, simply creating galleries of "local color" for a town or village doesn't really help to do that. I would request that you reduce the number of images on the page, and if possible expand the text of the article instead. Adding details of the history and culture of the town would be far more useful than creating galleries of images. Thanks, and happy editing! -Harmil 01:16, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and sorry if I mis-read! -Harmil 01:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ево између осталих имаш и овде, само што је на Мађарском, али коме треба тај ће знати да прочита и разуме:

[6] У овом одељку: "Az igazi nagy szlávosítás a 2. világháború után következett be, a nagyarányú kolonizáció keretében: a részben elmenekült vagy likvidált 300 000 német helyére a passzív területekről ugyanannyi szláv, elsősorban szerb és montenegrói telepest hoztak. A 40 000 elmenekült és a kb. 20-25 000 kivégzett magyar lakosság helyett csak a Sajkásvidékről kollektíven kitelepített községek (Zsablya, Csurog, Mozsor) megürült házaiba kerültek telepesek. A kollektív kitelepítés, majd pedig az úgynevezett önkéntes lakosságcsere veszedelme azonban egészen a békekötés aláírásáig ott lebegett a magyar lakosság feje fölött ez azonban, valószínűen a Szovjetunió ellenkezése miatt) nem következett be" А оном титоисти Халиду или како се зове, треба указати на разлику између идеологије и покрета, и да се не меша у Ратково и за то имам нешто материјала. За Јерменовце ћу се побринути мало касније када будем имао времена (или ћу смањити слику да буде мање празног простора :o)), сада нешто више времена проводим на српској википедији. Поздрав

László (talk) 02:17, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No bussiness to talk with you

The "dečko" have no bussiness to talk with someone who is not neutral and who continues the partisan probaganda and the current false and biased Serbian statements about the event. P.S.: In Laslovarga's source is written that the partisans killed people who opposed the communist ideology(mostly of them wasm't Nazi but supporter ofdemocracy)HunTheGoaT 10:04, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

about Vojvodina history

as you said I looked to the cities and names in Ottoman Turkish of these Serbian cities, but I found only three of them. I added the page to my watchlist, I will find more city names in the future , but for now there is only three cities that I know the Turkish names of them (Kula, Bačka Palanka and Novi Sad) . I added them so. In fact most of these cities that you said has the same name in Ottoman Turkish era, but only some of them called differently by Turks. And another interesting thing is, there are villages and towns in Anatolia that is named like these Serbian city names.--Anıl Tuna 08:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

deep note: someone is deleting the names , I don't underststand the reason.

KrisO

Bas nije to trebalo - brojni (citaj: svi) albanski wikipedijanci smatraju i javno "optuzuju" Krisa da je Srbin. :D --PaxEquilibrium 19:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Slavs in Banat

Was Banat majorily Slavic (Serbian) in the late Medieval Ages-to early modern Age. I noticed how there are numerious controversies between Serbs and Hungarians - but how come the Romanians form (formed) the majority of Banat, then? --PaxEquilibrium 20:12, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Could you offer up a non-biased, neutral opinion to a few surveys for naming convention changes? The pages are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:South_Tyrol, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Trentino-South_Tyrol, and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bozen-Bolzano. Thanks! Rarelibra 20:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vojvodina

OK, I will follow your directions.--Anıl Tuna 13:00, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NS

Mislim da treba napomenuti da Beočin, Sr.Karlovce i Temerin kao deo šireg dela grada. Pošto su skoro spojeni sa NSom i spojeni su sa gradskim autobusima. I podaci iz informatike nisu neslužbeni podaci i nisu est. podaci, pošto su to podaci iz gradskog registra stanovništva, tj. iz SUP-a grada. --Göran Smith 12:27, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

>Pa kada govoris o sirem Novom Sadu, ne moyes yanemariti ta mesta. Ne kazem ja da ih nešto puno spominjemo, ali kada govoris o sirem delu NSa treba ih spomeniti. Nisam ja o njima pricao u nekoliko pasusa ili u nekoliko podnaslova, ali ih opet treba spomeniti, makar u jednoj recenici. Kada govoris o Njujorku, naravno da ce spomeniti i gradove koji se nalaze oko grada iako se nalaze u Konetiketu i Nju Dzersiju, posto su to gradovi iz kojih ljudi putuju na posao u Njujorku i koji su ipak nekako povezani sa gradom.

I ono sa informatikom, to nisu neslužbeni podaci, to su podaci iz biackih spisova i stanju iz registra stanovništva iz gradskog SUPa. btw sorry na gramatickim greskama o ovj poruci, ne pisem na svojoj tastaturi :))) --Göran Smith 10:13, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ja sam ispoštovao administrativnu strukturu grada, tako što nisam navodio Lug, Čerević ili Gospođince, već samo nazive susednih opština. Jedno je kada pišeš u podnaslovu člankla o administrativnoj i politici grada, a drugo je kad pišeš o nekoj stvarnoj situaciji na terenu. Kada uzimaš širi deo grada, ne uzimaš samo administrativnu podelu, već uzmaš stvarnu sliku na terenu. Činjenica je da su ova mesta povezana sa gradom isto kao Stepanovićeno, Kisač ili Kovilj, iako nisu administratvno deo grada. Nisam ja nešto puno pisao o tome, samo da čitalac ima predstavu da su ipak ta naselja povezana i skoro spojena sa gradom, tako što imaju gradske autobuse, većina ljudi putuju na posao i u škole u NS, a da ne spominjem da su ta mesta fizički skoro spojena sa gradom.

"Besides neighbouring settlements whitch comprise the city; the metropolitan area of Novi Sad comprise also of neighbouring settlemnents in Beočin, Sremski Karlovci and Temerin municipalities. These settlemnents are closly connected to the city and mayority of people commute daily to Novi Sad. Keeping it in mind, these municipalities are not politicly part of the city." Šta ovde nije tačno?

Spomenuo sam Njujork, pošto sam video da su ti textovi svrstane u dobre članke, pa mi je to neki primer za NS, da ima sve karakteristike za dobar članak.--Göran Smith 13:48, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mislio sam da su fizički bliži nego Stepanovićevo ili Kovilj. To definicija sta je metropolitan area, po tome ne spadaju naselja Begeč ili Kovilj. Ali kada govoriš o opštini NS, tj o broju stanovnika u širem gradu onda treba napomenuti i okolna naselja, a koja nisu politički deo grada. Tipa rečenice: "Širi deo NSa ima toliko stanovnika, dok sa okolnim naseljima u susednim opštinama (koje politički nisu deo grada), koji su usko povezani sa gradom i čiji stanovnivi svakodnevno gravitiraju u NS, širi deo grada ima oko toliko stanovnika." .. tako nešto :) Ubaciću tako nešto, samo pošto nemam net do kraja sledeće nedelje, a u međuvremenu sam prikupio i informacije za one misteriozne opštine grada (lol), pa da napišem i za politiku ggrada i ostalo... :)))--Göran Smith 14:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tamo daleko

Tamo daleko je nominovan za brisanje. Ja sam napisao onoliko koliko znam. Ako imaš nekih informacija, dodaj. Mislim da bi bilo šteta da se članak o tako bitnom delu srpske istorije obriše Stefanmg 14:46, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naći ću engleski tekst negde na internetu da ne moram sada da prevodim :) Stefanmg 16:06, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Independent Republic of Vojvodina

You've tagged this redirect for deletion, but you haven't created an entry in the WP:RFD log, so nobody knows your reason for nomination and it will never be discussed. You need to complete step 2 of WP:RFD#How_to_list_a_redirect_for_deletion to continue with the process. Cheers, Yomangani ^talk 15:49, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ura e Fshejte

"Ura" is a Bridge "Fshejtë" I dont know it most be a old dialect. Perhaps I am wrong but it must to do with something like Saint, (Shën). Newermeand how I know from my mother she is comming from a family "Tabaku" (hase nothing to do with Tabak/Cigarett or with something else) and it was a "bajraktar" (chef-wariors) witch hase tradet with Leather from Stamboll to Belgrade and they have maked more thane 6-7 briges in the area of Dugagjin and Novi Pazar and Nish Sandjak. Last war (Kosovo War the Milosheviq peopel have killed the bajraktar holder (Flage holder of the family) a family with 19 persons and they have played socer with they head). Eneyway at thate time this brige it was the not lagers but the high brige in Dugagjin Nahia and it looks after the Mostar brig it was secend stone hight brige in west Balkan. Thats life. -- Hipi

ect.

Do me a fiver ask the old peopel (not seatler) around today Kosovo whar is Prishtina. I have asked some makedonian, serbia, boshnajks witch live in the border of Kosovo and they know Prishtina as "Market of Gold" beacose souch bajraktars after the trade was biger they have foundit Novi Pazar as poit betwen Sarajevo and Prishtina. Nish it was a centrum betwen Prishtina, Uskup, Sofia and Belgrad. Becose of thate the peopel there was mixed and they was more interest in the economy. Religion and Nationalisem it was for they Non-sence.

If you wount you can translete but the serbs in Gjakova say for this brig "most Ura e Fshejt" beacose it hase no sence to transet.

Ups!! I have a documentation even if the Millosheviq paramiliters has killed the bajraktar family. I presante here but is to early for thate. We have to many wrong transleters. You can start to translet this Stari most or perhaps is beter if you trai to translet the world "MOSTAR". hahaah

Upsss Typical albanian -i for masculium "MOSTAR-I" "MOS"- Do not TARI- River with meaning you can not cros Tara.

Unbeliver he has maked the brige to cros uncrosit Tara.

OK

Ajd kad se igras, igraj se do kraja. Nasta lici tabela? Banatski Brestovac popravi. ----László (talk) 03:10, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

Ово прво сам грешком урадио, а за ово друго, не видим у чему је проблем? Ја живим у општини Вондсворт у Лондону. Општина има "mayor"-а, чије име ни не знам, па тако и сам град Лоднон има "mayor"-а(Ken Livingstone). Ако погледаш чланак "mayor", видећеш да mayor значи исто к'о и "municipality president" (na engleskom). --estavisti 23:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ма немам појма да ли уопште стварно постоје те општине, ил' смо на папиру. Ја сам само хтео да покренем шаблон, јер - као за све на википедији - главна ствар је да се нешто покрене, и после иде "само по себи". Значи, направи измене које мислиш да су потребне, јер ја ништа више не знам. --estavisti 01:09, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Skorenovac

Sve je dobro sto si menjao, ako si primetio i ja sam prethodno poceo da menjam, "doterujem", clanak ti si to samo nastavio i koliko vidim, zasad i zavrsio. Nije lose, ako nam se nesto ne bude svidjalo, a i kasnije ako jos nesto dodam ,opet ce biti koja sitna izmena i sve je OK.----László (talk) 22:30, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxovi

За ово прво (грбове) нисам ни хтео да их избацимо. За ове друге две ствари немам ништа против да су укључене, ал' не бих хтео да инфобокс буде превелик. Сад, за градове можемо користити {{serbian cities 4}}, који се за сада користи само за Београд, мада не знам да ли други градови имају заставе. Ако не, БГ може да настави с овим, а за друге да се узме {{serbian cities 5}}, који се резликује једино у томе, што нема место за заставу, а има место за панораму. За општине имамо {{Infobox Serbia}}, уз неке измене које си сугерисао. За градске општине Београда постоји {{Belgrade municipalities}}, који би требао да ускоро има исти look као {{Infobox Serbia}}, па можемо тако и са осталим градовима. Пре него што почнемо са градским насељима и селима (што иначе подражам), требали бисмо да средимо градове и општине. Нпр, да БГ буде "сјајан", да остали градови буду "добри чланци", и да пола наших општина више не буду клице. Такође, мислим да сва та мала места ће морати да сачекају развој Мреже у Србији, да локални људи то попуне. Овако, са 10% становништва на Интернету, то је просто немогуће. Не могу да замислим да нас неколико, колико нас има, напишемо чланке о пар хиљаду села. --estavisti 14:53, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Narodnosti

U doba komunizma Srbi, Hrvati i Slovenci su priznati kao etnicke grupe, narodi; dok su Makedonci sa malo zakasnjenja priznati kao etnicnost, bilo je sukoba oko njih jer je prvo bilo u misli da bude navedeno da su oni samo priznati kao nacija, no autohtonos slovenskih plemena koji ih cine je bila presudna u ovom slucaju. Dok kod Crnogoraca nije tako - oni su priznati, naravno, kao nacija; ali pritom, bivano je podvuceno da su oni etnicki Srbi i/ili Albanci. Mnogo kasnije su i Muslimani postali nacija (ali nema tu naroda).

Sama cinjenica ozvanicenja Bosnjackog naroda, etnicke grupe mi nagovjestava nesto - vjerojatno ce i 40% Crne Gore ozvaniciti sebe kao "etnicku grupu" - u sta spadaju iskljucivo gradjani Stare Crne Gore, koji pripadaju tom zasebnom etnosu, dok ce ostali biti Srbi, Albanci, Hrvati, Bosnjaci, Muslimani. Ocito da nece uvoditi novi naziv kao bosanski muslimani, jer im je ovo vec istorijski. --PaxEquilibrium 10:57, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Znas ovo?

Nikola Tesla He refused to receive the Nobel prize which he had to share with T.A. Edison. In 1942 the American Supreme Court decided that Tesla invented the Radio, not Marconi. Jagoda 1 03:28, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zvedu tebi

Kako ja mogu tebi dati jednu zvedu za tvoj realan poso na Wiki. Uvijek si Fair. I think your fair on all thing to with balkans and its people. You deserve a star. If you can give yourself one quote me and add it to page, please. Ur a legend.

Jagoda 1 04:01, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eh - nije izmisljenje. Npr. pogledaj Geografsku Enciklopediju Saveza Komunista; etnografija je postala prilicno konfuzna i, vrlo grubo receno, zaj******* da vrijeme socijalizma. --PaxEquilibrium 18:44, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Popis

Да ли можда знаш где могу да нађем попис Србије из 1900-те? Потребно ми је да имам цитат за Belgrade, а ионако би ме занимало. --estavisti 23:24, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Тражио сам ја, ал' безуспешно. Сад сам се сетио једне књиге која можда има то што ми је потребно, па видићемо. Полако сређујем Београд, па биће то сјајан чланак кад-тад. --estavisti 23:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sr Kamenica

Sto pises o delovima Kamenice? Šta tu imaš da napišeš više od jedne do dve recenice? Napises o Paragovu i špreusmeris na Sremska Kamenica#Delovi, zar nije tako najbolje?

Text o Kamenici treba da bude jedan, tj da bude potpun i lepo napisan . Šta imaš o Gornjoj Kamenice da napises, reci mi, molim te? --Göran Smith 15:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

koliko se sećam.. zamolio si me da ne seckam text o Novom Sadu, Istorija NSa, Politika NSa, Kultura NSa i slicno... Pa po toj logici ne vidim svrhu da pisemo dve recenice o necemo kada mozemo lepo da napisemo text o Kamenici, a ne da ga seckamo na male klice. Artiljevo smo svi zvali, koji su ziveli u Kamenici i Ribnjak nije deo Petrovaradina, a ni Kamenice ..vec samo deo gradskog dela NSa. --Göran Smith 15:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa onda možemo pisati i o svakoj ulici u gradu, tko zivi i koliko drveca imaju. Ja sam ziveo u Gornjoj Kamenici i sta ima da napisem "Nalazi se policijska akademija, institut, jedan restoran i 2 zgrade, dok su ostale kuce", a paragovo ima samo crkvu i kuce. Ja tebe razumem, da prosirujemo i da pisemo o delovima, ali ajd prvo da sve to lepo napisemo u clanku Sremska Kamenica, pa onda kad to napisemo u potpunosti, onda prosiruj dalje...

Ne znam da li si primetio, ali gradsko podrucje NS, ovde na Wikipediji, ima vise cetvrti od Njujorka, ali koji ima 8 miliona stanovnika i povrsinu kao pola Vojvodine. Treba ipak napraviti neku granicu na koliko cemo delova seckati ovaj grad, jer je ovo ipak grad sa samo 300.000 stanovnika. Ako cemo ga vec seckati, onda bi to bilo pravednije da bude na mesne zajednice. --Göran Smith 16:20, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, ajd da imamo 50tak gradskih cetvrti NSa (da imamo vise od svetskih metropola), ali zar moras i text o gradskim cetvrtima usitnjavati, mislim na to što pricas o Naselju. Znaci pisaces o delu koji je deo Novog Sada, ti delovi naselja su samo dve-tri ulice. Mislim da je dosta jedan text o Naslju, Detelinari, Sajmistu, centru.

Ajd onda to stavi na sablon jedan, da bude preglednije.

Preglednije

Napisi ti text o Bockama, ali preusmeri na Sremsku Kamenicu. Pa da Sremska Kamenica ima podnaslov "delovi Kamenice", pa cemo tu napisati delove, sta ima u tim delovima i gde se nalaze. Pa kad taj klikne na Bocke dobije sve informacije o Bockama i Kamenici i onda uvek moze dopuniti sa textom. Treba da ih posticemo da pisu, da dopunjjuju, ali ne i da napisu textove do dve tri recenice. --Göran Smith 16:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Serbia

Дај неки свој коментар овде, да се што пре усагалсимо и кренемо са реализацијом новог инфобокса. :-) --estavisti 13:02, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your map of Kievan Rus

Hello, PANONIAN! Some users over here have challenged the validity of this map you provided. I would like you to state your sources of it to clarify the matter. --Illythr 13:57, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Russia 0900.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Russia 0900.gif. 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. 14:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Edits

Случајно сам видио код Дује да имаш 1,231 страница на вочу. Ја тренутно имам 3,128. Wanna swap? :-) --estavisti 04:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NS v.2

Možemo napraviti, samo ja već imam neku literaturu, a još čekam neku literaturu o razvojnu opštine NSa od zavoda za urbanizam ... pa možemo u tijeku sledeće nedelje to napraviti.

btw, imaš li ti MSN mesenđer ili yahoo? --Göran Smith 14:34, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Map

Aha, finally someone made this! :) I always wondered how's the border facing Albania slightly different from the present one... I believe you know the answer?

Also - what about the other parts that proclaimed union with Serbia? --PaxEquilibrium 21:26, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Serbia

Let's try to reach a final consensus with regard to the new template. [7] --estavisti 00:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you find the information about monasterise in Republika Srpska? --estavisti 03:43, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nadao sam se nekom dobrom sajtu. I hteo si reci "dobro jutro", ja mislim. --estavisti 03:48, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa meni su te dve stvari iste, nazalost :) --estavisti 03:52, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa sad mogu i ja tebi "dobro jutro". --estavisti 16:28, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

For edit warring, personal attacks, and other disruption, PerfectStorm/C-c-c-c is banned from editing Wikipedia for one year. For edit warring and incivility, Bormalagurski is banned from editing Wikipedia from one year. For edit warring and disruptive use of sockpuppets, Dardanv under any username or IP, is banned from editing Wikipedia for one month.

Hipi Zhdripi is limited to his one named account, Hipi Zhdripi. All edits by Hipi Zhdripi under another account or an IP address shall be treated as edits by a banned user.

Ilir pz, Hipi Zhdripi, Vezaso are banned for one year from editing articles related to Kosovo. Relation to Kosovo is to be interpreted broadly so as to prevent gaming. Either may be banned from any related non-article page for disruptive editing. All articles related to Kosovo are put on Article probation to allow more swift dealing with disruption. Editors of Kosovo and related articles who engage in edit warring, incivility, original research, or other disruptive editing, may be banned for an appropriate period of time, in extreme cases indefinitely.

ChrisO is warned not to engage in edit warring, and to engage in only calm discussion and dispute resolution when in conflict. He is instructed not to use the administrative rollback tool in content disputes and encouraged to develop the ability and practice of assisting users who are having trouble understanding and applying Wikipedia policies in doing so. .

Dardanv, Ferick, Laughing Man, Osli73, and Tonycdp are placed on Probation for one year. Each may be banned from any page or set of pages for disruptive edits, such as edit warring or incivility.

Ilir pz, Hipi Zhdripi, Vezaso, Dardanv, Ferick, Laughing Man, Osli73, and Tonycdp are placed on standard revert parole for one year. Each is limited to one revert per article per week, excepting obvious vandalism. Further, each is required to discuss any content reversions on the article's talk page.

For the Arbitration Committee. Arbitration Committee Clerk, 03:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Bokelji/Bokezi

You are now really free, as User:Afrika paprika has received a community ban from the Wikipedia. --PaxEquilibrium 21:23, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mapa Beograda

Да ли можда имаш мапу Београда, на којој се јасно виде све општине? Тренутна карта на чланку не приказује цео Београд... --estavisti 03:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ја немам појма што се тиче "имиџ едитинг"-с, па јел' би мог'о ти да измениш ову слику да одговара потребама енглеске википедије? Ако хоћеш, онда би могао истовремено и да промениш боје, ова браун-жута комбинације је ужас. Знам да си заузет, ал' баш би било добро ако стигнеш, јер намеравам да још мало средим чланак, па да опет предложим да буде "сјајан", што ће овог пута (ја мислим) скоро сигурно и усптеи. --estavisti 16:44, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Е, хвала за карту! То је баш оно што је било потребно :-) --estavisti 17:36, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bukovac

Nisam ja ništa izbrisao, niti smanjio ... samo sam vizualno ga doterao, da izgleda lepše i preglednije kada ga netko otvori. --Göran Smith 09:19, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa ja kapiram da se podnaslovi stave u textove gde ima texta, a tu ih baš nema... Vizualno je ružno i nepotrebno da stavis u podnaslov "See also: Novi Sad". U see also se stavljaju textovi koji nisu pomenuti u textu, zar ne?

btw da li je katolicka crkva ili katedrala u centru? --Göran Smith 15:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ma napraviću neku kutijicu za predgrađa NSa, pa će biti taj link... Mislio sam u centru, na trgu. --Göran Smith 15:17, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Treba mi nešto, nadam se da mi možeš pomoći. Razumem se ja u fotošop, ali ne toliko... Da li možeš da napraviš zastavu NSa? Svetlo placa zastava sa grbom bele boje. :) --Göran Smith 15:49, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mislio sam to, ali kao većina stvari, na netu nemožeš ništa nači... znači samo mi treba grb izbeliti na tamnoj podrlozi... ok, nije frka... raspitaću se još :) --Göran Smith 16:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar time

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your seemingly effortless work on Wikipedia, it's time that you get some recognition for all that you've done here (I've been meaning to give you this for a long time, but never really got around from doing it). Cheers! —Khoi khoi 01:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! ;-) —Khoi khoi 01:47, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KK Novi Sad

Nemam pojma, mene mrzi da menjam taj text, ali imas sajt sinalko super lige pa vidi :) --Göran Smith 08:40, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have MSN Messenger

I'd like to talk to you :) Reisender 16:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC) Reisender[reply]

Belgrade

You may be interested in Belgrade's FA nom. Please do not vote in favour simply because it is an article about Belgrade, but rather on the article's merits. If you feel that it is not good enough, please vote against. --estavisti 05:47, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:Operabgmunicip.PNG

Све се лепо види

Како то? И ја понекад користим Оперу, и немам тај проблем, као што можеш видити. Можда твоја подешавања нису у реду? --estavisti 17:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meni neće ovde da se prikaže screengrab, ako imaš isti problem, samo klikni ovde da ga vidiš.--estavisti 17:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Е, па јеби га, увек ће се наћи неко коме не изгледа 100% како треба. Важно је да добро изгледа у ИЕ-у, Фајрфоксу, и Опери (три најпопуларнији бровсери). Е сад, што ти користиш стару верзију, шта ћемо сад? Што не скинеш нову? --estavisti 21:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Па није да само мени изгледа оке. Ако погледаш овде, видићеш да све те бровсере (у којима се лепо види) користи отприлике 95% умрежаног становништва. Није увек могуће баш свакога задовољити. Ако ти је баш стало до тога, могао би и ти то да средиш, јер ја не могу одавде да видим како ће теби тамо изгледати. :-) --estavisti 22:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Klubovi

Ja stvarno želim da radim na NS textu da ima kvalitet good ili B klase na en wikipediji. Da bi znao standarde koje prolaze na Wikipediji kapiram da treba da vidim textove o drugim gradovima koji imaju taj kvalitet, najviše gledam kako su napisani Belgrade, Berlin, New York City i Los Angeles. Ajd za početak da se držimo tih standarda, pa posle ćemo da dopunjmujemo ako može. A ne da samo nabrajamo šta ima NS, bez pravih rečenica; jer bi onda imali samo jedan veliki spisak.

Ako stavljamo klubove u drugoj i trećoj ligi, onda bi trebali staviti još min. 20 klubova na spisak. Praxa na wikipediji je da se stavlja samo najvažnije, tj najvažnije klubove. Kada pišeš o limanu stavi da imaju igralište FK Kabel, ili za Slaviju. --Göran Smith 18:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Predgrađa mora da ide Sremski Karlovci, i sva mesta u koje vozi GSP. Moramo ih nekom kategorijom povezati sa gradom, kada su vez na puno načina povezani sa NSom.

"Suburbs are inhabited districts located either inside a town or city's outer rim or just outside its official limits (the term varies from country to country), or the outer elements of a conurbation." --Göran Smith 16:50, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drugo je politički, a drugo je stvarno stanje na terenu. Baš sam danas slušao predsednika opštine Beočin na TVu i 5 puta je govorio kako je opština Beočin predgradje NSa. Drugo je politika i granice opština a drugo je stanje na terenu, da većina stanovništva svakodnevno migrira u NS, a i geografsaki ih deli jedno brdo od grada (što je situacija u Sr. Karlovcima i Rakovac). Što znači da su ta mesta:

geografski predrađe grada
ekonomsko-kulturno povezani sa gradom
saobraćajno
i po definiciji "predrađa" deo predrađa grada, koje kaže da mesta uz administrativu granicu grada se mogu uzeti kao predgradje. --Göran Smith 18:05, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bokelji

Clanak na srpskoj wikipediji kaze da su vecina Bokelja deklarisani Crnogorci, dok se nekolicina izjasnjava kao Hrvati i Srbi. Koliko ja znam tu bi trebalo da pise da veci deo cine "Srbi", a jedan deo i "Crnogorci".

P. S. http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0:Kosmet_etnicko_ciscenje_1999.PNG i http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0:Kosmet_etnicko_ciscenje_2002.PNG bi bilo zgodno da mozes da napravis za ovde. --PaxEquilibrium 13:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But that's not by municipalities, but by settlements. Also, I think that that map's something like the one on Serbs of Croatia. --PaxEquilibrium 20:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Serbs022.png

Did you create this image? If so, use a license, such as "PD" or "GFDL" instead of "logo". That symbol is not copyrighted/trademarked or anything to use the logo template. :-) bogdan 17:11, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Further; please understand that a coat of arms is itself an expression of a blazon. It is not uncommon for people to confuse the two. A coat of arms can be created based on a blazon that is centuries old. Each individual coat of arms representation of the blazon has rights held by the creator of that version of the coat of arms. Simply because a blazon is centuries old does not mean that coat of arms derivatives of that blazon are automatically in the public domain. Thus, we need to know what the source of the image is so we can verify its copyright status. Where did you get this image? What is the copyright license of this version of the coat or arms? --Durin 21:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just cut a part of larger image. I found that larger image somewhere on Internet and I really have no idea where, so if that is problem, you can delete the image. PANONIAN (talk) 21:25, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave it tagged as a no source image. That'll allow it to stay here for seven days, after which it will be deleted. If you can remember where you got it from during that period, by all means please update the image to reflect the source. Thanks, --Durin 21:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's taken from the Coat of arms of Republika Srpska. --estavisti 21:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I take it from there (I saw now). :))) PANONIAN (talk) 21:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Serbs022.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Serbs022.png. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Durin 21:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Serbia12.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Serbia12.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. 02:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

FK Vojvodina

RK Vojvodina je pre jedno nedelju-dve zvanično prestao da postoji. Zato sam ga obrisao. [[User:Stefanmg|Stefanmg] 12:14, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Peace talks

Hey, I know we started off on the wrong foot, but considering the recent Bosnian suck up User:Rts [freak], my goal has become to be the neutral Wikipedian between the three ethnicities. He should be checked for treason or being a sockpuppet. Anyways, I am in collaboration with Estavisiti and HRE, along with Bosnians Emx, Live Forever, Demicx, HarisM, AdnanSa, etc. We have had our fair share of battle and have had different views. Therefore, I suggest that we look at the issues and talk about them.

I am saying this because I would formally invite you to join the Wikiproject Bosnia and Herzegovina. We need more active users. I am trying to make the articles on Bosnian neutral. Also you are pretty much the only user on Wikipedia that I have had issues with. Thanks and I hope you understand, Vseferović 03:29, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

However, this not only involves cooperation from me but also from you as well. Greetings Vseferović 03:34, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pannonian, I have never met you before, but I am writing here because Vseferović is writing things about me. The way he staretd off the above apology to you was almost word for word the same as the apology I gave to him a few days ago; he has since not responded to my apology, and keeps calling me a "sockpuppet" or I'm gulity of "treason". I mean, I've explained my actions to him and he won't even listen; I was mostly reverting edits by User:Thunderman - a disruptive user who has since been blocked from Wikipedia. I can't understand why he keeps "attacking" me behind my back, especially since I have apologised to him for any annoyances or disruption I have caused him, and since I haven't edited any Bosniak related articles for awhile. He seems to be willing to talk to you, so maybe you could talk to him on my behalf, because I am sick of him spreading rumours about me. Thank you. - [rts_freak] | 5p34k 2 /\/\3 06:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Odgovor

Izvini, ali kakav god da imaš spor sa Seferovićem, vas dvojica to treba sami da rešite ili se obratite nekom adminu da posreduje (a to sam isto i njemu napisao). Ja nisam admin pa ne vidim kako ja tu mogu pomoći pogotovo zato što nisam ni upoznat detaljno sa time oko čega se vas dvojica sporite. PANONIAN (talk) 12:53, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry Pannonian, but I can only speak English. It is my curse. There are so many beautiful languages would like to speak, but at the moment I can only speak English. So anyway, I didn't understand that message; could you please translate it? - [rts_freak] | 5p34k 2 /\/\3 13:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok

Moj cilj je da pisemo neutralne clanke. Problemi sa (znas sa kim) su rijeseni. Hocu samo da vidim ako stvarno ne zna "nas" jezik. Dakle, projekat treba da poveze sve tri naroda blize nego sto smo sada. Wikipedija ne bi trebala biti politicki orijentisana (i ako jest). Svrha je da pisemo clanke a ne da se raspravljamo oko BiH, Hr i Sr. Imam dobre odnose sa ostalim bosancima (live Forever, Emx, Dado...) hrvatima (The wanderer, Luka Jacov...) i srbima (Estavisti, Pax, ...), vi ste jedini korisnik sa kime sam ja imao velike sukobe. Vrijeme je da ostavimo sukobe izanas i da nastavimo sa kvalitetnim radom. Sa svake strane ce doci fundamentalisti i to je dio naseg zivota i rada (na wikiu). Ja razumijem da RS postoji ali moramo doci do nego realistickog "suzivota", a prvi korak je da od danas (sa projektom) stvorimo neutralne clanke sa kim ce svako se sloziti i procitati. Meni licno ni jedna jedina nacija ne smeta, znaci moramo raditi skupa da osvojimo taj cilj (goal). Hajde u clani se pa da vidimo sta mozemo u raditi. Svrha nije da protivi mo se sa ostalim. Hvala, (pa ne treba nam admin da se sukob smiri, ni smo djeca (mozda je on ali ja nisma)) Vseferović 19:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DAI

There is a new user that claims DAI calls the inhabitants of those Serbian lands Croats. As he does not count it because anyone can edit those articles, and neither counts any source if it's not viewable across the net. Do you know any internet-viewable site that shows the contents of DAI, so that he can see for himself that it says that Rascians, Travunians, Konavlians, Narentines and Bosnians are Serbs; and not Croats? --PaxEquilibrium 11:23, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Шаблони

Као што можеш на Template:Infobox RS/doc видити, има место за мапу на овом "требињском" шаблону, али ако се не стави карта не види се "Слика:Мапа.пнг" или сл. (тзв. optional argument). Као пример чланка који користи тај шаблон, а има мапу, погледај Berkovići. Уредније, зар не, да немамо црвене повезнице?
Ово што видиш на страници Template:Infobox Serbia није како изгледа шаблон када се користи. На Template:Infobox Serbia/example, може се видити да ширина шаблона у чланку зависи од садржине.
Дуја се већ сетио мањинских имена. :-) Наиме, он је убацио могућност да се користи "name_alt" (опет optional argument) за имена типа Szabadka (види Template:Infobox Serbia/doc). На тој страници такође можеш да видиш да има место за грб, само што ако га тренутно немамо, ништа се не приказује, док је до сада било оно ружно и неуредно "Слика:Грб.пнг",
Што се тиче линија, некако су ми много ружне, ал' ево пробаћу да убацим неке бледе сиве линије ако ти баш толико смета тај недостатак, мада морам рећи да мени лично изгледа много sleeker без линија.

Наравно, није ми жеља да идем против нашег договора. Баш сам зато само убацио шаблон у чланке о општинима у источној Херцеговини, који су међу најзапуштенијим чланцима о нашим општинима, да видим каква ће ту реаквија бити пре него што наставимо. Надам се да више немаш баш толико против ова два шаблона :-) --estavisti 16:29, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Оке, направио сам Template:Infobox RS temp, који може да користе те мапе, и убацио овде: Trebinje, Ljubinje и Nevesinje. То може да остане колико год треба, док не направимо стандардизоване мапе за све општине у Босни и Херцеговини.
Добро, имамо мапе за све општине, а за грбове можемо укуцати неки текст, да се види да постоји рубрика без слике.
Што се тиче мањинских имена, просто можемо с њима као што смо са ћирилицом и латиницом до сада - <br/>. Нема никакве везе ако су та мањинска имена "административно" заједно, јер ће бити приказана к'о да нису.
За линије, сутра ћу то средити мало, а данас идем да спавам у неко колк'о толк'о нормално време. :-) --estavisti 00:04, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Ban title

Can we come to some agreement? I would not like to turn this into some kind of argument with you...I would prefer that we have a consensus. Anyway I think to state that the word entered English language from Serbo-Croat is wrong. Why? Well because Serbo-Croat is not really a language but rather a name for group of languages, diasystem, a dialectal continuum. If "Croatian" really bothers you that much perhpas something else can be put like South Slavonic or something along those lines. Your thoughts?--Factanista 13:30, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope

Nema nigdje, za sada cu ostaviti da su stanovnici Rashke, Bosne, Travunije, Zahumlja i Paganije bili Hrvati. --PaxEquilibrium 14:22, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sándor Petőfi

Hi. I myself don't know if Petőfi's origin was Serbian, Slovak, Turkish or Tanzanian. I just know that a user keeps erasing and replacing mentions of Serb ancestry, without adequately quoting sources. Care to look into it? Dahn 16:01, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kako...

...ти се свиђа ово? --estavisti 16:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Па мени је далеко боље да нема тих црта између, а тако је (без) на Template:Infobox Country. Могу да ставим да је лева страна мало тамнија (Moscow), ал' црте између нећу. Ружно је много, јбг...--estavisti 22:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Е хвала што си ми рекао за ту црту коју нисам убацио. То ћу сада, а и истовремено направити оне друге измене. --estavisti 16:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Republika Srpska and Balkan politics

Sorry to bother you again, but I wonder if you have an insight in the current politics regarding Republika Srpska? It has been an issue here in Croatia recentlly that RS would be dissolved or if the Croats would have their own "entity of Bosnian Croats". I also read here on Wikipedia that the Serbs of RS aim for independance with a referrendum, like Montenegro did. The UN and EU has, as far as I concern, not been positiv to a seperation of Bosnia. So I wonder if RS any legal rights to demand a referrendum and is RS getting closer to be an independant state? And if RS would be independant, do you think a union with Serbia would be possible? Best regards - Litany 15:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Demographic history of Vojvodina

Answers are there. Öcsi 20:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I agree with your opinion concerning the demographic of the counties. But as user:Markussep recommended it, we could make a new article for the demographics themselves. Is this a problem? --Öcsi 20:19, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll start editing the article in the next few days. If you have time, please help me expanding it. Thanks. --Öcsi 10:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Moguli ja ili ako mozes to dignut one postove an mom tal page o population Hrvata i Srba Gledam to ocistiti, jer je glupi talk haha

Jagoda 1 21:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Odgovor

Па није проблем у томе што ми не можемо да нађемо страницу неке тамо општине, него просто те општине немају присуство на Мрежи и неће га ни имати наредних 5 година. Што да држимо ружну црвену повезницу кад просто не може да се попуни, јер нема чиме? --estavisti 01:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright of Serbian government works

You might be interested in Template:PD-SerbiaGov; follow the links therein for details (namely:Serbian copyright law). It should get us covered for the copyright of materials taken from gov.yu and related websites. See also Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights. Regards, Duja^► 10:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD Pannonian should be hold the tilte: The Funniest Agressive Wikipedist Of All The Time.

DDDDDDD! I have changed nothing in the Backa Killigs article, but you have reverted it. :DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD! What a Hungarophob!:DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD It is very funny!

Chill out, kid. Ok? PANONIAN (talk) 03:52, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image

You`ve got it.Sors bona 20:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Још о шаблону

Све то стоји, али да тако радимо, то би дало ужасан утисак work-in-progress-а. Неко ће додати повезницу на крају чланка, и неко ко зна како се ради са шаблонима ће то убацити у шаблон. Мислим, треба да буде user friendly али људи стварно нису морони...--estavisti 14:36, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Super, ja sam pisao tekstove da popunimo podkategorije o NSu, pa sam i zaboravio na četvrti. Ajd samo da napravimo neka pravila šta spada u četvrti, da ne ispadne da imamo četvrti više od Nju Jorka :))) Pošto u NSu ima 46 mesnih zajednica (sa okolnim mestima), da granice četvrti ne idu pola u jednoj, pola u drugoj mesnoj zaj., govorim ovo da bi mogli predsednik mes.zaj., upisati površinu, br. stan. i gustinu naseljenosti (pošto imam informacije o tome) i da ne seckamo Novo Naselje, na Tozovac, Šonsi,... :) --Göran Smith 19:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NS

Pa opština Novi Sad nije isto što i Grad Novi Sad. Grad Novi Sad je teritorija koja se sastoji iz dve opštine, a ne samo opštine Novi Sad. Jebeš glupave u gradskoj upravi što nisu opštinu nazvali "Bačka ili Sever", kao što su u NIsu i Kragujevcu pravili opštine :))) To je kao da se opština Vračar u Beogradu zove "opština Beograd", naravno da bi bio poseban članak o toj opštini, pošto nije samo ta opština "Beograd", zar ne? --Göran Smith 00:06, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A šta da se opština zove "Sever", po toj logici bi imali taj članak, naravno. Kada pišeš o Beogradu, pišeš tekst o svim njegovim opštinama, i o gradu, ali ne i o Beogradu kao naseju, tako isto i o Nišu i Kragujevcu. Ako za svaki grad u Srbiji (BG; NI; KG) ima članak o gradu i posebno za svoje gradske opštine, zašto ne bi i NS to imao? --Göran Smith 00:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Onaj šablon Novi Sad stavi na dno teksta, i pliz nemoj mi dirati onu tabelu i mapu u Suburbs podnaslovu, pošto sam se baš namučio sa bojama i tabelom :) --Göran Smith 00:35, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa meni je ok. Pa može da stoji, viđao sam to i na drugim tekstovima. To se i drugima dešava? --Göran Smith 00:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa meni u Operi 9.01 i firefoxu se vidi ok. Kako da koristiš Operu 6.03, koliko je to staru :))) Skini noviju verziju bre :))) --Göran Smith 00:46, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kakve informacije o naseljima i kvartovima? Koliko se secam bio je samo neki spisak nekih kvartova, ali o tome ima "see also", a detaljnije o istoriji gradskih opština i šta je deo koje opštine i šta je bilo deo opština do 89... to sam već napisao i stavicu ovih dana u politiku grada, pošto imam sve informacije o politici grada i opština. --Göran Smith 00:59, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa piše da je granica Dunav, a to koja je opština u kojoj regiji, zato imamo Geografija podnaslov, zar ne? :) A što da pišemo da jedni imaju town status, a drugi su selo. Mislim da bi to samo zbunilo čitaoca, pošto kad kažeš da je jedno town onda pomisliš da ipak imaju neku upravu , sa više autonommije, a Stari Ledinci i Sremska Kamenica imaju iste ovlasti i to ne predstavlja nikakvu prednost town ili selo (isto sranje). A ti nemoj da brišeš zadnju rečenicu u Suburbs. :))) --Göran Smith 01:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Da sređuješ? Izvini, ali tko je tebe ovde postavio da budes glavni i odgovorni urednik Novi Sad

teksta? Da si sređivao tekst, ne bi tekst bio veliki spisak (sem istorije) kada sam došao da neku rečenicu napisem. I taj lik Esti.. gleda standarde FA tekstova o gradovima koje ima ova Wikipedija. Mislim da bi se lako složili svo troje da pišemo tekst kao, pr. Beograd (da ne spominjem Nju Jork). Šta fali da imamo tekst kao Beograd? Idem da spavam, pa da sutra nastavim :) laku noć --Göran Smith 02:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Јеботе, људи, искулирајте... Имамо довољно свађа овде, не треба нам да се још и међусобно свађамо..--estavisti 02:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ali za to imamo tabelu, šta je u kojoj opštini? Onda izgleda kako da je Suburbs and municipalities manje više isti tekst, zar ne? --Göran Smith 15:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ne fale mi, kada čitaš za četvrti podnaslov piše da je Sremska K. i Pet. deo urbanog dela, a u podnalovu politike piše da je granica opština Dunav. Za Sremsku Kamenicu i Pet. se podrazumeva da su urbana naselja, pošto su deo "urbanog dela grada"

Napisao šta je potrebno da piše za obrazovanje u NSu, ako misliš da treba da pišemo za svaku srednju školu i osnovnu ti napiši education in Novi Sad, pa piši (imas u NS na srpskom spisak škola). Ja samo idem po kriterijumima Wikipedije za dobar članak :) --Göran Smith 15:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Po statutu grada, samo Grad Novi Sad ima zastavu i grb, gradske opštine nemaju grbove i zastave (već koriste od grada). A ne možeš staviti da je to gradonačelnik, kada nije... napiši da je predsednik gradskoj veća (counsil president). A taj inbox je ružan kada nemaš grb, zato sam napravio lepši --Göran Smith 16:15, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To je stari grb, a nije službeni grb. To možeš staviti u istoriju (što sam i uradio), kao neki istorijski grb, ali ne kao šlužbeni (pošto nepostoji službeni). A petrovaradin ima Mayora (iliti gradonačenika), a to je Maja Gojković, tj ona je gradonačenik cele teritorije grada ... to je potrebno napomenuti. --Göran Smith 16:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pa ti mu reci da se kod nas ne kaže mayor već municipylity president, samo to treba promenuti. --Göran Smith 16:38, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ima, sledeće nedelje dobijam informacije o gradskim opštinama, pa ću staviti :)))

Kvartovi

Pa ja imam jedno izdanje od zavoda za urbanizam sa površinom, ne mesnenih zajednica, već kvartova. A u statutu grada, mesne zajecnice su kvartovi (samo što imaju glupave nazive). Mesna zajenica je jedan oblik mesne lokalne samouprave, što grad NS vidi kao kvart ili četvrt. A predsecnik mesne zajenice se bira na izborima, tako da je on predsecnik kvarta Žitni Trg ili ostalih četvrti.

Zašto Rotkvarija ne bi imala površinu, kada joj znamo, isto tako za novo naselje, telep, centar, liman i ostala naselja. A i podatke o broju stanovnika možeš dobiti po mesnim zajenicama. --Göran Smith 06:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

btw Rotkvarija nije isto što i Žitni Trg, Žitni trg je druga ćetvr, a i mesna zajecnica, a i geografski nije Rotkvarija, taj deo počinje od Žitnog Trga pa preko Železničkoj. Tako da to nije isto. --Göran Smith 06:57, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poll

No, no, nothing serious. Please, have a say. --PaxEquilibrium 16:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, did you know that Baranja was originally a part of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina (Republic of Serbia) and later annexed to the Republic of Croatia? --PaxEquilibrium 19:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you didn't. :)

P. S. User:PaxEquilibrium/Poll#It_is_solved_already. --PaxEquilibrium 22:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo polje

How do you like , eh? :) Nikola 17:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Da, mada bi trebalo i ti da predjes na SVG. Nikola 11:11, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bolji je iz dva razloga: prvo, sliku u SVG formatu mozes da odstampas i na zgradi i izgledace kako treba (dok ako bi neko pokusao da odstampa PNG sliku na A4 ili dobice gomilu kockica a i u velicini koja se koristi na Vikipediji nece izgledati bas bog zna kako), a drugo, mnogo je lakse menjati natpise i slicne stvari koje se na mapama inace i menjaju, na primer, na onoj mapi mnogo je lakse povecati slova ili prevesti imena u srpski nego sto bi to bilo da je u PNG-u. Nikola 15:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naravno, ne moras da se gnjavis sa mapama koje si vec uradio, ali nove mape mozes da pravis tako. Moguce je i prebaciti PNG u SVG uz malo majmunisanja, ja sam recimo dobio dosta dobre rezultate sa tvojom mapom Panonije. Da ne zaboravim, program koji mozes koristiti je Korel ili ako ti je prekomplikovan/velik/sta god Inkskejp. Nikola 12:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dakle, baci pogled na

. Nikola 09:55, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Novi Sad

Ja nemam informaciju o površini mesnih zajednica, ali imam kartu od zavoda za urbanizan, gde je NS podeljen na četvrti kako to oni vide i sa površinom + milion nekih statističkih informacija.

Svrha Inboxa je da da opće informacije o tekstu, površina (ako je znamo), kojim mesnim zajednicama pripada, mapa koja označava koji je to deo grada i broj stanovnika (ako ga znamo). Ne razumem šta je tu pogrešno? Ok predsednike mesnih zajednica, to možemo skinuti.

Btw, ajd sredi General References. Ja to nisam stavljao pa ne znam da sredim. To treba da je sređeno kao Footnotes. Kapiram da su te reference iz istorije. --Göran Smith 18:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

General References u NS tekstu, gde piše literatura --Göran Smith 06:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comedian

Panonian - Norwegians, Makedonians and Czehs are genetically almost the same people (!!) - you are a big comedian, why don't you go to a comedy show - you would be successful!!! --Öcsi 12:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1944-1945 Killings in Bačka

Ok, if you want, but as I understood it, the killings happened after the end of the occupation, and were a direct result of the occupation. Ergo they deserve a small section on the Occupation of Vojvodina page, not a whole article, that pretty much repeats the other one. Its up to you though. - Francis Tyers · 18:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vojvodina infobox, numbers

Hi PANONIAN,

(returned old infobox because new infobox is totally crapy)

In what ways do you feel {{Infobox Country or territory}} is totally crappy here...? I'd like to understand, as this template is used in many other country and territory articles... Thanks, David Kernow (talk) 06:55, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PS Re the numbers in the Districts section, these were written as words per WP:MoS.

Thanks for your reply:

There are two big errors with that infobox that I replaced: 1. there was no list of ethnic groups, which is [] important information...

In other country/territory articles, I've found this information listed within the article, usually within a "Demographics" section. It can, however, be included as a footnote in {{Infobox Country or territory}}...?

Well, I noticed that you replaced infoboxes in other country/territory articles as well, and regarding countries and territories in the Balkans, the information about ethnic composition is an important information...

Some were already using {{Infobox Country or territory}} and some were not, so I thought I'd try to intriduce some consistency; however...

...I would agree that we can made new infobox named "Infobox Country or territory02", which would be based on the "Infobox Country or territory". It would have two basic differences: 1. It should have part about ethnic groups, and 2. it should be 5-6 cm shorter (if possible) because in the current size it do not look very good here if you see the page on Internet Explorer...

...I agree that ethnic groups can be a useful inclusion (not just for Vojvodina or the rest of the Balkans, but elsewhere too). However, as forking is discouraged on Wikipedia, I suggest {{Infobox Country or territory}} is adapted; have done so here. Re the display problem with Internet Explorer, I now see what you mean; I'd say, however, that such a problem is not a reason to remove the template but to sort out why Internet Explorer is unable to display it correctly – do you know any Internet Explorer experts...?

And just to answer suggestion that ethnic groups could be included as a footnote. You already done it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vojvodina&oldid=88232341...

So I did; sorry to forget! Yours, David (talk) 19:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...2. It was too big, so it pushed down template from the history section and made a hole in the text of history section.

Odd... Here the {{Infobox Country or territory}} infobox was around the same height as the current infobox, i.e. produced a layout that was virtually identical. If the effect you report were not to occur, would you be happy for {{Infobox Country or territory}} to be used...?

Regarding numbers, since many readers of Wikipedia are not native English speakers, they more easily could read "46" than "forthy six". PANONIAN (talk) 19:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Elsewhere, however – especially on paper – this seems to be a norm. (It's also an option here.)

Yours, David (talk) 01:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I did not had time to answer you before, but if you included ethnic groups into existing infobox, then I would not have problem if it is used.

Hope you're not feeling too busy! I've now reinserted the {{Infobox Country or territory}} for Vojvodina with ethnic_groups and map_caption added; if anything (still) amiss, please let me know.

Regarding problem with Internet Explorer, I do not know how that can be solved, but I suppose I could rearrange images and template from the history section, so it would solve problem in Explorer. PANONIAN (talk) 02:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rearranging might fudge a solution, but I agree that this behavio/ur shouldn't occur. I thought for a moment that it might be due to the subsequent {{History of Vojvodina}} – in particular the clear:right in its table's style – but having tried to standardiz/se it using an "infobox bordered" class, I don't think the situation has improved... If it has, great! Yours, David (talk) 03:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS Just spotted your {{History of Vojvodina}} revert; if size the only problem (per your edit summary) then no need to revert (per my subsequent edit summary). (The template may now be even thinner!) David (talk) 04:02, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have no objections to the infobox anymore. By the way, my thought was to include in infobox ethnic groups with their percentual participation (like it was before), not just to list them. :) But, I corrected that anyway. PANONIAN (talk) 13:27, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Percentages or no percentages; so long as the information isn't (accidentally) lost! I reckon there are many articles on countries/territories where using the ethnic_groups option could be an improvement, so I'm glad your observations prompted me to add it. Best wishes, David (talk) 21:53, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Горани

Није то етничка скупина, већ група Курда који говоре неко посебно наречје (сам наслов то говори: Gorani (linguistics)). Као ијекавци код нас или тако нешто. Сумњам да сами себе сматрају етничком групом, па што би их ми тако гледали? Са друге стране, не видим неке друге аргументе против померања чланка. --estavisti 20:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Animal sounds in foreign languages

Given that these sounds are all listed in the Montenegrin language, perhaps you want to put in their Serbian equivalents as well. Biruitorul 08:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Thank you. Biruitorul 06:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes

See you started to add infoboxes to articles. could help you bit with that. however, i would recommend you to use templates, as on the German Wikipedia. tables in every article cannot be standardized that easily. Within an article you only need to add input, nothing else.

The only thing to do would be to translate the templates or modify them a bit. --Maestral 18:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Created a template now. Please see Talk:Croatia and have a look at Virovitica. --Maestral 18:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NS

Why? --Göran Smith 17:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, do večeras će biti šablon za inbox serbian city gotov, sličan ovome samo napisan za naše gradove. --Göran Smith 17:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

btw, molim te, ajd sredi one general references u NS textu, onako da izgledaju kao footnotes... (ovo ti vec govorim 5 put). --Göran Smith 17:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, ako ne znas tehnicki kako se stavljaju, ja znam. Ali ja ne znam gde da ih ubacim, pošto nisam pisao istoriju NSa, a kapiram da je vecina tih general references odatle. Onda te general references numerisi sa brojevima, #, #, ... pa stavi u tekst na </ sup> u teksu, pa cu ih ja onda lepo srediti :) Ok? --Göran Smith 17:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, uradi kada stigneš, ali nemoj zaboraviti :) A kako možemo staviti nešto kao "dalje čitanje" ako je ta knjiga na srpskom, a ovo je na engleskom? hehe :))) --Göran Smith 17:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Hungarians are not Hungarians at all"

Panonian, I was just wandering through the talk page at Magyarization and I came across a statement of yours that I take serious issue with and feel I must comment on. You asserted that Hungarians are actually Slavs and as proof of your assertion, linked to some photos of Khanty people, who are among the closest linguistic relatives to Magyars. You then challenge anybody to find a Hungarian who looks like a Khanty, and since (by your own assertion) there are no Asiatic-looking Hungarians, the Hungarians as a nation do not really exist. To refresh your memory in case you've forgotten, look here: [8]

1. There are plenty of Hungarians who look sort of Asiatic, I've seen some. They don't look like the Khanty, but they don't look entirely Slavic either.

2. Even though it is obvious that the original, Asiatic Magyar tribes have in the past 1000 years intermarried and had children with various Slavic peoples from the region, thereby ending up looking more "European", that doesn't mean that "the Hungarians are not Hungarians at all." Such an argument is at best silly and at worst downright racist. It smells of ugly theories of "racial purity" that have terrorized the world for centuries. I'm sure even the Serbs have some "foreign" blood in them. Surely the current Hungarians are somewhat different from the original Hungarians that went with Arpad into the Carpathian basin a millenium ago, but do NOT tell me that "the Hungarians are not Hungarians." As long as we have our language, our stories, our music, our...interesting national character :), and our culture in general, the Hungarians ARE still "real" Hungarians. K. Lástocska 01:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zdravo Panonian, Sorry if I offended you at all or misunderstood what you were saying. I did not at all mean to call YOU a racist, I only said that your statement sounded "at best silly, and at worst racist." I did not at all intend to imply that you yourself are a racist, only that your statement sounded a bit similar to racist arguments I have heard from others. And I do apologize for misunderstanding--I understand now that you only meant that what is a Hungarian today is different than it was 1000 years ago. But doesn't that go sort of without saying? Isn't EVERY nation/ethnic group/people different now than they were 1000 years ago?

However I find it really, really hard to believe what you say, that the ORIGIN of the Hungarians is Slavic. As far as I know (and this is the general scholarly consensus), the Magyars originated somewhere in Central Asia, probably near the southern end of the Ural mountains. They were not Slavic, they were something entirely different. You yourself have pointed out that the closest linguistic relatives to Magyars are the Khanty, I also add the Mari and the Vogul, also to a certain extent the Sami (even the Kazakhs are a bit related linguistically--but not very much!). None of those are Slavic peoples. (Just take a look at the crazy magyar language--it sure isn't Slavic, and you and I should know! :) ) Also, Hungarian folk music at its most ancient essense is very different from Slavic folk music, much more similar to some Central Asian and Ural-area music (Mari, Chuvash etc.). Even just listen to some old magyar names: Vajk, Árpád, Bendeguz, Géza, Attila...those are definitely not Slavic! :) (and I know Slavic languages too.)

So while I obviously agree that nowadays Central Europe is all ethnically mixed-up, and the modern Hungarians have a lot of Slavic blood--I don't dispute that and I have no problem with that. :) I do however disagree with your claim that the Hungarians are ORIGINALLY a Slavic people--not for any sort of weird nationalistic reason (I like the Slavs as much as anyone), just because I think it's factually inaccurate.

PS--I'm not all that new a user, been around for about six months or so. Though I guess I'm a newbie compared to lots of people! :) K. Lástocska 03:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, well, that was just confusing then. What are these "many sources" that say modern Hungarians are actually Slavs? I have never heard that. As for the list of Hungarian wikipedians you gave me, I'm not going to bother getting involved in your little nationalist arguments, it's not really worth my time arguing over details of ethnic census or who called who a nasty name. I'm not a nationalist and I don't like to deal with them. K. Lástocska 04:03, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That map was really hard to read--especially since it came out huge and I had to scroll all around to try and find anything useful, and then I had forgotten what the first part said. :( As for the arguments, I am NOT going to get involved in those, I would only try to resolve the dispute but I can see it's pointless.K. Lástocska 04:37, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Karlovci

И мени се то дешава, али не мислим да је то до карте. Ко зна о чему је реч... // estavisti 23:21, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Petrovaradin

Znaš li kako se zove onaj deo Petrovaradina gde su stambene zgrade, kod železničke stanice i da li znaš koji je deo Novi Majur? --Göran Smith 09:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Source

You mentioned at Template talk:Infobox Serbia municipality that you have a government source which defines "village", "town" and "city". I know about Zakon o teritorijalnoj organizaciji but I can't find it there:

I have official publication with 2002 census results and all towns in Serbia are marked with letter "g" (gradsko naselje) in that publication. Places that are not marked with "g" are not towns, no matter if some of them are seats of municipalities. PANONIAN (talk) 14:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I can't find it on http://webrzs.statserb.sr.gov.yu either. Is it available online or you have a paper edition? Duja► 12:55, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Vojvodina_map.png je netacna karta. Zapadni Srijem je bio u Vojvodstvu Srbije, kao sto se vidi na Image:Militargrenze.jpg... mislim da si napravio jos jednu slicnu mapu... mozes li to ispraviti? --PaxEquilibrium 17:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smederevo

Vidim da si pomjerio grb ali to sad kod mene izgleda sj***no—grb Brankovića se sad preklapa sa "Industry" naslovom —, a prije je izgledalo dobro. Je li problem u Operi ili u tvojim podešenjima ili...? Možeš da mi baciš tvoje screen-shotove na e-mail prije i poslije? Duja► 09:35, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Serbian territorial aspirations in Bosnia

Is this Ceha's map correct? If I remember, the aims of the Republic of the Serbian People of Bosnia and Herzegovina were to separate the Serb part of Sarajevo, and not wholly take it. Additionally, what defined the borders? Then again, Kubura wrote on the image's talk page that Serb pretensions were AFAIC much larger... I'm confuzzled over there.... --PaxEquilibrium 15:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please, stop this lame edit war, what you started

It is really ridiculous to put a sentence into a separate section. Or should I start putting the foreign names of the Hungarian cities and towns into a separate section wich only contains: serbian: xxx, coratian yyy, german zzz? :) Please, act normally, and follow the conventions of enwiki, and stop this lame edit war, what you just started... --Vince ^{hey, yo! :-)} 00:44, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you joking? :D There's no such agreement, only an argument between you and another guy. You discussed wheter Bunjevaci are a descent ethnic group or serbs. And I guess you're not the leader of the serbian-wikipedians or what :-) Are you trying to fool me? Pls, don't be so ridicuolus :D Anyway, abt naming, you just reclamated, that why do not relevant foreign names in the Hungarian places' articles, and why are in the Vojvodina related places. So, in fact, you protested against, what you are stating on my talkpage and in the editorial resume's :))--Vince ^{hey, yo! :-)} 01:09, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What you offered me is an ultimatum, not a "compromise", and there's nowhere even a little bit of sign, that you've accepted it. I do not believe it, since you put many time to be sure, every little tiny village in Hungary will have the serbian translation wheter if serbs lived there ever in history. You won't delete them. And I think it is absolutely no need to put a separate section only one line. This is ridicuolus. In Belgrade, its ok (if it not would be in the miscellaneus part at the end of everything) or wherever has a long story, but in Banoštor only to put this line : (Serbian: Banoštor or Баноштор; Croatian: Banoštor; Hungarian: Bánmonostor) into a separate section - it is absolutely (and even more) needless. --Vince ^{hey, yo! :-)} 01:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vojvodina and a historical comitatus separated from a recent region is not the whole Central Europe region. Maybe we should start checking pege histories, to find out who started what, when, and what you, and what I did. And I didn't say, that I am opposing of putting translations into first lines. I haven't said anything about this question yet.

Maybe in some places, like Kalocsa its a bit hard to understand why is it important? Because in Buda it has a historical reason (as Hungarian names in Vojvodina/Slovakia/Transylvania/Burgenland/Carpathian Ruthenia places) Where not, they are not. (for ex many European cities has different Hungarian names, than their original one)--Vince ^{hey, yo! :-)} 01:53, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Pécs even the turkish name is mentioned in the first line, and I think it is good. --Vince ^{hey, yo! :-)} 01:56, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hi

I have adopted VinceB to show him the ropes, not to be someone to call when you have a content dispute with him. Issues about his contributions should be discussed with him, not me. I'm actually inclined to agree with him in the example you showed me, an extra section isn't needed for simple alternate names that can be listed at the beginning. As for your concern over the table of contents showing up, you can simply add __TOC__ to generate the table of contents if it isn't there automatically. Happy editing! --Daniel Olsen 04:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

not you too

~~First estavisti and now you??? Such a shame that both you guys are leaving, I might as well pack up as well. // Laughing Man 17:12, 25 November 2006 (UTC)~~ Very happy you decided to return! Welcome back :) // Laughing Man 04:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you will return soon

PANONIAN, please don't give up! You have done great job in Wikipedia and it would be really bad to leave after so much work just because of a dispute with one guy. You have survived many attacks of this kind in the past. There are formal procedures how to deal with vandalism and content disputes. It is worth trying them. Moreover, those petty conflicts over where to put foreign names are not so important, are they? The real substance, the content written by you (and this is the most important in an Encyclopedia) remains untouched. I know you are upset, but this will be such an unimportant episode in few years. On the other hand, if you really leave, all the articles about Central Europe may be taken over soon by a handful of nationalist vandals who have not contributed to them, but who are keen to push their POV wherever they can. Your capitulation would be their triumph. Doy you want to let them to destroy this wonderful project? How about taking a little vacation and returning after the things cool down? Well, it is your decision and in either case, I would like to thank you for your great contributions. And if you really wish to quit, perhaps you will be interested in editing Citizendium, which is supposed to have stricter rules (but a lesser impact) than Wikipedia has. Good luck in your life. Tankred 18:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We are trying to resolve such issues. I completly agree with you that there is too much incivility around, but overall, Wikipedia is improving. You may want to check Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) - from what I understand such a convention could have eased some of your experiences, where it complete... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 17:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Panonian, many editors need a Wikibreak from time to time. I hope this is a break for you. You've been a valued and respected editor. Durova^Charge! 01:40, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't want to raise too much drama about your departure, as I think that you're too notorious wikiholic. I look on this as a venting-off wikibreak, which we all feel we need every once in a while when feeling pissed off by jerks. I sincerely hope I'm right... Duja► 07:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand if some people get to you; been there, done than, got a T-shirt :))) The best way is to take a break couple of weeks, but do not give up on Wikipedia all together. I miss my arguments with you. Come back soooooooooooooooon :) --Göran Smith 10:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you all for support, I had time to think so I am back. In fact, I really do not care where these foreign names for the articles are writen, but I just was disturbed by the fact that one POV pusher reverted my edits in 50-60 articles (and my only intention was to make these articles look more NPOV). However, I really do not like fact that most of my work in Wikipedia is fight against vandalism and POV pushing and only small amount of time is that what I use to do something new and useful. In the future, I will be more concentrated on writting new articles and improving existing ones instead to deal with POV pushing and vandalism (which is really annoying thing in Wikipedia). I can just hope that at least part of what I do will not be vandalised or turned into POV. PANONIAN (talk) 17:23, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This what you call NPOV. Burning the other's villages, and you act to please the Serbian nationalists.

Not the non-nationalist normal ppl, but the White Eagles. Your neo-fascist, racist friend(s)/supporter(s) ( WhiteEagleSerbianPride (talk · contribs) 212.200.175.122 (talk · contribs) ) immediately run for helping you. You should rethink yr edits, and actions here on wikipedia, because they are supported by racist, neo-fascist

So in fact I (and everybody who you had an argument with) are washing up after you not backwards. Better restrict yr actions to those articles, where you're able to act normal, since (almost) every single hungarian editor has a problem with your behaviour and edits. Whoever makes an edit what you don't like, you instantly start to insult him/her. [9], but such lines are can be found wherever you stated or joined an argument.

So I call yr statements above, and what you wrote on yr userpage a doublespeak argument.--Vince ^{hey, yo! :-)} 16:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dem NSa

Ok, ja sam samo onu tabelu malo "doterao" :)

...i još nešto, znam da sam ti ovo rekao dosta puta. Text o NSu je skoro gotov, samo je ostalo da se srede General References. Ako možeš to srediti u sledećih nedelju dana, samo treba razvrstati šta je od toga References, Further reading i Footnotes :))) --Göran Smith 00:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Banat

Actually, the ţinuturi (provinces) were only established in 1938; the article says 1929 at present. See, for instance, Ţinutul Timiş. The division into these counties lasted from 1927 to 1938, as explained on the Counties of Romania page. The map showing the situation as it was in 1939 corroborates my point. Biruitorul 16:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Панчево

Подаци су одавде [[10]], био сам доста избирљив што се извора тиче. Овај извор има најверодостојније податке што сам до сада нашао. Поредио сам их са садашњим резултатима, мислим највише на податке од после другог светског рата и поклапају се са званичном статистиком. Такође за предратне информације имам неке књиге на мађарском и српском језику за Скореновац и бројке се слажу са стањем који ми даје овај извор. Иначе мапа коју си ти ставио је тачна, али Торонтал и Тамиш су мењали своје границе ,једна науштрб друге, па су највише ˈˈоштећенеˈˈ биле општине Ковин и Панчево. Тако да ни та бројка која стоји на сајту коју си ти дао није нетачна за неки временски период од 1900 до 1910 али тада је општина Панчево била мања. Имам негде тачно места која су припадала општини у то време, ваљда ћу наћи па ти јавити. Значи број који сам ставио одговара највише садашњој величини општине и припадајућим насељима и постојао је у то време (1910. године). Мислим да о том административном померању граница има такође на мађарској или енглеској страници википедије (треба пронаћи где :0)). ----László (talk) 23:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1,489: / Line 1,489: @@
 ::Well, thank you all for support, I had time to think so I am back. In fact, I really do not care where these foreign names for the articles are writen, but I just was disturbed by the fact that one POV pusher reverted my edits in 50-60 articles (and my only intention was to make these articles look more NPOV). However, I really do not like fact that most of my work in Wikipedia is fight against vandalism and POV pushing and only small amount of time is that what I use to do something new and useful. In the future, I will be more concentrated on writting new articles and improving existing ones instead to deal with POV pushing and vandalism (which is really annoying thing in Wikipedia). I can just hope that at least part of what I do will not be vandalised or turned into POV. [[User:PANONIAN|<font color="blue">'''PANONIAN'''</font>]] [[User talk:PANONIAN|<font color="purple">'''(talk)'''</font>]] 17:23, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
+[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Demographic_history_of_Vojvodina&diff=85381129&oldid=85377995 This what you call NPOV]. Burning the other's villages, and you ''act to please the Serbian nationalists''.
+Not the non-nationalist normal ppl, but the White Eagles. Your neo-fascist, racist friend(s)/supporter(s) ( {{user|WhiteEagleSerbianPride}} {{user|212.200.175.122}} ) immediately run for helping you. You should rethink yr edits, and actions here on wikipedia, because they are supported by racist, neo-fascist
+So in fact I (and everybody who you had an argument with) are washing up after you not backwards. Better restrict yr actions to those articles, where you're able to act normal, since (almost) every single hungarian editor has a problem with your behaviour and edits. Whoever makes an edit what you don't like, you instantly start to insult him/her. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASerbophobia&diff=87238098&oldid=87227653], but such lines are can be found wherever you stated or joined an argument.
+So I call yr statements above, and what you wrote on yr userpage a [[doublespeak argument]].--[[User:VinceB|Vince]] <sup>[[user talk:VinceB|hey, yo!]] :-)</sup> 16:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 == dem NSa ==

Revision as of 16:59, 30 November 2006

Old talks

Post new comments or questions here

Old Banat Maps

Hi PANONIAN

South slavic languages

Some Help Needed

sockpuppet??????????

What proof

Request

Gone Quiet

Veeeery sneaky

Edit war

Austria Hungary

Crişana

Old maps

Serbs: Caucasian origin?

Industrija

Srijemska mitrovica

Image tagging for Image:Serbia01.gif

Thanks

Arbitration request on Kosovo

CheckUser

Hey

Why

E,

DNA

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo

Okruzi

RfA

Križevci (former county) move proposal

editing

come take a look

NS

Napravite red u Tesla article

Barnstar

Serbian lands

Slovenian names.

Anštajn

Smile

CG?

Categories

Image tagging for Image:Hungarian migration03.gif

Kingdom of Hungary

Re: Yes

Reply

Support

Re: Odgovor

Re:Nemci

Well...

Temporary injunction in the Kosovo arbitration

What's up?

E!

Bos. Dubica

Kingdom of Hungary

Dubica issue

Banat category

milanmm

Afrika paprika

Novi Saaaaaaad :)

Demografija B.Broda i Doboja

Your edit to Category:Politics of Kosovo

Your edit to Category:Politics of Kosovo

Subdivisions of Serbia

"Lesser" Serbo-Croat peoples

Croatian counties in Kingdom of Hungary

Bokelji

Socks

Romanian in Moldova, Hungarian in Romania

Šablon za srbijanske gradove

Епархије

Where...

Hello

Bokelji

About Socialism and Socialist Economy

Coordinates

Komšija...

Treaty of Trianon - Line 31

New Flags and Cotes of Armes

PITANJE - Brisanje Historije