Ante Vranković

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 03:04, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Your recent edits to User talk:Ivan Štambuk could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. freshacconci talk to me 03:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action, as you did at User talk:Ivan Štambuk. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.  Someguy1221 (talk) 03:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ante Vranković (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have decided not to use my basic human right to protect my human dignity against malicious accusations of Ivan Štambuk by constructive legal means, after I was informed about this: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum/Archives/2010-05#Death_threat.2C_immediate_action_required Ante Vranković (talk) 10:17, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. — Daniel Case (talk) 14:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ante Vranković (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Dear Sirs, here is what happened: I was editing an article about Josip Šimunić, and Ivan Štambuk deleted my contributions twice, calling my contribution a „garbage“(!). Later I have seen that he falsely accused me of quoting non important person, although I have quoted president(!) of Šimunić`s FC Dinamo Zagreb, as you can see for yourself in the history of the page. As it is clear criminal act of defamation, I have asked him to send me his address so that we can solve this legal matter in a civilised manner in the court, so that Wiki would not have any harm from his behaviour. Still, Ivan Štambuk reported me as an attacker(!) which gave him “legal threat“. Anybody literate knows that legal threat is impossible phrase, because if something is legal, it cant be classified as a threat, because threat is illegal i. e. criminal act. Still, I have found out that this type of accusation is possible on en.wikipedia as a private site, and that I am blocked for a lifetime(!), without any previous warning whatsoever(!). My wiki-friends told me later that they know Ivan Štambuk as a person who has a long practice of direct malicious insults and even unhidden death threats as in the case of Robert Ullmann https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum/Archives/2010-05#Death_threat.2C_immediate_action_required They have also told me that he was never sentenced for this kind of behaviour, not even in the case of direct death threat to mr. Robert Ulmann, because his wiki-friends are protecting him no matter what he does, although I do hope that it is not officail policy of Wikipedia foundation (please correct me if I am wrong). I have realised that I have to make new contributions only to the subjects which are not connected with “serbo-croat“ (?) interests of Ivan Štambuk, and that in that case there would be no problems with my contributions, and that in the case of death threats and other kinds of criminal acts of Ivan Štambuk, I have to act according to Wikipedia guidelines so that my behaviour could not be again categorized as a “legal threat“. I hope that you can unblock my account now or delete it as it never eXisted - as you prefer. Sincerely, Ante Vranković, archaeologist and art historian Ante Vranković (talk) 8:42 pm, Yesterday (UTC+0)

Decline reason:

Since this unblock request does not contain an explicit withdrawal of the threat of legal action, I am declining it. You may also want to read this before filing another request. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:26, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ante Vranković (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Dear Sirs, I am not taking any legal actions against Ivan Štambuk, I am declining it. Ante Vranković (talk) 17:46, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Based on the somewhat combative nature of the reply below and the fact that you state you are "declining" to take legal action (which suggests that you believe you still have a right to take legal action, you're just choosing not to at this time), I believe it is in the project's best interest to leave this account blocked. only (talk) 10:43, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Ante Vranković (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Dear Sirs, I am not taking any legal actions against Ivan Štambuk, I am withdrawing it, as Yunshui explicitly asked me as a condition for my unblock. If you have some new, additional conditions for my unblock please inform me about them. I was surprised by your statement that it is in Foundation`s best interest to keep blocked person with 2 university degrees in favor of a person without a single degree, and I can`t believe that this is official attitude of the Foundation (please correct me if I am wrong!), especially concerning all other relevant facts from this particular case, and my previous behavior (I never had any problems with anybody except Ivan Štambuk) as well as previous behavior of Ivan Štambuk (see for example: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum/Archives/2010-05#Death_threat.2C_immediate_action_required.) Still, if all this is official attitude of the Foundation, as Only implies please delete my account completely! PS: If you (Only) do not intend to keep your word (Yunshui) and you are obviously decided to keep punishing me publicly with your block no matter what, as you are doing, are you still asking me to keep my word concerning logical legal actions against Ivan Štambuk? If you do, please explain me the logic of that, and by what mean you are going to sanction me even further in the case that I decide to withdraw my word as a reaction on the fact that Only already officially withdrew yours. Because by his irregular behavior Only has now tided your hands completely. I think that you should employ admins with at least a bit of common sense in the future. It is all your call now, and if you don`t intend to keep your word as Only implies please give me one reason why should I keep mine.Ante Vranković (talk) 14:31, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Accept reason:

I'm accepting your unblock request as you have explicitly withdrawn the legal threat. However, I want to make a few things clear to you:

1. Legal threats are not allowed because they disrupt the stability of the project. You have the right to use legal means to protect yourself, but you do not have the right to edit Wikipedia while you do so.
2. Expert editors are valued on Wikipedia. However, stability of the project is valued higher. If you become disruptive, then your qualifications will not matter and the qualifications of the other parties will not matter. Work collaboratively here as you would be expected to in a professional environment.
3. Only and Yushuni are very experienced Wikipedia administrators. Although you may be an expert in your subject, they are experts in Wikipedia. You should lean on them for advice on our processes as you would lean on one of your colleagues in your professional position.

If you make further legal threats, you will be blocked again. v/r - TP 20:03, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear Sir, thank you for the unblock, but even more thank you for your kind explanation! As I have stated I will keep my word and try to avoid any conflict, as I have avoided them here and on Wikipedia in other languages for 4 years until now. It was not my intention to do something against regulations in the first place: I am simply not a destructive person. Special thanks to Yushuni and TP. Merry Christmas Everyone! Ante Vranković (talk) 21:03, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Look Ante, I don't know what your "friends" have told you, but Mr. Ullmann has had some serious health-related issues at that time (he has passed away in the meantime), and was behaving irrationally. Telling someone you are so dead means "You're going to get yourself into serious trouble" not "I am going to find you and murder you". The comment you added to the article [[Josip Šimunić]] was a conspiracy theory that FIFA's sanctions against Šimunić where influenced by some supposed "domestic traitors" who would (presumably) use the incident to strike another lethal blow to "true patriots". It has every reason to be called garbage - it's non-notable, far-fetched speculation that plays well into the hands of those who see nothing wrong in making the salute (which is, sadly, much of the Croatian public). I can see that you're a contributor to Croatian Wikipedia - English Wikipedia has generally much stringent requirements on notability and reliability of sources. Just because someone somewhere said something does not qualify. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If conclusive and widely-reported evidence indeed comes to light supporting the speculation that certain Croatian politicians exerted influence on FIFA, than it would be justifiable to have that mentioned as well. I hope this clarifies some confusion. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 01:09, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear Sir, OK, we will wait and see. Still, there are obvious several manipulations in your proving the point. One of them is that quotion of president of Šimunić`s FC on the subject matter is simply RELEVANT FACT, so it could never be a "garbage" as you stated. I am a scientist with 2 university degrees, and when you became academic citizen, you will know this as well as I do. Sincerely, Ante Vranković (talk) 17:46, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

In your request you say you can't believe we'd keep blocked a "person with 2 university degrees in favor of a person without a single degree." This is the kind of attitude/statement that makes me think keeping you blocked is better at the moment. This kind of academic "pissing contest" (for lack of a better phrase) is not healthy; the idea of "well I have more degrees therefore I know more and my opinions/edits matter more" is not a net positive for the project. only (talk) 17:32, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

(in reply to your comments in the unblock request) I'm not sure what "word" I have not kept here. No where did anyone say "you will be unblocked as soon as you withdraw your legal threat." There are other issues surrounding your contributions/commentary that we are taking into consideration as well. Telling us that we lack "common sense" is not going to endear administrators to you and make them sympathetic for your request for unblocking. Additionally, you are implying here (by saying that any potential legal action you take is "logical" among other comments) that you still believe that legal action is a possibility in this case. As for what further sanctions could come against you, the next admin can decline this and then lock your user talk page so that you can never comment again. only (talk) 18:11, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear Sir, I cant bilive that you are making a manipulation that is so obvious: after the word "degree" is not "." (full stop) as you are consciously falsely stated but "," (comma) and the sentence continous: "specially concerning all other relevant facts from this particular case, and my previous behavior (I never had any problems with anybody except Ivan Štambuk) as well as previous behavior of Ivan Štambuk (see for example: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum/Archives/2010-05#Death_threat.2C_immediate_action_required.)" Still, it this lying and continuation of your public sanctions against me for no reason is your last word, please inform me here publicly about that. I am glad that you already admited that you are not keeping your word in the way that you are thinking out new reasons in the form of obvious lies to keep me blocked: I am just asking you this: please answer me on this question: when you have publicly decided not to keep your word, why do you think that I should keep mine? And if you don`t that`s OK too, but I am just asking public answer on that question.Ante Vranković (talk) 18:09, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear Sir, yes, there is not stated: "you will be unblocked as soon as you withdraw your legal threat." It is stated: "Since this unblock request does not contain an explicit withdrawal of the threat of legal action". In the meantime I have explicitly withdraw the threat of legal action TWICE. Your kind of proving reminds me on legal practice in communist countries before 1990: if it will make you feel better, you are free to completely block my account now, so that I won`t be able to put out the obvious facts about the case (this is my official statement/agreement on that). And when you do that, what then? =)

I've asked another administrator to step in and take a look at your latest request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Unblock request at Ante Vranković. - only (talk) 18:16, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank´s. Ante Vranković (talk) 21:21, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

"Blocked user" on your userpage

I've simply blanked your userpage. Since the page never existed before the {{blocked user}} template was added, I can't restore it to a previous version, and of course there's nothing that would belong without the template. You have three choices:

1. Do nothing. There's nothing wrong with a blank userpage, as long as that's what you want.
2. Put something on your userpage. We have rather wide latitude on what goes on a userpage; see WP:UPYES (suggestions) and WP:UPNO (prohibitions) if you want the rules, but basically a userpage is for some comments on who you are as an editor.
3. Ask for its deletion. To do this, type {{db-u1}} on the page, and it will soon be deleted.

Please feel free to leave a note at my talk page if you have any questions. Nyttend (talk) 03:33, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Opus isodomum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mortar. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Lion of Kea moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Lion of Kea, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. The Duke of Nonsense^{What is necessary for thee?} 21:28, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lion of Kea (September 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Abelmoschus Esculentus was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Lion of Kea and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Lion of Kea, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

—AE (talk • contributions) 10:18, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Ante Vranković! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! —AE (talk • contributions) 10:18, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

I am editor since 2009./2013. and I have provided aditional reliable source, which was asked. My sources are one scientific monograph available in the libraries of world`s most prized museums, and one famous/reliable tourist guide. Article is illustrated with earlier photo from Wikipedia itself. (It all proofs that the subject exists, which was the main objection on my article.)It is enough for the subject of one old, weather-worn sculpture. - Ante Vranković (talk) 18:07, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Lion of Kea

Hello, Ante Vranković. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Lion of Kea".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Legacypac (talk) 10:12, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alfred Freddy Krupa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amalgamation. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

March 2022

Hello, I'm Aidan9382. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Alfred Freddy Krupa have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Aidan9382 _(talk) 17:09, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Dear Sir, this accusation is completly unfounded. My correction of the wrong data is marked as "vandalism". I am official art critic in Croatia for more than 20 years (see the proof here: https://www.academia.edu/45630466/Rje%C5%A1enje_HZSU_i_Odobrenje_Ministarstva_kulture_2002 ), one of very few with such a reference (less than 1000 people in the world!), and you are calling me "a vandal". Are you serious?! - Ante Vranković (talk) 17:24, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand. Your edit to Alfred Freddy Krupa was entirely unconstructive. You simply added some unexplained newlines every few words, making it harder to edit and also breaking the citation. Im not calling you a vandal, im just reverting that edit as it seems problematic. Was there a reason you did it? Thanks. Aidan9382 _(talk) 17:27, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

You are mentioning my "misundersatanding", and you haven`t even red what I have stated about the reason of my correction: it is wrong data (about artist`s education) as I said. Still, if you just want the article to be your way, not to be factually correct, OK, let we keep the data be wrong. Best wishes - Ante Vranković (talk) 17:39, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Im not 100% sure we are on the same page here. Im referring to this revision, in which you added a couple of new lines throughout the first paragraph. If you actually corrected data in the middle of that, sorry, but i didnt notice. Im fine if you want to do the edit again without the newlines to correct the data. Just be careful not to break it. Thanks. Aidan9382 _(talk) 17:48, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mama ŠČ!, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Queen.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

June 2023

Hi Ante Vranković! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Kj cheetham (talk) 17:56, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Works of Hungarian architects in Croatia moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Works of Hungarian architects in Croatia. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 21:32, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I have shown in the Litarature that all the info in the article is from there quoted exhibition catalogue. I can only add pages from the same catalogue. Still it woulld not change anything substantional, so it is the best that you delite the article. There is no point of any changes, since when they are made, it changes nothing, as I witnessed in many ocassions, for example in the case of my article on Teréz Zsolnay. Just delite the article it is best for all. I will try to contribute less in the future, I promisse. Sincerely - Ante Vranković (talk) 00:07, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Works of Hungarian architects in Croatia

Hello, Ante Vranković. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Works of Hungarian architects in Croatia, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:06, 18 February 2024 (UTC)