User talk:Bitola/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

RFAR

Oh, ok, but what does that mean, I never heard of arbitration.

Wikipedia:RFAR#Macedonia_naming_dispute.

I do not see how I am involved in this dispute. The only editing I did was reverting vandalism [1], [2], [3]. I would appreciate it if you could remove me from the list of involved parties. Thanks Naconkantari e|t||c|m 20:37, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Bitola, I have removed my statement to avoid cluttering up the page, pending the acceptance or rejection of the case. I stopped editing Macedonia related articles when I gave you the "olive branch of peace" and as far as I am concerned all disputes ended there, so I don't consider myself involved in it any more. Please remove my name from the list also and in necessary, I can post my thoughts on the workshop if they accept the case. I really don't want to get drawn back into this after those good weeks of abstinence ;-) --Latinus 21:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Потсетување

Здраво Битола, без разлика што ќе биде исходот од арбитражата, за порталот не треба да дозволиме да се промени името, колку и да Грците паничат. Во него нема ништо навредливо за другите региони. Оваа "треска" што го зафати корисникот Македонас бргу ќе му помине (тој праќа некакви пораки кај Мискин, Тхеатхенае и други грчки корисници, со некаква содржина да се "зголеми анти фиром пропагандата" и "монополот" со името). Поздрав - Bomac 11:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sure we will - don't worry about other users, they tend to get a little emotional at times, this is an issue of significant national pride for the both of us. I still believe that the ArbCom will refuse to decide the outcome of the dispute (they always reject content disputes), but you never know... I'm sure we'll remain friends whatever the outcome :-) --Latinus 12:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Macedonia

No, you're not wrong, on the contrary. I've already expressed understanding and sympathy towards Macedonians on numerous occasions. And that Bulgaria was the first country to recognize the Republic of Macedonia is also well known. But you have to understand that the issue, as important as it is, has already been discussed and it is close to absurdity to begin addressing the Republic of Macedonia just as Macedonia. Yes, your opinion as Macedonians is of key importance, but there are other factors that have influence on the issue. It must be made clear that Macedonia is a vague term that is confusing, misleading and in constant need of clarification when used. You also witness how a number of Greek Wikipedians get offended by the current use of the name in the portal, and I tried to be polite and warn you in the very beginning, so you could solve this, but it looks like I had no success. My opinion remains the same, the name is misleading and has to be changed, again, no offence. → Тодор Божинов / Todor Bozhinov → 15:08, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

See my comment at User talk:Jkelly. I told Bomac this would happen... --Latinus 13:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Што сакаш, Битола? What did I do that offended you? --Latinus 17:54, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

To answer your assertations:

• I am not working against your country, I have no problem whatsoever with your country or its people.
• My proposal to rename the portal is for the reasons I specified in my recommendation (which do not include hatered of your country) and most (neutral) Wikipedians who have commented so far indicate that I acted reasonably. Come on, it's not as if I proposed to move it to Portal:FYROM!
• Do you really think that I should keep to my words after Bomac reassured my not to worry about the portal and then went back on his word? People's opinions can change - just as it happened with Bomac and me.
• That edit war at the Bitola article is in reference to Miskin drawing my attention to it (he did give you a good summary as to why his version is appropriate on his talk page). I explained my reasoning in my edit summary. Refute it if you think it appropriate, but just don't expect me to refrain from expressing my opinion.

One final question, do friends always have to agree - I could just as easily have claimed that your Portal:Macedonia was a bad faith propagandistic device like Makedonas did. Are you allowed to serve your national self-interests whereas I am somehow not allowed to by virtue of our "friendship"? I hope you know I am not your enemy - there really are people who wish ill of your country, but I am not amongst them. --Latinus 18:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Macedonia

Bitola, you know that I've spent hours, days and months convincing people not to refer to us as "Macedonian Slavs" on Wikipedia (you can check my contributions), so I hope you won't consider my latest vote as a stab in the back. Until the dumb naming issue is finally, internationally resolved, and the Greek government finally gets some sense of reality, there's hardly any chance for a stable Portal:Macedonia in the near future. I know that you had the best intentions, and acted in good faith, but it simply won't pass for now. Perhaps it is my fault that I haven't warned you that the name of the portal would cause problems - I should have done that in the first moment I received your message, but meanwhile, I totally forgot about the portal. If I have dissapointed you, I'm really, really sorry. --FlavrSavr 03:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Republic of Macedonia in the Article Improvement Drive

Hey Bitola, I recently nominated the Republic of Macedonia article as a candidate for the Article Improvement Drive. The drive is a great way to get articles up to Featured Article Status. I hope you will take the time to visit the AID and vote for Republic of Macedonia! Below is the comment I wrote when I nominated the article. --Caponer 03:53, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

"The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia makes an excellent candidate for the Article Improvement Drive because it is very close to reaching featured article status in both content and layout. I feel as if we should always be focusing on articles that only require minor adjustments and additions in the AID instead of those that need complete and total reworking, and this is one that will only require a week to make the small adjustments required. Macedonia deserves a spotlight since it is poised to become a member state of the European Union and is a state that we will be hearing much more about in the news in the years to come. Its location adjacent to Albania and Kosovo will also make it a player in the upcoming debate over Kosovo's independence movement. I just feel it will be a fabulous choice and I hope you will think so, too. --Caponer 17:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)"

Dear ΜΟΝΑΣΤΗΡΙ,

1. I was never unpolite with you (not that you deserve it).

2. I am glad I was right. You were watching.

3. You are so right. Threats are so much more inferior than actions.

Николас NikoSilver 13:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

PS. By the way, your recent "neutral-and-above" attitude is impressive. Only problem is, as you can easily see, that you don't fool anyone with your new mask.

Stop trying to hide the truth behind the Bulgarian name Bitola and its being a translation from the Greek. I've got credible sources for my edits, and the reason I haven't included them is because there's no reference section. If I do decide to include them however, I'm going to have to make extensive edits about the recent demography of the region, which you're not going to like. If you continue with this attitude then I'll compile a realistic, detailed history of the article according to the modern historical references. Miskin 11:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Stop passing POV into the article. Monastiri is the original name of the city as it was founded and inhabited by Byzantine Greeks until 1913. Just deal with this fact. This is not explicitely mentioned in that way, but if you continue adding your POV, I'm going to point out that the region was primarily Greek until the early 20th century. I've got credible sources for that, and the reason I haven't insisted on it so far is because I know your nationalist sensitivities on the subject, whereas I couldn't care less. But if you push it to the limits by not even admitting the fundamental reality on the historical background of the city, I'll write a fully sourced historical section on the recent Greek presence in the region. And if you by then continue to make such obtuse edits, I'm willing to take this as far as it gets. Miskin 14:38, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Can you please tell me what displeases you in the last version that you have been mercilessly reverting? Point out the exact part that you doubt, and I'll provide you the source for it. Miskin 15:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Pak jas...

Ej, stvarno juzhnive nashi sosedi (pa i istochni) se prav udav... (Latinus kje go razbere ova :-))... Ova im e neshto kako "odmazda" za portalot za nashata drzhava shto go pravat so gradot na konzulite. Epa stvarno se licemeri i ednostavni... Kako li vlegle vo E.Unija ovie lugje koi se odnesuvaat kako da se od kameno vreme? Bomac 13:45, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Ona e glup! Ova ne e “odmazda” i stvarno juzhnive vashi ne sme licemeri i ednostavni. Jas kazhuvah tebe che ove shte sluchuve, ti ne slusha! Pozdrav, Bitola. --Latinus 16:26, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Bitola

It was a true pleasure, I really like the article you've built at Bitola. :-) I hope that the portal question and the edit-war on Bitola's name won't make you lose faith in wikipedia; we need serious and honest editors like you for areas so disputed as the Balkans. Ciao! Aldux 12:50, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

In the history section,it is written(i do not know if it was u who editted it) that it was called Monastiri at the same time when it was first mentioned as Bitola in Samuil's treaties.so far,i do not see any source that the name 'Bitola' predates the name 'Monastiri'.knowing the fact that the greeks predate the arrival of the slavs and that greek was the official language of Byzantium after the 7th century,i am not sure if the name 'Bitola' was the first given to the city.i am not nationalistic either,but i do not see any historic reference satisfing your claim more than mine.be sure,i won't break the rule and hope u won't either:)--Hectorian 19:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Здраво

Само што почнав да ти пишувам, гледам си ми пишал пак. Не, не ве помешав само го помешав делот за тоа кој ми кажа за "шпионите" :))) Гледам дека има и такви кои цело време го посветуваат работејќи на штета на другиот место за своето добро, па не сум комотен тука да комуницираме за се пред очите на толку вакви набљудувачи. Па затоа и тебе да те замолам да воспоставиме и контакт преку мејл. Веќе го виде мојот, па пиши ми барем колку за да го имам и јас твојот (мислам подобро отколку да го оставиш јавно тука) --Realek 19:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Do not violate the 3RR.i am not changing history,but u say when it was mentioned first time as 'Bitola',without saying how was the city called before that time(1014).the city is older than that...--Hectorian 18:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

3rr at bitola

Hi, you violated the three-revert rule on Bitola. I have disabled your editing permissions for 24 hours. Please read our guide on dispute resolution during the time you are unable to contribute to Wikipedia. Feel free to return after your block expires, but take your differences to the talk page and please refrain from edit warring. Cheers, —Ruud 12:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Ruff

Здраво

Извини за тоа што сменив на страната Битола беше по грешка,мислев дека се работи за популација,а не за големина на градот.И фала за корекцијата на Куманово што ја направи за популацијата.Ако ти треба некаква помош со задоволство би ти помогнал. Поздрав

Block evasion?

I, of course, hope that you don't get blocked for violating WP:3RR ever again. If you do, however, it really isn't okay to switch IPs to continue editing, even to just leave notes on Talk pages. Thanks for understanding. Jkelly 19:00, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

You really should listen to Jkelly. You are still using socks (full details at Talk:Bitola) and are making insulting edit summaries, identifying the work of fellow editors with someone called Adolf Metaxas [4]. This will do you no favours. --Latinus 23:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I have no clue what is going on at the article Bitola. Latinus seems to think that you're so unhappy with it you are switching IPs to keep editing after being blocked. But from Talk:Bitola, it looks like you were in the middle of working out something everyone was happy with. Can you explain to me what is going on, or come to some agreement with the other editors of that article? Jkelly 01:10, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Could you check your e-mail. --Latinus 12:37, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Personal atack

Приметив те обвинуваат грциве (без докази нормално) дека си вандализирал неколку страници. Убеден сум дека не си ти, можда некој друг е убеден дека си ти но тоа не е важно - не слушнав никакви докази, а Latinus насекаде вршеше Personal attack со неговите непоткрепени тези. Веројатно не си приметил ама на страницата Turkish People дал коментар: rv hate motivated edits of User:Bitola; Јас ќе се обидам да си го добие заслуженото - предупредување за Personal attack! Поздрав --Realek 00:23, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Zdrasti

Hi, Bitola, I'd like you to know that the results of the IP check are that you are this anon: 62.162.188.223 (talk • contribs), in other words, you logged out and then pretended to be someone else. It doesn't really matter now, as we seem to have reached an agreement, just don't do anything like that again. Especially considering that you said that you don't use socks - I think you should put that into practice.

On a more cheerful tone, I think that we should make an agreement to not revert each other. That way, any hostile sentiments of the variety present in revert wars will go. Hopefully, it'll spread to all Greek and Macedonian users and the edit wars (and presumably the blocks and everything else negative about them - except maybe the fun :p) will go. Regards, --Latinus 19:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

It's Χαιρετισμοί = Heretismi. I only thought that you were that anon because his first edit was to revert on Bitola. Had he not done that, I probably would have thought it were someone else (I'm not saying who). Unfortunately, I don't know much about PCs so if that wasn't you, again sorry for stigmatising you on those articles. Technically, it is possible to spook someone's IP address once it's known (banned user:MARMOT did that to user:Cool Cat once, I think), so it could have been someone impersonating you. How though, I have no idea...

We'll see what happens with the edit wars - I'm planning on leaving the Macedonia related articles for some time. I want to complete Arabic grammar (very time consuming) and to do my bit to the Comparative military ranks series. Ranting on the talk pages of Macedonians (ethnic group) and Republic of Macedonia is just a waste of time (can anyone even be bothered to archive that page again). --Latinus 20:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Известување :-)

Барање за Администратор за корисникот Khoikhoi. Можеш да гласаш на [5]. --Bomac 18:30, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

OK! (од мејлот)

Секако. Поздрав, Bomac 16:58, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Да, да, ја разбрав работата :-) Многу добар потег... Се читаме! Bomac 17:07, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Здраво!

--HolyRomanEmperor 20:09, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't online. I am suprised that you don't remember me. I though that we had met (or read ;) through our common friend, User:Macedonian. So, just to note, you can count on me (regarding the making friends bit). Поздрав! --HolyRomanEmperor 20:34, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

POLL: Introduction for Republic of Macedonia article

Hello! Given ongoing discussions and recent edit warring – and with the hope of resolving this issue – you might be interested in a poll currently underway to decide the rendition of the lead for the Republic of Macedonia article. Please weigh in! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 01:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Здраво!

Памтиш кој сум нели? :) Причината поради која ти пишувам, претпоставувам ти е јасна - да не елаборирам тука :))) Се вклучив во дискусијата за Република Македонија и би сакал твој коментар за моите коментари (дали се добри како за еден сосема нов корисник нели) --Dipazi 01:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Уште еднаш поради истата причина --Dipazi 23:46, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Сигурно не ти смета нели :))) --Dipazi 23:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Stop orchestrated personal attacks against me

{{npa}} Stop harassing me. It is ridiculous. Fyromians is what you are. You are not and will never be Macedonians. Again, if you think Fyromians is an insult, Macedonians is a bigger insult for me. Moreover, you used npa3, which is obviously unneeded and you seem to cooperate with (fellow Fyromian) Realek for that. --Avg 16:21, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Bitola, bear with Avg for a while, he's still quite new - I'll be having an e-mailed word with him about this. Edwy ^(talk) 16:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Why an e-mailed word??? Do you have something to hide??? And why do you constantly use e-mails to comunicate withg other Greek users? What is it that you don't want other editors to see??? --Realek 16:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

It's so refreshing to see you assuming good faith for a change, Realek ;-) Now if you excuse me, I prefer to tell some things to Avg in his mother tongue and lenghtly such tales don't belong on enwiki (the odd note is OK). Edwy ^(talk) 16:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do - I know you don't like that term, who would? An occasional joke is OK (like the Fopogians I hear so much from Realek and Makedonec), but there is a limit. Edwy ^(talk) 16:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I had a little word with Avg too, about a similar matter and I'm sure we are going to see drastic changes in his behavior. Please consult Realek a little bit too. I am going to use "FYROM nationals" from now on. I know it is not OK with you, but at least it is not insulting. I hope you agree and I hope we too will manage to tone down a little bit, aside from our differences.  NikoSilver  ^{(T) @ (C)} 17:44, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

FYROM nationals sounds excellent to me as well. I'll be more than happy to use it. I hope it helps us arrive at an amicable solution.--Avg 17:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Bitola your behaviour is appalling. You don't accept the compromise but you place a warning to Nikosilver? There is good ground now for YOU to be reported for personal abuse. I'm adopting a new term, Fyrom nationals, for your ethnicity. It's this or back to where we began. --Avg 21:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok. I guess you want me back to "Fyromians" then... I mean, if both are PA's, I'll use the most convenient one.  NikoSilver  ^{(T) @ (C)} 09:37, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Yesterday, without nobody imposing that to me, I decided not to use the term Fyromians (which i still do not find an insult), simply because you find it insulting, trying to follow WP:CIV and even if for me there was no breach of this policy. Additionally, the term Skopians is not an insult because this is what Greeks use in everyday speech and the term Vardarians is not an insult because this was your official name under Vardarska Banovina, before Tito imposed you the name Macedonians (for his own agenda). And still, while these are not insults I again assumed good faith and decided to not use them per WP:CIV. An administrator investigated the issue and commented (see below) that this appears to be a content dispute. So the one who has ground to pursue this further is me and not you, since you're obviously abusing WP:POINT. Let me quote what WP:NPA is saying: "Disagreements with other editors can be discussed without resorting to personal attacks. It is important not to personalize comments that are directed at content and actions, but it is equally important not to interpret such comments as personal attacks". The term Fyrom national is as neutral as it can get, used nowadays officially in international context by my government (because internally the term Skopians is used). It is more time consuming for me to type than simply Fyromians. I would appreciate if you refrained from any POV pushing from now on. You will only result in you being reported again and also me going back to Fyromians, which I strongly believe, cannot be condemned by any reasonable person (simply Google it and see how many results you can find).--Avg 10:23, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

WP:PAIN

Hi. I have removed User:Avg from the WP:PAIN list as any issue seems to have been resolved by them undertaking to stop using the term which offended you.

If you feel that there is an ongoing problem, I would urge you to attempt to resolve it via an informal discussion with the other parties. However, if you believe that further intervention is required please feel free to contact me (or another admin), or raise the issue on WP:AN. Thanks TigerShark 23:21, 8 April 2006 (UTC)