User talk:Kubura/Archive9

Archive 1 - Edits on "SC language"
Archive 2 - Srijem issues
Archive 3 - W.Herzog, Stjepan and Montenegro issues
Archive 4 - Cro-Ser questions, very interesting discussion, many topic being opened/touched/resolved
Archive 5 - Some Doclea and Dalmatia issues
Archive 6 - Farsi, Diego, NHL, Stjepan
Archive 7 - Republic of Dubrovnik, Haydn, various
Archive 8 - Mostly vandalism dealing, Zadar, Mikalja

Split

Kubura, opet pokušavaju preimenovat "Split" u "Split, Croatia" i stavit ga u split (disambiguation). Ideološke razlike na stranu, pokušavam to spriječit i ako si protiv toga, dobro bi mi došla pomoć na talkpageu, hvala. DIREKTOR 04:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Possibly, but Split is still Split, and I'll do my best to stop the renaming. DIREKTOR 14:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Illyrians

See Illyrians Later usage of the term - section, please Zenanarh 20:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Dubrovnik

Naš stari prijatelj Giovanni Giove opet probaje promjenit sva imena u taljanski i ubacit da je taljanski bia službeni jezik. Ako nisi prezaposlen dobro bi mi doša neko za pomoć. DIREKTOR 20:08, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

First of all, I'm not saying I would not like to see the Republic of Ragusa article changed into Republic of Dubrovnik, what I am saying is that that is impossible because the country is called the Republic of Ragusa in English. The same way Hrvatska is not called "Hrvarska", but Croatia. This has nothing to do with Italian, but with the Latin name of the city (in Dalmatian it is also Ragusa). I won't revert your change of Ragusas to Dubrovniks, but I appeal to your common sense, that you please undo it yourself, because we are getting the appearance of radical nationalists due to this. I would also like to remind you that the English have different names for cities in different historical contexts, "Ragusa" is simply the name their historical science uses for the period of the Republic. In any case please let's first just concentrate on getting rid of our friend Giove here, to do this we need to be moderate. DIREKTOR 16:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Tvoje mišljenje

Dobro bi mi došlo kad bi iznijeo svoje mišljenje o našemu priajtelju gioveu na Administrators' noticeboard/incidents, tamo sam ga prijavia za mijenjanje i editanje tuđih (uključujući tvoje) commenta na Request for Commentima šta ih je posta. Šta me više ljudi podrži to bolje. P.S. Pišem na Hrvatski jer giove i Brunodam uporno čitaju sve što napišem, pa neka sada guštaju. DIREKTOR 22:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Place of birth

You stated in an example for removing Yugoslavia on a football player that you will discuss when someone puts in that Karađorđe was born in Turkey. That would be a factual error to say so, he was however born in the Ottoman Empire and the second paragraph contains that information. Your edit was reverted. Evlekis 12:10, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh I don't know about citizenship and how things were then. To get down to a more serious issue than historical accuracy, I am writing as we speak a response for the Sabrsko Massacre. In it, I attack the Hague court, and the points that it makes. Nothing personal to you. It will be posted in a few minutes. OK? Evlekis 12:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey Koruba, just out of plain curiousity. Why is it that you oppose Croatia's membership in the EU? Evlekis 09:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Well although we havn't been agreeing 100% with each other on the Sabrsko Massacre presentation, I totally stand by everything you say about Croatia and the EU. You clearly see the facts with your own eyes and not "somebody elses", well good luck in trying to convince the majority of Croatian citizens this.

Some time before the fighting in our region started, the early architects of Croatia's present-day republic were stating their reasons for why Croatia should not be a part of Yugoslavia. Like with the Slovenian lobby, one of the key reasons given was "economy"; obviously the millions of dollars our post-war country received helped build Slovenia's and Croatia's infrastructure; such as the hotels along the coast which cater for the millions, but more so the solid industries in both republics (factories built in the 1960s etc, you know them better than I do). Now, obviously, the people who voted along those lines must have realised that their own living was good as it was - and so their intention was to make it better. Looking at it from other people's viewpoints, (ie. Macedonia and Bosnia for its larger part), well with these places, "own economy" was not a reason for wishing to split. So, I always thought, if Croatia (and Slovenia, I don't forget them) wanted to split from a larger unit so as to enjoy more of their own benefits, why is it that those same people want to join another even bigger organisation where they'd be forced to share? If living in Slovenia means a good standard of living for Slovenes without help from outside, then they will have to help those less privileged, such as the Portuguese whom you mentioned. For although Portugal and Spain look nice, although Greece is a favourite for holiday makers, and even though Italy is a member of G8, those four ALWAYS had their snouts in the trough when it came to "receiving" from the EU; Germany and the UK are the two biggest donors. Now look, you've got Malta and Cypurs, neither bad but neither brilliant; and eleven other Eastern European states (discluding Slovenia); well, Slovenia is now a donor itself. Its poorer people (and there are a fair few) are suffering whilst Ljubljana nurses the Portuguese and the Southern Italians. Croatia is potentially strong, I always knew that; its products are all good quality, they always were, even 40 years ago. You already see that there is a two-tier system in this "Union", where-by sadly, the Eastern European lands are one "union" and the long-timers form the other. But I think it is crazy to wish to join the EU, splitting from Belgrade's control in the name of Hrvatska also meant parting company with Slovenia, and vice-versa. Now you will join hands again, and soon after, with the rest of the sewer rat republics whom you split from...and all in an economical free-for-all. About the ITCY, that is not so relevant; you are wasted here on Wikipedia, your best bet is to gather individuals who think the same, and then spread the message: show the world that Croatia is not another "pro-west microstate". I have written about Macedonia (poorer bur prosperous) on my user page, that if Norway doesn't need to be an EU member, neither does Macedonia. Evlekis 12:24, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. Kubura, I was absolutely shocked and somewhat disheartened that you brought my user page to the attention of admins; I feel a little betrayed. Now I know that we were not in full agreement over one or two issues but I never thought that those small things would hinder a healthy editorial relationship between you and me. After all, we can discuss things and I felt that we have done this in a civilised manner. We're human, we have strong feelings towards things - but when we play a fair game, two people with initially different views can both influence the other to a certain degree and I felt that this could happen in our case where we've discussed the ITCY etc. I developed a lot of respect for your personal views, and as you know - with regards the EU, I fully stand by what you have stated. Naturally, my story was ficitonal, but it was only confined to the user page itself. But swearing has offended you? Kubura, are you not a Croat? Since when did swearing offend Croats and make life "intollerable"? I have never known anyone swear so casually as the Balkan population. Down the years I have had many Croatian friends and acquaintances; and I have met and conversed with thousands. They may vary in a number of respects but not with regards to foul language. In August 2000, I sat with a Dubrovnik Catholic priest, I mean - this man was devout - as Croatian as you are and very friendly; but did he ever swear. As I sat explaining the poor situation in Macedonia; he was agreeing but by saying "ma jebo this, jebo that"; he even continuously said (when surprised), "jebo te Papa" (The pope fucks you), unheard of in English. When my father served in the JNA in Osijek in 1961, he recalls the local population in the bars and cafes using the same language and using /Bog/ after it (God). I've heard Croatian nuns using foul language; I've even come across school teachers talking in foul language to their pupils; all of this in Split, your town. And one thing I will never forget; in 2001 I was in Istra - Rijeka to be precise. I sat at a trendy bar having a coffee with a friend, on the table to my left was a party of local Croats speaking in the Istian Slavic dialect, on the other side, a group of lads who spoke Italian. The Italians ordered their food and drink in standard Croatian; I realised that they were not from Italy herself, but from Istria. Of course, I don't speak Italian, but something odd happened. After ten minutes, these Italaians downed their drinks, paid quickly and left. My friends and I bumped into the same Italians two hours later in another cafe; we managed to get talking (in Croatian). They explained the reasons that they left; obviously speaking Croatian aswell, they fully comprehended the conversation of the Croats sitting to my left. I wasn't paying much attention to them because to me, everything sounded the same and I am used to the way locals speak. But everything these Croats were saying was followed by "Pički katolički", and other things which involed "matera", (of the mother), and in Italian culture, it is seen as a severe offence to speak badly of the "mother". The irritable Italians just walked away, yet they are from the same city. Now you tell me how often young Croatian men swear and leave out the "mother". Not often is it. I am sorry if you were personally offended by a silly little story, though I am still surprised that you could find it offensive. The words don't come from a website; I happen to know them. They are purposely chosen to reflect how I really feel about politics, about governments, about leaders, about polititians, about promises, about everything in that department. Politians are one and the same, all liars, all "where the wind blows", you may be a proud Croat but don't ever fool yourself that Franjo Tudjman cared about you or your family. Sure he is the father of the nation, but he was a Partisan once upon a time. Now on the one hand, yes, the Communists supressed opposition, and so to be in politics, you had to be one of them. He spent a fair section of his political career persecuting disloyal individuals. In reality, if you live under a system which you don't believe in and that system does not recognise opposition; you either join rebels and take what comes, or you stay out of public life until such time as the climate naturally changes, then jump in. But you don't publish 10 books about Presdient Tito and his good works (as did Vojislav Seselj), and then emerge as an anti-hero. If the tide should change again, you watch every one of those "democratic people", Mesic, Tadic, Drnovsek, Jansa, Silajdzic, Komsic etc. squirm like dogs and join the new movements. They have no shame. Neither has Tony Blair; in the early 80s, he was an outspoken activist in banning the nuclear bomb. Well, he didn't voice his concerns about "banning the bomb" in the 10 years he was in power. Polititians are scum, and so are their organisations. So for that, there is no apology for me calling a president Ben Zona ("Son of a bitch" in Hebrew), and his land "Arsehole" in Dutch. That's how I feel about ALL countries. Evlekis 15:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration request

You have been named as a party in an arbitration request here. Please consider making a statement there. Regards,--Isotope23 ^talk 16:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I've noticed your message today; I've been working on Croatian wikipedia these days, so I was few days off en.wiki.
You've caught me by surprise. At least, you could announce this RfA to me, so I can plan my time. If you have send this message a week later, I'd be on vacation, and I wouldn't be able to see nor write/respond anything. At least, you should wait for my notification "I'm informed about RfA", and than "the time can go" (usually, as I know, notified users have to notify that they saw the message about RfA, otherwise, RfA fails, as I saw on some cases here).
One important thing. I think you should report... no, you must put the article Jakov Mikalja on that RfA also.
It's exposed to heavy vandalising and edit-slaughter by user:Giovanni Giove (edit-slaughter: while opponents respect the rule "don't do anything on the article till consensus made on Rf..", at the same time, vandal-slayer freewillingly and with attitude "who-cares-for-idiots-that-obey-the-rules-and-do-nothing", edits the article the way he wants it to be, or POV-ize it). Recent edit without discussion is [1], and after user Zmaj's revert (note: rv back - user Giovanni Giove reverted the edits of a total of 8 editors), he again made his actions [2]. Both his actions were made Aug 27. Of course, he gave no explanations on talkpage. I can copy this on RfA, wright?
Now, to business.
How many times do I have right to give statements on that RfA case? Or, how many time do I have for statement? It'd be fair if my time counts from today, Aug 27, 17:17.
Thanks for patience while reading this. Sincerely, Kubura 15:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

• I did inform you here. This arbitration has not yet been accepted, so you still have time. If you want to make a statement at the request you can certainly include the Jakov Mikalja article as another that should be considered; please note thought that this arbitration is strictly about editor behavior issues, not article content. At this point you can make a brief (500 word) statement at the arbitration request. As far as I know there is no set amount of time you have to make a statement, at this point it is simply being established if there is enough of a reason for ARBCOM to get involved here. If this case is accepted it will move to an evidence gathering phase where you can make additional statments and present evidence that you wish the committee to consider.--Isotope23 ^talk 15:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

The case of Giovanni Giove on administrator's noticeboard /incidents is archived here Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive289. Kubura 15:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

A sockpuppetry

(notification to Zenanarh)
Do you know that user Brunodam had a sockpuppet, that he used for edit-warring?
Here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Brunodam.
I'm telling you to have this in mind, to let you know that he's prone to do such things.
I'm notifying you, because you and Brunodam have intersections of interests; you're a party concerned here, and there's a chance that you'll have problems with his editwarring and sockpuppetry.
So, if you notice something suspicious, if somebody gets into edit wars on the article (and always "someone new" jumps in to save someone from violating 3RR rule), have in mind whome you're dealing with.
Especially when these "newcomers" have particular interest in same articles... and their interventions are theirs only contributions. First edits, and already edit-warring. Kubura 07:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dalmatia

Hello,

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

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 20:06, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Croatian Wikipedians' notice board

Many others states are having local notice boards so that interested users can know everything about article problems (edit wars and similar). This way we like Serbian, Hungarian users will know when there is problem in article and we will not fight alone revert wars. It will be nice if you will send this message to other users which write about Croatia or Croats. Rjecina 18:41, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Croatian Americans

List of Croatian Americans, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that List of Croatian Americans satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Croatian Americans and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of List of Croatian Americans during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Leuko 18:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

User:PIO and Socks

| 151.33.89.104

| 151.33.92.29

| 151.33.95.148

| 151.33.89.84

User:PIO, or a close associate, has been editing under these IPs, which are all in the 151.33.**.** block owned by Italia Online, continuing agitating while claiming to be 'unlogged for technical problem' [3]. Under 151.33.89.84, PIO made various person attacks and repeatedly removed warning messages from the IP's talk page.

Using these IPs, PIO has many times exceeded WP:3RR on Istrian exodus.

Such use of IPs, particularly when they're all involved in the Istrian exodus dispute, is a serious violation of WP:SOCK. PIO has also been accused of being a sockpuppet of User:Jxy, but claims that they are 'friends who use the same computer'.

Note that User:DIREKTOR has been heavily involved in the Istrian exodus controversy as well. However,given the amount of flak PIO and associated IPs have given, I'm impressed by DIREKTOR's restraint.

Hope this helps. Michaelbusch 23:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Michaelbusch is right to bring this to your attention. I really could use some help in the Istrian exodus matter. The main problem is that User:PIO is trying to make me look like a lone "POV warrior" with the involved Admin, Riana (talk), and on the Istrian exodus talkpage. DIREKTOR 10:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The Marco Polo RfC

On the Marco Polo ethnicity RfC (on the Marco Polo talkpage), Giove insists on constantly posting this apalling statement:

* The idea of a Croatian nationality was developed after the 1840s, in the time of the Romantic Nationalism, 600 years after Marco's dead. In the XIII century, Croatia was a small possession of the Hungarian Crown, quite far from Curzola (which anyway retained a population of romance language). In no case Marko could be called "Croat". --Giovanni Giove 11:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I keep removing it and explaining to him it is simply fundamentally incorrect and very offensive, but he constantly restores it. I was wondering if you could take a look... DIREKTOR 21:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Re Marko Polo

You are right, of course. However, let me correct you in one detail, wether the dinasty was Polish, or Neapolitan or English is not important, but the title held by the King. The Kingship titles of an Anjou king make him the King of Hungary and of Croatia. The fact that he's from Naples is immaterial, and it certainly does not make Croatia-Hungary a Neapolitan possesion (or vice versa). He might not even speak Hungarian (or Croatian). DIREKTOR 13:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Saborsko

It seemed rather redundant to me at the time. My apologies. --Jesuislafete 19:06, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Saborsko

I'm inclined to agree with you. It should be a place of peace here; sorry if my tones appear aggresive, I hope you know that I never wished to become enemies with you. That's partly the reason I briefly discussed the Croatia-EU topic with you some time back; conscious civilised talk, that was all. I also agree that the edit war has gone on a little too long, and it seems to be ignored by admins. It maybe that they see how long you have been here, and how long I have - and have decided that we know the rules of the game and should be able to solve disputes without interference. Naturally, I don't know as much asbout the Saborsko chapter as you do, it was after all you who introduced the article. It certainly makes every contribution of yours very important. When we revert each other, it seems that we blank out a whole host of minor edits from here and there, some maybe minor and grammatical, others more sinister. As I am writing to you, the other user Paulcicero has reverted you. Let me assure you that this is not a sockpuppet of mine; you need to take my word for it because I really cannot prove it to you. But as a gentleman, I am not using additional accounts on Wikipedia; I publish as an anon occasionally if I have not logged in etc, but those edits are minor. Back to the massacre, I think we can resolve each edit piece by piece. I will now make an edit to the introduction so that it is not made to sound softer than it was. I hope it will be more agreeable for you. I will also refrain from "reverting" once you have adjusted the article to how you wish for it to be; but for the bigger issues, such as the ICTY, we'll discuss those on the talk page itself. I think we can find a way of strengthening the article to look good, and be agreeable for all of us. Puno pozdrav. Evlekis 08:01, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Just to say, the Saborsko Massacre article is about 98% how you originally wrote it. I feel that both Paulcicero and I have given in; if you have some decency, I request that you accept the page as it is now. It would be appreciated; I simply cannot stretch my edits any further. The Gospic massacre did contain elements of anti-Croatian propaganda and I have done what I can to ammend that; I am equally set on seeing that the Croatian position is not misrepresented, and the Muslim too. It's up to you now Kubura. Regards. Evlekis 20:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I know what you mean about the JNA from after September 1991, without its Slovenes and Croats. There is no dispute there. There are technical differences between Serbs fighting for a Serb state and Serbs within a federation, but that is neither here nor there. Elliminate is a good word which could mean either kill or displace, another word you may wish to use is remove. The best thing you can do is extend the sentence so as to say that X-number were victims, so many were killed whilst so many were expelled. I'll see if I can improve that part for you (so if I edit it, it won't be to change the effect, just to reitterate your precise message). Evlekis 14:00, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Your accusation

KUBURA I ASK YOU TO APOLOGIZE, for the accusation of sockpuppetry.--Giovanni Giove 15:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Republic of Ragusa

Giove is now editing Republic of Ragusa. He once again claims Italian was the official language, with no sources at that, can you do something about this? DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 11:41, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Dogovori

Molija bih te da mi se javiš u svezi nikih stvari. vezano za Dalmaciju , Iredentu i sličnu tematiku na en.wiki.

javi mi se preko moje adrese na stranici! --Anto 20:48, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

language

You mentioned [4]., which is indeed inexcusable, and I will say so, but please also see [5] and [6]; true there is also [7] and [8]--and a good deal else from various people. I warn you as well. I suggest you refer just to the edits, and never to each other, and certainly no using each others' names or mentioning each other's ethnicity. ethnicity. It will help a little. Restricting the discussion to this particular event will also help. I'll keep watch.

I very strongly urge a similar approach to other articles. The events of the recent years are bad enough, and can only be described fairly with a great effort at objectivity, which is best obtained by writing as impersonally as possible. I know it's easy advice to give and hard to follow, but it really is the only way. It has been attained on other topics. 11:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

as for the article, I think it is relatively descriptive now, and you are right that most un-involved people would indeed accept the ICTY as at least a relatively neutral source. I altered one change you made in the lead which is awkward--and does not really add anything--the responsibility is clear enough without that phrase. Lede paragraphs should not attempt to resolve all specifics. Not worth arguing over, frankly. DGG (talk) 11:45, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Serb propaganda

Talk:Zagora_(Croatia)#Serb_exodus

You either can't read or are truly, extremely obsessed by Serb propaganda seeing it where there are no Serbs. LOL, man. :))) --PaxEquilibrium 18:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't play dumb. You've inserted this [9].
You obviously don't read the material I gave you on wiki, on few places. Kubura 13:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't play dumb and I still fail to see what has that got to do with Orthodox people 600 years ago? If I recall, to that you referred. I read everything. Please don't insult. --PaxEquilibrium 18:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

More bit da i uspije...

Neznam, čini mi se da oni stvarno jemaju prav' kod imenaDubrovnika, ovo trenutno je englesko ime za tu državu, i ide po vikipravilima. Al' neka, ne smeta ;D ...
More bit da i uspije ovi move, al' neće ti to oni ostavit na miru, bojin se. DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 21:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Stvarno malo oladi sa svim tim srpskim zavjerama i propagandom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DIREKTOR (talk • contribs) 21:33, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Malo si manje ovdi od mene, a i puno manje si pročita od mene. Ne želin strašit sa babarogama, i pi*dit bezveze, ali ja vidin podle igre. Nisi ti vidia kako su sve izgledali članci. To je bila obist i izdivljavanje u njihovim željicam.
Danas su podmukliji i lukaviji, pa neupućeni in lako nasidnedu. Ali ja vidin puno veću sliku, pa se ne dan priveslat.
Primjerei: Spominjanje nas Hrvata se izbigava ili umanjiva, a nazočnost ovih drugih se priističe i priuveličaje. Malo šaljivo ću ti reć: godišnje su nekad, kroz čisto hrvatske krajeve, jednom ili dvaput prošli dva kamiona iz Srbije sa gudinima, i ovi ti to odmah prikazuju ka' njihovu vikovnu nazočnost. Vratimo se na ozbiljnu priču. I onda, šta će inozemac pomislit? Da nas nima nikako ondi, da šta mi hoćemo, još će ispast da išćemo višje nego nas zapada.
You're less here than I am, and you've read less than me. I don't want to scare with boogie-man i bulls*it around, but I see perfidious games. You haven't seen the articles the way they looked before here. That was orgy of their wishie-wishes.
Today, ther're more perfidious and more clever. Those who don't know things easily buy what they say. But I see the "big picture", so they cannot fool me.
Examples: Mentioning of us, Croats, is being avoided or decreased. The presence of those others is overaccentuated and overpresented. To say it in comical way: during Yugoslavias, once or twice a year, two trucks from Serbia (that were selling pigs) would pass through purely Croat inhabited areas. These new smartas*es from en.wiki find that as reason to say that they were always present here. Now, let's get serious: what would foreigner think? That we weren't there at all, that what we want at all, someone may think that we want more than we're supposed to get.
Open your eyes. Kubura 13:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand that with the trucks.

Also, the Serbian nationalist Wikipedians say the same thing. We hear this same thing ("national diminishing") from many Croat, Bosniac and Serb Wikipedians. The very same story. --PaxEquilibrium 18:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Vrlika

If I do not make mistake you are very interested about Dalmatia so you will be interested about anti-Croatian edits in article Vrlica. This is easiest way to show you changes [10] . I have reverted today but in my thinking user:Kukar will revert again. My demand for administrator intervetion has been refused ..-- Rjecina 20:26 13 October 2007 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 20:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I have seen 1 very interesting internet book about which we need to write article. With that I want to say that this book will be source of article because in this is writen all about modern serbian propaganda. This is link [11] . Tell me your thinking about book ? ..-- Rjecina 20:26 17 October 2007 —Preceding comment was added at 20:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Hvala

Thanks for your attention. Yes, i reported it and that IP was blocked or even still it is. Have a nice day. Laku noc. --Koppany 20:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dalmatia

This arbitration case has closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Giovanni Giove and DIREKTOR are each subject to an editing restriction for one year. Each is limited to one revert per page per week (excepting obvious vandalism), and is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. This notice is given by a Clerk on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. Newyorkbrad 01:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Marco Polo (and Ghepeu)

Hi Kubura, I'd just like to turn your attention to the Marco Polo article's Birthplace and ethnicity controversy subsection, there are basically two problems here:

• Our old pal Ghepeu, insists on saying "most sources support the Venetian theory". And that "Polo was a self-declaring venetian citizen". What this means, really, is "we think most scientists believe this theory" and "Polo says he was born in venice, so the above thingy is stupid". He also insists on uncompromisingly calling Korčula "Curzola", without even the contemporary local word for the island in brackets ().

• I seriously suspect a lot of stuff was removed from the Korčula theory arguments subsection. In any case it needs expansion, could you add a sentence or two?

• And finally, get this sentence currently in the article:

"..."Pol" is known to be a type of sea bird in the Dalmatian Chakavian dialect of Serbocroatian which was strongly..."

Thnx, DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 08:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, will you lend a hand with the matter? DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 09:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

You're right, of course. The "Korčula theory" is a valid historical theory wich has not been disproven in any way (see [12], for example). I'm trying to ensure our "friends" don't make it sound like we're saying Polo was an alien from outer space.
Get this sentence, for example:

"In their new enthusiasm, local Croats from Korčula (in the comical sense) like to say that they have two sculls of Marco Polo in Korčula: one, from the times when he was a child, and one from the times when he was older."

DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 09:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Just have a look at the subsection ([13]), its turned into a regular POV-fest. You can see a short list of the problematic statements of fact on the talkpage of the article. The scientifically accepted concept of Marko Polo (possibly) being Korčulan is riddiculed and discredited with weasel words.
Should you decide to give this a article the benefit of your attention, please read the discussion concerning the problematic statements (in two short sections, here [14], and here [15]). DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement

LoL!! Ja se zajebajen cili dan da reportam giovea, a ti si ga već reporta prije dva dana! U svakom slučaju pokaza sam arbitratorima šta je bilo i Newyorkbrad je reka da će ih požurit tamo u Administrators oticeboard/Arbitration enforcement da šta prije riješe tog lika. DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 01:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Your repeated insults

If you do not cease to insult me you will be properly reported. --Giovanni Giove 11:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Go on, Giove.
When you go to admins' noticeboard, don't forget to send them my greetings, and don't forget to explain them this Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement#User:Giovanni_Giove.
Have you forgot what was told on the RFARB? Kubura 14:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

GiovanniBlock

Kubura, Giove was blocked for six days I think. Why are you saying the admins took no action, I'm confused... DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I understand, but the question is did he violate the ARBCOM restrictions after the six-day block. Da se razumijemo, I believe the guy deserves to be blocked for a much longer period, but this is what the admins will ask. DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 19:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Split article

Could you lend a hand with the Split article? Basically I wonder if you know how to remove the annoying "[[Image:|200px|none|]]" text from the new "city infobox" I implemented? DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Problem sa slijom

Yeah, I figured as much. I will try to find a map simmilar to the Zagreb article map. Could you lend a hand? DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 20:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Answer

Probably the fact that I live there. I don't contribute to Wikipedia that much anymore so I might as well remove it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keaze (talk • contribs) 15:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Ustaše

Maybe I am POV about this but category of this article is Political parties in Croatia ??? They are in category with modern parties of Croatia !! Problem is that I do not know how to delete this category.... Rjecina 18:00, 21 November 2007

I've never heard of them as a political party. They were the political movement. Kubura (talk) 00:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Široka Kula massacre

I don't get it...why is there even a revert war going on for this and the Voćin massacre page? You should contact the admins, you definitely have sources to back up most of your claims, this shouldn't even be happening. Is there something going on that I am missing (besides the fact that the user automatically reverts anything you write)? --Jesuislafete (talk) 07:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll help you monitor that page...his constant reverting cannot go unnoticed for long. If we work together, we can keep the page in its proper form before he reverts again. He cannot revert forever. --Jesuislafete (talk) 23:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know...

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussioni_utente:Giovanni_Giove/personale

AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 23:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Ha ha! In an earlier 'contribution' (Wikipedia talk:Suspected sock puppets/Giovanni Giove (4th)) he was on about me being your sockpuppet. If you and I are really the same person, can you lend me 100 euros till next week? Promise to pay you back, honest... :-) AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 15:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

You should check this out too. Apparently we are "Barbarians":
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussioni_utente:Giovanni_Giove#Thatcher131
AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 16:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Theories on the origin of Croats

I saw your contributions here earlier. This article is totally destroyed. It should be restored at last version before removing Iranian theory. Gothic and Avar theory were empty, I can edit it. Iranian theory was too long it should be shortened but not removed. What do you think? Zenanarh (talk) 15:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

A translation

I will try and translate that article in a week or so. Right now I am in the middle of university finals so I apologize if I can not do it too quickly. Nokhodi (talk) 07:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

The translation is done. It's not as detailed as the English one but its a good start. Enjoy. [16]. Nokhodi (talk) 07:17, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Croatia will enter the European Union, you like it or not

Kubura (or one of your sockpuppets), you are a Croatian nationalist who believes that even in Wikipedia can be done the crazy Balkan wars! Only ridiculous Croats can go down to "Stamp" level and see Italian irredentism menaces on simple stamps!! Your lies are astonishing: you started the attack on Giove in the Italian wiki, successively you wrote to many admins against him until you got him irritated with your group and finally you got him "banned". Now is it my turn? What else in the future....? Tito times are gone, open your fanatical eyes: Croatia is going to be part of the European Union, even if you don't like it! And within the European Union all the opinions (and even our Italian opinions) will be democratically taken in consideration (in one way or another) by the "European Croats" in the future. Be sure of this, even if you don't like it. From today I am no more going to deal with you and your group of fanatics. But I will monitor what you and your group do with the Dalmatian related articles and notify (with precise references about your changes) the authorities & the serious admins of Wikipedia.--Cherso (talk) 00:06, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Hoo wow. I've never seen someone get that mad over a stupid little userbox before. --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 11:58, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Your Question

Yes, that was related to a name change. I don't mean to give you an equivocating answer, but I am not at all familiar with that user. If the situation is as you describe, I have no objection to tagging the user page appropriately. -- Cecropia (talk) 17:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Dalmatia, not in Italy

Good work for finding that edit and undoing it. Really, these irridentists are unbelievable. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 12:12, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Croato-Bulgarian Wars

If you have little time can you look my new article because of my poor english. With his edits Prevalis has really helped this article.
Has anybody checked if user Cherso is puppet of Giove ?--Rjecina (talk) 18:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Because of that article I have needed to write articles Svetoslav Suronja, Gojslav and Krešimir III of Croatia. Maybe I am mistaking but Krešimir III has been greatest moron between Croatian kings. He has lost Dalmatian towns and Slavonia only so that he can be king !!!

Sve najbolje tijekom božićno-novogodišnjih praznika. --Rjecina (talk) 20:43, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

If you have little time can you please look article Ante Starčević. I really know very little about him which is really shame but there has been for me great questionable edits. In near future I will not have time for looking this article. --Rjecina (talk) 02:02, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

121.45.

Happy New Year to you too buddy. Whoever this guy is (my bet is it's GG) he's a fanatic, and needs to be watched. I'll write something in support of your report on the noticeboard. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:20, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Nada Klaić

...čime je sirotica zaslužila tako oštre riječi? Morao sam staviti POV tag, možda da malo ublažiš ili dokumentiraš svoj dodatak? I inače u članku nema referenci osim na njene radove. Plantago (talk) 08:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Mara Croato

Kubura, I hope that you are fine. I would like to make it clear to you that our actress Mara Croato is not "of of Croat origins", therefore please refrain from adding such comments on her biography. Thank you and have a nice day. Tony the Marine (talk) 15:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Mara Croatto

You wrote:

Listen, her father is Tony Croatto.
It wasn't me who gave the info that his father is of Croatian origins.
For your information, westernmost parts of Croatia were in areas that were after 1918. given to Italy (peninsula of Istria), after the division of Austria-Hungary.
After the Mussolini's fascist became ruling party in Italy, authorities started with violent Italianisation of area. There were fascost laws, that regulated the forced Italianization. Laws, in which "funny Slavic names" (beside others) were forbidden and was ordered to "restore them in original Italian form". (e.g. "Regio decreto legge 10 Gennaio 1926, n. 17: Restituzione in forma italiana dei cognomi delle famiglie della provincia di Trento").
Many Croatian surnames were violently Italianized then. Same was with surname Hrvatin (it literally means - Croat). Here's location of that village on fallingrain.com [17].
So, I don't understand you. How do you think that she cannot be of Croatian origins? Why do you find that categorization as problem? Kubura (talk) 07:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC) My reply:

• I know who Tony Croatto was and who his daughter Mara Croatto is. I was the person who wrote about her.

This is not about what you, nor I nor what some other person may believe. Wikipedia is about "facts" which can be verified with a reliable source. I believe that you are aware of that.

We cannot assume that the Croatto surname was of Croatian origins nor that it originated from the Hrvatin nor that it was Italianized by Mussolini's government. It is not our job in Wikipedia to assume. Unless, a verifiable source is provided and cited as required by Wikipedia policy that the Croatto surname is of Croatian origins or that Tony or his daughter Mara have themselves publicly expressed the fact that their surnames are of Croatian origins, then it will be considered a "rumor" which is unacceptable under policy.

To give you an example, we cannot pretend nor assume that because Mark Cuban's surname is "Cuban", that it is of "Cuban origin".

You ask and I state:

• So, I don't understand you. How do you think that she cannot be of Croatian origins? Why do you find that categorization as problem?

1. I am not saying that she cannot be of Croatian origins. You provide a cited a verifiable reliable source where she states that "she" is of Croatian origins or that without a doubt that the Croatto surname is of Croatian origin and the issue will be solved.

2. I do not find categorization a problem. I find categorization of what is assumed without a cited verifiable source as "required" by policy a problem.

Tony the Marine (talk) 21:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

user:Pederkovic Ante

I am interested to hear your thinking. Today I have started to delete all edits of this user and his puppets during time when they have been banned. Yes you know this user under name user:Velebit and user:Purger but I like to use this name (which he has choosen). My question for you is if I am right (wikipedia rules) to delete his edits during time when he has not been allowed to write on wiki or not ? --Rjecina (talk) 20:59, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Now we will see if this user Stagalj/Standshown/Smerdyakoff is user Pederkovic Ante (aka user:Velebit aka user:Purger aka user:NovaNova) [18] --Rjecina (talk) 18:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

RfA disruption

Just as a fair warning, I have started an ANI complaint against your disruptive !votes on the RfA page.Balloonman (talk) 08:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello there. I've got a question for you, but if you choose not to answer, that's okay. :) It seems that two years on Wikipedia is an inflexible requirement of yours. For example, here, if the user had waited another five or six weeks, xe would have been a wiki-veteran who'd recognize things, but right now, xe is not experienced enough. I guess I'm wondering why two years is a hard requirement. Just wondering, but again, if you'd rather not say, no hard feelings. Cheers, WODUP 08:35, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I am also shocked at your high standards: Adminship is no big deal, remember? _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} ^{round of applause} 23:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Vrlika

Is there anything that can be done about poor Vrlika's page? It has been sabotaged over and over; any help would be appreciated. Hvala. --Jesuislafete (talk) 06:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)