User talk:Mareklug/Archive 1

Zapraszam

• Wikipedia:Polish Wikipedians' notice board--Witkacy 13:16, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Björk and Harmony Korine did collaborate on "Harm of Will" on Vespertine

Ah, sorry, I thought someone got it wrong and missed seeing Korine's name as a contributor on the liner notes of the album. Thanks for the information, I didn't realize they were friends and wrote the song together with Guy Sigsworth.
Unsigned message from 67.80.95.46, 28 August 2005

Faustyna Kowalska

Dzieki, dobra robota :)--Witkacy 00:47, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Warszawa

Czołem! Sama idea takiego zdjęcia nie jest zła, choć ja osobiście uważam tabelkę za ważniejszą. Natomiast w przypadku Warszawy na pewno trzeba by się zastanowić, czy najbardziej charakterystyczną częścią miasta jest właśnie pajac - i to na tak kiepskim zdjęciu. Poza tym, jeśli rzeczywiście należy tam umieścić zdjęcie (choć wolałbym niżej), to trzeba też przesunąć tabelkę. Inaczej sam tekst na moim ekranie zajmuje ledwie 1/4 szerokości ekranu...

Tak czy inaczej - osobiście wolę tabelki, tak jak na setce innych stron o polskich miastach. Zdjęcie byłoby dobre, jeśli mogłoby coś powiedzieć o ogólnym wyglądzie miasta, co w przypadku Warszawy jest niemożliwe - mało jest miast na świecie z takimi kontrastami... Halibutt 13:56, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Not bad taste

It's no more bad taste than including the birth and death in brackets as follows (April 7, 1979 - ). It's a standardised infobox template. I must disagree with you strongly. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:00, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

I have made a new infobox, but find it a bit rich that you could not make one yourself instead of just reverting every damn article I added it to. Not impressed. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:17, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

OK, wasn't aware of this. However, why didn't you create the infoboxes yourself? This just caused more work for me, and I have a slow computer :( Sorry for getting snippy, but reverting without compromise often annoys me. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:20, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Biography living. Didn't know you didn't know how to create infoboxes... now I understand! - Ta bu shi da yu 03:34, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Re: Diva cleanup?

Hi. I placed the cleanup tag on Diva, as two things could be done to impove it. Either:

• Keep the primary article about women singers at Diva, and add a disambiguation notice at the top, leading to Diva (disambiguation) which lists the other meanings of the word. This would mean the "Other meaning" section would be removed, and put into the disambiguation page.
• Or, make Diva a pure disambiguation page, and move the article about women singers to another name, and link to it from the original page.

I prefer the first idea. It would look something like this:

Diva

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

This article is about female singers considered divas. For other uses, see Diva (disambiguation).

Diva is the Italian word for "goddess", etc, etc...

I feel this make the page much neater, and would help visitors to more easily find the meaning of "diva" they want. --Daniel Lawrence 09:00, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Vote on moving Lost (2004 television series) to Lost (TV series)

Hi. Just a quick note that we're voting (again) on renaming/moving the Lost (2004 television series) article, this time to the shorter Lost (TV series). As you were a participant in the previous discussion/vote, please register your support or opposition here: Talk:Lost (2004 television series) Thanks! LeFlyman 05:34, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

persistent vandal

He is: 212.219.82.37 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Antero Niittymäki

I created the page, with Niittymaki redirecting. A month or a little less ago, some people in the WP:Hockey project decided they did not want diacritics used on En.WP so they would move pages to illustrate their point to get a vote going... Anyways thanks for your support for diacritics on En.WP! Hazelorb 21:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Imminent renaming of Polish monarchs

I am encouraged by your letter, "I object to this proposal," on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics), to bring your attention to User:Francis Schonken's proposal imminently to change Polish monarchs' names from the current correct renditions to his own versions. I think the proposed changes would be disastrous. logologist|Talk 10:52, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Teresa Ciepły

I reworded the article, shortening sentences and putting her athletic achievements in order of the date they were won. I have moved birthplace and place of death out of the first paragraph, in accordance with Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies). Finally, I have added a more verifiable source into the External links section, for her 1962 bronze at 100m. Kind regards, Sliggy 23:57, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, that reference to the Manual of Style regarding birthplace etc. should be Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Dates of birth and death. Kind regards, Sliggy 00:02, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about your update to the medal template. I'll be sure to use that in the future. Kind regards, Sliggy 20:55, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Medal template use in non-olympic contexts

I noticed when editing a page that uses Template:MedalTopEAA (European track and field (athletics) championships medal table top) that Template:MedalGold, Template:MedalSilver, and Template:MedalBronze have the undesirable side-effect of adding the page to an olympic medal category.

So I created new templates just for use in non-olympic contexts: Template:MedalGoldGeneric, Template:MedalSilverGeneric, and Template:MedalBronzeGeneric which don't do any adding to categories.

I went ahead and updated all the pages affected by this that I found linking to Template:MedalTopEAA, but I don't know about other non-olympic medal table contexts.

(This pertains to your edits on Linford Christie and Sebastian Coe, Baron Coe when you cleaned up the medal tables.) -- Mareklug ^talk 20:53, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Oooh...good catch! I hadn't thought about that. Actually, I was entirely unaware of those categories...seems like someone added those after the fact. I know that the {{MedalTopEAA}} template is the only one that I created. I'm unsure if anyone else created anything different. Maybe for each {{MedalTopXXX}} template, we could have {{MedalGoldXXX}} so that we can add appropriate categories...sound like a good idea? I'm sure there aren't too many widespread competitions that give out gold, silver, and bronze medals. tiZom_(2¢) 23:57, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I looked in the template index starting with "MedalTop" and Template:MedalTopEAA is the only one there beside the two Olympic ones (standard and the one for pictures). I'm not sure how to look for templates for other competitions; there may not be any. For now I hesitate to adopt a policy that unnecessarily spawns templates -- the Olympic medal templates do the special category adding to Olympic medal categories, yes, but there may be no need for that for other competitions. For now, I'd say, let's just remember to use Template:MedalGoldGeneric (and its Silver and Bronze variants) with non-Olympic competitions. And yes, the idea of giving out gold, silver and bronze medals is a generic idea -- in sports and otherwise -- and includes such things as World Championships, European Championships, Commonwealth Games, Pan-Am Games in many sports and other regional championships as well as various national competions. Chances are they all merely need what the Template:MedalGoldGeneric, Template:MedalSilverGeneric and Template:MedalBronzeGeneric provide: formatting a single row in a medal table with no side-effects. -- Mareklug ^talk 00:25, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Comment to anyone reading The above distinction is now moot, since it was decided to remove automatic Olympic medal categorization via Template:MedalGold, Template:MedalSilver, and Template:MedalBronze, due to undesirable lack of sort key in those additions. So now all 3 pairs of "Medal<color>" templates are equivalent -- all they do is format the row of the medal table, and nothing else. So it goes. Of course, who knows what the Olympic Wiki project people may think up to do retroactively to any page that uses Template:MedalGold etc., so it's still safest to use Template:MedalGoldGeneric for non-Olympic medal tables. -- Mareklug ^talk 21:51, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Template:BiathlonAt2006WinterOlympics and the various Biathlon pages

Hello. I don't think Template:BiathlonAt2006WinterOlympics belongs on the main page for biathlon at the 2006 Games, Biathlon at the 2006 Winter Olympics, that normally resides in the Category:2006 Winter Olympics events, but instead I think it belongs on the specific biathlon competition pages to allow for navigation among them: Biathlon at the 2006 Winter Olympics - Men's Individual, Biathlon at the 2006 Winter Olympics - Men's Sprint, Biathlon at the 2006 Winter Olympics - Women's Individual and the pages for the other 7, assuming they will be created one day, that populate Category:Biathlon at the 2006 Winter Olympics. I removed it but you restored it.

This is analogous to the situation already existing for Template:AlpineSkiingAt2006WinterOlympics -- the template is not featured on Alpine skiing at the 2006 Winter Olympics which is a member of Category:2006 Winter Olympics events but it is featured at each the 10 individual pages for the specific competitions that populate Category:Alpine skiing at the 2006 Winter Olympics.

Instead of using this navigation template to get to the individual competition pages from the sport's main page for biathlon or alpine skiing at the 2006 Games one uses the links in italics under the individual competition headings on the sport's main page; for example: Main article: Biathlon at the 2006 Winter Olympics - Men's Individual.

One problem with Template:AlpineSkiingAt2006WinterOlympics is that it was apparently designed for the sport's specific competition pages at the 2006 Games and automatically includes the page it is placed on within the sport's 2006 Games subcategory. But the main sport pages don't live within their individual event page subcategories but rather in Category:2006 Winter Olympics events one level up, except when templated like so and thus miscategorized. This is the case for all the main event pages for the 2006 Games.

Please let me know if you agree with the above -- I don't want to accidentally get into a revert war over this. The speed skating pages are another case of the same (the corresponding template needs to be removed from the main speed skating page for the same reasons). -- Mareklug ^talk 10:21, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey there. Personally, I think that the navigation template should be on all the individual event pages as well as on the main discipline page for the year. Having it on the discipline page adds an easy way of navigation (it's a lot easier to use the box to get around than to scroll around on the page to find the various "Main article:" links, especially if someone wants to open more than one at a time). My optimal solution would be to remove the category from the template and manually add it to the event pages. However, that's more work than I'm looking to do right now, so I've just taken the template off the discipline page. Happy editing! -- Jonel | Speak 10:33, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Category:Cross country skiers at the 2006 Winter Olympics

As this has been contested I've delisted from WP:CFDS, feel free to list on WP:CFD. — xaosflux ^Talk 04:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Boxing category

Dear Marek: Hi! Thanks for the message letting me know about the category. I think it's a good idea, particularly because in boxing many people have died after a competition. Auto Racing should be another sport for which a similar category should be formed but aside from Auto Racing, we have had deaths during basketball and association football games but those are too few to have in a category.

It's sad when a person dies period, let alone in boxing where there is still room for improvement. Authorities just choose to ignore this in the name of the "green paper".

Thanks for your message and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Chicago Hot Dog Martin

San Jose, California

There was already a long discussion about the proper title for the city on the talk page. The problem is, everyone here just calls in San Jose, regardless of what the officials say. And hundreds of existing maps and roadsigns say San Jose, not to mention hundreds of existing wikipedia links ... -- ProveIt ^(talk) 07:07, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Per the above note, as well as the discussion on the San Jose talk page, it is clear the common form in English is without the foreign accent mark. My edit conformed to that. I left it in those cases where it correctly reflected a direct quote, but otherwise the name now matches the name of the article. Regards. Jonathunder 19:26, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Appell

Translated a bit as you requested but . . . Please see here for my concerns re the sentence about Harvard. The French article has a few spelling mistakes and wrong birthdate - I did wonder if it had been put together hastily.--HJMG 19:44, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

It looks as if Morse was taught at Harvard by Birkhoff, while Appell was doing war-related work, then busy at the League of Nations in the 1920s.--HJMG 20:15, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Fucking Amal

That's original research. The only link the film has is its title, and this is just silly. Ambi 04:21, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Meerkat

Sorry. I misread the talk page. My apologies.

--BDWill Talk Contribs 03:59, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:Leeann.jpg

That image was most likely taken from here, which was the first page that came up on a Google image search. The shot in question comes from an FHM shoot she did in December 2004. Hope this is more useful than the answer you received. --BillC 23:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Pomocnik

Racja... sam nie wiem dlaczego tak pisałem wszędzie... dobrze że to przejrzałeś, bo chciałem zrobic tak ze wszytskimi zawodnikami... Adik7swiony 21:26, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Widze, że zająłeś się poprawianiem artykułów o piłkarzach... chwała Ci za to... ja sie za bardzo nie znam na angielskim i mogłem dawać tylko infoboxy, ale widze, że wspólna pracą informacje o zawodnikach na angielskiej wikipedi sa lepsze niz na polskiej... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adik7swiony (talk • contribs) 29 May

FIFA Controversies AfD

There is a fundamental problem - AfD is not a vote, so counting the "opinions" was counterproductive. My job as an administrator was to evaluate the strength of the rationales, and unsurprizingly I was more impressed with the "Delete"s. I think the article is irretrievably and unencyclopedic, and I definitely don't think there was any consensus on those crucial issues, in other words, the 41 did a poor job rebutting the 18 - other than by their sheer number, which was not considered. Hope that cleared it up for you. - CrazyRussian talk/email 13:20, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

World Cup Sponsorship AfD

Hi, I just wanted to tell you that I’ve made some rather large additions to 2006 FIFA World Cup sponsorship and would appreciate if you could take a look at them and possibly reconsider your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2006 FIFA World Cup sponsorship. I thought it was a worthy topic, even though it had a wretched article, so I added information about revenue and the sponsorship process, the sponsor related controversies of this World Cup (tickets distribution, Budweiser in Germany, Mcdonalds at a sporting event), and took out the copyvios. Please take a look. Thanks! Vickser 19:31, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Fußball vs. Fussball on the German Wikipedia World Cup 2006 article and in 2006 FIFA World Cup

Why isn't the "trademarked slogan" being used in the English version of the infobox? Why should the English article be any different than the German one in this respect? 69.109.185.85 03:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

Apologies about the delay in getting this to you, but...

		The "Rescue from AFD" Award
		I award you this barnstar in recognition of all the work you did to improve the 2006 FIFA World Cup controversies article, which resulted in it's AfD proposal being rejected and the article being kept. Keep up the great work! Killfest2—Daniel.Bryant 01:58, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

2006 FIFA World Cup

I am totally new at Wikipedia, so I don't know all the rules. However, 25 years as an editor and the backing of the Chicago Manual of Style along with other style guides and grammar books makes me pretty confident about commas after years in dates (i.e., "The game on July 9, 2006, went into overtime")--the comma before the year functions like a parentheses. Check out the Chicago manual's website. I've even seen the comma used on other Wikipedia sites. Btw, does Wikipedia have a style guide?

Also, what does rs linkspam mean? (I'm serious--I am a total neophyte.)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Chiaroscuro123 (talk • contribs) 1 August 2006, 01:19 (CDT)

Thanks for the info

• Thanks for the links to the style guide pages. I did find some examples of dates both with and without commas in different articles. (See Linsday Lohan,William Shakespeare, and World War I, for examples with commas--but don't ask how I came up with a list that weird! And see 1906 San Francisco Earthquake, for an example without. Of course, none have the precise configuration of the World Cup entry, which was listing range of dates.) Obviously, in such a large enterprise as this there will be inconsistencies. And I must wistfully concede the decline of the comma in writing, but it still looks funny to me without it. The European way of writing dates does obviate the comma--1 August 2006.

• And thanks for the info about the signature. I had not gotten up to the Talk Page directions in the tutorial until today.--Chiaroscuro123 16:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Good Article!

Finally! After months of hard work and toil, 2006 FIFA World Cup controversies was promoted to Good Article status. On behalf of everyone, I'd like to take the chance to thank you for all your hard work in improving this article. Thank you! Daniel.Bryant 07:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your Poland-related contributions

Hello Mareklug/Archive 1! Thank you for your contributions related to Poland. You may be interested in visiting Portal:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board, joining our discussions and sharing your creations with us.

-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  08:43, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

MK

Cześć. Widzę, że pozmieniałeś już trochę w artykule. Mam jednak pytanie: czy z języku angielskim można dopisać do twojego tekstu "a proposed union of cities" słowo "sąsiadujących" bądź "połączonych". Chodzi o to by to brzmiało jakoś tak - "planowany związek sąsiadujących ze sobą miast" bądź "planowany związek połączonych ze sobą miast". Dlaczego to takie ważne? Ponieważ na świecie intnieją związki miast, nawet oddalonych o siebie o kilkaset kilometrów (nie biorę tu pod uwagę partnerstwa miast tzw. miasta partnerskie, miasta bliźniacze). GZM z założenia ma nas zintegrować w jedną całość - związek/obszar miejski, aby jako jeden organizm walczyć o dotacje, zarządzać drogami, kanalizacją itp, promować ten jeden obszar, pozyskiwać dla niego inwestorów. Biorąc pod uwagę, że język angielski jest bardzo skromny (w porównaniu z j.polskim) i często wiele słów ma po kilka znaczeń oraz to, że są na świecie związki miast oddalonych od siebie, proszę o pomoc we wpisaniu tego o co tu poprosiłem. Pozdrawiam. LUCPOL 21:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Boeing 737

Hi Marek, This would not be me. You need to make a request to have the outline changed on Wikiproject Aircraft. We are trying to do a uniform outline. It was decided that we reduce the number of indentations in the table of contents. look at Boeing 757, 767, A330, A340, A310, 747-8, and many others and you will see it done there too. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.74.115 (talk • contribs) 09:46 (CDT), 3 October 2006

Flags

Would you be so kind to tell me how should I behave in this situation? As I see it someone decide to change the colours of a flag, but the discussion about this change is somewhere else, in a language I do not understand. As I do not understand why we at en.wiki should do what pl.wiki decide.--RedMC 13:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I answered at Talk:Flag of Poland.--RedMC 19:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Commons..

Hej, zauważyłem właśnie zobaczyłem twoją grafikę na commons. Mógłbyś powiedziec, czy jest gdziekolwiek używana, tak, żebym mógł ją spokojnie skasowac? Dzięki, odder 11:28, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Englis/Non Englsih letters in NHL bio articles

Hello Mareklug, see Krm500's compromise at my talk page. I suggest Krm500, should put his compromise up fo Afc at Wikipedia: WikiProject Ice Hockey/Player pages format. GoodDay 23:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm hoping for all Euro & French Canadian NHL bio articles titles, to be in sync soon. If these numerous bio articles continue to be out of sync (some with English titles: example Jaromir Jagr & some with Non-English titles: example Antero Nittymaki), I may seek an Arbitration Commitee Ruling. Diacriticals OR No Diacriticals, we need consistancy. GoodDay 01:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Good point, add it to the Rfc at Wikipedia: WikiProject Ice Hockey/Player pages format. I just want to see the Diacritical inconsistancies on the NHL bio articles end. You correct though, ALL English Wikipedia bio articles should be the same. I'm not trying to have things 'my way', I'm trying to seek common ground. GoodDay 18:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

GZW

Bądź tak miły i nie manipuluj. Chodzi o twoje wpisy w kawiarence i tu. LUCPOL 11:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I mały komentarz odnośnie twojej treści: "Hasla typu Aglomeracja, Polska beda zawierac poprawione wyliczenia/populacje nastepujacych aglomeracji na Slasku: katowickiej, rybnickiej, bielskiej i czestochowskiej" - a kto ci na to pozwoli? Zrozum, że twoje dane są z nierzetelnych źródeł, opisujących aglomerację z administacyjno-politycznego punktu widzenia. Sprawa GZW: GOP i ROW będzie jeszcze długo dyskutowana, sprawa aglomeracji częstochowskiej i bielskiej odpada już na samym początku. I proszę, używaj trochę inteligencji ^{(to nie jest atak personalny)}, bowiem bezmyślne kopiowanie absurdalnych treści z internetu tylko dla zasady "lepsze to, niż prawda bez pisanych źródeł" jest patologią. LUCPOL 11:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Upper Silesian Industry Area

Artykuł trzeba zmienić:

• zmienić metropolitan area na conurbation
• sekcja geography jhest błędna, bowiem jest podsekcja "miasta" a w niej nie ma wypisanych wszystkich miast. Nie powinieneś na ślepo kopiować artykułu GZM do artykułu GOP
• po co tam są sekcje typu "Famous people"?

LUCPOL 21:30, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Achhh. Niestety zrobił się mętlik, i to nie mały. Teraz praktycznie każdy artykuł - GZW, GOP, ROW i GZM jest błędny. Po pierwsze: nie nadużywaj w artykułach słowa "metropolitan area", ponieważ to jest całkowicie błędne w stosunku go GOP i ROW. GOP i ROW to conurbation or/and urban area, natomiast metropolitan area można nazwać tylko GZW. Nie oczekuję od ciebie doktoratu z geografii, ale jeśli zajmujesz się takimi artykułami to powinieneś się na tym choć trochę znać. Sprawa druga: dlaczego zmieniłeś artykuł User:R9tgokunks? Wpisał on do ROW oznaczenie "industrial area", czy to jest błędne? W moim słowniku angielskiego oznacza to "przemysłowy obszar", co jest prawdą w przypadku ROW (choć w tym wypadku lepsze by było "coal area" etc). LUCPOL 11:39, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

PS. To że GOP jest często zastępowany nazwą "aglomeracja górnośląska" czy "konurbacja górnośląska" jest faktem. Niestety tak już jest. Nie mniej jednak wiarygodne źródła wprost, że GOP to konurbacja np. Encyklopedia Onet, CD Geografia i inne. Myślę, że nie trzeba się kłócić że jest inaczej. LUCPOL 11:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Poprawiłem artykuły:

• Rybnik Coal Area - rozszerzyłem artykuł, zamieniłem "twoje" błędne metropolitan area na coal area (jeśli uważasz to za błędną nazwę to pisz na mojej dyskusji, przedyskutujemy poprawną nazwę)
• Upper Silesian Industry Area - zamieniłem "twoje" błędne metropolitan area na conurbation (zobacz dyskusję wyżej), usunąłem sekcję Famous people
• Upper Silesian Coal Basin - pozamieniałem stare błędne nazwy na nowe, dodałem "coal basin" (wkońcu to zagłębie węglowe), do słowa metropolitan area dodałem "de facto" (co można rozumieć jako non official)
• Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union - dodałem nowe informacje, zamieniłem "twoje" błędne 2,8 mln metropolitan area na urban area (aglomeracja) / conurbation (konurbacja), zmieniłem tabelę na uniwersalną

LUCPOL 12:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Mam prośbę, nie skarż na mnie że "zrobiłem to a to". Użytkownikowi poniżej napisałeś o mnie w sposób negatywny... a to trochę nie fair. Po drugie: podsumując: w czym jest problem? Co według ciebie należało by jeszcze zmienić w artykułach: GZW, GOP, ROW? Ja naliczyłem dwie rzeczy: nie podoba ci się określenie "conurbation" w GOP i nie podoba ci się określenie "[de facto] metropolitan area" w GZW. Czy coś jeszcze? Najważniejsze, by spokojnie dojść do porozumienia. Te dwie sprawy do przedyskutowania zostawmy na koniec, dlatego pytam się czy są jeszcze jakiś inne sprawy, które "ci się nie podobają". LUCPOL 12:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

PS. Usunąłem większość zbędnych i dublujących informacji z:

• Upper Silesian Coal Basin - diff, teraz artykuł ma tylko najważniejsze informacje zgodne z tematem: [1]
• Upper Silesian Industry Area - diff, teraz artykuł ma tylko najważniejsze informacje zgodne z tematem: [2]
• Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union - w tej chwili to tylko GZM ma wypisane uczelnie, zabytki itp. ze względu, że jest to jednostka administracyjna. I myślę, że się ze mną zgadzasz, bo te same spisy w artykułach GZW czy GOP to lekka przesada.

LUCPOL 13:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Silesia

Alright, i see your point... since... before i did anything Upper Silesian Coal Basin, Upper Silesian Industry Area, and Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union were all practically exact duplicates of the Katowice article, in fact there is still stuff on all 4 of them that is the exact same...go check it out for yourself is you do not believe me-- Hrödberäht (gespräch)

User:LUCPOL is at it again , after just bring blocked from the Polish Wikipedia for the 30th time(not joking, for a month) he is vandalizing articles on the English version; copying things i am saying in the edit summary, and reverting pages that he doesn't want to be reverted or deleted, Most notably:

• Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union
• Upper Silesian Industry Area
• Upper Silesian Coal Basin

-- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 01:27, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know, that POV tag you added to Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union was removed by LUCPOL 1 revert later, I put it back. -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 19:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Could you possibly get User:LUCPOL to stop adding back that useless info to the articles Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union and Upper Silesian Industry Area, and stop him from removing TAGs from Upper Silesian Coal Basin, Upper Silesian Industry Area? Thanks -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 17:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Medals Tally in 2007 Melbourne

I just updated the whole medal tally. I only counted manually the medals won in the Medal Summary that's already in the article, so it's probably best to check if I missed out something or I counted wrongly... Anyway, does it look better now? RaNdOm26 17:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Conflation of indoor arena and stadium in Hangzhou

I'm no expert on the subject. Make whatever changes, renames, or merges you see fit.--Daveswagon 21:41, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Sansei yamao

Done. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Five-octave vocal range

I see you have a history of working on the article Five-octave vocal range. I am looking at it from the project Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles where it is one of the longest {{unreferenced}} tagged articles that does not meet at least the barest minimum of verifiability. It has been tagged and completely without references since June 2006. It would be extremely helpful if you had some references you could add to the article to help support its verifiability and notability. Thanks for any help you can give. Jeepday (talk) 14:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Jerzy Janowicz

Here's the article in it's entirety (minus the <blockquote>s):

Jerzy Janowicz (born November 13, 1990 in Łódź, Poland) is a polish junior tennis player.

Airport

Mam poważne wątpliwości co do sensu tej twojej edycji. Mnóstwo portów lotniczych na świecie nie jest zlokalizowanych w samych miastach lecz poza administracyjnymi granicami danej miejscowości. Zauważyłem, że edytujesz artykuły związane z lotniskami, więc to co teraz napisałem jest dla ciebie znane. Dlaczego takiej edycji dokonałeś tylko przy porcie lotniczym Katowice-Pyrzowice. Dziwniejsze jest również to, że poprawiałeś również tekst o lotnisku krakowskim, a ten leży niedaleko Krakowa, w Balicach a tu takiej informacji że leży niedaleko Krakowa już nie napisałeś. Jeżeli nie zamierzasz napisać przy każdym porcie że nie znajduje się w granicach danego miasta to proszę o zmianę twojej edycji aby pisało po prostu o porcie katowickim (czyli tak jak było przed twoją edycją i tak jak ma port w Balicach). Nie można stosować odmiennych kryteriów to wybranych przez siebie portów. LUCPOL (talk) 12:47, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:It's-It (album).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:It's-It (album).jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo issue

I hope you have many friends who will support the view that Bosnia has not decided on recognising Kosovo's independence...because I think Avala will do an edit war here and claim that Republika Srpska represents Bosnia. This is total nonsense since the world recognises the government at Sarajevo--as the legitimate ruler of Bosnia. I first noticed that Avila said Bosnia does not recognise the independence of Kosovo and was puzzled until I saw the Serb Republika Srpska reference. It would have been better if a Wikipedia Admin got involved ASAP and stopped Avila's Serb POV's. It seems as if the Admins have fallen asleep today. Regards, Leoboudv (talk) 00:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Warning for content removal

You have committed Blanking type of vandalism which is Removing all or significant parts of pages' content without any reason, or replacing entire pages with nonsense. Sometimes important verifiable references are deleted with no valid reason(s) given in the summary. Please refrain from making such edits in the future. --Avala (talk) 00:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Wikipedia. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

Please don't create mistifications with this ridiculous accusation, as it was your unreasonable and misrepresenting edits that I have been removing, being at that, one of several other editors, who object to your POV-pushing, untrue misrepresentations of werifiable facts. As an administrator of the Serb Wikipedia, you should know better, than to falsely create impression of culpability to serve your own ends, by supplying user talk page content of this sort. You have already been reported today by me on Wikimedia Commons for engaging in persistent edit-warring and vandalism of your own, in the matter of presenting a false state of facts on the maps depicting official state recognition or nonrecognition of independent Kosowo. Your bad-faith edits, which I and others have been removing, while you keep reverting, no doubt violating the 3RR rule, consisted of placing misleading references purporting to support the view that Bosnia or Armenia have officially acted not to recognize Republic of Kosovo, whereas in fact, the two countries have not. So, I refute your attempt to paint me in a bad light. Furthermore, there seems to be mounting evidence that an RFC should be conducted over the matter of your edits in the matter of Kosovo as damaging to two or more Wikimedia projects and their credibility, thereby resulting in transgressions no admin should ever commit, on any project, even where he is not an administrator, because he is expected to know better. --Mareklug ^talk 00:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I supplied two sources for presiding and another member of tripartite presidency saying that Bosnia will not recognise and that there is consensus on this issue. Better question is why are you removing this information? Consider this a second warning that vandalizing pages will not be tolerated. I am an admin because I fight vandalism which you endorse. Giving two sources is not truth twisting, removing content is. --Avala (talk) 00:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

How dare you lie on my talk page and give me unwarranted warnings (two, by now!), whereas it is you who are involved in this edit war yourself, breaking the WP:3RR in the process singlehandedly, and on the wrong end of facts, at that. In fact, it is you, who removed content, sourced content at that, and far more pertaining to the official position of the government of Bosnia re: Kosovo's independence, replacing it with sources quoting individual POLITICIANS, not GOVERNMENTS. Furthermore, that material may well pertain to Republika Srpska, but it does not to Bosnia and Hercegowina, as you are continuing to misrepresent. Badly placed, misleading text should be removed. Republika Srpska IS NOT BOSNIA, and it's high time for your Serb-centric mentality to register that fact, and stop pretending that it is. It is you who are guilty of removing sourced NPOV content and replacing it by inserting irrelevant, misrepresenting content, which surely is vandalism of the highest order. You are the worst kind of admin, a double-talking false accuser of others, using Wikipedia lingo to create misimpressions of appropriatness of your actions, which are most unsaviory and damage the Wikipedia. You accuse users such as me, who are actually editing impartially and removing your misrepresentations. Please quit littering my talk page with your nonsense and false accusations. I think your actions should be looked at by English Wikipedia admins, who should take into account the social unrest you are causing on the Kosovo-related pages among editors objecting to your ujustified take on official stances of governments. --Mareklug ^talk 01:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not any politicians it's presidency members of Bosnia and Hercegovina (not Republika Srpska).--Avala (talk) 01:29, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

And again in Russia it is. Why? well because countries have different political systems. Polish president never said "Poland will not recognize Kosovo" only "Poland should wait with recognizing Kosovo". Presidency members in Bosnia have used finite form - Bosnia will not recognize Kosovo. no shoulds but will not. Because they have the power to do so (or they are silly people who make statements outside of their jurisdiction). Now either provide us with at least some sources for your statements or stop with blanking. --Avala (talk) 01:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

This is sheer sophistry on your part: you demand sources for statements, which the government of Bosnia (or Armenia, for that matter) has not made in the name of the state YET. Instead of leaving in place the NPOV source for Bosnia, which you removed (talk about blanking!) in order to make room for quotes by individual members of tripartite presidency or Armenian minsters or whatnot (individuals, in any case, speaking individually!). Had you presented your sources in a measured, appropriate context, there would be no conflict, but you wholesale acted on these quotations by highly placed individuals as actions of states! That, they are not, and it is you who must provide verifiable sources of concrete state actions. And no per analogiam to Russia, ruled by a despot. Who already spoke ex officio, and who had his diplomats present the matter formally at hte UN Security Council. Which Bosnia or Armenia HAVE NOT. --Mareklug ^talk 02:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: User:Avala etc.

3RR reports should be filled at WP:3RR. Another page to check: WP:DR, with mediation being highly suggested if not tried before.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:14, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo

Hello. Japan will recognize Kosovo's independance soon : [3] . Could you please change the colour of Japan into light blue on the map you've made (Kosovo relations) ? Nonopoly (talk) 08:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey there Mareklug, Croatia and Japan will recognize Rep. of KV (kosova) soon, I hope you will be the one to change the map. Today there was a meeting between Croatia and Japan..and the Japan minister asked Croatia what it thought, kind of corned Croatia. Expect Croatia to recognize Kosova Thursday. 68.114.197.88 (talk) 18:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)Kosova2008

WP:AN notice

FYI, your editing is being discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Blanking_sourced_content. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Bjork

So are you going to add Bjork to the article or not? Was the purpose of opening a talk section about Bjork's opinion just to annoy other editors or you were sincere? --Avala (talk) 17:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Please don't add Bjork ! If you do, thousands of other people, politicians, celebritites and others will be added as also relevant. That will render the list unusable. I am going to assume good faith and assume that the latter is not your intention. Passportguy (talk) 19:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion project

Your request for a third opinion has been edited to comply with Wikipedia:Third opinion#How to list a dispute. If your entry as originally worded contained information vital to an understanding of the dispute, please add those details to the article talk page where the dispute exists. Thanks. — Athaenara ✉ 00:01, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Grsz 11 05:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I have not insulted you in any way and there is no need to be so hostile. What's the deal with the lately missing click :) of the troika of the Serb government POV-pushers. In that case I should call you the Kosovar (Shiptar) goverment (but wouldn't call it that) POV-pusher.Top Gun

Re. The matter of fabricated quote for Brazil entry in International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence

Hello. Could you please direct me to the source? I will read it and tell you if a refusal to recognize Kosovo is explicit. If not, I may well proceed to translate the entire declaration. Regards, Húsönd 00:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

From what I read, the official Brazilian position is pretty much like the Spanish one. The first lines say, "The Brazilian government does not support the independence of Kosovo, as it occurred in an unilateral manner, and will only recognize it when that becomes the result of a political agreement with Serbia, under the conduction of the United Nations". I can translate the rest if it's necessary, but from this source it does seem like there's a clear refusal to recognize unless Serbia accepts Kosovo's independence. Regards, Húsönd 01:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

The source belongs to a newspaper from the city of Florianópolis. It is not official but they do seem to interpret/quote official sources. Here is the complete translation:

The Brazilian government does not support the independence of Kosovo, as it occurred in an unilateral manner, and will only recognize it when that becomes the result of a political agreement with Serbia, under the conduction of the United Nations. This interpretation of recent declarations of the Minister of Foreign Relations Celso Amorim, and of an official note made public this Friday, on which the Ministry of Foreign Relations expressed its preoccupation with the violence wave in Serbia and with the attacks to the Embassy of the United States in Belgrade, was confirmed by diplomats.

From the Ministry of Foreign Relations' point of view, by declaring the country independent, the leaders of Kosovo have ignored the UN Security Council Resolution 1244, from the year 1999. That text stipulates a compromise of the United Nations towards the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Yugoslavia (current Serbia) and also determines, on its second appendix, that a possible sovereign government of Kosovo be the result of a political agreement.

"The Brazilian government reiterates a call for restraint and reaffirms its conviction that a peaceful solution for the Kosovo issue must continue to be searched through dialog and negotiation, under the auspices of the United Nations and in the legal framework of the 1244 resolution of the Security Council", informs the note.

The Ministry of Foreign Relations is especially worried with the cascade effect that the independence of Kosovo may have throughout the world, as has indicated Amorim on the last 18th, in Brasília. Particularly, in countries with a fragmented population. In his recent declarations, the minister defends that Brazil awaits a decision by the Security Council before defining its official position on the matter. For him, the countries that have already recognized Kosovo's independence have put the United Nations in a "second place".

This is it! Regards, Húsönd 01:47, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. Húsönd 03:37, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Reflist

Hi. You need to get rid of the entire ref at talk:International.....independence, because it doesn't show your signature, or anything that anyone writes after the ref. I would do it myself, but it converts your signature to mine i I try. BalkanFever 14:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

It's taken me a while to get back to you :D. I saw your reply when you posted it, but I couldn't edit anything due to the server (ugh). All I wanted to say was that the (now removed) section referred to something along the lines of "violence of Serbs in Macedonia (among other places)" which is incorrect because the instability is about the outstanding issue of the Albanian minority. Either way, the guy didn't elaborate on Macedonia so it was just misleading to have that there. BalkanFever 00:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

May I ask for your help?

Mr. Mareklug, it was written in the article Kosovo: "Kosova" redirects here. For other uses, see Kosova (disambiguation). but that was and still is not the case as when I type Kosova it does redirect me to "Kosova (disambiguation)". The aforementioned sentence was deleted in the article today by user Husönd. So I would appreciate your help, Sir. The discussion is going on here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kosovo#There_should_be_a_redirect_from_Kosova_to_Kosovo --Tubesship (talk) 14:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Problem solved, they just did it! :-) Tubesship (talk) 16:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Re. User:Tocino disruptive on Kosovo-related article. Please enforce probation.

Hello Mareklug. Actually, I had left a message at Tocino's talk page asking him to refrain from being uncivil. I also left a message both at his talk page and at Talk:International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence reminding of the probation affecting all Kosovo-related articles. I believe that shall suffice for the restart of harmonious dialog. Anyway, I will refrain from banning any users myself, as it's preferable to have an uninvolved administrator to do it (I've been editing Kosovo-related articles frequently). Hopefully it won't be necessary. Regards, Húsönd 18:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I still haven't investigated the current Brazilian reference dispute, but I'll have a look at it later on. Thank you. Regards, Húsönd 18:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Consenus breached, need support

Hello Mr. Mareklug, contrary to a reached consensus there is a splitting going on instead a merging: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kosovo#Split_completed And I would appreciate your assistance. Thank you! --Tubesship (talk) 04:56, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Some thoughts on Kosovo articles Kosovo and Republic of Kosovo

I respect your opinion, but based on long discussions on talk page (note, not votes) and my understanding of NPOV I believe this is the best solution. If Kosovo were the article alloted for the Republic, people here would attempt to use it to legitimize their viewpoint that Kosovo is the Republic of Kosovo. The most obvious manifestations of this are people slapping an infobox onto Kosovo, or putting "Kosovo is a state", etc. This isn't fair to the Serb POV.

However, you are largely correct about the redundancy, and I am working to improve that. Superm401 - Talk 05:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Translation

Hi Mareklug. You're probably busy with the Kosovo articles and all, but if you have any time, could you please translate Makedonsko devojče into polszczyzna? I'd like to create an interwiki for it. Thanks in advance, BalkanFever 05:43, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks. Could you provide the next two verses? BalkanFever 06:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

:D. They're dark. Polish girls? BalkanFever 07:30, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

True. My personal picks are Izabella Scorupco, Weronika Rosati and Joanna Krupa. Is there anyone you think I've left out? BalkanFever 07:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Central Europe in general is pretty satisfying :). Must be the historical mixture, as you said. And good idea about the footnotes - I'll make them for all the interwikis. Now to find all the other Slavic-speakers (I have an elaborate pan-Slavic wiki idea for this song :D ). If you ever need a Macedonian translation, you know where to find me ;). BalkanFever 12:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

---

Thanks for the tip, I've removed it. For one of the most popular Macedonian songs, it has quite a few sourcing problems :( .

Apologies

I would like to apologies over my remark on Somaliland. I sympathies for partly recognised countries such as Kosovo. I believe in "If the majority of a country wishes to be independant" However I generally disagree with counties such as Somaliland as they have no recognition. So no change, therefore no point in supporting them. However if an organistion such as the African Union was to recognise Somaliland, my view and opinion would change, to recognition, as there has been significant chance. If such news does occur, please let me now. I am also pro British, Kosovo, European and Polish (Krakow is the best city i have ever visited) please let me know of any information. Apologies again, if you would like any support on any Kosovo dispute or anti Polish attack, please let me know as i will support your view/ opinion. Peace. Ijanderson977 (talk) 00:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Macedonia

I am asking for your help on changing the position of Macedonia.

This is the current position of Macedonia on international reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence:

"The Republic of Macedonia will decide its view when we deem it most appropriate for our interests," said President Branko Crvenkovski. Crvenkovski said that Macedonia would follow the position of NATO and the European Union on Kosovo, but he pointed out that nations in the two organizations have to yet to assume a common stance.[130][131] The Democratic Party of Albanians left the government coalition on March 13 after it failed to meet their six demands, recognizing Kosovo's independence being one of them. However, it returned on March 24 after demanding the recognition of Kosovo. [132] The various politicians involved are busy conducting negotiations and their outcome remains unsettled as of March 19, 2008.[133]"

All of these references are from non-official sources (news agencies). The MFA of Macedonia today declared on its' website, "In his informal meetings with his other colleagues, in the context of the resolution of the future Kosovo issue, Minister Milososki reiterated that the Republic of Macedonia supports the proposal by Special Envoy Ahtisaari, and the unison EU position on this issue." [4], the new description should read that "Macedonia supports the Marti Ahtisaari plan." Kosova2008 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your note on the 'edit wars'. I can probably add back the comment on Cuba when it is unlocked. As a Canadian from Vancouver, I am neither Serb nor Albanian but I agree with my government's position that it is better to recognise Kosovo. The Kosovars have waited too long here. The question is whether the Asian and African states will slowly recognise the new situation or not? I personally don't think Cuba will recognise Kosovo but so far they have remained quiet--maybe Raul Castro is more cautious compared to his brother. Regards, Leoboudv (talk) 19:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Mareklug I seriously appreciate your help. I think an admin needs to remind the opposition (tocino, Avala, etc) that since this is a controversial matter we need to only resort to irrefutable evidence. Quotes from X dailies is good but evidence from MFA are stronger, it is this belief of mine which made me ask for your help in the MACEDONIA section. I hope you can agree, only through NPOV we can move towards progress. Also if we don't have serious OFFICIAL (MFA, PM, or any official website) than if we are left to X dailies info the newer X daily info should trump the old since it represents a current up to date; you saw with Macedonia how the MFA was complete opposite of what X dailies were saying a month ago. Best Regards, Ari. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kosova2008 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

OMG CHECK THIS OUT, this IS BREAKING NEWS!!!

"The imbroglio between Macedonia and Greece has been resolved by default – by > the coming to light of an ancient manuscript ceding sovereignty over both > territories in perpetuity to today's Kosovo.

In addition, Kosovo would also hold claims over a region in south-east Bulgaria, formerly referred to as Bulgarian Macedonia until the Socialist regime changed the name to Pirin region." [5] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kosova2008 (talk • contribs) 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, a very clever April Fool's joke. :) --Mareklug ^talk 21:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Could you reply next time on my talk page? Yea, I found out I wrote at my friends in Kosovathanksyou.com and they told me it was a joke BUT its NOT FUNNY because I read the news 7mins after it got posted..its STILL the 31st here, this is seriously not funny, im so pissed there should have been a tag at the end of that article. Kosova2008 (talk) 02:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Serbian reactions to Kosovo Independence

Uhhhh, do you actually need to make a separate article? I suggest merging some of the content into the Serbian Reaction section of the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence article.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 03:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

We had no choice! Under the table format, it was becoming unmanagable, ever-expanding, a dissertation. And the story has only begun. I'm sure we have only seen the beginning of Serbian reaction. My bigger concern is avoiding the phenomenon of a timeline, and keeping it a coherent article, as events unfold. I have no doubt about its notability -- it's a canddate for A-class importance for Wikiproject:Serbia. I'd appreciate your help in managing it. There's no chance of folding any of it back into the international reaction article -- which is already way too bloated and if anything, expect other spin-offs. :) --Mareklug ^talk 03:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm referring to the section on the actual declaration of independence, not the one for the international reaction.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 03:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I see. Let me think about that.

One thing that comes to mind, is that the Serbian reaction is relatively immune to edit-warring along the lines of Kosovar vs. Serbian POV, and thus, will not be ever locked in disputes, unlike the Kosovo articles. Second, the aforementioned projected ever-lengthening volume of it persuades for keeping the article separate. Third, it should be findable through the Category of Politics in Serbia by anyone looking there first. Fourth, linking to an article from the international reaction article is more fool-proof (the link won't break, should someone edit a section heading). All these things speak for keeping the article as is. --Mareklug ^talk 03:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, presently the Serbian reaction section on the declaration of independence article deals mostly with the protests in Serbia, though an article already exists on them. I don't think Serbia's reaction will go much further than it is now given the elections are only a little over a month away. If the European Serbia coalition is able to win it could change things around, though it's more likely a nationalist coalition between DSS-SRS and maybe even with SPS would be formed. The ICJ matter is going to be around September before it can even be put forward. For now there seems to be nothing justifying a separate article. I think just shortening the discussion of Serbian protests there and basically just putting the information there would be fine. Honestly, the declaration article has not been exposed to the same kind of POV nonsense going on in other articles.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 04:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Care should be taken to distinguish between Serbian reaction and Serbia's. The latter was nearly completely neglected in the article. I added a synopsis covering the main (not all) points and converted the seealso to the protests article into a dual main. Now, if you feel up to it, it would make sense to pare down the riots in that "Serbian reaction" section, and make sure that Bosnian Serb teens in Banja Luka etc. are included, as well as the Republika Srpska entity parliament's proclamation intending to seek independence while condemning Kosovo's (how ironic). So, as you see, I'm going just hte opposite of your initial suggestion -- reducing the column inches, while generalizing the content. It's for the best, trust me. The Serbian reaction is far from a closed book, and spans not just Serbia in its present borders. Or Serbia's reaction. --Mareklug ^talk 05:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Mareklug, I have new developments. Rep. of Kosova has picked Skender Hyseni to be the MFA of Kosova and Minister of Returnees and Communities to be Ismet Hashanin. The deputy-minister of Ministry of Administration of Local government has been named Branislav Brbiq (Serb/Bosniak ?). Source is in Albanian, my translation is not the best (on the names of position in english). Source Kosova2008 (talk) 14:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Re. any reason why a noncontroversial editprotect request is not being handled or even acknowledted?

Done. Could you please verify if it's ok now? If so, please remove the edit request template on the talk page. Regards, Húsönd 17:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo

I would appreciate it a lot if you would join us in the Kosovo article which has turned into a mess. Your opinion and presence would help to further advance that article. Thank you. Jawohl (talk) 08:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes please, there is an admin thinking all WPs all over the world are wrong but himself being the only NPOV. We really need someone stopping this admin and free this article. --Tubesship (talk) 08:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey There

I see that I agree with you 100%. Let me know if you need any help, esp with that Serbia's reaction article. Want me to make a timeline, the events you've included but in a 2D picture ? Kosova2008 (talk) 21:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

You draw a line and in it you put perpendicular short lines with key events. LOL. I can't or don't know how to load images in WP. I only know how to link a URL to a page which hosts the image. I still can't or don't know how to use the <src img="SOMETHING"> as I would in HTML Kosova2008 (talk) 21:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Re. 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence

Hello Mareklug. I see that an edit war is starting on this one too. I think that you should request full protection for this article at WP:RFPP, and talk your diagreements with Tocino on the talk page while the article is locked. I shall not grant protection to the article myself, as I'm involved with the Kosovo topic. You'll require a neutral admin. Thus, WP:RFPP. Regards, Húsönd 19:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

preemptive vs. in-progress

Hi there. You just declined an informed request for page protection on grounds that we don't protect preemptively. But a casual inspection of recent revision history shows an edit war in progress. Why do you wish to wait until a 3RR rule becomes a factor? The request is predicated on the ongoing multi-week debacle on International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence -- the very same edits, the very same information, the very same contention, POV-pushing, falsifications, and reverts. Please reconsider. --Mareklug ^talk 22:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

If you can indicate the section of the protection policy which applies here, I will do so. Stifle (talk) 08:16, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Archive suggestion

This talk page is becoming very long. Please consider archiving. Stifle (talk) 08:16, 10 April 2008 (UTC)