Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
In all honesty I'm disappointed by the way you have responded to the Bulgarian municipal templates. I noticed you didn't respond when I first mentioned it, I gather you don't think it is a good idea. If I could access the guide Bulgaria site more easily I'd start working on it myself but my computer comes to a halt when I try to access it. Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 14:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Excuse me if I haven't replied, I'm pretty sure I'm not being paid by Wikipedia to contribute and so I can't be expected to be regular in my editing—or communication. I'm often too busy to engage in any such initiatives or even to reply, and sometimes I can't reply at a given moment and forget to do so later. I don't believe anything of those can be disappointing, but I do apologize if you have actually relied on me.
I don't think those templates are a bad idea, they can have some use although I'm not a great fan because I think categories are doing the job just fine. I'd simply prefer to devote the currently little time I have for Wikipedia to authoring original content aimed at DYK, GA and FA. I'm sorry if that is disappointing, but I simply don't have the hours to organize templates. I do personally believe that writing engaging, well-referenced, quality articles is more important to WikiProject Bulgaria than that. See, everyone has the right to choose how to contribute, you can't really be disappointed by the personal choice I've made.
Also, I don't think Guide Bulgaria is the most authoritative source, they seem to be actually nicking content from Wikipedia, they are certainly biased as a tourism website, and their English is pretty crappy.
All the best and good luck with those templates. Todor→Bozhinov 16:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 05:35, 10 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
I reverted your last edits from the Wallachian plain because it is the same plain. Your argument "not the same at least culturally" is vague, because this article is about a Geographical feature, not a cultural one. In Bulgaria it is not treated separately, but it is described only in the dimensions that belong to that country. Same for the Balkan mountains, the Rhodopes etc. I give you also an example from Romania: the plain in the western part of the country is called in Romania "The Western plain" (Campia de Vest), and it is described only in the dimensions that belong to Romania. But from the Geographical point of view it is part of the Hungarian Plain though. In Slovakia they call the southern part of the country "Danubian plain" but actually it is part of the Hungarian Plain. --Olahus (talk) 22:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
I think you have right. I apologise! I confused the Wallachain Plain with the Lower Danube Bassin, which are 2 different issues, because the Lower Danube Bassin includes the entire space between the peaks of the Southern Carpathians (as the northernmost limit) and the peaks of the Balkan mountains (as the southernmost limit). Best regards and cheers! --Olahus (talk) 15:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi, I thought this issue might interest you; perhaps you'd want to comment before something radical gets done. Fut.Perf.☼ 09:24, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hi, I wanted to have a look at Radeva's article linked to from Anatolian Bulgarians but it doesn't seem to work. Tried to find the article in another way so I could fix it myself, but didn't succeed! (Including trying to find the site for Демокрация - did they fail??) Maybe you can help.
There's an interesting discussion going on about a youtube video made in one of the villages inhabited by Anatolian Bulgarians, contact me if you're interested. — Martha (talk) 19:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Tnx for reply. Visit http://archive.iecc.com/search.phtml/eefc and search for 'Multilingual speakers' from 2008-2009. But some of the discussion (the most interesting part of course!) was private. Can we connect by e-mail on this? I don't know how to do that from Wikipedia. — Martha (talk) 20:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hi! Thanks for your judgment. I understand your thoughts and take them on board. But I’m sure you see that I have only placed this category into articles which states a Turkish community. I do not think it is necessary to have a certain percentage point as even 1% is quite a high percentage for certain cities. Also please not that the category is not about ‘major’ populations, just Turkish communities… Turco85 (talk) 13:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Places with a Turkish community outside Turkey sounds fine to me... however I do remember naming disputes on this category in previous months. Nevertheless, I would be satisfied with such a change. My only objection would be to having a certain percentage for the category for the reasons I set forth before… Turco85 (talk) 14:06, 21 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Seems my secret plan of teaching you Romanian bit by bit is working :D. Good to see you've caught a shine for the DYK - you're doing a very good job there too. And thanks, Dahn (talk) 20:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Praise from Caesar - thank you for that. Oh and: sure you know, and I know, that they should go straight to FA, but the philistines keep bothering me with the review processes :). But seriously: I expect the toughest criticism from my friends, so please don't hesitate to point out any flaw you may come across. I'm sure there are plenty, they're just more discreet since I learned how to fake erudition ;). The very best to you too, Todor, and à la prochaine. Dahn (talk) 09:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On February 23, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Delyo, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hiya - I've redirected your page, as convention is that aircraft incidents are just known by the flight name - please help at the main article! Many thanks! Pedro : Chat 10:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hi, Todor, and thanks a lot for verifying the length and date on this. Now that Dahn has proposed a more suitable hook, only that remains to be checked. There's a source in the article, plus plenty more here. - BiruitorulTalk 04:51, 27 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hello Todor! Since you were involved in my past unsuccessful attempt to get the Byzantine navy article to FA, you may be interested in participating in the second nomination of a much expanded & improved article. Thanks in advance and best regards, Constantine ✍ 19:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
Hello again! The article has been successfully promoted. Thanks again for your vote! Cheers, Constantine ✍ 11:18, 16 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The February 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:01, 4 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You have been engaging in edit warring at Slavic-speakers of Greek Macedonia recently. As a word of advice, when you notice that you are carrying on a conversation in edit summaries like this, that means things have gone too far. You shouldn't be able to revert each other enough to hold a discussion like that, and, more importantly, it just encourages the other person to revert you back, especially when you use taunting edit summaries like "You started it, you'll face the consequences." Please keep your discussions to the talk page instead, and try to resolve the conflict the first, without this confrontational warring. If you have an edit conflict, WP:DR may be helpful. Please take a look at the essay on edit warring for more insight. Additionally, you should be aware that a prior arbitration case pertains to this subject matter, and administrators have the power to block editors who disrupt Macedonia-related articles. Dominic·t 12:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator electionedit
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:32, 8 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
Виж си пощата, ако обичаш! Jingby (talk) 17:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks, thanks, I had some big time personal problems and decided to call it a day for some time (six months or so). I think I'm much better now so I decided to come back. I won't be around that much, but still here. I see some things have changed, some haven't, some better English, some familiar faces and so on. So, thanks again and happy editing as always :) --LaveolT 19:53, 15 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
Military history WikiProject coordinator electionedit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 07:17, 21 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hello! I've translated Ivan Alexander (el:Ιβάν Αλεξάντερ) to greek. I would also like to translate the map mentioned above but it seems to have invalid svg code. Since I'm not very experienced with svg Ι wonder if you could check the map again. Thank you! --Egmontaz♤talk 21:34, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
No need to thank me, I should thank you instead for your contribution to that article which gave me the opportunity to translate an interesting article. --Egmontaz♤talk 15:20, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
You have been blocked from editing for hundreds of years in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for incessantly spreading bourgeois nationalist Bulgarian propaganda. As an IMRO member and a lackey of the Tsar, you have no place among the workers' and working peasants' alliance moving forward to build socialism. You already fought about three failed wars against Greece and Serbia: can you not renounce these expansionist delusions and comfort yourself with building socialism in one country? Per Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Digwuren#General_restriction. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.
Please unblock me, I am innocent! I am a faithful servant of our great Tsar General Secretary. I have always been a devoted communist and internationalist! Long live Balkania! Todor→Bozhinov 18:53, 1 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Welcome to the class struggle, comrade! (Granted, this guy has long been blacklisted - indeed murdered by our Glorious Teacher Stalin, but his sentiment was correct back then.) - BiruitorulTalk 19:04, 1 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago12 comments9 people in discussion
Hi. Sorry to see the trouble you're having with this. If you want my advice (and maybe you don't!) I think you should consider withdrawing the FAC. Yes, I know you think that would make no sense because of the multiple support votes, but based on nothing more than my (admittedly only recently acquired) experience at WP:FAC, I don't think the article will be promoted this time around; the delegate who reads the FAC page to determine whether it will be promoted, archived or left open will give significant weight to the opposition because it has come from those experienced at reviewing featured article candidates, and because—though you may disagree—the oppose statements are based on a coherent, legitimate argument rather than "I don't like it." So, I do think the most prudent, least stressful course of action for you would be to withdraw the FAC, take a look at the recommended sources at your leisure, include any relevant details, and resubmit the article in a few weeks. Please don't let the frustrations you've encountered this time put you off FAC for good; I'm sure that if you follow this advice, the next time will be far less stressful. All the best, SteveT • C 19:37, 1 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, it's been really stressful. I do believe the article has the required quality and meets the criteria, that's why I've sustained the nomination. I also think the voting and the overall opinion have been generally towards promotion and the delegates cannot ignore that. I deeply disagree with the reasoning and judgement of those who have voted oppose. I simply don't find their comments actionable or even reasonable: how can I be asked to contact experts during a FAC, or comply with a request to rewrite a GA with overwhelming FAC support to boot? I can't understand that. Withdrawing the nomination would be like acknowledging it doesn't meet the criteria, and so far I've seen no solid facts presented to back that position. Might be a few more days (or weeks?!) of stress, but it may prove worth it.
The truth is, I've been very disappointed with the FAC process and I'll probably take a break from Wikipedia once this is over. It's been way too much stress for what it's worth. I'm probably never going on FAC again (or at least in the near future) because it really has been a very unpleasant experience compared to my previous FA attempts and my overall experience with Wikipedia. This particular nomination has been a rollercoaster, and not in a good way ;) Even the most heated Balkans-related discussions have been less unpleasant. Probably because they can never be that much personal as an article you've carefully worked on for months that people ask you to research again and rewrite.
Thanks for your comment though, I really appreciate it. Best, Todor→Bozhinov 20:20, 1 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
I understand your frustration. FAC can be one of the most stressful areas; by design it exists to hold our work to a higher standard than most of the rest of Wikipedia can match—and this is how it should be. But what I will say is that I don't think anyone was saying the article required a complete rewrite; Laser Brain seemed to be suggesting that other experts on the topic weigh in with an opinion on the best sources to use and "have them review a working outline." I don't know what that means exactly, but it doesn't look like a rewrite request to me. The principal objections are resolvable; you indicated that you could access these books given enough time. I feel sure that if you withdrew the FAC and took some time to look over the books then the opposition would disappear; as it stands, I'm 100% sure it won't be promoted while their concerns are outstanding, but RelHistBuff indicated a willingness to support, and the other editors are honourable reviewers who I'm sure would be happy to reconsider their votes if you pinged them upon renomination. I'm sorry if I seem like I'm repeating myself, perhaps that proves just how much of a shame I think it would be if you were soured to Wikipedia and to FAC because of this experience. SteveT • C 21:33, 1 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Apparently, though, they do want a complete rewrite: "the whole thing needs to be rewritten, top to bottom". When someone goes from a comment to oppose then to comment then to symbolic oppose then to full oppose, you start to wonder if you're really sure what you're doing at all with this nomination. It feels like people are opposing organizedly because I couldn't take a month-and-a-half nomination anymore and wanted it finally promoted, against their vocal but small minority. It gets from bad to worse.
But really, I don't think anything can persuade me to go back to FAC after this, it kills all the joy. Todor→Bozhinov 06:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Todor, let me begin by saying this: though I have read through the FAC, I haven't cast my vote because I do see a point to the some of the comments about sourcing, or, at least, it would take me too much time to look into every individual source, assess its nature and how important it is to the text. Voting implies a responsibility, one I can't take in this context. That said, I notice that many negative comments there are irresponsible in the opposite way, and some are simply parasitical (the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" type). FAC is a self-important and often grotesque process (I should know), but I found it is better to go the extra mile before submitting an article and make it bulletproof by several standards, which is why I've "sabotaged" at least one intended FAC nom for my contributions.
Whatever the outcome, please, please reconsider your decision to leave us, or, if there's no way of persuading you to change your mind, please, please return soon. This project needs you, and the Bulgaria articles can't do without you. Cheers. Dahn (talk) 12:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
No way, you're leaving. I double Dahn here - you have to stay.--LaveolT 12:10, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Hey ;-) Pleaseeeeeeeeeeeee don't leave us :(:( Don't pay attention to those who are annoying you and go on with something else... We have to fill in tons of templates, write articles for villages, river, landmarks... and without you we are lost. Поздрави... и не обръщай внимания на ония охлюви ;-) --Gligan (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Hi there. Steve gives you great advice above so I won't try to rehash it, but let me try to offer you some encouragement. You are a great editor, and you brought great prose to FAC. If you got away without an Oppose from Tony1, you know you have that much in the bag. However... there is nothing worse than the sinking feeling that your labor of love might have problems that can't be fixed within the scope of a nomination. I know it's bringing you down, especially since you don't see eye-to-eye with the opposition. FAC should be your shining moment, when all your hard work is recognized for what it is. So I know how you feel! Some people bring nominations in that aren't ready, and when they get archived, the editor goes, "Yeah, you got me" and shuffles off to work on it some more. Somewhere inside, they knew it wasn't ready. Sometimes they don't come back, but usually they do. But some editors believe in their hearts that the material is ready, and there is nothing quite so demoralizing than being told your 100% ready article doesn't meet some criterion or another. It's demoralizing because you spent 100% of your effort getting it there and you don't know what else you can do to appease them. But, please—take a step back. Take two steps back. Have a cup of earl grey. Then look at it again and I think you'll find that a) the opposition is acting with best intentions for the article, and b) it won't take as much work as you think. Engage the opposition and work to fix their concerns. If they don't respond, then they have nothing to bitch about, do they? This is an important topic! Who cares if the 5th episode of season 7 of the Golden Girls is using the best sources? But yours.. we've got to get it right. And we need your help. --Laser brain(talk) 16:55, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Hi Todor. I echo the sentiments of Steve and Laser brain, but I also wanted to assure you that generally articles do not spend this much time at FAC. You had the unfortunate luck to nominate the article in a time when there weren't a lot of reviewers, meaning it took longer to get feedback than it should have. Articles are also now only evaluated twice a week, and with my recent appointment as an FAC delegate, I recused myself from closing this article. This means the nom actually only gets looked at once per week. I understand your frustration, and I encourage you to overlook some of the more over-the-top comments from reviewers who are probably also frustrated. If the nomination is archived rather than promoted, you can either a) leave the article alone, confident that it is the way you envisioned it, or b) work with those reviewers and see if their suggestions may improve the article, and then optionally bring it back to FAC. Either way, you should be proud that you have created a useful article on a very important figure. Karanacs (talk) 18:05, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Todor, I feel your pain. My FAC has been up for almost a month right now, and my article has vastly improved. If it does't pass, then I keep working on it anyway. You don't need someone else to tell you the article is great. Even the best FA on WP could be improved. Just imagine if Ernest Hemingway came back from the dead and decided to write a bio of Vasil, even you couldn't beat that (or could you?). So just take it all in stride and don't let it frustrate you, try to remember it is all constructive criticism. From one WP author to another, your article is great! You can't please everyone. You probably spent a lot of time on this article, which is more than the other 98% of editors out there can say. There are very few editors with more than five FAs, and you already have two, so obviously you are an accomplished editor without which Wikipedia would be sorely lacking in the Bulgarian history category. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 19:12, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Todor, I echo Dahn and Gligan's sentiments. You may need a break and a rest, and that's normal. But please be back soon: you are needed and much appreciated here. - BiruitorulTalk 04:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your understanding, guys. Don't worry about me—I just really need a break. I'll be back in a few weeks, maybe a month. I don't have time to devote to Wikipedia right now and I don't have the inspiration to research and write stuff. I was hoping the Vasil Levski FAC would bring the joy back, but it did the exact opposite. It was a tough and disappointing experience and I wouldn't recommend it to anybody I don't deeply detest. People voting at FAC really need to rethink the way they assess stuff and they have to take some responsibility for their actions. So just give me some time—I never said I'm quitting, I'm just taking a break. Todor→Bozhinov 08:30, 3 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVII (March 2009)edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The March 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi! I'm a user from Japanese wikipedia, mainly translating articles into Japanese. I didn't know what kind of trouble you are involved in, but I liked many of your works & I've translated some of them into Japanese. I hope you spend good time during the break & come back someday. See you!--Peccafly-talk-hist 09:23, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On April 6, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Grigor Nachovich, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi, unfortunately I have no printed book in home about Albanians in Turkey and Bulgaria, for whom I had tried to create articles, unssucesfully. Of course I will be more then happy to collaborate with you on this topic. Have a nice day, Balkanian`s word (talk) 12:10, 13 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
I am getting 8:2 (with Encyclopedia Brittanica speaking about the dialect of Arbanasi of Croatia) [1]. But as Arbanasi Croatia has about 30,000, Arbanasi Bulgaria 64 thousand, i.e. 2:1, I see no huge distinction. If you insist, I have no problem, but I think that a disambiguation page, which would include Arbanasi, Bulgaria; Arbanasi, Zadar; and Arbanasi as a ethnolinguistic group, would be better. What do you think?Balkanian`s word (talk) 16:39, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
I bet that Arsenal won`t win:-), but I prefer Arbanasi as a disambiguation. It`s something like Georgia: Georgia US has 2:1 googling results than Georgia country, but as Georgia country has a national group in it, its a disambiguation. Cheers, Balkanian`s word (talk) 16:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago12 comments4 people in discussion
Hey, how's my report coming on? I want to be reported! Fut.Perf.☼ 17:47, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Is that sarcastic or it just looks like it? --LaveolT 18:40, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Wow, I saw your talkpage - you've got some serious issues right now - why did you do it (besides being really pissed off by the petty nationalists we are).--LaveolT 18:44, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
This is the backbone of our GDP. Bulgarian bananas look photorealistic on smaller resolutions, but once you zoom in, you realize they're just fakes of Ecuadorian originals. Todor→Bozhinov 20:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Bah, you guys disappoint me. Here we have a censorship law that will make, for instance, publication of the German Wikipedia in your country a punishable offense. And all I get for pointing that out is a bunch of fake bananas? I want some real bananas, or a real report, at least. Fut.Perf.☼ 05:54, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
"In the city of York, it is legal to murder a Scotsman within the ancient city walls, but only if he is carrying a bow and arrow." Todor→Bozhinov 06:30, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
That list is funny, but it's a poor ploy for defending the indefensible. Those funny English "laws" are evidently some bits and pieces of medieval rules that are long forgotten, haven't been in force for centuries and it just so happens that nobody ever bothered to formally repeal them. They don't need to be; that's how English law works. But that Bulgarian censorship law was passed a few weeks ago, by people who were evidently fully aware of what they were doing, apparently with the full intent of curtailing the freedom of academic (and other) printed discourse, and we must assume: with a full intention of actually enforcing it. "Banana republic" is charitable. This is serious monkey business. Fut.Perf.☼ 06:36, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Look, I really don't care about some stupid law that nobody would ever enforce. I don't care and I don't even feel like discussing it: if you're so obsessed with it, so be it, just don't involve me, okay? What involved me was your ethnic slurs: I have no relation to that law whatsoever, but I'm still part of a "stupid idiotic lot of people" and a proud member of a "banana republic" that is doing "monkey business". Please don't bother me about it anymore, thanks. Todor→Bozhinov 06:49, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
No prob. It wasn't me who made this a personal issue between us two. If you take personal offense on seeing your country criticised, that's your business. Fut.Perf.☼ 06:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
You're as free to criticize as the next guy, I take no offence in your bashing of this law and I agree with you on this—it's stupid, but at least I know it won't work. It's the slurs, dude, not hard to understand I hope. I've been pointing this out the entire time. Todor→Bozhinov 07:01, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Fut, I'm glad you've got some sleep or a break or whatever. As a German you have no idea about our laws and the way none obey most of them. This one is tricky since it was the Ministry of administration that drafted it (lol) and was intended only for the correct transliteration of the place names in the country. It's been criticized a lot as Todor would tell you if you'd stop taunting him for a moment. Rousse has been transliterated like that for hundreds of years and now it turns out it's wrong (wtf?!) - it's nice to have a standard, but not in such a lame way. Plus, we're having a much bigger problem with a Communications law proposal that would allow the police to listen in on your telephone and Internet communication with no real reason. If this law passes (he was rejected twice) I'll be the first out of here. There's lameness all around, but it doesn't mean we're all idiots or that our country is more banana than any other in the region/continent/world.--LaveolT 09:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
That's a pan-european issue Laveol. This law is an EU directive that passed on the 6th of April. We're a big banana republic. All 27 of us.--Avg (talk) 17:04, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Dear TodorBozhinov,
Turkish name of Kyustendil is "Köstendil" derived from Constantine Dragas' name. She was also ruled by Serbian Empire between 1330-1355. Please, you look the map of Serbian Empire in 1355: [2]. Kyustendil is derived from Köstendil, whose name during Ottoman rule. Sincerely,--Cemsentin1 (talk) 23:17, 18 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago13 comments4 people in discussion
If you are that keen on adding the "Historically relevant" names to every article. Then add "Selanik" to the Salonica article, followed by "Sofya" here. PMK1 (talk) 11:18, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
And what's the basic difference between Sofia and Sofya if I may know? --LaveolT 12:25, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Let me guess - 9000 bananas?--LaveolT 13:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
If you want to christen Meliti as "Вощарани" with a "щ", then you should be more then happy to add the Türkiş name to Mila Sofya. I cannot believe that you added an entirely new section just so you could squeeze in Majka Bãlgarija. PMK1 (talk) 14:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
I added a new section so that you stop with the silly trolling and edit-warring. Plus, you used the "щ" letter as well until the second council about the standardization of the language, so you must be more than happy to be reminded of these times :) --LaveolT 19:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Oh, and are you by any chance some high Greek official to say that 1500 people are not worth a town? Do you even feel how ridiculous you're getting? --LaveolT 20:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Oh please, that is low. About the town vs. village, i dont care. Call it whatever you like. PMK1 (talk) 00:31, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
PMK1, the Thessaloniki article has a Name section with all the relevant names — the Greek Macedonia villages obviously don't. Also, by your ignorance that Thessaloniki was in its majority a Ladino-speaking Jewish city I can judge how little you know about the region of Macedonia in general. Sofia also has a Name section, feel free to add the uniquely different and entirely original Turkish name there if you find it useful. Just like we have the Thracian, Latin, Greek and Turkish (the latter two in current usage) names of Plovdiv, the historic Greek, Latin, Bulgar and Turkish names of Pomorie (none of those is in current usage, while the Bulgarian names of villages in Greek Macedonia are), and so on.
Just accept it, guys — the Bulgarian names of formerly Bulgarian-inhabited villages in Greek Macedonia are very relevant encyclopedic content that we're able to solidly back up with sources. There is no absolutely reason to remove the Bulgarian names from these articles. Todor→Bozhinov 09:21, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
"Names in other languages prominent in the city's history include سلانيك in Ottoman Turkish and Selânik in modern Turkish, …" Todor→Bozhinov 09:49, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Go for it then. By the same logic, then every ethnic Macedonian inhabited village in the ROM should also have the "Bulgarian" name attached to it. Can you see where you are going now? PMK1 (talk) 12:45, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
You do know that the addition of the usual sources, (V. Kanchov, 1900; Makedonsko i Odrinsko, 1873 etc.) does not justify the addition of the Bulgarian name. PMK1 (talk) 00:27, 22 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Your POV doesn't concern me, please don't post on my talk page unless you have something surprising and interesting to say. Todor→Bozhinov 09:02, 22 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I was given that information by a Bulgarian academics who have been involved in these matters. I will try and find out the location for you. It would make my day if there has been no destruction. I am also looking now at the book The Ten Lies of Macedonism. I can see its faults but I think there are also good observations in it. I wish those who attack it in Skopje could be more specific. It is only through open discussions that the air clears. Politis (talk) 11:33, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, TodorBozhinov. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. . Thank you. PMK1 (talk) 11:29, 22 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Orphaned non-free media (File:General-Nikolaevo-Rakovski-RomanCatholic-Church.jpg)edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading File:General-Nikolaevo-Rakovski-RomanCatholic-Church.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:36, 24 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
File:Persina Natural Park Belene.jpg listed for deletionedit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Kyustendil was known "Küstendil" and "Köstendil" during Ottoman rule. Before belonging to Principality of Bulgaria she had very large Turkish people. Most of them were killed or forced migration to Turkey during Ottoman-Russian battle between 1877-1878. Some Turks have surnames of Köstendil and Köstendilli. Yours sincerely--Cemsentin1 (talk) 16:38, 28 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On May 7, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Vito Positano, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hey, can you please be more specific as to what the problem with that particular paragraph is? From what I gather, you seem to disagree that the Zhelevo Bulgarian Fraternity was a Bulgarian organization. Given that it was founded in 1907 (decades before the spread of Macedonism) and that its name (which may or may not have been changed, I don't really care) explicitly references Bulgaria, and specifically given that the claim is properly cited from a book, I don't see exactly what you're disputing. The article says clearly that a part of the old Macedonian Bulgarian diaspora in Canada identifies as ethnic Macedonian today and there's a non-Bulgarian source to back that. As for the sentence about villages in Aegean Macedonia, are you actually disputing that the villages are located there, or what? It's not like I have made up any of the content, it's all from the relatively recently published books by Magocsi and Kolev.
I am not to sure on the nature of those books you are citing, but the Zhelevo organization never had the word "Bulgarian" in its title. I know because the organization still exists today, and they have published original photos and posters in their almanacs. The name that it was registered under was "Zhelevo Benevolence Brotherhood". You say that the organization was founded "decades before the spread of Macedonianism" therefore you are implying that the org was pro-Bulgarian? Trust me, you'd be surprised by the local church politics that was happening at the time. Polibiush (talk) 19:43, 8 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On May 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ivan Buresh, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On 29 May, 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2009 Yambol bus crash, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.
Latest comment: 14 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion
I'm not a troll! I'm making a legitimate question, why is this accident so important. You could answer with reasons instead of deleting me! It's very rude to delete other people's commentaries! --Againme (talk) 19:00, 29 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Now, that is a proper reason (and answer): such major bus accidents with so many victims are rare, and for countries the size of Bulgaria this is a huge tragedy and the event of the year so far, it has nothing to do with respect. --Againme (talk) 19:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Hmmm, don't tell me you didn't see the template that preceded your comment. The one saying that part of the article was on the news and probably on the main wiki page. --LaveolT 20:10, 29 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
I did not! But anyway, I wrote part of those stories in the press and are against that being considered notable... seriously. --Againme (talk) 20:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Well, that's your personal view. What a pity wiki policies are against you on this. --LaveolT 20:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Hehe :) Must be that I know the media, and Wikipedia just follows it blindly. Ok, goodbye --Againme (talk) 20:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On June 1, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mezek, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On June 1, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Matochina, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:13, 5 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On June 7, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sofia, New Mexico, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Great work on this article! It was on my to do list because of its relationship to my work on papal tombs but it looks like you beat me to the punch. Savidan 21:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Orphaned non-free media (File:Blagoevgrad-coa.gif)edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading File:Blagoevgrad-coa.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:07, 14 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi,
In your edit to the Seven Rila Lakes article, you describe Okoto as a "circus lake". As far as I know, this is not a term used in English. Can you explain what you meant by it? Thanks, Rojomoke (talk) 07:56, 16 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:28, 16 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
File permission problem with File:Georgi asparuhov.gifedit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
File Copyright problem
Thanks for uploading File:Georgi asparuhov.gif. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wknight94talk 22:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
File source problem with File:Evksinograd1.jpgedit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
File Copyright problem
Thanks for uploading File:Evksinograd1.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wknight94talk 02:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On July 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sucreries Raffineries Bulgares, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Replaceable fair use Image:Zheravna yard3 800.jpgedit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Replaceable fair use
Thanks for uploading Image:Zheravna yard3 800.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Brainmachine (talk) 14:33, 21 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
You may not agree that the link on the Plovdiv article is worthy of inclusion which is fine and I repsect this, but there is no need to be sarcastic in your approach "Yeah, we don't need travel guides."
I do think this is highly uncalled for, especially when I am someone who heavily edits external links myself (look at my edits including a long standing arguement on the Plovdiv article from previous) and I create worthy articles on the Bulgarian theme (I wrote the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plovdiv_Roman_amphitheatre article among others).
Please be mindful in future that you dont take this tone with others as its not very nice.
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on Boyko Borisov . While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 20:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC) Toddst1 (talk) 16:14, 4 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
On August 5, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tsetska Tsacheva, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The July 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
On August 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mercia MacDermott, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On August 15, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ivan Stranski, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On August 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Konstantin Jovanović, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:40, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Orphaned non-free media (File:Dzhebel-gerb.gif)edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading File:Dzhebel-gerb.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:09, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading File:Tran arms.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Orphaned non-free media (File:Sliven Bulgaria coat of arms.png)edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading File:Sliven Bulgaria coat of arms.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:29, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Orphaned non-free media (File:Isperih-gerb.jpg)edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading File:Isperih-gerb.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Orphaned non-free media (File:Etropole-gerb.gif)edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading File:Etropole-gerb.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Orphaned non-free media (File:Kavarna-coa.png)edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading File:Kavarna-coa.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 07:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago9 comments2 people in discussion
Stop removing referenced material.Megistias (talk) 07:13, 20 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Those are cities founded by ancient Greeks as the refs say.Thracian settlements are to be mentioned with proper refs.Megistias (talk) 07:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Learn how wiki works by reading the rules.Megistias (talk) 07:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Seriously man, chill, double standards are bad. Quite clearly both Apollonia Pontica and Cabyle were Thracian settlements that later fell in the Greek sphere of influence as colonization went. Cabyle was even a Thracian royal city until Philip II conquered it. Have some respect for other contributors, it's not like you're the one to be teaching me, you know. Todor→Bozhinov 07:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Sources say that Apollonia and Cabyle were founded by the Greeks.Thracian settlements are not considered "polis" or cities in general.The ref says that Phillip II founded the city.Megistias (talk) 07:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Also Parvomay looks awful.The external links belong to an external link subsection and those that can be used as refs can be used as refs.And some links are useless images.Megistias (talk) 07:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Also page 893 ,Kabyle ...founded or refounded by Phillip IIMegistias (talk) 07:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
In general many ancient Greek colonies in Thrace were founded on or close to the sites of Thracian settlements.It doesnt make them thracian but ancient Greek.Greeks founded cities, thracian founded only one city that was a minor and most of the times not considered a polis, Seuthopolis.Megistias (talk) 07:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
You cabyle "ref" with the symposium cant even be checked for what it contains.You just write of a symposium;Megistias (talk) 07:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
— 16 March 2009
: 23 March 2009
edit
.svg){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
![[2]](http://static.newworldencyclopedia.org/d/dd/Dusanova_Srbija200.jpg){kind=link}
Thanks for uploading File:General-Nikolaevo-Rakovski-RomanCatholic-Church.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
