User talk:Tzowu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Tzowu, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Button sig.png or Insert-signature.png or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Marek.69 talk 21:37, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Getting started
Finding your way around
Editing articles
Getting help
How you can help

Za dom spremni[edit]

You've recently made several edits to this article which appeared to perpetuate improper synthesis using unreliable sources. I'm going to assume good faith, but you should really better acquaint yourself with the relevant policies before making further edits, especially in this kind of a contentious topic area.

In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user working on articles concerning the Balkans. Before any such sanctions are imposed, editors are to be put on notice of the decision. This notice is not to be taken as implying any inappropriate behaviour on your part, merely to warn you of the Arbitration Committee remedies that govern edits to these articles. You can read the full decision here. Thank you.

--Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:14, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Which one of the 14 sources added is unreliable? They were all added by me anyway and I think they are reliable enough for what is written in the text, excluding the parts which where already there before I made the edits. (Tzowu (talk) 20:22, 24 November 2013 (UTC))

For example, links to image or video files on public hosting services without meta data identifying their source. Realistically, anyone could post anything there, and claim that it's something which it is not. A reliable source for an encyclopedia is a published work in a respectable publication. In particular, a source that specifically says what you've summarized, and doesn't require further interpreting, is best. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:17, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
OK, I'll fix that. (Tzowu (talk) 15:03, 25 November 2013 (UTC))

Tzowu, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Teahouse logo

Hi Tzowu! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Ryan Vesey (I'm a Teahouse host)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 21:15, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to join MILHIST[edit]

December 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Croats of Vojvodina may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • 843 Croats or 86.46% out of total population), [[Kukujevci]] (1,775 or 77.61%), [[Novi Slankamen]] (2,450 or 59.22%, [[Petrovaradin]] (3,266 or 57.02%), [[Stari Slankamen]] (466 or 48.19%), [[

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:05, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Domagoj of Croatia may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Roman politics of [[Boris I of Bulgaria]] who then ruled much of the Balkans.<ref name=Maddalena>[http://books.google.com/books?id=MdLYAQAAQBAJ Maddalena Betti: The Making of Christian Moravia (858-

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:02, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

minor edits[edit]

I just wanted to bring your attention to the fact that this or this don't actually fit the definition of minor edits - that's a category reserved for typos and the like. So please feel free to leave the checkbox unchecked next time you do things like adding sentences or references. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 20:06, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Re: Principality of Dalmatian Croatia[edit]

Yes. The English-language works matched the old Roman terminology better apparently, associating the Croats on the coast and in the Dinaric Alps with the Roman province of Dalmatia, and those to the north with the Roman province of Pannonia. The term primorska Hrvatska can be literally translated into English, but that's basically original research because English-speaking authors don't generally do that. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:27, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 9[edit]

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

Principality of Dalmatian Croatia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Venetians and Nin
1989–90 NK Dinamo Zagreb season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to FK Budućnost
Domagoj of Croatia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Novigrad

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16[edit]

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

Kingdom of Croatia (medieval) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Illyricum and Avars
Croatia in the union with Hungary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Ugra
Principality of Dalmatian Croatia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Roman Church

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Knin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Krka (river) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Croatia in the union with Hungary, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Union (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

January 2014[edit]

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Republic of Ragusa shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Warned the IP as well. This warning is not a comment on content at all. Dougweller (talk) 16:41, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Principality of Dalmatian Croatia may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Thomas the Archdeacon): [http://books.google.hr/books?id=B6xNIF-9PmgC&redir_esc=y ''Historia Salonitanorum Atque

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:25, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Hey[edit]

Hey, you know, we Italians are, generally speaking, a civil people, unlike some others you may get an idea about by scrolling back the edits on particularly sensitive articles on this goddamn Wikipedia. This is why, instead of provoking and whatnot (as I've seen so many other contributors from a certain geographical area doing), I'm discussing with you.

Yes, what you've added on the page and is sourced must stay. There's no other way to put it, it must. I simply oppose that tiny little article, the spoken languages - that gives an idea of a 99% of the population being Slavs, poor and oppressed by the minority of Latin rulers, who exploit them and put their own languages as the sole official ones! Outrageous! If it was true- but, guess what, it isn't.

As for the etymology paragraph, I'm sure that anyone would agree with me the current order of the topics doesn't make sense. Regards. --95.246.153.51 (talk) 16:56, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Revert explanation[edit]

Just posting this to explain my revert.

  • It is more accurate to post a question mark than a circa date, since we don't really know even that it was founded "circa" 925. That's just the date of a Papal letter to Tomislav. For all we know Tomislav may even actually not have been the first king, as the whole hypothesis hinges on one singe mention in a letter, the authenticity of which has been questioned. By rights there should only be a question mark there, with (c.925?) in brackets, i.e. "? (c.925?)"
  • The infobox is for contemporary names, translations like "Kraljevina Hrvatska" belong in the lead paragraph. Sadly, no name in early "Slavonic" has been attested for this Kingdom. Certainly until 1102, and, so far as I know - all the way to 1527 as well.
  • I rolled back your removal of the profusely sourced lead paragraph on the Kingdom's collapse. The whole point of the lead is to present the article in summary, and the kingdom's end is certainly a lead-worthy subject.
  • Citing individual authors in-line in the article's text is completely unnecessary, and I oppose such a move.
  • Bellamy states outright that historians generally view the Pacta conventa document as a (quote) "fake". See the source ("historians believe that a transcript of the Pacta Conventa preserved in Trogir is a 14th century fake"). Meaning that it was forged then, and not transcribed faithfully.
  • If an overhaul of the article section on the Hungarian union/conquest is to be done, it needs to be done carefully and through agreement on the talkpage.

-- Director (talk) 05:07, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kingdom of Croatia (925–1102), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Union (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Croatia in the union with Hungary, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Union (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

An invitation to join the WikiProject Croatia[edit]

WikiProject Croatia
Project Icon
Hi, Tzowu, you are graciously extended an invitation to join the WikiProject Croatia! WikiProject Croatia is a WikiProject whose aim is to improve the quality and coverage of articles related to Croatia and the Croats. It is chiefly designed to help users collaborate on articles, but also to resolve open questions and disputes, to establish project-wide conventions, and to coordinate work on vandalism clean-up.

WikiProject Croatia currently covers a total of 11,331 articles and 3,281 other related pages on the English Wikipedia.

We look forward to welcoming you to the project!

Disambiguation link notification for February 16[edit]

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

Duchy of Croatia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to John the Deacon and Kingdom of Croatia
Guduscani (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bribir

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:12, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Kingdoms[edit]

Please discuss further controversial changes re the unification/conquest of the Kingdom of Croatia & Dalmatia - before implementing them. You know full well the issue is sensitive. Btw, is "Silverije" perchance your sockpuppet? I have some experience with these sort of things. -- Director (talk) 12:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

As far as I know, no, he is not my sockpuppet. I could be mistaken though, there are so many of them and it's difficult to remember all their nicknames. Tzowu (talk) 13:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
You're joking.. right? :) -- Director (talk) 13:43, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 :) Tzowu (talk) 13:47, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Lets not joke around with such things. People can easily get permanently banned through a quick checkuser. -- Director (talk)
Are you sure? Anyone can in a few seconds change his IP just with a quick disconnect/connect. Anyway, Silverije is an old user on both Croatian and English wikipedia and apparently on German one too, while I only know a few words in German so you can be calm about that. Also I'm not married, I live in Zagreb, I'm not a Catholic and I don't tend to chose "Izvorno hrvatsko" just because those are Croatian products, I believe in a free market and don't really care whether a product is from a Croatian, Slovenian, Polish or British company, their quality is all that matters. However, I do enjoy rock music. Tzowu (talk) 17:21, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Heh. Yeah, I'm sure. Just asking. -- Director (talk) 17:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kingdom of Croatia (925–1102), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Larousse (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

March 2014[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. -- Director (talk) 14:02, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Croatia in the union with Hungary, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Požega and Križevci (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.   Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:32, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Trpimir I of Croatia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kingdom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Re: Quality Assessment[edit]

Hi! While there's no formal forum provided by the project, one may always turn to WT:CRO in general or ask any user to perform the task. Instructions of some sort are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Croatia/Assessment.

Since you posted on my talkpage, I took a look at the article. Overall, it's very nice. There's a lot of improvement in the article, and it certainly deserves C-class rating on the quality scale. Before the article progresses to B-class, every claim in the article need be referenced to WP:RS. While most of the article is referenced even now, the final sentence in the "Nomenclature" section lacks a ref, the "Geography" section is unreferenced completely, as is the first paragraph of the "Between East and West" subsection. The final sentence of the penultimate paragraph of the same subsection also lacks one reference, as do the final sentences of the 3rd and 4th paragraphs of the following subsection.

Aside from this, please note that the "See also" section should not repeat links already used in the article (per WP:ALSO), and that links in the article itself should not be repeated (exemptions apply to the lead paragraph, infobox(es), image captions, tables etc) per WP:OVERLINK. Also, the "Further reading" list should not repeat material used in inline references (per WP:FURTHER). These would have to be addressed before the article progresses to the GA-class but are not obstacles to B-class itself.

Overall, good work. Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 09:00, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Good progress. In terms of referencing, I believe only the final two sentences of the "Geography" section still need a reference, but that should not be hard to obtain, to satisfy B-class referencing criterion. You're quite welcome to reassess an article to C-class yourself, even if you are the primary contributor to the article - as long as you adhere to C-class criteria presented at Wikipedia:WikiProject Croatia/Assessment or WP:C-class (those are the same). The principal difference between Start and C-class articles are that a C-class is better developed, has better topic coverage (not necessarily complete), and some form of article structure (sections), as well as coverage by references (not necessarily complete).
As a matter of fact, it is quite alright to rate an article B-class yourself, also adhering to Wikipedia:WikiProject Croatia/Assessment and WP:WIABCA (also matching, with B6 having some additional instructions regarding WikiProject Croatia regarding accessibility). Unlike C-class, a B-class article needs comprehensive topic coverage, full coverage by reliable sources using inline references etc. An exception to this are articles belonging to the WP:MILHIST (Military History project), where the project bars principal contributors to an article from assessing the article as B-class-compliant. The MILHIST project has a dedicated B-class assessment request page at WP:MHAR. I brought this up here because of the article of Domagoj of Croatia and other similarly themed ones. If a person's military "service" contributed directly or indirectly to his/her notability or was in itself especially noteworthy the article also belongs to the military history project. In such cases please add the {{WikiProject Military history}} to the article talk and request B-class assessment at WP:MHAR.
Ratings above B-class (GA, A, FL and FA) require nominations at dedicated review pages. For example, GAs are applied for at WP:GAN. Their requirements are similar to B-class, requiring somewhat better prose quality and adherence to WP:LEAD in addition.
Personally, I prefer to have another editor have a look at an article for B-class assessment to see if I missed something. Having said that, feel free to post such requests at my talk page or at WT:CRO - it's always a pleasure to read a well developed article.--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:10, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
I noticed that the information regarding seats of the realm is present only in the lead paragraph and the infobox. According to the WP:LEAD, the lead paragraph should be a summary of the article, i.e. all information presented there should also be found in the main body of the article prose. Consequently information in the lead need not be referenced (but it must be referenced in the body prose). While this is not a B-class requirement, it is relatively simple to do, lends better information value to readers who may or may not read beyond the introductory paragraph and fulfils a GA-requirement later on. Cheers.--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Duchy of Croatia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vinodol (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

June 2014[edit]

Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Bosnian War, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.219.58.106 (talk) 11:08, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Battle of Vrpile may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • captives were saved.<ref> Rudolf Horvat: Povijest Hrvatske I. (od najstarijeg doba do g. 1657.))/Hrvatska god. 1491.—1495.</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:50, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Vrpile, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Vladislaus II and Una River (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

edit summaries[edit]

Please use edit summaries, especially in larger edits such as this one. More generally, please split large and diverse edits per topic, if possible. Adding referenced content is appreciated, but arbitrary removals with no explanation aren't. Having different issues in different edits makes it easier to review and summarize, and will ultimately lead to fewer reverts. Thanks. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:10, 15 July 2014 (UTC)