Jump to content

User talk:LAz17: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
LAz17 (talk | contribs)
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 274: Line 274:
::Čeha is on wiki vaccation around 7 days and very soon I will be out 3 days.--[[User:Rjecina|Rjecina]] ([[User talk:Rjecina|talk]]) 04:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
::Čeha is on wiki vaccation around 7 days and very soon I will be out 3 days.--[[User:Rjecina|Rjecina]] ([[User talk:Rjecina|talk]]) 04:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
:::I might go away a bit during the thanksgiving break too. ([[User:LAz17|LAz17]] ([[User talk:LAz17#top|talk]]) 04:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)).
:::I might go away a bit during the thanksgiving break too. ([[User:LAz17|LAz17]] ([[User talk:LAz17#top|talk]]) 04:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)).

== WP:ANI notice again ==

You were mentioned at [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#BiH_ethnic_maps_and_data]]. -- [[User:Ricky81682|Ricky81682]] ([[User talk:Ricky81682|talk]]) 10:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

== [[:Image:BiHSimplifiedEthnic1991.gif]] ==

LAz17, if you have a problem with [[:Image:BiHSimplifiedEthnic1991.gif]], go list [[:commons:Image:BiHSimplifiedEthnic1991.gif]] or deletion. Simple as that. Now, read the [[Wikipedia:ARBMAC]] rules. One more complaint about that image, one more whine about it's all a lie, one more calling someone a fascist or any other name-calling and you are blocked (if I find out that you are calling people names in foreign languages like [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3APaxEquilibrium&diff=256914463&oldid=256795480 this supposedly is], it's going to be a LOONG block. I've had enough of this complaining and bickering. And before you start, do not complain about other people. Two wrongs do not make a right and I will block you double for it. I will work with everyone I can and warn everyone who deserves it. Now, do you want to respond to the simple question at [[User:Rjecina/Bosnian_census#Clean_slate]]? -- [[User:Ricky81682|Ricky81682]] ([[User talk:Ricky81682|talk]]) 07:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:43, 10 December 2008

Project Croatia

My goal is to put up an image, in the form of a map, of every Croatian municipality by the end of 2007. (LAz17 23:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)).[reply]

License tagging for Image:Donji Kukuruzari Municipality.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Donji Kukuruzari Municipality.PNG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:06, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Glina Municipality.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Glina Municipality.PNG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:06, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Kosovo: country debate

Hello. There's a discussion going on Talk:List of countries as to whether or not Kosovo should be included in that list. You have an interest in Serbia-related articles and I thought you might be interested. The articles List of countries and Annex to the list of countries (where the inclusion criteria reside) are both relevant. Cheers. DSuser 13:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Eh, I am not too interested in arguing about Kosovo's status. -LAz17 - July 28, 2007.

You will be reported

if you keep vandalizing Croatian city pages with the absolutely absurd category of RSK cities. I cannot believe you are capable of such a thing. --Jesuislafete 20:00, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- It is a totally legitimate category. It is towns that were in the RSK. What is wrong with that? The RSK does not exist and the category is towns that were in it. -LAz17 - July 28, 2007

it is NOT a legitmate category at all. It is so absurd, I guarantee you that any administrator will agree with me. RSK was a so called "state" that was NOT RECOGNIZED by any other country besides Yugoslavia, and was founded on the ethnic cleansing of Croats, and I will ask you to read Wikipedia:Categorization before you make such a gross error again. How anyone can put up a category based on the unrecognized state carved out of the internationally recognized borders of Croatia?!--Jesuislafete 20:12, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The category is perfectly fine. RSK was a region, and an important one. The fact that it was a region and that these towns were in it is of great historical importance for history. This is not supporting RSK, it is just giving information about it. - LAz17 - July 28, 2007
I contacted a number of users to stop Jesuislafete's vandalism. Keep up the good work LAz17.
Thanks. :) (LAz17 23:49, 30 July 2007 (UTC)).[reply]

Hi

I just want to let you know, user:No.13 is accussing you of being a sockpuppet. [1]

PS: I have my suspicions on the user 217.68.80.50 Just check Knin history.

Hmm, yes, I found this out recently. He was complain to some guy... PANOMIAN or something like that is his username. Anyways, he may say whatever he wants, for the fact remains - I am not a sockpuppet and i do not have sockpuppets. (LAz17 20:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)).[reply]

Sockpuppet

The user No.13 now thinks i'm a sockpuppet. As I stated in the other discusion, this is getting out of hand. No.13 said i was your sockpuppet on a users discussion. Do you know anyone that can help with this situation? Benkovac 06:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but I wish I did. (LAz17 14:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)).[reply]

Debate on the correct adjective for Kosovo

Hi! Based on your interest in the Balkans, you may be interested in the currently ongoing debate on whether we should be using Kosovo or Kosovar/Kosovan as the adjective for Kosovo. —Nightstallion 15:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RSK towns

Good idea LAz17 :)

Pozdrav Benkovac 03:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

idea

How about we put the following in artcles.

--See also--


Benkovac 05:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Former towns of RSK

Thanks for a notification however when I returned back home the vote had already been closed (( Alæxis¿question? 08:30, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bih census 1953 maps

[[2]] Is the source for the most of those maps Ceha 18:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: need your advice...

User:No.13 has been banned, as per being a sock-puppet of a community-banned user. --PaxEquilibrium 10:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the problem is....does the fellow wants to remove the category because he believes it's irrelevant today? I don't see too much discussion on the talk pages, so I can't tell. From what I can see, he doesn't believe the "current situation" section should be there because the C.R. of Herceg-Bosna ceased to exist over ten years ago and therefore that chapter is closed. But if there is proof and good sources that the idea or situation is still being dealt with (which obviously, there is), I don't see what the problem of putting a small section explaining the situation in the page...It's not like it's a huge paragraph under the politics section of the Bosnia and Hercegovina page. Pozdrav. --Jesuislafete 16:59, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of More than Hagnesta Hill

A tag has been placed on More than Hagnesta Hill, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD A1.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Phgao 00:03, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles that you have created yourself, as you did with More than Hagnesta Hill. If you do not believe the article should be deleted, then please place {{hangon}} on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. Cheers, Jonathan t - c 00:11, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging

Please AGF, what you need to realise is that tagging New Pages occurs right after they are created, so of course I tagged it a few mins after you made the article. You can add a tag, saying the article is in the process of being written and that usually prevents any tagging. Furthermore, if you wish to avoid this happening again, you can do draft versions in your sandbox and submit a more complete version. Phgao 00:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For example you can create pages like [3] which you can add whatever you like (up to a point), and create "draft" articles there. Phgao 00:31, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also as you were told, please don't just remove tags as they are there for a reason, instead hang on is a good way to go about things. Phgao 00:31, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Huh?

Calm down, calm down. The reason you shouldn't delete a speedy tag is because if you want the article to stay, add {{hangon}} to the page. The reason the article was put up for a speedy was because it had very little context. There's your answer, and I ask you to please remail civil. Thanks! Cheers, Jonathan t - c 00:24, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Kent

I didn't even realize the singles were intended to be grouped, I assumed the line breaks were coincidental. The grouping isn't very clear, and doesn't work well with smaller window sizes. IMO grouping the singles is not necessary, as few other artist navboxes do so. Still, I have restored the sectioning for now, as you apparently feel they were important enough to warrant your reversal of all of my changes. --PEJL 16:23, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Safe Area Gorazde

Giving readers direction like " Therefore the book should be read carefully, as it portrays only part of the story" is something you don't see in an encyclopedia. It shouldn't be up on the Safe Area Gorazde article.

Whether or not the story is biased (for all I can see, it isn't) is not something that wikipedia should be the judge of. It does show "one side", but that is not the same as bias - bias is when one side is misrepresented. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.192.211.24 (talk) 10:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Povljane Municipality.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Povljane Municipality.PNG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Tillbakatillsamtiden.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tillbakatillsamtiden.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) 05:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BlocPartyLittleThoughtsTulips.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:BlocPartyLittleThoughtsTulips.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) 20:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Drnis

Where? --Bolonium (talk) 22:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're talking to the wrong guy ;) --Bolonium (talk) 22:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that must have been an accident, I didn't mean to remove credible information... The mistake was reverting to an earlier version of the article without the same data. Regards, --Bolonium (talk) 01:58, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Require your help

I am asking for your help since from observation, I see that you have added population data to to a number of articles including Jajce. Can you check the jajce population data for 2003 and 2004. I added the source. I want to know is this a good source? Is this source acceptable on wikipedia?

Spread tha word (talk) 11:33, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Fair use rationale for Image:Kent-GenerationEx.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Kent-GenerationEx.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 03:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Urađeno

Uradio sam ono što si tražio! Samo ako kojim slučajem mi Hrvati u BiH dobijemo svoj entitet i ove tri općine idu u taj entitet. To je sam Dodik rekao jer kako on kaže Republika Srpska ne želi raditi ništa suprotno Daytonskom sporazumu! --77.221.10.200 (talk) 11:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC) hr:Suradnik:Mostarac[reply]

Mislim da su u Novom Travniku Hrvati i sad većina. A što se tiče BiH, meni ne bi smetalo da to ostane jedna država, nego da svatko ima svoje. Srbi svoj, Bošnjaci svoj i Hrvati svoj entitet. Tako bi bilo najpoštenije. Po meni su Srbi narod koji je najviše profitirao nakon rata. Ljudi imaju svoj entitet, a za ostalo ih boli neka stvar. Pa Federacija BiH je '98., '99. imala trostruko jaču ekonomiju i sve. A danas RS je stigao FBiH, mislim da će je u dogledno vrijeme i prestići. Zašto? Vrlo jednostavno. Zato jer su u RS-u samo općine i ljudi imaju 16 ministara (znači samo vlada RS-a), dok u Federaciji osim općina tu je 10 županija, pa tako FBiH ima 108 ministara (vlada FBiH + 10 županijske vlada). Zapravo te županije su rak Federacije jer mi Hrvati nedamo da se ukinu jer tu jedino imamo vlast (u Hercegbosanskoj, Zapadnohercegovačkoj, Hercegovačko-neretvanskoj, Posavskoj županiji Hrvati imaju vlast), a balije (Bošnjaci) žele ukidanje županija. Eto toliko, a ako bude rata u budućnosti, mislim da će Srbi i Hrvati u tom ratu biti saveznici (ne baš veliki, ali ja mislim da se neće napadati) jer se Bošnjaci razmnožavaju više i od Hrvata i Srba zajedno. Povezat će nas to što smo kršćani, a zatim ćemo pobijediti balije i stjerati ih sve u Sarajevo i onaj dio Bosne. Ja tako mislim. Pozdrav! hr:Suradnik:Mostarac —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.221.10.200 (talk) 10:49, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on 2007 Eurobasket Division B Results, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Pip (talk) 20:51, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Deleted something that should have been kept!!! - Towns in RSK

Please read the Proposed Deletion policy. I have restored the article, as the policy permits. It could still be deleted via another method such as Articles for Deletion, if an editor feels it does not meet our inclusion guidelines. - Rjd0060 (talk) 02:26, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Centre Sheraton

Centre Sheraton look at that guy's talk page under the same heading. (quote) We don't keep pages because they have links to them. I deleted it after its Proposed deletion was uncontested. What exactly is the problem? - Rjd0060 (talk) 00:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If they were proposed for deletion, I would have. - Rjd0060 (talk) 00:53, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are so right, this guy, Rjd, is disruptive and opinionated to boot (as well). Peter Horn 01:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think he's a pretty nice guy. I guess when people come to his talk page and leave inappropriate remarks and accusations of disruption and "mess creating", he has less patience than normal. Cheers! - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:22, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RUSSIA roll call and your input required

Privet. You are receiving this message as you were listed on the membership list of WP:RUSSIA at Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Members. Recent times has seen minimal activity within WikiProject Russia, and there is an attempt to re-invigorate the project and have it become more organised into a fully-fledge functioning project, with the aim of increasing the quality of Russia-related articles across English wikipedia.

As we don't know which listed members are active within the project and Russia-related article, all listed members are receiving this message, and are requested to re-affirm their active status on Russia-related article by re-adding their username to Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Members by adding:

# {{User|YOURUSERNAME}}

to the membership list. You may also like to place {{User Russian Project}} on your userpage, as this will also place you in Category:WikiProject Russia members.

There is also an active proposal on the creation of a single WP:RUSSIA project. The proposal can be viewed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Russia#Proposal_for_overhaul_and_creation_of_a_single_WP:RUSSIA_project, and your comments and suggestions are welcomed and encouraged at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia/Proposal.

We all look forward to your continued support of WP:RUSSIA and any comments you may have on the proposal. --Russavia Dialogue Stalk me 04:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Towns

What's next? Towns in former Third Reich?
LAz17, respect the decisions of voting. Kubura (talk) 12:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LAz, you're opening Pandora's box.
That list can be the part of the article about so-called RSK (article exists).
We shouldn't play with unrecognised states. These kind of listings are too provocative and problematic. Kubura (talk) 09:52, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Man, you don't get where is this leading. Do you want to create article about towns from Serbia that were part of NDH? Or the towns from Serbia that were part of Bulgarian Empire (in First, and in Second World War), listified with their names in Bulgarian? Or the towns from Serbia that were added to Greater Albania in WW2? Or the towns from Bačka (northern Vojvodina, Serbia) that came under Hungary in WW2?
Finally, I'll repeat. Voting was on category. But, before any conclusions made, you've decided for yourself, without asking anyone. You've seen the outcome of voting. Kubura (talk) 13:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1) How can you say such thing? Kosovo towns and municipalities are part of internationally recognised country. Previously, Kosovo was recognised federative unit of Yugoslavia. Kosovo is not like so-called RSK. Don't compare internationally recognised country with the terrorist-controlled area. In fact, so-called RSK was the mask for Serbian territorial conquest of Croatia (an attempt of violent changing of international borders) hidden behind local puppet-government.
2) Towns in Serbia that were part of NDH, don't have single article like "list of cities and towns in NDH". So, the cities and towns under rebel Serb control can stay in the article about so-called RSK. We don't give importance to terrorist ruled-areas, that someone (self-)proclaimed to be the "state".
3) About the cities that Mussolini took from Kingdom of Yugoslavia and added to its possession Albania - check the old maps.
4) "'...because of a recent shift in voters to say for it to be listified.". And whome have you left previous votes, that explicitly said: delete? Kubura (talk) 06:11, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1) Again the same thing.
Kosovo is not "more controversial and provocative". Kosovo was recognised federative unit in SFRY, with equal voting rights, same ones as republics had.
So-called RSK is Serbian conquest of Croatian territory, only hidden behind "independent unrecognised state". Strings were openly coming from Belgrade.
2) "Most of that land had a Serbian majority, so it was not really a conquest.". Oh, really? Here's obvious your imperialist and expansionist attitude. So-called RSK was occupied territory of another country,.
3) "The entity is merely a creation to avoid the genocide as the neonazi croat president and government outright reduced serbian people to second class citizenship". No child, he wasn't a neonazi. Where are your proves for that? Don't use defamation methods.
4) What "second class citizenship"? Maybe you expected that Serbs could have that undeserved privileged status infinitely? With military factories solely in Serb-inhabited areas? With official military language as Serbian? With most of military personnel, secret service and police being Serbs? With unproportionally higher share of Serbs in state services and key functions and sinecures? And all that funded from Croatia? And we couldn't built a single highway from Split to Zagreb, because it was "nationalistic"?
5) "... and glorified the genocide done on the serbs in world war two". Woo, wait? Who glorified? We want facts here, not Ottoman-type argumentation ("kadija te tuži, kadija te sudi"). Regarding genocide, look who's talking. AFAIK, only the number of Croats was reduced after WW2. Probably the number of Albanians also, but Serb hegemonist government always showed the number of Albanians in smaller numbers in statistics, than they really were.
6) So-called RSK is based on violent changing of ethnic structure at the expense of Croats. It begun since 1918, with colonizing of famillies of Serb volunteers in Croatia (especially in fertile valleys in NE Croatia), Serbian police and army terrorizing of Croat population (e.g., Sibinj victims, Senj victims in Gospić), that forced many Croats to leave for abroad. When that terror draw interests from abroad, Serb diplomacy told that these (Croats) were "Communists" or "restaurators of Habsburg monarchy". Same story always. At that time, best way for defamation was to call someone as "Communist", today is best way to use terms "Nazi, neonazi, fascist...".
In WW2, before proclamation of NDH, "Yugoslav army" forces, made of Serbs, killed Croat population (e.g., Bjelovar area, Donji Mosti near Bjelovar [4]).
"Serb uprising" was in fact ordinary shooting of pilgrimers in areas, since then completely ethnically cleansed from Croats (Boričevac, Udbina and neighbourhood, Srb, Cetingrad, Zrin, Španovica, Rudopolje, Prijeboj, Gvozdansko, Potkonje and Vrpolje near Knin, Palanka on Zrmanja, Joševica...), in the areas that were later part of so-called RSK. No Croat was ever allowed to return. Of course, Serbs upriser simply changed iconography and battlesigns, as need occured, so they simply switched chetnik and "partisan" signs. These chetniks were nazi collaborators, and Serbia (to make things worse) recently rehabilitated that movement.
Then in socialist Yugoslavia, Croat population was decimated, expelled or eliminated especially in areas that later became "pure Serb", and population that remained with pure Croat inhabitants significantly suffered a population loss (Slunj area), or lost majority (Banovina, Lika, Krbava). Strongest strike was in 1945-1950, but later police pressure took its toll.
Finally, with Serbian aggression on Croatian, whole Croat population was expelled or exterminated on areas the greaterserbianists managed to occupy. And Croatian minorities (especially Hungarians, Slovaks, Czechs, Rusyns and Ukrainians) suffered. E.g., in Petrovci near Vukovar, chetniks have thrown out Rusyns from their homes and settled the Serbs there. There you had your "that's not really a conquest". Shame on you. Kubura (talk) 07:56, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Vy från ett luftslott, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Vy från ett luftslott is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Vy från ett luftslott, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 11:50, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1991 BiH map

Greetings. Answers to your questions you can find at [5] and [6]. As for possible inaccuraties in the map those are mentioned on map's page in the section between Licesing... --Čeha (razgovor) 00:36, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As you can read in the discusion I founded it somwhere on the net. It has been long time ago, and now source can not even be googled out. If you have some credible source how can those map be enhaced(rastko.net is not one of that) please show the correct version so the errors can be removed.--Čeha (razgovor) 04:15, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Copywrite rights on that map should be da same as 1981 map, and this 1991 map. If they are from the same source that should be that.
Map of which is talked is not a propaganda map, surely not a Croat one (most of the the 1981-1991 changes are in Bosniak benefit), although it may be possible to constain some inaccuracies.
As for update, I haven't see the map, nor you did not source it (name of the book etc). The point was, if existent 1991 map has inaccuracies, and the new map is accurate to simply change it, rather than manualy puting the new source on every page which has a link to existent map.
--Čeha (razgovor) 18:11, 8 November 2008 (UTC) Ok. I'm interested to see it. --Čeha (razgovor) 00:13, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


War map

South of Doboj is Ozren mountain which was under serbian control most of the war (they lost most of it in final stages). I think that maps are very good sourced so you can chech it out.
--Čeha (razgovor) 21:00, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately no. Map is correct.
You can see the same map in "Bosnia" , by Erich Rathfalder "Balkan Odyssey" by lord Owen and many others.[7] BS army wanted to "brake" another coridor at Olovo and isolate Tuzla.
--Čeha (razgovor) 21:33, 9 November 2008 (UTC) What other guy? Try to see the sources(borrow one of thouse two books in library), or google it out. Also map of mines in BiH is very usefull when discussing front lines (more things to google:)[reply]
--Čeha (razgovor) 23:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1991ethnic.jpg =

Laz17, this image has very low quality. Can't you upload it in higher resolution?
--Čeha (razgovor) 01:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Look, If you have a copy of that map in your possesion there shouldn't be any problem to upload it in higher resolution. Intermunicipal borders are murky and not clearly visible. Also contrast on it is a little bit too high. Try to upload it in higher resolution which would be more up to wikipedia standards. As for contrast, look at 1981 map how it should look like.
As for your photoshop inclanation part, as a wikipedian user and editor I'm ablied to work in [8] and [9] and I'm not going into [10]. Which I would recommend to you also if you are planing to avoid administrator's warnings.
Also, I have an impression that you are trying to found some "belosvetske zavere" when you are speaking about that older maps. They were reported as having inaccuracies long before you've even came to wiki.
--Čeha (razgovor) 08:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Laz, it would be normal that you respond to discussion on the map you puted on the wiki [11]

Also I would call you to improve your english, and to try to read article before you give a false accusation.


--Čeha (razgovor) 15:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've been asked to comment on this map issue. Please see a few questions and comments of mine at Image talk:Bih 1991.jpg. Can I also first ask you to keep it all friendly and relaxed, there's no need for accusations. Thanks, --Fut.Perf. 17:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible block

On ANI I am asking short block of both users [12]. User LAz17 is guilty of incivility (word fuck and others), but in trying to calm situation maybe it is best that both are blocked for short time period.

LAz you are 100 % guilty of incivility, but I want to calm you both. On monday I will look census data in question.--Rjecina (talk) 05:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Why did you remove and add a load of sections as you did here? D.M.N. (talk) 13:58, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the same subject as D.M.N.'s post, I've put your comment in the existing section at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Bosnian maps dispute - I guess you inadvertently edited an older version of the page? PhilKnight (talk) 14:08, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? I don't get it... I just posted one short paragraph... I don't know where that other stuff is from? Some error? (LAz17 (talk) 15:38, 22 November 2008 (UTC)).[reply]

Maybe I am making mistake but this is now dispute aboute census data. Because of that I have created page User:Rjecina/Bosnian census in my user space. Can we please continue discussion in my user space. After consensus page will be deleted.--Rjecina (talk) 23:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Čeha is on wiki vaccation around 7 days and very soon I will be out 3 days.--Rjecina (talk) 04:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I might go away a bit during the thanksgiving break too. (LAz17 (talk) 04:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)).[reply]

WP:ANI notice again

You were mentioned at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#BiH_ethnic_maps_and_data. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LAz17, if you have a problem with Image:BiHSimplifiedEthnic1991.gif, go list commons:Image:BiHSimplifiedEthnic1991.gif or deletion. Simple as that. Now, read the Wikipedia:ARBMAC rules. One more complaint about that image, one more whine about it's all a lie, one more calling someone a fascist or any other name-calling and you are blocked (if I find out that you are calling people names in foreign languages like this supposedly is, it's going to be a LOONG block. I've had enough of this complaining and bickering. And before you start, do not complain about other people. Two wrongs do not make a right and I will block you double for it. I will work with everyone I can and warn everyone who deserves it. Now, do you want to respond to the simple question at User:Rjecina/Bosnian_census#Clean_slate? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]