Jump to content

User talk:Kubura: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
History of Dalmatia (A Wiki Book)/Paper tolerates a lot!
LAz17 (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 60: Line 60:


:PS. Thanks for answering. [[User:Sir Floyd|Sir Floyd]] ([[User talk:Sir Floyd|talk]]) 01:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
:PS. Thanks for answering. [[User:Sir Floyd|Sir Floyd]] ([[User talk:Sir Floyd|talk]]) 01:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

==problemi na hr wiki==
You blocked me on the HR wiki. The word "zajebavas" is not a swear word. I was very civil, and undoing edits that were ruining the article. Your information there is totally un-sourced. ([[User:LAz17|LAz17]] ([[User talk:LAz17|talk]]) 17:18, 28 October 2009 (UTC)).

Revision as of 17:18, 28 October 2009

Bold textArchive   1 - Edits on "SC language"
Archive   2 - Srijem issues
Archive   3 - W.Herzog, Stjepan and Montenegro issues
Archive   4 - Cro-Ser questions, very interesting discussion, many topic being opened/touched/resolved
Archive   5 - Some Doclea and Dalmatia issues
Archive   6 - Farsi, Diego, NHL, Stjepan
Archive   7 - Republic of Dubrovnik, Haydn, various
Archive   8 - Mostly vandalism dealing, Zadar, Mikalja
Archive   9 - Saborsko, RfARB, prop, ...
Archive 10 - Italianization, Pagania, diacritics...
Archive 11 - Epics of Evlekis, some trolls, puppet theater, campaign of LAZ...

Proposed deletion of Ivan Radočaj

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Ivan Radočaj, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Notability. No significant coverage of the subject outside his murder.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. --aktsu (t / c) 08:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Register

Hello Kubura! Thanks for the friendly advice, I might just do that.123.2.59.195 (talk) 00:22, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have Registed

Hi Kubura just a quick note. Just read the article on Pagania (again) it really needs a serious rewrite.Sir Floyd (talk) 04:34, 4 April 2009 (UTC) (formerly 123.2.59.195)[reply]

CSSD

Hi, please discuss it [[1]]. And do watch for your tone, as it's very disdainful at first sight, emanating negative energy. Also, try citing from those books relevant parts, and not your amateurish conclusions. For example, you saying There you'll see that Croatian and Serbian had separate lines of development - I'd really like to know in what scenario have Serbian and Croatian managed to have "separate lines of development", but managed to share 99% of grammar (phonology exactly the same, trivial differences in morphology & syntax). --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 15:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Dear Kubura

Here to say goodbye. Wikipedia seems to have writers of extreme views (Stalin Style) and who are very abusive. Wiki seem to tolerate them. So I’m leaving. Thanks for the surport you gave me. Also could you please thank the writers who supported me with the Wikipedia: Reliable sources/Noticeboard.

Regards Sir Floyd (talk) 11:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kubura, this is User:Luigi 28, thought you ought to know :). He's "leaving" because his cover's been blown and I told him we'd report him... seems he's trying to draw out some pathetic "victory" by leaving before we get him banned. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 23:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI notification

You're mentioned at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Communist_Croat_gang. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 17:14, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kubura a communist?? LoL!! xD --DIREKTOR (TALK) 20:29, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend you calm down. Kubura, I'm starting to think you are trying to harass me. Are you actually simultaneously accusing me of "anti-Croatian edits" while citing an edit restriction I got while I did my best to stop the Italian irredentists from using Italian names for every single Croatian city up to 1918? How weird is that? I'm actually proud of my ARBCOM edit restriction. I took the bullet so that Wiki can see how fanatical those Italian guys like old GG are. He got blocked. All of them got blocked. It can easily be seen from that which side was riddled with nationalist POV, and who was just trying to repair the damage. I just did a massive pile of work de-Hungarianizing the articles on Croatian counties

Now you had best stop following me around in your impotent "rage" over the deletion of a double article. I know hrWiki is crappy and disorganized, but on enWiki we deal in actual existing states, not Croatian fantasies like the famous "Hrvatsko-Ugarska". I have set-out to reform Croatian history articles. This page has been deleted so that we can make a fresh start and create a line of state succession from the Kingdom of the Croats to the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia.

Kubura, I'm here to HELP. Try to understand that. I am NOT, repeat NOT on an "anti-Croatian" agenda. I am here on Croatian history articles to make them less "fantastic" and more factual and up to international standards of objectivity. The Triune Kingdom EXISTED. Nobody "deleted" it! But you CAN NOT have the Kingdom of Croatia (1527-1868), the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia (1868-1918) article and the Triune Kingdom article at the same time. That kind of crap destroys the entire group of Croatian history articles! Ma ja nemogu virovat da me ti jos ne razumis... --DIREKTOR (TALK) 08:56, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History of Dalmatia (A Wiki Book)

Hi Kubura just here to inform you (just in case you didn’t know), that there is a book out called History of Dalmatia [2]. It seems to be mostly made from older Wiki articles, yes including Medieval Dalmatian Principalities & others (maps & all). Considering with what speed that some articles can change on Wiki, it’s a bit of a worry. Lets say there are some historical mistakes. I quote from the Pagania Chapter “ The Neretvians were also know as Pagans, because by the time of their Christianization, all Serbs already accepted Christianity”. Regards Sir Floyd (talk) 02:20, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's got something to do with free licenses-GFDL & CC (& Wikimedia Foundation team). One of the aspects of free licenses is "Anyone is free to re-use the content either in non-commercial or in commercial settings, so long as they properly attribute the content to its source/authors". I'm carefully considering whether one should put too much time and effort into the content of Wiki-Articles. If Wiki-Articles can be released and then somebody gets profits from it, I then don't see the piont of it all. The words rip off comes to my mind. That photo, what can be said? Considering that Dalmatia is one of the best looking places on the planet, the publishers could have done better.
PS. Thanks for answering. Sir Floyd (talk) 01:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

problemi na hr wiki

You blocked me on the HR wiki. The word "zajebavas" is not a swear word. I was very civil, and undoing edits that were ruining the article. Your information there is totally un-sourced. (LAz17 (talk) 17:18, 28 October 2009 (UTC)).[reply]