Talk:Towns in the Former RSK

Town Names

It is Hrvatska Dubica and Hrvatska Kosajnica, not Srpska Dubica or Srpska Kostajnica. Why are people such fools to create these names for cities that do not exist? And furthemore, one of those is in R.S., not Croatia. (LAz17 14:20, 30 August 2007 (UTC)).

Erasing?!?!

What the hell is this, for some guy to be erasing the entire page and make it redirect to the R.S.K. page?! This is their IP... 89.172.237.119 (LAz17 02:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)).

Relevant link

I think that this is the discussion in which it was decided to create this article, which had previously been a category. There was a great deal of discussion, and disagreements on both sides, so this is clearly a controversial area. Therefore, major changes should be made only after seeking consensus, and not be the decision of a single anonymous user; if our IP user wants to log in and use AfD or this talk page to seek consensus, it would be more useful than just trying to remove the article. -FisherQueen (Talk) 11:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

The only thing that was concluded there is that the category should be deleted. Some people suggested it should perhaps be listified but majority said nothing on the subject. This "article" is a mere list of towns which were occuppied by Serbian forces, if anything it doesn't not satisfied the conditionas when something warrants an article on Wikipedia. What is next? "Article" with a list "Former Towns of Nazi Germany"? Come on... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.172.198.245 (talk) 12:28, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

The closing admin read the consensus as 'listify.' If you think it should be deleted, use the process. I don't know enough about Serbian history to have an opinion, considering how little actual explanation of the issues involved is in the discussion or in this article. Log in, go to AfD, and explain why it should be deleted. You have that right, and if you are in the right, the discussion will probably go the way you hope. But it's not obvious enough for you to make the decision alone, when we have a perfectly good process that will allow the community to share in the decision-making. -FisherQueen (Talk) 12:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally, I don't think I would have any problem with Countries in the former Nazi Germany or similar. They were bad; that doesn't mean they're necessarily non-notable. -FisherQueen (Talk) 12:37, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Tell me what value does this "article" has? Name me just one? I don't want to log in because I don't have an account and I don't want to create one. This "article" is just stupid, it's not an article, it's a list of towns which were occuppied by an illegal entity. In fact what I think I will do next is to create an "article" (a list actually) about "Former Towns in Nazi Germany", I am sure this "article" will be welcomed with open arms. There is an article named Republic of Serbian Krajina and you can find out everything you need to find out about the occuppied parts of Croatia and settlements there. There is no need for this list that pretends to be an article, if anyting this list if it really needs to exist should be part of that same article and should not exist on it's own. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.172.198.245 (talk) 12:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

If you aren't willing to create an account, you're right, you won't be able to nominate this article for deletion, and so you will have to accept its continued existence, unless someone else nominates it. I recommend against using Former Towns of Nazi Germany, because there were a huge number of towns and cities annexed by that country, and your list would become unreasonably long. Territories, or countries, will probably work better. By the way, you need a user account in order to create new articles, so you'll need to register. But I'm afraid that the fact that you aren't willing to become a registered user doesn't mean that you can work outside of Wikipedia's process. You'll have to choose whether it's worth registering in order to be able to create a new article or request deletion for an existing one. -FisherQueen (Talk) 12:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Again, I do not want this "article" to be deleted, I want it to be redirected and merged with Republic of Serbian Krajina where it actually belongs. What is next? Is Wikipedia going to create additional "article" for each section present in every article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.172.198.245 (talk) 12:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

If you are not planning to add this information to that article, then what you are requesting is the deletion of this article. You recently tagged this article for deletion, if you recall, and only started redirecting it after I declined that tag as not meeting the speedy deletion criteria. The effect of your change is to delete the article. And maybe that's the right thing, but the right way to achieve it is through AfD, not by simply blanking and redirecting. -FisherQueen (Talk) 12:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I am not requesting the deletion of this article. You rejected it so what I am asking is redirection and merger, the reason why I asked for speedy deletion in first place was that I think Republic of Serbian Krajina provides more than enough information on this subject. I don't know nothing about "AFD" or whatever that is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.172.198.245 (talk) 13:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

You can learn more about Articles for deletion and how to request deletion by reading the Articles for Deletion page, a link which I have posted to this conversation and to the talk pages of your various IPs quite a few times. AfD, not speedy deletion, and not simply redirecting to a different article, is the appropriate path to deletion for this article. You are now in violation of Wikipedia's 3RR policy, so you could read that policy after you've read more about AfD. -FisherQueen (Talk) 13:05, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Article needs to be deleted

This fascist entity that was never recognised by anyone was made by murder,crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing.It's was an illegal entity.So thise page needs to be deleted.--(GriffinSB) (talk) 08:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_July_29#Category:Former_Towns_of_RSK_1991-95.
1) LAz17 created this article on 5 Aug 2007, as he saw that he'll lose the discussion (see link above), and it was obvious that that category would end in deletion. Before any conclusions ("conclusion" was on 6 Aug), he imposed new solution, on 5 Aug.
2) Important to note: user LAz17 has acted through sockpuppets to win this discussion Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/LAz17 (user:124.177.49.44).
3) Another sockpuppetry (user:Semberac, user:Fkzeljo, user:Benkovac). user:Nikola89 [1] (??)
4) This is the same as creating "Towns previously owned by Nazi Germany/Former Towns of Nazi Germany 1939-45", "Former cities of Fascist Italy" (and including French, Croatian, Slovenian, Greek, Ethiopian cities), "Former cities of Bulgarian Empire 1915-1918" (and including Serbian cities in that) etc..
5) All these settlements aren't towns at all. Most of them are villages.
6) Last, but not least. The votes.
Delete - 15
Keep - 7
Listify and delete - 6
Breakdown by users:
Keep (7):
Petri Krohn, LAz17, Koppany, Avala, Nikola Smolenski, TheFEARgod, Peterkingiron
Note: Petri Krohn is banned user [2], by ARBCOM decision (period of 1 year, starting from 21 Oct 2007).
Keep (unregular votes) (1):
130.194.13.105 (IP's are not registered users, their votes are not valid).
Keep (Puppet votes):
Semberac, FKzeljo, Nikola89 [3](??), Benkovac, 124.177.49.44
Delete (15):
Johnbod, No.13, Duja, DIREKTOR, Digwuren, Zenanarh, Jesuislafete, Postlebury, Piotr Mikołajski, Bbik, Rjecina, Æthelwold, Dr.Gonzo, Kubura, PANONIAN
Delete and listify (6):
Xtifr, Garion96, Tefwik, Asterion, Ante Perkovic, GregorB
This was not supposed to be listified, but deleted. User Kbdank71 made a mistake. Result of discussion was delete. 15 is more than 6. 15 is more than 7+6.
So, we must act as it was decided in voting. Kubura (talk) 07:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll restore the tag "speedy deletion", since I've seen no discussion regarding the removal of the tag, and this propagandist article is still here, despite the discussion results (see above). Kubura (talk) 06:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

It does not matter if User:Kbdank71 made a mistake or not, the decision was made. And I see that another admin has also weighed in on this above. So to delete the article will require an AfD. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 15:51, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

By the way Wikipedia:Articles for deletion are not based on voting but on Wikipedia:Deletion policy which states that "These processes are not decided through a head count, so participants are encouraged to explain their opinion and refer to policy." So Kbdank71 will have made their decison on the arguments presented. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 15:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Ustashe (croat nazi fascists) trying to delete this

The Croats want to complete the genocide on the serbs by deleting all our Krajina pages on Wikipedia. This here is merely the start of a bigger project aimed at the erradication of anything to do with Krajina. It has been explicity decided that this page is going to stay. It was decided that the category will be deleted, totally deleted. However, at the same time it was decided that it will be listified instead of deleted. This page is the result of that ruling.

Furthermore I am no sockpuppet holder. This has been determined here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/LAz17 - evidently they are sock puppets of some other guy. They did an IP check and all, so your aspirations of trying to demonize me are false.

Lastly, all those who claim that this was a fascist entity are fascists themselves. This entity, RSK, was a response to fascist hatred against the serbian minority in croatia.

(LAz17 (talk) 21:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC))