User talk:Avala

Talk for User:Avala

The Working Man's Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For dilligent work on Serbian passport. Great job! Meelosh 23:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

T&T

Tacno je da mozemo biti izuzeti, ali procedura za izuzece od viza (ako citas dalje na stranici) ide tako sto odneses ista ona dokumenta koja su inace potrebna za vizu u Ambasadu Velike Britanije (jer u BG nema ambasade T&T), i onda na osnovu toga kada stignes na T&T mozes da dobijes to izuzece za $50 TT. Meni to lici na klasicnu vizu, bez obzira kako se zove :) Postoji slican presedan, u suprotnom smeru doduse - australijski ERT. Iako je formalnost bez koje ne mozes u Australiju (ukoliko si drzavljanin zemlje kojoj nije potrebna AU viza), smatra se da to nije viza, jer podrazumeva samo prijavu putovanja i ostavljanje podataka putem Interneta. Meelosh 23:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC).

Sorry, malo im je konfuzna ta stranica. Moja greska, skroz si u pravu. Sad cu da vratim :) Pozdrav, Meelosh 23:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC).

Serbian diplomatic missions

Good job! Kransky 03:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Serbian election

I think that the text we have is a bit unfair. When compared to the elections in 2003 Democratic Party won almost twice the number of voted while radical party stayed around the same. I think that text we have is trying to prove the negative outcome while it's not. It's important to say that nationalists have only one party to vote for - radical party while there are several left and center "democratic" parties. Not to mention that the party which was led by Slobodan Milosevic won only 5.9%! Avala 14:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Please bring this up at Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. -- Zanimum 19:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Energy: world resources and consumption

Could you please look at Energy: world resources and consumption and comment if it is ready to be a featured article? Thank you for your help.
Frank van Mierlo 13:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Dr Zoran Đinđić u tekstu o Srbima

Zdravo Avala,

zar ne misilš da je malo neukusno to što radiš? Hajde razmisli kako bi se osećao da neko edituje sliku i doda joj fotografiju dr Vojislava Šešelja recimo? Zar ne misliš da imamo mnogo bitnijih istorijskih ličnosti? Mislim da te tvoja politička uverenja sprečavaju da budeš objektivan. Hvala na razumevanju. Pozdrav, N. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Novakovic (talk • contribs) 12:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

Look Avala, please stop this. I do adore Đinđić, but modern politicians should be kept out of such places. I insisted on removal of Milo Đukanović from Montenegrins and I must insist here as well. Otherwise, someone could add Milošević as well under the (unfortunately, correct) assertion that he had more support among Serbs than Đinđić ever had. There's no point in creating such divisions when they're not called for. Duja► 10:28, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Random Smiley Award

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award
originated by Pedia-I
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

--TomasBat (Talk) 13:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Saint Petersburg

Hello after a long time! I see that you added Saint Petersburg to the list of cities Belgrade is cooperating with. Can you give a reference for this? As Belgrade is a featured article it has a bit higher criteria... Nikola 11:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Dobro, ali ni na strani Petrograda ne pise izvor za to. Uopste nisam znao da je neko pisao upravi Beograda niti da su podaci sakupljeni sa razlicitih adresa - samo smo preuzeli ono sto stoji na sajtu Beograda. Nikola 06:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Slazem se da je moguce da je lista nepotpuna, ali je jedina koju imamo - koliko sam shvatio ni u tim mailovima koji su ti slati nije pomenut Petrograd? Nikola 13:17, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Diplomatic missions by country (DMBC)

You have written for this category. If you would like to discuss developing a common template, please go to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Foreign_relations#original_council_proposal_discussion_for_Foreign_relations Kransky 15:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

GA grade for Boris Tadic

Hi, I saw you assessed Boris Tadic as a Good Article for the WPBiography project. However, that grade is reserved for those articles that have successfully passed a Good Article review. Since Boris Tadic was never nominated for GA, I've downgraded it to B-class. If you feel it deserves to be GA, please nominate the article at WP:GAN, and wait for the review. Errabee 10:20, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Size of logo in airline infobox

Hi. Can you tell me where is the ruling for the size for the logo that has to be 300 px? I found it a bit too large (and disproportionate with the infobox itself. --Zack2007 01:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Can you provide the source for the Image:AirAsia logo.png. It is up for deletion and will be deleted soon. it's just too good to be deleted.--Zack2007 23:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Ambiguous link

Hello. Thank you for your recent edit to Slobodan Samardžić. Your edit included links to the pages English and German, which are disambiguation pages. This type of page is intended to direct users to more specific topics. Ordinarily we try to avoid creating links to disambiguation pages, since it is preferable to link directly to the specific topic relevant to the context. You can help Wikipedia by revising the links you added to Slobodan Samardžić to refer directly to the most relevant topic. (This message was generated by an automatic process; if you believe it to be in error, please accept our apologies and report the error to help us improve this feature.) --Russ (talk) 16:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Vuk Jeremić

Well done with the article on Vuk Jeremić. Perspicacite 03:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Request

Could you please give your comment at the discussion at Talk:List of political parties by country. Electionworld Talk? 18:57, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Osijek twin towns

Hi. I noticed you added Zemun to the list of Osijek's twin towns. Do you know if they are actually twin towns, or do they just co-operate in some other way? It's just that Zemun isn't on the twin towns sign in Osijek, unless it's been added recently. Cordless Larry 19:22, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. Does that translate as twin town? Cordless Larry 19:59, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Nemanjic.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Nemanjic.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -N 14:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Tenis

Hi! :) ... vidim da smo mi jedini iz Srbije koji pišemo i o tenisu... pa ono, samo da kažem Pozdrav. Ja sam počeo da punio kategoriju Srpski teniseri, pa ako hoćeš dopuni ili napiši nešto u tim textovima... da se bolje zna da smo najbolja tenis nacija :))) --Göran Smith 21:56, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Russia article

Please, please discuss such large edits on talk before unilaterally deleting images and replacing them with your own (and the images you replaced them with are oversized and make the page look unprofessional), this is tantamount to vandalism and you will be reported if you delete the images again. No one is saying that the oil well is Russian, it is meant to be an image of a generic oil well to demonstrate that Russia is a large oil producer and exporter, you missed the point completely.--Ilya1166 12:58, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'll break it down for you. Your photos are all different sizes and 'ugly' as you put it, I don't know what resolution you are using to view wikipedia but this is how the article looks:

http://img382.imageshack.us/my.php?image=image4ol8.jpg

http://img266.imageshack.us/my.php?image=image5in7.jpg

http://img382.imageshack.us/my.php?image=image6co3.jpg

Professional and clean in its original form compared to your mess:

http://img266.imageshack.us/my.php?image=image1gl0.jpg

http://img372.imageshack.us/my.php?image=image2cn3.jpg

http://img382.imageshack.us/my.php?image=image3of4.jpg

• The picture of Moscow State University shows the whole building, unlike your image which only gives a ground level view of the central tower
• It doesn't matter that the Swan Lake performance is given in Vienna because Russian composer Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky composed Swan Lake, and the picture is included because Swan Lake is widely recognised around the world. The picture you replaced it with is tiny and people will not know who she is.
• Kazan Cathedral was the first church restorated after the end of the Soviet Union so it is fitting that it be included. The image you replaced it with is in portrait form and encroaches far out of the 'Religion' section as you can see in the image.
• The Bolshoi Theatre image shows the only part of the theatre worth showing, the magnificent front. In the image you replaced it with is shows the carpark and the unimportant sides of the theatre and is just a poor image overall.
• As for the Sochi image, this is unnecessary and doesn't provide any useful visual aid (it is already stated that in the text that Sochi will host the 2014 Olympics) a much better image would be of the various sports played in Russia such as ice hockey, football, etc. Do you expect this picture to be up until 2014?

I realise you've changed it back again to your own version, don't worry, this version won't be up for long. On a final note, please leave the Russian articles to the Russians and the Serbian articles to the Serbs if you don't realise that you just can't go around unilaterally replacing a whole heap of things with your own version without first going to talk.--Ilya1166 13:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

You obviously know very little of Russian history because the Kazan Cathedral was also destroyed by Stalin and rebuilt during Yeltsin's presidency. With regards to image size, most of the images you put up are in portrait form which completely skews the article. The image of Leo Tolstoy you put up is HUGE, it is bigger than the text of the section, the same goes for the picture of the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour, the image is much larger than the actual text itself and spills way over into the culture section. As for Moscow University, a University is a large building, while the Bolshoi Theatre is not, the image that was present before you deleted it DID show the whole bulding, just not the bare walls and car park as the image you included does. "As you can see I haven't removed a single photo but you did."- are you joking? You removed the picture of the Kazan Cathedral, the Nivil Monastary, etc. As for the last comment, you missed my point completely, I said "if you don't realise that you just can't go around unilaterally replacing a whole heap of things with your own version without first going to talk" as part of wikipedia is not changing things unilaterally but coming to a concensus, you can't expect to come to this article and suddenly delete images and replace them with your own. How would you like it if I went to the Serbia article and unilaterally replaced all the images with images that I thought were more important?--Ilya1166 14:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Wrong again, the Kazan Cathedral was also destroyed by the direction of Stalin, and your images are still far too large and look like a child has edited it, for an indication of what size images should be take a look at the United States or Australia articles, the images are compact and uniform and never spill over into other sections, unlike the enormous monstrosities you have put up. The image of Troitse-Sergiyeva Lavra shouldn't be in the culture section at all, this is not the 'Religion' section, where a picture of a church is already present. The Nivil Monastary is representative of the 'Architechture' section of culture and is a great representation of Neoclassical architechure as was noted in the caption.--Ilya1166 14:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Again you avoid the questions of image size your images which replaced the perfect ones that were present before are different sizes and look like a child has edited this article, the images of Cathedral of Christ the Saviour and Leo Tolstoy are ridicuously large and have caused the Culture images to spill into the Sport section. Did you check how the images are set out in the the United States or Australia articles? The image of Troitse-Sergiyeva Lavra is renowned more for its spiritual center than its architecture, the image of Nivil monastary specifically talks about the architectural significance of the monastary while your image talks about its spiritual significance.--Ilya1166 14:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

But you see that is the problem with your images, portrait images don't fit well into those sections and now they look squashed and they are still not uniform with the other images, giving a very unprofessional look, the images before were fine, they looked good, they were great examples of Russian culture and religion. It still baffles me how you replaced the images, eg your removal of the Swan Lake image, a famous Russian ballet which is instantly recognised throughout the world, with an image of a ballerina that virtually no one around the world, not myself have heard of before.--Ilya1166 15:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

It can be added in the caption that it is performed by the Viennese ballet, it doesn't matter since Swan Lake is a Russian ballet and the fact that it is being performed in Austria is a testament to it. You can not equate Swan Lake in importance to the importance of a single dancer, especially one who isn't well known.--Ilya1166 15:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

You have broken the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule, please stop or I will report you.--Ilya1166 00:16, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

You have reverted 3 times by deleting the images and replacing them with your own, I thought that you had to revert 3 times to break the rule but it's 4, so if you revert once more then you will have broken the rule.

• 1st revert: 12:35, 11 July 2007
• 2nd revert: 13:19, 11 July 2007
• 3rd revert: 23:52, 11 July 2007

--Ilya1166 00:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

LOL, MY bold edits?!? You're the one that has been deleting images. I'm merely trying to prevent vandalism.--Ilya1166 00:57, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

3RR

User:Ilya1166 has filed a 3RR report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR regarding your recent edits to Russia. I see no violation, but you may comment here. Perspicacite 01:16, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

conversion

What would be the best and easiest way to convert PNG files to SVG file format? Avala 14:17, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

There's no easy way, since going from a pixel format to a vector format is practially impossible. You'd have to draw the image yourself, or you can try finding a vector image at http://www.brandsoftheworld.com and converting it to SVG, there's a utility called pstoedit, but you also need to install GhostScript. Both are free. — Alex^(U|C|E) 19:18, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Russia. For the Mediation Committee, Daniel This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 08:17, 13 July 2007 (UTC).

religion

Can you reference the extra comments you added to the religion section in the Russia article. Thanks.--Ilya1166 15:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes but can you look through the references and find where it says those things you included and add the appropriate reference to each sentence. Also is there an landscape instead of a portrait image of Tolstoy of Dostoyevsky as the image currently there looks out of place.And do you have a problem with me removing the explanation of why Sergei Einstein is famous from the caption, as it is unnecessary to explain what they are famous for in the caption and it is already mentioned in the cinema text that he was a revolutionary film director.--Ilya1166 02:13, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

please note

please note the discussion on the biased name for war in croatia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Croatian_War_of_Independence, which is proposed to be moved to its original title.

Kosovo Elections

Hi again. It's probably a minor point, but there a discussion and vote going on at Talk:Kosovo#Kosovo:_terminology as to whether or not it's better to use Kosovo rather than Kosovan or Kosovar in the Wikipedia articles. Perhaps you have no interest, in which case sorry to bother you! DSuser 15:55, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

photos

I don't understand why you keep messing with the photos, I tried to compromise by including the Leo Tolstoy photo even when it is clearly too large for the brief amount of text, now you have replaced the image of Tchaikovsky with one of Eisenstein (which was deleted by another user before), and which now encroaches way over into the sport section.--Ilya1166 11:14, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Also the images do not cover up words, the only word which is partially covered is 'Beauty' and even then it is only half of the 'B' and the word itself can clearly be identified.--Ilya1166 11:18, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

It's very simple, Avala. I said the photos should be landscape not portrait before, when all the culture sections were broken up and there was a little bit of writing for each section and not enough room to put a portrait photo. Now that the various culture sections have been merged, there is room to put 1 portrait picture, but not 2.--Ilya1166 11:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, you should contribute something useful to the article, like adding sources, instead of playing around with pictures.--Ilya1166 11:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

education

"Russia is the world leader in terms of the number of students attending public institutions of higher education (free of charge): its 567 colleges, universities and academies now teach close to 3 million students, which is more than in all European countries taken together.". Source [1]--Ilya1166 12:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:BEGlogo.jpg

Stop reverting the image to your own version. The current one is much better in terms of quality. The two versions can be compared here:

• http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/739/begxl5.png

My version, the original version, is the one on the right. Notice how it looks more crisp and suits the article better than the other one? Don't revert it. :+) --Bolonium 16:38, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

It's not getting pixelated in the infobox though, so there should be no reason to change it. Also, the fair use airport logo is reserved only for the airport page; you won't find it elsewhere. --Bolonium 19:28, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Nope. So you'll stop? :) --Bolonium 03:23, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

We already established that the version wasn't better for the article itself. Otherwise, it's not a bad file. And I do have respect for you as a contributor here. --Bolonium 16:04, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thank you. Dubidub 10:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

England

Hi, I presume you are meaning the revert on the England article as you did not state? My apologies but I misunderstood your edit and have now changed it back. However, I would again refer you to the message above mine about providing edit summaries, something that helps other users to understand edits. Your edit did not have an edit summary and whilst I made the mistake of not noticing you were merely moving the tag from one section to the header, where it should go, providing edit summaries is something that is best done, and would prevent such things happening. Thank you ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 20:42, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Tadic's advisors

I can't see the reason you've reverted my edit, it's easier to read and (how do you say preglednije?) to have a short bulleted list, than to have just a text. It's not a big deal, and I've seen you've put a lot of good work into this article, but I just think the article looks better this way. I won't revert it, of course, if you think the other way, since it's practically your article and you should know best how to make it look better. Pozdrav--Vitriden 23:21, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Taramost.jpg

Hello! I have found that you have loaded this photo to [2] and [3]. It seems it is NOT the view of Tara river, canyon, and bridge, but of Piva river - also in Montenegro. Check this page to verify, please. Could you rename the photo file, or add correct information to its description? Cien 18:51, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

You helped choose Parliament House, Canberra as this week's WP:ACID winner

JoshuaArgent 05:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Serbians image

Hello :-)

I think you might be interested in reading this. M.V.E.i. 20:21, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Re:Logo

Yes, but the other one is also claimed to be used in documents, and includes the logo. The current one is ruining the look of the article. --Bolonium 22:11, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

No, it is not a design book, scrap book, or whatever you want to call it. Don't irritate me ether. All of those logos were official. However, there is a point where you are actually ruining the aesthetics of the webpage, which you have to consider. Also, that particular logo was meant for cell-phones. --Bolonium 03:14, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Boca Juniors logo

Hi!

I reverted your changes to Boca Juniors' logo because they're incorrect. The logo featured in the club's official page [www.bocajuniors.com.ar] is different than the one you changed it to. The one in the shirt is similar to the one you created but it's not the same since the shirt's logo has no stars inside and the number 47 immediately below it.

Please leave me a message if you wish to discuss the matter further.

Thanks,

Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 23:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. The logo you uploaded has more stars "inside" the shield, because BJ adds stars with each championship. The reason I reverted is the three stars on top, that really don't belong there. I would welcome you uploading the shield without those three stars, since you are correct when you say that it's more recent.

Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 19:01, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Re:.svg images

Hi Avala,

Yeah, I thought so too... A lot of those images that are jpegs don't look that great. I'll try to get some of those images for the cities and municipalities since you brought it up. Take care, --Bolonium 00:34, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Crtez

Daj sta stavljas taj crtez bedza mupa,taman sam uredio lepo stranu o mupu ti mi to stavljas opet,a postovao sam orginal bedz opet cu vratiti a ovo tvoje necu staviti tamo.--Boki13 22:08, 6 October 2007 (UTC) Ma daj slika je orginal bedza ,niko se nije mesecima trudio da sredi strane o vojsci i policiji,pa ti necu dozvoliti da kvaris moj rad sa tim crtezom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boki13 (talk • contribs) 22:13, 6 October 2007 (UTC) Znam ja sta je politika a znam sta se nekom svidja ja se trudim da uredim sto realnije ako postoje orginalne fotografije zasto bi stavljao crteze i zasto ti naprimer zelis da menjas nesto sto se tebi svidja umesto da dopunis novim tekstom i slikama,jer si ti ustvari uplodovao novu sliku preko stare.--Boki13 22:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Great Seal of Vermont

Hi Avala, there is no color version of the Great Seal of Vermont. The version you have posted is not official, nor does it fit the description approved by the Vermpont General Assembly, and used by the Secretary of State of Vermont. The version you have uploaded is a colorized version of a design intedended to reproduce in a single color: white on white when embossed on paper, or dimensionally embossed on a gold foil receiver, or it is reproduced in black, or a tint of black. The colors applied to the design you imprted in the articles Great Seal of Vermont and Vermont are based on the colors of the Coat of arms of Vermont a device designed for different applications. Please direct any further questions regarding correct form or display of either the Great Seal of Vermont or the Coat of Arms of Vermont to

Ms. Deborah Markowitz Secretary of State of Vermont Office of the Secretary of State Redstone Building 26 Terrace Street Montpelier, VT 05609-1101

Official symbols may be seen here http://www.sec.state.vt.us/kids/emblems.html or here http://www.libraries.vermont.gov/www/html/emblems.html CApitol3 22:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons

Thank you for uploading images/media to Wikipedia! There is however another Wikimedia foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In the future, please consider creating an account and uploading media there instead. That way, all the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons (you may view images you have previously uploaded by going to your user contributions on the left and choosing the 'image' namespace from the drop down box). Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading!

--OsamaK 16:08, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Redundant Images

Hello. Thanks for checking on redundant images. Just one point, the images need to be in the same format before they can be deleted under WP:CSD#I1, so a png doesn't make a gif redundant, or an svg a png, etc. All the best! Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Special thanks for care

Thanks for uploading Logos for National Commercial Bank and Saudi Aramco .  A M M A R  22:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Template:Progress in future enlargement of the European Union edit

It's true that Serbia has signed an SAA in 2007, as you have indicated, but this is only a preliminary signing which is intended to be followed by an official one in 2008. Source: [4] (setimes). So do you think that instead the date should be indicated as (2008) or not? Or perhaps left as 2007 currently, and then changed to 2008 when the official signing occurs... I believe they call this preliminary signing as an "initialing" and it is probably wrong to indicate the year of the signing as 2007. —Insanely Beautiful 01:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how correct it would be to leave it as 2007. [5]. It just so happens that most countries initial it and sign it in the same year, and so this issue is not a problem. But the template specifically says signing, which this is not, but is an initialing. You are correct that the coming into force comes with the official signing, but that can in fact take a few years: for example Montenegro has official signed the SAA, but it obviously won't come into force until all of the members have ratified it, which will obviously not be this year. And also look at other countries, where the gap between signing and coming into force is a few years, but an initialing and signing are usually very close together (i.e. in the same year), and therefore we cannot say that the coming into force comes immediately with the signing. It just so happens that Montenegro initialed and signed it in the same year: all Serbia has done at this point is agreed on the final version of the text, to which no or very little changes will be made. I think it should probably be changed to (2008) as the meanings of an initialing, signing, and coming into force are very distinct and very clear, and this is not a signing. —Insanely Beautiful 01:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and changed it. I stand by the fact that it is only correct to report that a signing has taken place instead of an initialing. These two things are completely distinct and we need to be precise. I have added a comment, though, to Accession of Serbia to the European Union and to the corresponding section in EU enlargement to indicate this milestone of negotiations for Serbia. —Insanely Beautiful 02:08, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

1. Parafiranje sporazuma o stabilizaciji i pridruživanju 7.11.2007. - corresponds to SAA signature in template
2. Potpisivanje sporazuma o stabilizaciji i pridruživanju 31.01.2008. - corresponds to SAA entry into force in template
3. Zahtev za članstvo 31.01.2008. - corresponds to Membership application submitted in template in template
4. Odluka Saveta EU o početku procedure za dobijanje „Avisa“ 01.03.2008. - (decision of EU council on procedure of getting Avisa)
5. Evropska komisija priprema i šalje upitnik Republici Srbiji 01.04.2008. - (EU send questionnaire)
6. Odgovori iz upitnika se pripremaju i šalju Evropskoj komisiji 15.06.2008. - (Serbia answers the questionnaire)
7. Evropska komisija šalje dodatna pitanja i zahteve za razjašnjenja 25.07.2008. - (additional questions)
8. Dodatni odgovori i razjašnjenja se pripremaju i šalju Evropskoj komisiji 01.09.2008. - (additional answers)
9. EK šalje Savetu ministara pozitivno mišljenje. Savet usvaja pozitivni „Avis“ 10.11.2008. - (EU confirms Avis)
10. Evropski savet odobrava status zemlje kandidata Republici Srbiji 15.12.2008. - corresponds to Candidate status received in template

If this is a guide which you trust, then to the contrary it actually shows what I have been saying. The meaning of parafiranje is initialling in English, and the date for this is indicated as a a 2007 one. On the other hand potpisivanje means signing, which is what we are concerned with, and the date given is a 2008 one. Initialling and signing are two completely different and distinct things, and the template most definitely is referring to signing -- which has not occurred yet -- and not initialling, otherwise the template would say specifically initialling. The coming into force does not come automatically with the signing, but is a consequence of it after all states have ratified the SAA, which is the date the template is concerned with -- the time when all states have ratified and the agreement becomes valid, no sooner. I point to the example of Montenegro which has already initialled at the start of 2007 and signed at the end of it -- but we still do not say that it has come into force despite the signing, and this will not happen this year. Please try and understand this point.

I understand that it has been the practice previously, as in the case of Montenegro, to indicate a signing when only an initialling has taken place, and this usually has not been a problem as the signing happened in the same year, but this now is not the case and I wish to keep the accuracy of the template. I have indicated in the article that Serbia has initialled the agreement, and this is enough for now. The template column in the template is concerned with signing not initialling. Please do understand this. —Insanely Beautiful 23:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Beli_dvor

Dear user Avala,

Dear others who made changes to my Beli dvor article.

I have made a very detailed article about the Beli dvor, about what the tourists can see and about the arts. But, user Avala and a few others keep on messing with my article.

For example, someone added that the word Dvor translates to Court of Palace, like that is relevant. You can figure that out from the name Beli dvor and the English translation that is used officially by the Royal Family - The White Palace, therefore that whole comment about using the word Court or Palace, was not needed.

Then, someone added:

"Scholarly research has cast doubt on this story, given the fashionable elegance of the building and the ages of the children at the time of Beli dvor's planning (all three boys were under the age of 11)". If I tell you that on the tours and on the Royal Family brochures it is written that the Beli dvor was built for King Alexander's 3 sons when they would become of age, then that's more credible than some quote from some foreigner. What does the elegance of the building have to do with it? What does the children age have to do with it? This was meant to be the home of the 3 young Princes when they grow up and have their own families.

Crown Prince Alexander insists that Beli dvor was built for his father and his two brothers (Peter, Tomislav, and Andrej) when they became of age. That can also be heard on the tours of the Palaces, given by qualified tour guides. King Alexander I wanted to conduct his affairs without interference, and that is why he built the Royal Palace - to have a peaceful life far from the city noise. The other Palace, the White Palace was built for his 3 sons. Period. The king planned ahead which may appear unusual in comparison to the mess in our society today.

Beli dvor was completed in 1936, not 1937. Princess Elizabeth (Jelisaveta) was born in Beli dvor in 1936.

Now that I have that clarified, please stop messing with my article. Thank you. Just leave it as is. Please! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sa banjice (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok sorry I had no idea it was "your article". Nobody will make any further edits because you own it. --Avala 13:22, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

ACID Atom

The article Atom, which you voted for the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive on August 30, and was removed on September 11, because on one got around to choosing it as the winner, has been renominated and needs votes. Zginder 16:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Nice Job!

Kudos for your work on updating the 2016 Olympic bid pages (and adding Baku and Prague). Great work!-Cbradshaw 20:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!--Avala 20:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

You helped choose Atom as this week's WP:ACID winner

Zginder 00:33, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Naim Krieziu

Can you please explain me the sense of this edit?[6] Naim Krieziu is Albanian and has represented Albania at the international level, no matter he was born in Kosovo. --Angelo (talk) 08:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I've noticed you removed the USSR flags from players such as Alexei Mikhailichenko. Current WP:WPF consensus is to indicate the player's international teams he has represented (both USSR and Ukraine, in Mikailichenko case, and Albania in the case above). I'm going to revert these edits of you. --Angelo (talk) 08:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/United Nations Parliamentary Assembly

Hello, I have created an article about the UN Parliamentary Assembly, a proposed world body that would be similar to Europarl. Please review and vote on the WP:FAC nomination. Thanks, Sarsaparilla (talk) 01:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

FAR listing for Plate tectonics

Plate tectonics has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Serbian presidential election, 2008

United States Republican presidential candidates, 2008#Candidates with national campaigns.

What do you think? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:47, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Montenegrins, Kostunica & Tadic

Many, if not most Serbs draw their descent from Montenegro. Tadic belongs to a specific Serb clan in Montenegro, the Piva.

This should be in the article, especially since Boris Tadic prides himself on Montenegrin origin. E.g. he mentioned that in this year's interview on Croatian national television (though he also added the mythic family's origin from Kosovo). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Lol. ;) Actually, just father. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I was having second thoughts, because the Damljanovics are from Herzegovina and not (Old) proper Montenegro. Technically that is Old Montenegro, however Kostunica's family already abandoned the family links asserting as Kostunicas by the time Montenegro finally expanded to most eastern Herzegovina...and the deeper origins of the Damljanovics from The Highlands are not fully known (though that quickly joined Montenegro). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

And Voja's emotional links lie just in Sumadija ("proper Serbia") and Herzegovina. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I can't believe I am going to call upon Kurir, but still - check out http://arhiva.kurir-info.co.yu/Arhiva/2004/jun/30/V-03-30062004.shtml . --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:29, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Yep. That's a result of 2 seconds of Google. ;))) I'll go to the Democratic Party hq (have links) to do personally a little research. Cheers. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:40, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

---

OK, but I still think Ceda's poster is good for it. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

SVG logos

Hi there - I'm not sure that the free use rationale stands up for SVG logos, particularly the line stating "It is a low resolution image, and thus not suitable for production of counterfeit goods". For example, Image:UWA_crest.svg is very high resolution:

UWA logo (click "show" to expand)

thumb|800px|left|UWA logo

Would you agree? - Gobeirne (talk) 23:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Pres. elect.

The table shows as if Boris Tadic already won and Tomislav Nikolic passed into the second round.

What's this about the retired? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

SPE2008

http://www.mtsmondo.com/izbori08

As far I know, they're "free". There's plenty of images there. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Movement "I live for the Frontier"

...is a political party. They ran on SPO's list in January 2007 (Pokret "Živim za Krajinu").

Also, add solely political parties? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Presidential election

See Talk:Serbian_presidential_election,_2008#Rounds.

Why did you replace the poster? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Because Pastor conditioned the support. Tadic responded that he will not answer to any conditioning, thus losing the official support of DSS-NS, LDP and its friends as well as the Magyars. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. Maybe it's better if we include all those links within the article as references? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:40, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Then why did Boris Tadic yell how "Otpor!" supports him and Otpor's flags were at the convention yesterday? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Where is Turkey

Thanks for making the fix. A 15 year old Turkish boy (and his sockpuppets) has been changing the Diplomatic Missions by Country. He is having trouble understanding Wikipedia procedures for changing articles by consensus. We have to pick one continent per country - in this case Turkey is Middle Eastern. Kransky (talk) 12:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

List of war crimes

Hi. As a Serb Wikipedian are you aware that there is absolutely no mention of Ustasha crimes in the List of war crimes?

Something needs to be done. Unfortunately I am not in a position to do so, but I submit it for your consideration. Spread the word. 216.194.20.252 (talk) 22:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

changing flags

I noticed an intresting thing in your contributions, you changed the flags of several countries yesterday, here is a short list.

1. 23:26, 6 February 2008 (hist) (diff) Finland‎
2. 23:24, 6 February 2008 (hist) (diff) Peru‎
3. 23:20, 6 February 2008 (hist) (diff) Costa Rica‎
4. 22:56, 6 February 2008 (hist) (diff) Hungary‎
5. 21:27, 6 February 2008 (hist) (diff) Austria

And then you use these articles as examples that you changed a few hours ago in a list? I find that intresting. The question is why would you change the flags of a bunch of countries at the same time? Hobartimus (talk) 19:23, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

So some countries use the coat of arms in their official flag some do not, you should not change the flag of a county until you are sure that is the official flag. In the case of Hungary the official flag is the one without the coat of arms (to change the official flag you have to change laws and the constitution describing the details of the flag) Hobartimus (talk) 19:29, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Where did you read that "whenever there is difference between state and civil flag Wikipedia uses state flag in the article"? Hobartimus (talk) 20:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Zeleni Venac

Hi. Source for what? I only should add that it stopped in 2000. PajaBG (talk) 21:57, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Right...Do you live in Belgrade? PajaBG (talk) 23:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Stop deteriorating the Germany article

It seems you have decreased the quality of images or even deleted them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.7.102 (talk) 17:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Right...--Avala (talk) 17:25, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Helen Clark

The official portrait of Clark, which you placed on the article, has been much criticised on the talk page on the grounds that it doesn't look very much like her. The picture currently in the article is of high quality and everyone who has commented so far prefers it. You are welcome to express your opinions at Talk:Helen Clark#Pic, but the current consensus is in favour of the 2007 picture. If you want the official portrait displayed on this article, perhaps you could place it lower in the article, and explain why on the talk page.-gadfium 21:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

The intention of the 2007 photo is not to present an unflattering image. I certainly don't regard it as such. Clark is well known to be a keen tramper and generally "outdoorsy", and this photo reflects that to some extent, while still being a posed and dignified photo as is appropriate for a PM.-gadfium 21:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Serbian borders

As you have probably noticed there is a strong disagreement among wikipedians on whether Kosovo is now a state or not. People are spoiling a lot of energy by changing and reverting over and over the same things again. Now, I have just seen that you were the 10th (or so) person today changing one of Serbia's neighboring country from Kosovo to Albania. For how long will it remain so ... What's the use of it? You have the choice: Either join discussion seeking consensus or just end up fighting an edit war with people, who might turn out to be as persistent as you are. Tomeasy (talk) 22:17, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Commons

Daj, ajde šalji slike na commons da ne moramo dva puta daih šaljemo. -- Bojan  12:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Mislio sam onako globalno za sve slike. Često sam viđao PD-Serbia slike ovde umesto na ostavi. Recimo u Spoljni odnosi Srbije još uvek stoji ona mapa pre povlačenja ambasadora. Video sam bug, ali ne znam ti pomoći. Sve slike o demonstracijama sam već poslao, osim one sa Obrazom i Karadžićem (otvorio sam katergoriju na commonsu) -- Bojan  13:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Removing fair use rationales

Do not remove valid fair use rationales from images, as you did at Image:Belgrade Kosovo is serbia protest Obraz flag Karadzic portrait.jpg. If you believe an image with a valid rationale should be deleted, use WP:IFD. Superm401 - Talk 13:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

You've done it again with an image I uploaded, again with no edit summary or explanation. This is a completely invalid way of trying to delete an image with a valid fair use rationale. If you believe it is an invalid fair use claim, use IFD. Superm401 - Talk 14:01, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

First of all, stop making edits without edit summaries. Second, you are correct that the images are copyrighted. However, United States law has fair use provisions that allow certain uses of copyrighted material. Wikipedia:Non-free_content_criteria is Wikipedia's interpretation of that law, and I have complied with the guidelines. If you believe I have broken one of the guidelines, please tell me which one. Otherwise, I will revert. These are not a blatant copyright infringements because I have made apparently valid rationales; db-copyvio does not apply. Superm401 - Talk 14:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Other removals of image descriptions

I also see you blanked the copyright information at Image:Cedomirjovanovic.jpg without any explanation, at which point it was deleted...for not having any copyright infromation. I have restored this. Superm401 - Talk 14:18, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't suppose you have any evidence. It looks like a government photograph to me. I have no reason to doubt the uploader, though a URL would be helpful. Superm401 - Talk 19:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

You did nearly the same at Image:Milutinmrkonjic.jpg, except this time you said it was "wrong". Of course, again, no reason to believe you over the uploader was given. Superm401 - Talk 14:24, 24 February 2008 (UTC).

Again, the problem was that you blanked Image:Cedomirjovanovic.jpg without any explanation whatsoever. You may indeed be correct, but you didn't show that, and it does look like a government photograph (not news media). Look at the artificial background; it was probably done in a studio at the government's request. With Image:Milutinmrkonjic.jpg, you provided no explanation of why it was the wrong tag. The URL [7], (which you didn't even note before, and still haven't on the image page) is not the source for it. They may each have a common source (and the source could be PD), but the backgrounds are different, so neither came directly from the other. Image:MP Milutin Mrkonjic.jpg is indeed valid PD; I never said otherwise. Superm401 - Talk 19:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Adding no source tag based on facts is indeed correct. However, in neither of these two cases did you add a no source (or any other) tag. In both cases, you removed a tag, and provided no reason. You have provided evidence now, but you should have done so then. Superm401 - Talk 19:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

International reaction to Kosovo's declaration of independence

Hey, I noticed that you edit the map a lot. Well since I don't have Photoshop or any other software to edit it for myself, I would just like to point out that the Sudan and Morocco are currently neutral (the map currently shows them as having made no response). So next time you edit the map would you fill in those two countries? Thanks. --Tocino 18:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Misleading and self-serving " Warning for content removal" you left after edit-wars on my talk page

You wrote on my talk page the following untrue accusation:

You have committed Blanking type of vandalism which is Removing all or significant parts of pages' content without any reason, or replacing entire pages with nonsense. Sometimes important verifiable references are deleted with no valid reason(s) given in the summary. Please refrain from making such edits in the future. --Avala (talk) 00:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Wikipedia. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

Please don't create mistifications with this ridiculous accusation, as it was your unreasonable and misrepresenting edits that I have been removing, being at that, one of several other editors, who object to your POV-pushing, untrue misrepresentations of werifiable facts. As an administrator of the Serb Wikipedia, you should know better, than to falsely create impression of culpability to serve your own ends, by supplying user talk page content of this sort. You have already been reported today by me on Wikimedia Commons for engaging in persistent edit-warring and vandalism of your own, in the matter of presenting a false state of facts on the maps depicting official state recognition or nonrecognition of independent Kosowo. Your bad-faith edits, which I and others have been removing, while you keep reverting, no doubt violating the 3RR rule, consisted of placing misleading references purporting to support the view that Bosnia or Armenia have officially acted not to recognize Republic of Kosovo, whereas in fact, the two countries have not. So, I refute your attempt to paint me in a bad light. Furthermore, there seems to be mounting evidence that an RFC should be conducted over the matter of your edits in the matter of Kosovo as damaging to two or more Wikimedia projects and their credibility, thereby resulting in transgressions no admin should ever commit, on any project, even where he is not an administrator, because he is expected to know better. --Mareklug ^talk 00:51, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

How dare you lie on my talk page and give me unwarranted warnings (two, by now!), whereas it is you who are involved in this edit war yourself, breaking the WP:3RR in the process singlehandedly, and on the wrong end of facts, at that. In fact, it is you, who removed content, sourced content at that, and far more pertaining to the official position of the government of Bosnia re: Kosovo's independence, replacing it with sources quoting individual POLITICIANS, not GOVERNMENTS. Furhtermore, that material may well pertain to Republika Srpska, but it does not to Bosnia and Hercegowina, as you are continuing to misrepresent. Badly placed, misleading text should be removed. Republika Srpska IS NOT BOSNIA, and it's high time for your Serb-centric mentality to register that fact and stop pretending that it is. It is you who are guilty of removing sourced NPOV content and replacing it by inserting irrelevant, misrepresenting content, which surely is vandalism of the highest order. You are the worst kind of admin, a double-talking false accuser of others, using Wikipedia lingo to create misimpressions of appropriatness of your actions, which are most unsaviory and damage the Wikipedia. You accuse users who are actually editing impartially and removing your misrepresentations. Please quit littering my talk page with your nonsense and false accusations. --Mareklug ^talk 01:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

It does not matter, which politicians these are by title. They are not the government, and their say is not congruent with the official stance of the state, which is as of yet unknown. Any other characterization is a lie. Case in point, analogously, is the say of the President of Poland in the same matter. He was on record as not wishing to have Poland alienate Serbia and recommended not recognizing Kosovo's independence. yet, today, officially, Poland, the state, officially recognized Kosovo. Please examine your motives here; they are occluded by nationalism, I'm affraid, and your edits will not stand up to community's scrutiny or other forms of arbitration. --Mareklug ^talk 01:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

This is sheer sophistry on your part: you demand sources for statements, which the government of Bosnia (or Armenia, for that matter) has not made in the name of the state YET. Instead of leaving in place the NPOV source for Bosnia, which you removed (talk about blanking!) in order to make room for quotes by individual members of tripartite presidency or Armenian minsters or whatnot (individuals, in any case, speaking individually!). Had you presented your sources in a measured, appropriate context, there would be no conflict, but you wholesale acted on these quotations by highly placed individuals as actions of states! That, they are not, and it is you who must provide verifiable sources of concrete state actions. And no per analogiam to Russia, ruled by a despot. Who already spoke ex officio, and who had his diplomats present the matter formally at hte UN Security Council. Which Bosnia or Armenia HAVE NOT. --Mareklug ^talk 02:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Users Avala and Mareklug

I highly recommend WP:DR with mediation if it has not been tried before to solve this issue.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I would like to help

It seems like there is a concentrated effort by Kosovo Albanians and their supporters to fudge the facts in their favor. I'm only an editor on WP:English though... I've never edited on commons. Give me a link and I'll see if I can put in a good word on your behalf. --Tocino 20:25, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Intl Recognition of Kosovo Map

Hi! Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Northern Marianas and Guam as territories of the United States automatically recognized Kosovo when USA did some weeks ago. Please color them green. Great Map! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.50.12.73 (talk) 16:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Diplomatic missions of Europe

Template:Diplomatic missions of Europe has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Kransky (talk) 12:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Discuss the International reaction to Kosovo article?

Noticed we've been making conflicting changes to the article, so thought it might be good to discuss. The problem I see is twofold: the list is a numbered list and therefore all items should be numbered. Moreover, the list makes no mention of UN membership as a requirement -- that idea's already been dropped. (Arguing over the exact number of countries needed to be considered recognized isn't very fruitful either, as you can see from the archives). The ROC's special situation is duly noted in the article, so it's not NPOV either, so it should be numbered appropriately. Your thoughts? Konekoniku (talk) 19:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for writing back. Understand your point, but my concern is 1) the format is not wp standard -- I haven't seen it on any other page, 2) it's confusing to most, if not all readers (see the discussion page itself), 3) no explanation is made for the anomaly, and 4) it's NPOV in the sense that there's no objective criteria to use to define "partially recognized state", and certainly no WP principle. (This is another discussion, and I don't want to stray into it too much, but just to give you an idea almost all states are partially recognized, take North Korea for example, which until 2000 was recognized by less than 10; Afghanistan, which until 2003 was recognized by only 3; Switzerland, which before 2002 was not a UN member state; the Vatican, which still is not a UN member state; Israel, which is not recognized by more than 60 countries (and a few decades ago was not recognized by a majority); and China, which is not recognized by 23. This doesn't take into account the fundamental logic problem of using "recognizing country" to define "country" since what is a "country" will affect your definition criteria. Konekoniku (talk) 01:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Language icons in Otpor article

Several refs and external links in the Otpor! article are not in English. My best guess is that they are in Serbian so they need a {{sr icon}}. I would do it myself but I can't tell the difference between Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian languages so I'm not sure if this is the icon or it is {{hr icon}} or {{bs icon}}. Thanks for your help. JRSP (talk) 19:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Added. --Avala (talk) 23:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, would you please do the same on the inline references "IZVOZNICI REVOLUCIJE PUSTIH SNOVA O LEPŠEM ŽIVOTU" and "Otporaši na Maldivima". JRSP (talk) 12:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Your concern

Looks like two people have left Jakezing notes at this time. This may seem a bit backwards, but if you apologize (even in a small way) for causing the edit conflict it may allow him to "back down" without losing face. That might be important to a continued atmosphere of collaboration and mutual respect. If you really don't want to, I could understand, but it seems to me a good idea -- worst that can happen is you come out looking very gracious in comparison. Not an obligation at all, just a suggestion. Feel free to carry on. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Very nice, thank you. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 22:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, so I see. Removed the rest of it, hopefully that gets the point across. Will check back, but let me know if anything new comes up. – Luna Santin (talk) 18:57, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Your revision

Avala! What has happend to you...? You reverted also legitimate spelling corrections. not only "British" English. Can you take care of them? --Camptown (talk) 19:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Ever since the article was opened there was a consensus to use the British English as the article is concerning European affairs. It wasn't my decision but if there is consensus it should be respected. If you disagree you can always start a discussion in the article talk.--Avala (talk) 21:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

St. Petersburg

Hi, Avala! Regarding this, I would like to note that your reasoning is not incorrect, but we don't normally put more than one official website in infoboxes (otherwise they'll eventually become carbon copies of the "External links" section"). Here in the English Wikipedia, we normally use the government site as "official" (for the infobox purposes). The other site is the city presentation (something a tourist board might put together), and while it was developed by the city administration, it is not "official" in the strict sense of the word. I'd appreciate your further insight on this. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 22:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Fine, have it your way. I have, however, formatted the links to show full URLs, as it is so done in other infoboxes of this type. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Recognition map

Hey, as I said earlier I don't have Photoshop or any other software to edit maps on WP. Well the current version of Image_talk:Kosovo_relations.svg is horribly wrong (last edited by Mareklug so that could explain why)... Bosnia and Cuba are colored in as neutral when in reality they are opposed.... also Montenegro and Macedonia are in the will recognize category when in reality they are currently neutral. Also Czech Rep and Portugal are currently neutral, but on the map they are colored in as will recognize. This map is no longer used on the English version of International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence but it is on every other langauge so it's important that these corrections are done. --Tocino 19:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

It looks like Mareklug has reverted some of your edits... Cuba is now nuetral, while Montenegro and Macedonia are in the will recognize category. Does the same three revert rule apply to commons? If it does is there anyone else that can revert Mareklug's disruptive edits? --Tocino 16:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Map is screwed up again. BiH, Brazil, Cuba, Libya, Uruguay, Algeria, Slovakia, are all currently colored neutral when the International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence‎ article with sources prove that they are all against. --Tocino 18:32 20 March 2008 (UTC)

By the way, User:Patstuart's explanation for his revert doesn't make sense. He says that this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7304488.stm is a good source but that link is only about Bulgaria, Croatia, and Hungary's decision to recognize. --Tocino 18:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Malay translation

Sorry I was offline for so long. The translation is available in Talk:International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence/Malay translation. Borisblue (talk) 17:55, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

The last edit by Mareklug

Hey, I was recently warned that I was engaged in an edit war so I have stopped editing for now. I reverted more of Mareklug's long edit and then my edit was reverted by Zscout. You can see the difference between my revert and Zscout's revert which just put Mareklug's work back into the article... here it is [8] . Some of it has since been changed (such as the number of opposing countries has been changed from 20 back to the real number of 25), but still some of it is still on the article. He puts emphasis on certain sentences that suit his agenda, also he added irrelevant info such as, "Serbian TV reported in a Serbian language news story that..." and (Wikipedia-translated Spanish official press release), etc.. With his reverts came bad English, such as "He was further quoted:" became "He was furhter quoted:". Mareklug also added bizarre statements such as, "His assertion was immediately discredited by Slovak experts on Kosovo and rival politicians, reflecting the wide variety of opinion in Slovakia." I reverted most of his work but then my revert was reverted by Zscout and since I am warned I cannot clean up after Mareklug unless I want to get banned for a day (and I don't want to do that). You know, I am not even Slavic. I am American with Irish and British ancestry. But this issue, the West's foolish reaction to it and specifically dealing with Mareklug has really gotten under my skin. I feel I am not dealing with a reasonable person and that I need to fight fire with fire. I find myself monitoring this article all day. I am going to take a break. This weekend I am going away and won't be around a computer much. So basically what I am asking is keep an eye out on certain editors and keep this article tidy. Thanks. :) --Tocino 05:52, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Nebojsa Medojevic

Your image has been deleted. Where did you took it from? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:07, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Map of Serbia

Hello. Today somebody removed the province of Kosovo and Metohija from Serbia on the map of Serbia (see: [Image:Europe location SRB.png]) which is used on the Serbia article. User:Movieevery did this despite a lack of consensus on the Serbia talk page where the map has been discussed numerous times. Can you revert his disruptive edit? Thanks. --Tocino, 20:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Image may be nominated for deletion

There appears to be a couple of editors that wish to have the Image:WORLDHEALTH2.png image deleted. I feel it serves a very useful purpose, especially for us Americans who with it can visually see how out of step we are with the rest of the developed world. Since you worked on this map, your comments or input would be greatly appreciated. --Lifeguard Emeritus (talk) 04:52, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Template:Passports

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3APassports&diff=201350705&oldid=201339917

Hi. No edit summary to explain your reversion...? Sardanaphalus (talk) 16:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I did not revert. I just edited the list so it would take less space but I left the collapsable option. --Avala (talk) 16:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Apologies; I've just realized what happened and then recieved your message. The unwrapped "International organizations" means a lot of the template's space is eaten up in smaller windows/screens, so hope you understand my restoring it. Sardanaphalus (talk) 17:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

All About Rep of Kosova

Exactly a week ago, March 21st 2008, you said, "just opened the South Korea (will not bother with others) and unlike your fantasy title "S.Korea thinking about recognition" I see this.." It was FANTASY TITLE wasn't it? Don't think your POV ideas aren't bothersome, they are also counterproductive when you discourage posters from adding new information. You keep trying to be anti-Kosova but facts speak for itself, you can expect Macedonia by this time next week hopefully. Kosova2008 (talk) 05:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Copyvio at Battle of Kolubara

As one of the few admins on en: with strong Template:Sr icon, could you look into this please? It appears that a long-ago copyvio on sr has been cloned into other languages, but I don't read the language, so I can't be certain. Thanks, LeadSongDog (talk) 21:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for following up, but I'm still puzzled. When I compare the texts, I see entire sentences that are letter-identical on this and on this. Did it already get cleaned up? LeadSongDog (talk) 04:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Well it has been expanded quite a bit since then. Plus all these sentences that you see that are the same are a bit technical. Where did the battle take place and on what day and who were the army commanders. I think it can be safely used as a reference. --Avala (talk) 11:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Great. Thank you.LeadSongDog (talk) 13:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Pristina

Please would you give your view here [9] Ijanderson977 (talk) 15:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Coat of arms of SFRY

1. Artistic impressions and interpretations are allowed, look at all those products of Germany, the West and you shall see just that
2. If needed a secondary file can be made and uploaded under the exact name Coat of arms of Yugoslavia (socialist).gif
3. If needed you can find files/images that are not taken form children's sticker-albums. The image that you want if just that, from a Gornji Milanovac published sticker-album.
4. Official image (which is not completely exact to every detail) can be found commons:Image:Coat of arms of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.png.
5. One should use that design together with the Constitution of SFRY and the Law on the flag, CoA, anthem and the protection of the work and character of Josip Broz Tito and work up the details.

Imbris (talk) 22:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Tadic

Hi. I replied on my talk. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Notification of arbitration case

{{subst:Contentious topics/alert|topic=b}}

I noticed that you are edit-warring at Template:Countries of Europe without discussing your changes on the talk page. Please cease, or you may be blocked under the above-mentioned arbitration remedy. -- ChrisO (talk) 21:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)