User talk:F382d56d7a18630cf764a5b576ea1b4810467238

HI ADMINISTRATORS!!!!!

Hi, everyone! I just wanted to say hello, and to inform you that you can write to me here, and i will answer...

Best wish!!

                               Tadija, good wikipedian...

---

NPOV vs NPOV

It seems that both of us think this is a NPOV! Maybe it is a good idea to discuss it on Talk:Srbica! —Anna Comnena (talk) 20:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok. I think Srbica is the how it is recognized internationaly, that sounds fair. But i still think that in Albanian should be second and Cyrillic third (Serbian latin/Albanian/Serbian cyrillic) - this is the order that the international community writes it. What do you think? —Anna Comnena (talk) 22:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Tadija, look at the Kosovo page, I think this could be a good guideline for naming other pages related to Kosovo. Don't you agree? —Anna Comnena (talk) 11:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

As I also stated earlier on Talk:Srbica, I agree that Srbica should go first. However, in the comment sent to you I was referring to infoboxes. There is no "official" standard yet. But it is only fair to use the Kosovo page as an example (the discussion on that page is gigantic). Preferably it should go International/Albanian/Serbian. — Anna Comnena (talk) 13:40, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes. But, in this case Srbica is international, Skënderaj is Albanian. Afterwards in Serbian you can write it however you want, Cyrillic or not! —Anna Comnena (talk) 13:49, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia neutral? Than it should use the standards used by neutral UN. These are names used by UN. Anything else is pushing POV. So please stop reverting. —Anna Comnena (talk) 19:29, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Don't worry, I'm watching the Đakovica page - particularly on its first word. Evlekis (talk) 16:03, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Tadija, please see WP:RS for more on reliable sources. Wikipedia articles[1] should rely primarily on reliable, third-party, published sources. And please, any bigger conceptual change on these pages is preferable to go through the discussion page. —Anna Comnena (talk) 13:34, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

September 2009

Please do not edit other's talk page comments or interfere with their !votes, as you did here and have done elsewhere. You can't unilaterally declare !votes invalid and indent them. Also, please read WP:OWN, your behavior on that talk page is bordering on the ridiculous. I have neither Serbian or Croation ties, for the record. Phil153 (talk) 13:49, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Edit Warring

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. You have received 3RR warnings before; consider this your last warning. keɪɑtɪk flʌfi (talk) 14:32, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Do not continue the war at Prizren

Please see the result of the 3RR complaint. Both parties are warned not to keep reverting. Get support from at least one other person before making your change again. Blocks may be issued if the war continues. EdJohnston (talk) 14:06, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Pokajnica Monastery.JPG

File:Pokajnica Monastery.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Pokajnica Monastery.JPG. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Pokajnica Monastery.JPG]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 14:32, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Vandalizing

Stop vandalizing my userpage--Kreshnik25 (talk) 15:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)