User talk:TadejM/Archive 3

——————————————— MY TALK PAGE ————————————— Hello, welcome to my talk page. You are welcome to post any comments below. Please be polite and follow wikipedia guidelines.

-- coding taken from White Cat.

Notice: I will reply here. If you ask a question here, please check back regularly to see if I have replied (or add this page to your watchlist). I want my threads to be in the same place, because otherwise the comments will be scattered around and out of context.

-- coding taken from Timwi.

Leave me a message

Fight systemic bias. Thanks!

Archives

• Archive 1: January 27, 2005 - May 23, 2005
• Archive 2: May 23, 2005 - April 5, 2008

---

Wikipedia:Babel

slUporabnik govori slovenščino kot materni jezik. en-3This user can contribute with an advanced level of English. fr-2Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau intermédiaire en français. de-1Dieser Benutzer hat grundlegende Deutschkenntnisse.

Correct

You are correct see my talk page. Jeepday (talk) 19:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Simobil-logotip.png

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Simobil-logotip.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Rebula

pls see comment to your message on my talk page Kaktus999 (talk) 09:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Károly Doncsecz

Dragi Eleassar! Ti si slovenec, jaz tudi. Na Madžarskem, v Prekmurju in v Slovenijo je zelo slaven bil Karel Dončec. Iz Ljubljane tudi mnogo obiskovalci prišlo na Verico. Jaz tan živim. Ti razmejš prekmurščina? Akoš Dončec

Iskreno rečeno, meni Karel Dončec ni znan. Vendar če je bil res slaven, potem ne bo težko navesti zanesljivih virov o tem. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 16:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Alojz Rebula

On 9 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alojz Rebula, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bencherlite^Talk 19:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Congrats, reckon you;re up to starting an article on Cinema of Slovenia? ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 12:08, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for having provided this link. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

At present it links to the list of films which I have drawn up by country -but Slovenia's pretty badly developed at present. Slovenia is one of the few cinema articles missing from Template:European cinema. Anyway in relation to your painter, I'm not certain what copywright law is in Slovenia and when it expires, but you could probably upload one or two of his paintings for encyclopedic purposes. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 12:14, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

It's a shame this is only a list. Thanks anyway. Currently I'm creating articles on notable Slovene personalities but plan to add images in the near future. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:16, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I know thats what prompted me to try to get a project running, as in many places Slovenia seemed very unequal with even neighbouring countries such as Croatia. Very glad you are tackling Slovene biography which I have on my list as a much needed area of growth. Anyway I found some Jakac images on e is a commons portrait of Preseren which I thought helped. I've blue linked Academy of Fine Arts and Design, Ljubljana as it seemd to link many notable Slovene artists together -I'm sure that could be developed more fully eventually, but the most important thing is catching up with coverage on here for Slovenia. All the best and keep "em" coming ! ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 12:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Nice work I've made a start on Lucijan Marija Škerjanc -perhaps you coulf expand it from slovenian wiki -such as his compositions when you have a moment ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 13:15, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I plan to create articles for all Prešeren laureates. I'll expand Lucijan Marija Škerjanc when I finish my work on Božidar Jakac. Thanks for your help. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 13:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Munch and Jakac

Hello! Still in the process of writing the talk page comment, which will be up in a moment, and will address the issue. Ewulp (talk) 20:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Another DYK

On 12 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Si.mobil, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Daniel Case (talk) 08:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Srebrenitzacoat.JPG

Hi. Shall I nominate Image:Srebrenitzacoat.JPG for deletion? It seems very dodgy. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I think this would be an appropriate action. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 13:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Have done. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Vitomil Zupan

Hi. I was actually not in Budapest when I edited the article on Zupan, but in Sofia :) Anyway, I have read all the articles listed, as well as Rožanc'es Roman o knjigah. I usually do it like this: when I have the sources with me, I add them as references (possibly with the page numbers); when I don't, I list the sources I have read and then add one or two essential writings on the subject. I do the latter only if I know well the authors and if I have a basic idea what the books or articles are about. For example: when (or if) I write the article on the philosopher France Veber, I will of course list Dušan Pirjevec'es Estetski nazor Franceta Vebra among the sources, although I admit I haven't read it through (nor do I plan to). But I believe it's an essential source and it gives the reader an excellent reference to read and doublecheck the claims in the article. Nevertheless, I think you're right: in such cases, it's better to subdivide the list between "sources" and "further readings", as you have done when you edited the article on Cankar (at least I think it was you). I'm gonna do the same here. And I'll try to remember to stick to this policy also in future. Take care, Viator slovenicus (talk) 15:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

May you adopt me?

Please adopt me {{adoptme|20080419182614}} --Sean (talk) 20:10, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Invitation

Hiya, I noticed that you are an administrator who has some familiarity with Eastern European topics. I'm an admin too, and am currently trying an experiment to sort through some Hungarian/Slovak disputes. There were several articles which were being disrupted by tag-team edit-warring, and I'm trying to encourage the participants to stop the edit wars, and instead engage in consensus discussions for how the disputed issues (many of which involve ethnic names) should be handled. I would love to have another uninvolved administrator or two in the mix, especially ones who are familiar with the topic area. Would you be interested in helping? See the page at User:Elonka/Hungarian-Slovakian experiment (and associated talkpage) for more. Thanks, Elonka 03:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Anže Kopitar

Even though Kopitar is Slovenian, the country of his birth is Yugoslavia. At the time of his birth, Slovenia did not exist and was, in fact, a constituent component of Yugoslavia. In the future, please do not change the country of birth of individuals in National Hockey League articles, unless the country of birth is factually incorrect. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 04:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Slovenia actually did exist but was a constituent component of Yugoslavia. The diction "(born 24 August 1987 in Jesenice, Slovenia, Yugoslavia)" does not deny this at all. In the future, please do not undo changes if they have been generally supported on the talk page as this is against WP:IDHT. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 08:10, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello Eleassar. I've used the Jaromir Jagr solution. GoodDay (talk) 00:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

PS- you should bring your concerns to Wikipedia: WikiProject Ice Hockey. -- GoodDay (talk) 18:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

The image

Imbris came one day and altered the image, changing the white color to yellow. For a month by now he failed to supply any sort of sources or anything at all to back up his claim, and his argument are that the existing sources which support it white are all false, and what is the most bizarre thing, including sources even he himself uses in other disputes.

Week ago, he has also abandoned any and all discussion, but still regularly reverting to his version and withholding his claim. To me this is a clear example of violation of Wikipedia:No original research.

Well, I have no problem with a RfC, but what would it look like? Imagine if I now appear and claim that the red color at the bottom of the Flag of Slovenia is in fact green, claim that all sources claiming otherwise are wrong and keep reverting to my version, also without any discussion. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:57, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Alphabets

Hi. I'm not sure about this, so I thought I should ask a Slovenec. Shouldn't Bohorič alphabet, Dajnko alphabet and Metelko alphabet be moved to Bohoričica, Dajnčica and Metelčica respectively? Regards, BalkanFever 10:58, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Slovenes

First of all, let me thank you for the Barnstar, I appreciate it. However, I don't think I'll be able to help on the expansion of the Slovenes article right now. In the past month, I had a lot of "empty spaces" in my schedule, which I could fill by editing on wp. In the next two months, however, I think I'll be mostly absent from wp., maybe making some small edits here and there. Take care and good work, Viator slovenicus (talk) 23:06, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:Koper

The page is a webpage of Italian irredentists (but rather moderate ones, I might add). Still, I think it doesn't qualify as a reliable source. Nevertheless, the data of the 1921 census seem to be correct (I am almost sure they are, the numbers are very much similar to those I remember from the official datas). The problem is that they relate to the old Austrian disticts, not to the single settlements. The figure of 51% Italians, 33% Slovenes, and 15% Croats is for a large area including the contemporary Slovene communes of Piran and Izola, and the Croatian district of Buzet. The other problem is of course that the Italian census of 1921 was a biased one and rejected by the Allied Commission in 1945 as unreliable. As of the 1936 census, I am more perplexed. It had to be a secret census for internal use. Anyway, I wouldn't use the data in the article without propper explanation.Viator slovenicus (talk) 12:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:Burger_OtokKriznaJama.jpg on Cave

Hi Eleassar,

Earlier this month, you added Image:Burger_OtokKriznaJama.jpg to the Cave article. I have a few problems with this and I want to discuss this with you.

Firstly, the image causes problems on the page. The major problem is that text flows under the image and is therefore unreadable. I have attempted to move the image elsewhere within the article but I have not been satisfied with the results. I think the elongated width is the major problem with trying to locate it within the article.

Secondly, although an interesting image, it is not excellent because of its low resolution. The other images on the Cave article are of excellent quality.

Finally, the other images within the article are related to the section in which they are contained. I can find nowhere to put the cave island image.

I am hesitant to remove the image from the article without discussing this with you. I am prompting that discussion now.

Thanks for your consideration, WTucker (talk) 03:09, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree the image is not of excellent quality but depicts a very interesting phenomenon so I thought it worth to be included in the article. Anyway, if you think it diminishes the quality of the article, feel free to remove it. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 11:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I have moved it within the article. There was a bunch of white space on the right side of the see also section and the image seems to fit well there. I am satisfied with it now. Thanks. WTucker (talk) 12:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Coat of arms of Socialist Republic of Slovenia

Hi. I honestly don't see such a big difference. As far as I can tell, only the colours are slightly different. I wouldn't be able to tell which one is more exact. I guess this is sth. that should have been discussed on the talk pages, with the user who unploaded a new version of the c.o.a. explaining what was the reason for the change. Viator slovenicus (talk) 14:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:Zemljevid Posočja.jpg

Image:Zemljevid Posočja.jpg hardly can be public domain. --AndrejJ (talk) 20:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I've tagged it with {{nsd}}. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 06:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Bohinj Lake/Lake Bohinj

Thanks for your note, Eleassar. But I still think that Lake Bohinj is the correct translation into English. Bohinj Lake just sounds very awkward.

Actually, I'm not sure I'm right about American English. They put "River" after the name (e.g., Mississippi River) but I think they put "Lake" before the name (e.g., Lake Ontario).

Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

In that case we should find out what English-language references call the lake, although I think that "Lake Bohinj" is the standard English name. Stephen Turner (Talk) 12:48, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The Slovenia Tourist Board call it Lake Bohinj — see http://www.slovenia.info/?_ctg_kraji=2507. Stephen Turner (Talk) 13:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

OCD

Hi, I dont really now how to use wiki, i noticed your comment on the Neurology page, i have recentley become interested in Neurology and the more pshyiatric side of it, i was just wondering is Over Compulsive Disorder part of neurology? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.14.88.147 (talk) 15:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

See Obsessive-compulsive disorder (another name for the same entity) or ask at WP:RD/S. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 16:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

References

Would you like to discuss Talk:Slovenes here please? Thanks --Makedonij (talk) 22:30, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Trdinov Vrh

Hi. I honestly don't know much about the subject. From what I've heard it seems pretty much accurate. Kučan's quote is there obviously for the reason to "support" Croatian claims on the issue:maybe it should be put into context. But don't to venture in the editing, I just don't know enough, sorry. Viator slovenicus (talk) 20:45, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Flags

For your change see for example Finnish language, Karelian language. --xJaM (talk) 00:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

For you changes and deletions of flagicons ([1], [2]) please see and think over also these articles (European stadions with largest capacity): Olimpico, Luzhniki, San Paolo, Olympic Stadium (Munich), Celtic Park, Lia Manoliu, St James' Park, City of Manchester Stadium, Villa Park, Stadio Friuli, Elland Road, Stadio San Filippo, and others. I am giving you here a notice and consider this. For deletion of links to main time events please see also many other similar articles (for instance Ernst-Happel-Stadion). --xJaM (talk) 12:49, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

What about some counterexamples like Camp Nou, Wembley Stadium, Olimpiysky National Sports Complex, San Siro, Croke Park, Twickenham Stadium, Atatürk Olympic Stadium etc. etc. In any case, I don't consider "other stuff exist" a valid argument. Neither the flags nor the links do not deepen the reader's understanding of the topic discussed in the article or improve readability. For the linking of years, I think you should have a look at the contributions of User:Lightbot to get a wider perspective on this issues. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 13:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Article City of Manchester Stadium is for example a featured article. I can't uderstand why you often have to meddle about these kind of trifles. What do you consider a good argument, then? The idea of not deepening of reader's understanding is obviously yours - I have no problems with this (and I believe also many others who had put flagicons and links to main events in such articles). I think that counterexamples are older articles than that I gave you for 'good' examples, and still do not have flagicons. Article Camp Nou has icons () for rating. --xJaM (talk) 13:59, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Leave articles alone until some other decision is made, if you're not satisfied with current versions. Do I have to revert all what I have contributed and what does not suit you? --xJaM (talk) 14:10, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

What I can't understand is why do you meddle about this kind of trifles so much that you go so suddenly to the Slovene Wikipedia to make all the articles about stadiums "in your own image" without informing the community there that you were going to make mass changes to their articles. Can't you understand that your changes go against WP:MoS? You have no consensus for them. There's a reason why the MoS was written - to improve readability and style issues. I know some people don't care about consensus and still add flagicons and link individual years where according to the guidelines this is not appropriate. But that doesn't make them right. If you don't agree with our current guidelines make your point not by edit warring and trying to impose what you deem correct no matter what it costs but at their corresponding talk pages. The current trend is to reduce the usage of flagicons (see WP:FLAG) and to delink individual years (see WP:MOSNUM and WP:CONTEXT) so I don't agree either that the counterexamples are just "older articles not improved yet" or that City of Manchester Stadium got promoted to a featured article because it had a flagicon. Btw, that's the revision that was promoted to FA in September 2006 and that's the revision that appeared on the Main Page in April 2007. Do you see any flagicon there? And the idea of not deepening the reader's understanding is not mine but is written at WP:CONTEXT.

Another thing, the argument that I respect is community consensus as written in policies and guidelines and as expressed at talk pages. If you can demonstrate other contributors explicitely support your point of view. Also, it's not about what suits me but what is written in our style guidelines. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 14:31, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I have made changes in Slovene Wikipedia not to be againts any Manuals of style. As I've said, I have seen usage of flagicons at both English and Slovene wikipedias, but not consistently, and then I've tried to improve articles and consistency. But you're persuading me that I'am doing wrong. There is no consensus about this nor in English nor in Slovene Wikipedia. Yes, the sintax of infobox of mentioned featured article is also older. There is no difference whether the flagicon was in the article at the time of promotion or not. This bothers just you, as I see. I do also respect consensuses and please show me explicitely where your assertions are written. Only then I shall respect contributions like these, and until then I'll consider them as close to vandalism. I have told you this already several times. Do not insult me with terms like "in your own image", since I am doing my best. If you're not pleased with contributions of others, then write wikipedia on your own, bloody hell :-) Please show some respect and help others if they are wrong. Okay? --xJaM (talk) 14:57, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

For instance, I have never touched Slovene article Stadio Olimpico, and is not "my image". I just want to care about consistency. --xJaM (talk) 15:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, must I cite all the articles that you've changed? And if there's no difference then why did you mention that the one featured article about a stadium had a flagicon?! As for the guidelines:

1. For the flagicons see Wikipedia:FLAG#Help the reader rather than decorate: "Flag and other icons are commonly misused as decoration. Adding a country's flag next to its name does not provide additional encyclopedic information, and is often simply distracting (example). Wikipedia generally strongly eschews the use of images for decorative purposes, preferring those that provide additional essential information or needed illustration."
2. For the years see Wikipedia:CONTEXT#What generally should not be linked (number 2): "In general, do not create links to the following. Plain English words, including common units of measurement. Low added-value items are linked without reason—such as, 1995, 1980s, and 20th century." and Wikipedia:YEAR#Date autoformatting: "Date elements that do not contain both a day number and a month should not generally be linked; for example, solitary months, solitary days of the week, solitary years, decades, centuries, and month and year combinations. Such links should not be used unless following the link would genuinely help the reader understand the topic more fully."

What more do you need? I have explained my removal of the links and icons in the edit summary by referencing MoS. You were not able to cite a policy or a guideline proving your point and still that didn't prevent you from putting them back in the article for no good reason except for referencing style errors in other articles. Then please, who's the one that should go write his own project?! I suggest you consider this. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 15:23, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Map of Slovenia

Thanks, I was at the point of fixing the description, and got an edit conflict ;) Miguel.mateo (talk) 09:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for catching the reference problems...

...in the last section of general relativity. I've been working on this article for quite a while, and I thought I checked all the references thoroughly at one point. Seems that I didn't do that, after all, though – I'm going through all of them now to make sure. Thanks for catching this; I'm on the verge of putting the article up for FAC, and it would have looked pretty bad to have these broken references. Markus Poessel (talk) 18:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Bold vs disruptive

I'm saying this here, rather than at Talk:Slovene language because it's about you and not the topic. Per your postscript in this post, I'd like to respond as the person who did the reverting.

Bold moves aren't wrong per se and the nice thing about Wikipedia is that if someone makes bold moves that people end up disagreeing with, the edits can be reverted. However, in this instance there was a clear controversy over the removal as:

• You removed flags at Slovene language on June 7.
• XJamRastafire reverted this change on June 12
• You soon after started a discussion
• XJamRastafire then explicitely disagreed with your opinion.
• Your response was to revert the reversion (in defiance of your stated desire to "prevent an edit war") and then, removed flags from 25 different language pages in the scope of an hour.

So it is false that "no one replied" until after these edits. XJamRastafire is, indeed, a person who replied thus establishing that there was, at the very least, no consensus in removing the flag icons. In addition, justifying poor behavior by a positive outcome goes against Wikipedia policy, namely Don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point.

To put it another way, if XJamRastafire hadn't said or done anything, then the edits to the 25 articles would have simply shown poor judgment (which we don't necessarily have a policy against). Because XJamRastafire said something, it was disruptive to edit those articles. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 19:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

The first thing was xJaM adding flagicons[3] and readding them[4] without any consent or rationale after being reverted.[5] If anything, it was me who established with reverting him that there was no consensus in adding the flag icons in the first place.

Another thing: after I started a discussion, xJam didn't voice his opinion but simply reverted me.[6] --Eleassar ^{my talk} 19:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if he simply reverted you or expressed his opinion. It was pretty obvious that there was no consensus regarding their removal in the 25 other articles, which is what I'm talking about. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 20:45, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

"It doesn't matter if he simply reverted you or expressed his opinion." In fact, it does matter very much. If A (me) tries to talk about the dispute and B (xJaM) simply reverts him instead, that's uncivil edit warring of B. And then B goes and accuses me of being almost always nonconstructive. I admit my mistake but you seem to imply that I'm the only troublemaker here. I have to protest against that as being a prime example of poor judgement. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 06:44, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I stand by my claim. It doesn't matter whether he reverted you or he posted a disagreement in the talk page: it was still obvious that there was no consensus. This is only in regards to your implication that you were simply being bold. It was clear there was no consensus. You edited anyway. You were being reckless.

Granted, xJaM may not have gone about with his disagreement in the most harmonious of ways (and in that sense, I agree that discussing is better than reverting) but there's a vast difference in unconstructiveness between a couple of reverts and two dozen disruptive edits. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 08:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Look, I've admitted my mistake even if my intention was good and based on WP:FLAGS (or at least my interpretation of it). What more do you want from me? --Eleassar ^{my talk} 09:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikiversity School of Medicine

Would you like to participate in the development of the Wikiversity School of Medicine? Please join our discussion regarding the content of our first curriculum. As a medical student, your input would be very much appreciated. 90.207.182.246 (talk) 22:38, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Just a note to remind you

I will be handling the 3rd Opinion request. Please remember, and your in serious trouble of violating it, the Three Revert Policy. Further edits to the article should not be made until a consensus can be reached. Thanks, Dusti^SPEAK!! 15:45, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm aware of the rule and as far as I can see no one has yet performed more than three reverts. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 15:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Remember, you do not actually have to make the full three edits to be considered in an Edit War. Dusti^SPEAK!! 22:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Survey request

Hi,
I need your help. I am working on a research project at Boston College, studying creation of medical information on Wikipedia. You are being contacted, because you have been identified as an important contributor to one or more articles.

Would you will be willing to answer a few questions about your experience? We've done considerable background research, but we would also like to gather the insight of the actual editors. Details about the project can be found at the user page of the project leader, geraldckane. Survey questions can be found at geraldckane/medsurvey. Your privacy and confidentiality will be strictly protected!

The questions should only take a few minutes. I hope you will be willing to complete the survey, as we do value your insight. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Professor Kane if you have any questions.

Thank You, BCeagle0312 (talk) 15:00, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

MCOTW

JFW | T@lk 22:12, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

the pad lock

please unlock the pad lock ΨṭΏ฿Жњ comand q —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.238.69.95 (talk) 09:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

A new task force under wikiproject Europe

Hello,

I've noticed that you are active in the area of Europe. I just wanted to let you know that a European Space Agency task force has been set up to improve the presently very poor condition of articles about ESA and related topics. If you are interested, please join the task force here. We sure could use your help. Thanks.U5K0 (talk) 19:20, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Eleassar,

I reverted back the link to Proteopedia on the HIV-1 protease page, and outlined the reasons I believe it does not breach WP ELNO 1 and 12 on the discussion page of HIV-1 protease. Please consider keeping this link. Please visit the linked-to page in Proteopedia, (you need Java installed) you will see that it offers a lot of interesting information on the 3D structure in an engaging and interactive format - make sure to click on the green links.

Best regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.77.4.129 (talk) 16:54, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:MOSNUM?

Torej si Walter Wolf (industrialist) ne zasluži niti povezave na rojstni datum? --AndrejJ (talk) 20:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Tako je: "Dates are not linked unless there is a particular reason to do so."[7] Če si recimo pogledaš Wikipedia:MOSNUM#Dates of birth and death, boš videl, da datumi niso povezani. Enako tudi v čedalje več izbranih člankih: Barack Obama, Roman Vishniac, Syed Ahmed Khan. Pa ta sprememba. Ali pa recimo prispevki sodelavcev: [8], [9]. Itd. Glej tudi Wikipedia:CONTEXT#Dates. Eden od razlogov je med drugim, da želimo opustiti avtoformatiranje. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 07:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Datum rojstva je po moje gotovo particular reason, sicer pa se postavi vprašanje, kateri datum, letnico sploh povezovati? Če se v članku o določenem dnevu v letu zapiše dogodek ali rojstvo, bi moralo biti tudi obratno. --AndrejJ (talk) 13:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

No, po moje pa ni. Ne vem, zakaj bi bil. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 14:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Torej: kateri datum, letnico potem sploh povezovati? --AndrejJ (talk) 16:35, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Pmm bolj ali manj samo v člankih/razdelkih o samih datumih. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 16:55, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Tukaj se strinjam z Eleassarjem, povezava je odveč. Nasploh se čisto preveč stvari povezuje in zato izgledajo članki po nepotrebnem pisani. In ko smo že pri Wolfu, bi se kdo spravil napisat kaj o aktualni zadevi, ki zadnje čase polni prve strani časopisov? --Tone 20:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

V splošnem se strinjam da so letnice (sploh v sl:) in datumi prevečkrat povezani, za datume rojstva/smrti in dogodke pa gotovo ne.

Tudi sicer v Wikipedia:MOSNUM ne razberem, kje je eksplicitno zavrnjeno povezovanje rojstnih datumov. Pa tudi Meta: Linking a date to date content is not only useful for accessing that content, but also for the backlink: to find pages linking to a particular year, month or day. This gives us a list of events (and subjects related to events) that happened in (or are at least related to) that time period. This also allows easy checking of completeness and consistency of the source and target page.--AndrejJ (talk) 06:14, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Sem pogledal nekaj izbranih člankov, kjer naj bi bilo to urejeno, pa vidim, da polovica datume poveže, polovica pa ne (tako na prste). Uporaba in neuporaba se mi zdita obe smiselni, vsaka s svoje strani. Po moje je najboljše, če se obrneta po nasvet na ekipo, ki stoji za MOS. LP --Tone 07:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Ja, poglejta si, kako se krešejo mnenja na pogovorni strani WP:MOSNUM. Če moj odgovor ne zadostuje, se tam lahko tudi postavi vprašanje o povezovanju rojstnih idr. datumov. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 08:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Ja, pogedal, mnenja se krešejo (predvsem o zapisu samih datumov), ampak nikjer nisem opazil definitivne zavrnitve povezovanja rojstnih datumov (ki bi bila celo zapisana v obliki smernic).

Našel pa zanimivo mnenje, ki ga podpisujem: That a relatively small group of editors thinks they can make a major change to one of the more visible aspects of Wikipedia in a two week period is truly appalling. This should have been discussed in far more detail, in a much more public way, before the policy page was changed.--AndrejJ (talk) 09:22, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Komentar: "Necrothesp, I appreciate that you were unaware of any discussion, but discussion on depreciating autoformatting of dates, already longstanding, drew in a large number of editors on this page through July/early August as it moved towards consensus. It was then posted to the Village pump and to WP:Centralized discussions through August.[4] Additionally, several Wikiprojects were individually made aware of it, as were a large number of individual article writers. Thus, autoformatting was depreciated. 86.44.27.255 (talk) 19:37, 5 September 2008 (UTC)"

Prav, kaj zdaj? --Eleassar ^{my talk} 09:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Zanima ma, ali ima smisel vrniti povezavo k rojstnemu datumu ali to vodi k večnemu vračanju člankov.--AndrejJ (talk) 09:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Slednje. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 09:42, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Okej ... --AndrejJ (talk) 09:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Sej se lahko obrneš še na koga drugega (glej WP:DISPUTE#Turn to others for help). --Eleassar ^{my talk} 09:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Curiosity...

I have the oddest twitches throughout my body. I can see hemuscle in thebottom of my eye move not twitch, and I feel a somewhat heavy magnetic in the bottom of my feet when i tap my feet. I could be holding an object in my hand or driving my car and my hand will move itself to the point where I would steer in a different direction. I am wondering why this is. I have alot of pain in my haed sharp pains. I can also feel when my muscle are weak through out my arms.

I also get a feeling in my top thighs thatmy muscles are being tugged on and strtched.

Im hoping maybe you can give me some knowledge of why this happens..

Thank-You Kim —Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.9.31 (talk) 22:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I urge you to visit your doctor. Wikipedians do not give medical advice. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 08:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

your change at MoS

Hi, thanks for the change conerning Julian/autoformatting. Would you mind having a look and removing or modifying the point at User:Tony1/Monthly updates of styleguide and policy changes/August 2008 concerning this? I think we might cheat and pretend that it all happened in August. The update is due to be published in the Signpost next week. Tony (talk) 08:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Birth Dates

I won't change it again because I don't really think its that big of a deal. But I think WP:CONTEXT applies to birth dates. As the dates show what was going on when the subject was born/died which helps to create a deeper understanding of the subject through understanding the time period they were alive in. I actually believe birth/death dates are the actual reason context exists, so people understand those are the dates that are relevant to link while the date of a event in their life does not need to be linked. -Djsasso (talk) 17:39, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:Only make links that are relevant to the context#Birth dates?. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 11:23, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

All that shows is that one editor feels that way. As for the template you removed, that was actually a new way of doing things for featured articles (and I assume you want this article to become one eventually) according to a dispatch I just read. The idea behind it is that it hides some additional meta data in the article for web browsers etc. However, I do see you like to edit war so I might as well leave that article alone because you seem to WP:OWN it. -Djsasso (talk) 16:14, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually three editors (me, Jeandré and Greg L at [10]). I don't know what dispatch are you talking about but please take into consideration that one such template is already used in the article. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 16:22, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I only followed the link you provided so I only saw Jeandre. I will bow to being out numbered. :) I hadn't thought about the infobox. I suppose we might have that template already worked into it. -Djsasso (talk) 16:25, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Slovenian presidential election, 2007

Oj, mi lahko malo pomagaš z viri pri članku o volitvah? V naslednjih dneh ne bom imel veliko časa, nominacija je pa odprta. Hvala, LP --Tone 20:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Bom pogledal, samo žal trenutno tudi sam nimam veliko časa. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 08:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Slovenian elections

Please stop removing the flag. We've had this discussion so many times that I can't remember, and the result is always that the flag stays, It is not purely decorative - one reason being that some articles have more than one election template on so the flags help distinguish the templates. I really can't be bothered to go through it again, so please just restore it and save us all a grinding and irksome debate. Cheers, пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:03, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I've had the MOS:ICON on my watchlist for a long time and have read enough of debates to conclude this is not an appropriate use of a flag. Please, provide an example of an article with more than one election template. By the way, I like long and irksome debates although a third opinion would also help a lot. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 19:08, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Cypriot Annan Plan referendum, 2004 or Singaporean general election, 1963 are two I can think of off the top of my head. You might want to ask User:Nightstallion for a third opinion - he's probably the second most involved people with these templates. And working in the Israel-related arena (and also recently acquired a football-related stalker), I've really had enough of arguments. пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I've posted a request for comments at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (icons). --Eleassar ^{my talk} 10:40, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Luna (Novi Sad band)

I have corrected the article and believe there are no more weasel words. Please check and remove the weasel tab.

Miloš Pavlović 22:44, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Republic of Slovenia (1990-1991)

Hi:

actually, the article caught me by surprise, too. We in Slovenia are not used of thinking in these categories. Nevertheless, I think the article actually goes absolutely to the point. Although we seldom realize this, the Socialist Republic of Slovenia ceased to exist with the Constitutional Amendments of March 1990, while the independent Republic of Slovenia was established only with the Declaration of Independence of June 25, 1991. In the meantime, a different entity, the Republic of Slovenia as part of Yugoslavia, existed, which was something completely different from the previous Socialist Slovenia (either the People's Republic or the Socialist Republic) but not yet the current Republic of Slovenia. I never thought of that, but now I realize this was the case, although we often tend to forget that. I believe the article should stay, since it is legally, politically and logically well founded. Viator slovenicus (talk) 15:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Slovenia

Why removing numismatics? do you really think that people in the wolrd knows that Slovenia uses the euro and mints its own coins? Isn't this relevant enough? It is such a small section and the pointers to the main other two articles are relevant in my opinion. Numismatics is not part of economy. If you want to reduce the section, pelase go ahead; but a section itself with such a small and important information should stay IMHO. Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 12:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

File:Riva prema jugu.jpg

You proposed it for deletion with very shaky argumentation. The image has also a credit, which hampers its free use - what does this mean? What precisely? Can you explain it? What credit? How it hampers its free use? It could easily be replaced with a better one - so you will replace it? How come you suddenly worry about the articles and my userpage where you've never contributed before? Isn't it just your childish sabotage of my user page User:Zenanarh, after my contribution in discussion about Sveta Gera, where I was your opponent? Zenanarh (talk) 13:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

My motives are irrelevant, what matters is copyright and image quality. See WP:IUP and WP:NONFREE and post your questions elsewhere. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 14:47, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Please see WT:Only_make_links_that_are_relevant_to_the_context#Break 1 for the current discussion. I'm letting everyone know who has a comment on the relevant talk pages. Obviously, we're not going to push anything through without a full discussion of every issue, including whether to merge at all. My sense is that there's wide agreement on all the big points, but the devil is in the details. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 18:48, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Provincia Sclaborum mentioned in 595 AD

Hi Eleassar: I want to know why you insist that my references are not valid ones. Because you revert my editions but you don´t explain why am I supposedly wrong. Maybe I am wrong but I need an explanation please. Everybody erase my editions but in the discussion page nobody has a single evidence that I am wrong, and I cant find anything in the Web with the explanation of your point of view. Thanks And Greetings from Argentina--Marcos G. Tusar (talk) 17:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Black-Pantherism

While working on the Black Panther you did some editing, which I had to overrule in the edit conflict. Awfully sorry. I did my best to state only indisputable facts but I think the result now shows even more clearly that a new sectarian "Pantherism" has arisen; this is why I put the deleted Šavli reference back in. "Unreliable source" is of course an extremely mild expression. You must be a great humanitarian!Marschner (talk) 17:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

About your warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Carantania. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

But YOU are the one who is reverting me, and you don´t participate in the talk page as I do, I explain my editions and you simply erase, even information which I cite with a proper reference, and you erase pictures I put fron WikiCommons. I sent a mail to you, too. You didn´t answer--Marcos G. Tusar (talk) 21:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

There's a difference between you and me. You have been reverted by many other editors and your reference has been designated as unreliable at WP:FRINGE. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 21:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Who judges that a reference is reliable or not? Because I don´t know how this works. And not "many" reverted me, just Jalen and you. I´d like to know who decides if a reference is reliable or not, and if no neutral editor is deciding this I´d like a mediation, because I notice that in the discussion pages I am almost the only one who writes there--Marcos G. Tusar (talk) 21:48, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Informal mediation

I have adopted Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-10-01 Sveta Gera. There are some questions to help get things underway. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Vassyana (talk) 15:05, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Flags of templates

Hi! You've removed the EU flag from CoE and EU candidates' templates. Please look at these templates too for same visual order. (OIC, CIS, AU, AL, ECO) You have to add the EU's flag or remove those flags from the given templates. Thanks! --Turkish Flame ^☎ 14:05, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Slovenian presidential election, 2007

Hi. After some break on this article I have decided to give it one more try. I have fixed the refs and quotes you mentioned. Regarding the OTRS for the photo, any updates? There is another possible option in the Commons cat, are there any issues on that one? I'd be happy if you could have another look at the article before I nominate it again. Greetings. --Tone 17:18, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

That's cool. I'm glad you've decided to renominate it. I've notified the uploader regarding the OTRS, whereas for the quotes probably it would make sense to separate them from references (see Wikipedia:FOOTNOTE#Separating reference lists and explanatory notes). Otherwise it seems ok now. Cheers, --Eleassar ^{my talk} 10:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Great. I'll wait a couple of days to see what happens with the OTRS, then I'll renominate it. Regarding the references, it probably would make sense but on the other hand, there are very few cases that would need such move so I will not do it for now because I don't want to make it more complicated (notes with refrences that are references itself etc.) Cheers. --Tone 17:43, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Renominated. I'll be happy if you could have a look at the nomination from time to time. --Tone 13:20, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Can you fix the issues with the images in the article? You have more experiences there... I find it really weird that there are problems with the Slovenian COA. Thanks. --Tone 21:56, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what's missing there. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 09:47, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Me neither. But there are some complaints still. Maybe you should talk to the user, you know Commons policies better. --Tone 10:58, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Slovenia

You're welcome. I was going to notify all the members first but I could see it was clearly viable to break free from "Europe" given that it has four times as many members than many of the other wikiprojects we have. I've created a new banner, really we need to rename the category from "Slovenia task force articles" to "WikiProject Slovenia articles" and if possible replace the "Europe" banners with the Slovenian one. However if you are happy to leave them as they are but only tag new articles with the new tag from now on I have no objections. I've also given the page a bit of a redesign to reflect the flag and give it an individualistic look. Ahh I can see you didn't like the coloured background but the rest is OK. Best Count Blofeld 11:03, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Why did you remove the Flag of Russia!!!!!

Why did you Eleassar remove the from the Foreign relations of Russia template. Please put it right back now. It is a good design yet you decieded to have it removed. All Foreign relations templates have the flags of their nations please put it right back now!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kinpo (talk • contribs)

Such icons are unnecessary per MOS:ICONS. It is used purely decoratively and does not help navigation. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 18:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Seeking help

Hello Eleassar,

I have Slovenian parents and am trying to write their story. They immigrated to Australia in 1968. They haven't been back and I haven't had the chance to venture over yet either, so piecing things together has been quite interesting! I've gained lots of info from Wiki and got excited when I stumbled across the chance to contact Wiki editors such as yourself. I'm wondering if you would be available for me to send the occasional question to? Feel free to say no. There's no-one I know there and my cousins have all grown up in Australia. My grandparents have all passed away and my parents haven't stayed in contact with anyone there (even though I have thousands of aunts and uncles no doubt!). My mum grew up in Ljubljana (although my dad insits it's spelt Ljublana)and my dad grew up in Kamenscak. Hopefully through the research I might find lost family members (in addition to doing in my head)!

Regards, Ivy Kostanjevec (talk) 00:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Template:Sl icon

Hi, just a question about the Template:Sl icon, directed at you since I noticed you edited this template in the past ... I have been using this template to add to references to sites that are in Slovene and until recently it always displayed correctly as (Slovene), but recenly it has started appearing as (Slovenian) on my computer at least. I have checked the template page and it has the correct term in the template itself, but when I used it on pages such as Kolovec or Radomlje it displays as Slovenian, whereas in older edits where I have used it such as Polhov Gradec it still displays correctly. I could not find a way to fix this, so perhaps you might have a better idea? Thanks!Kaktus999 (talk) 11:53, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Translation

Hi! I wonder if you can tell me if this links are valid references to the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bezgovo_cvrtje claimed to be a Slovenian national dish made of elderberries, fried in dough, (elderberries Sambucus nigra), recipes, to this article or possibly this ones:

Med.Over.Net

http://www.slovenia.info/pictures/business_event/atachments_1/2006/Strategija_gastronomije-31.8.2006_4277.pdf

http://www.mladina.si/tednik/200823/cejkotova_domacija__goce ref with picture

http://kitchenstories.blog.siol.net/2008/06/07/deliverance/ ref with picture

Bezgovec Po receptu, ki ga najdemo v knjigi Jedi na Goriškem, se iz zrelih bezgovih jagod in sladkorja pripravi tudi bezgovec za zimo. Zrelemu bezgu se obere jagode, ki se jih strese v lončeno ali leseno posodo in pretlači. Bezgovino shranimo v klet in počakamo, da nakisne. Potem jo pretlačimo skozi platneno ruto in pustimo, da se sok očisti. Precedimo ga skozi prtič in izmerimo, dodamo sladkor, kilogram na liter soka, in mešanico segrevamo. Ko zavre, kuhamo bezgovec še dvajset minut in sproti odstranjujemo pene. Nato bezgovec odstavimo in ga vročega nalijemo v ogrete steklenice, ki jih dobro zamašimo in hranimo za zimo. ALENKA TRATNIK

Ocvrto bezgovo cvetje in domači bezgov sirup Foto: Alenka Tratnik

I am only guessing though.

Warrington (talk) 10:12, 19 January 2009 (UTC).

Bezgovo cvrtje?

Hi, do you have any reliable references or information on this Slovenian dish, Bezgovo cvrtje, you can add at the Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 February Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 February 6# Bezgovo cvrtje

Warrington (talk) 19:20, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Karel Dežman

You indicated in your edit of 13:38, 9 February 2009 to the Goldhorn article that Karl Deschmann (Karel Dežman) was a notable individual. He sounds notable. I understand that he was a museum director, historian, geologist, speleologist, botanist and archaeologist as well as a collector of folklore. Despite the two entries by Nada Praprotnik on Google Books, I found nothing about him in WorldCat, just a listing of two books he authored. Praprotnik's Karel Dežman in njegovo botanično delovanje (Karel Dežman, his botanical work) and Karel Dežman is not forgotten both sounded interesting, but there was no publication data, and I as said, no mention of them in WorldCat, nor in the Harvard, Princeton, Yale, University of Michigan, Stanford or University of California library catalogs. I did find a very enjoyable article about him, Južnič, Stanislav (2006) "Karst Research in the 19th Century - Karel Dežman's (1821-1889) Work" Acta Carsologica 35(1): pp. 139–148. Do you know people in Ljubljana who could provide the substantive research to support a Wikipedia article about him? --Bejnar (talk) 05:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I think User:Viator slovenicus would be able to provide the needed material as he has written numerous articles on notable Slovenian individuals. You may also try at COBISS/OPAC (the Slovenian library platform). There is an article about him in the Slovene Wikipedia: sl:Dragotin Dežman. It says Dežman was also a mayor of Ljubljana in 1871. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 11:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Cardiology task force

Cardiology task force is looking for editors to help build and maintain comprehensive, informative, balanced articles related to Cardiology on Wikipedia. Start by adding your name to the list of participants at Cardiology task force Participants. ECG Unit (Welcome!)

-- ~~~~

Maen. K. A. (talk) 23:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Intertranswiki/Slovenian

You are invited to join WikiProject Intertranswiki and join Wikipedia:WikiProject Intertranswiki/Slovenian. It is intended to be a joint group between Intertranswiki and WikiProject Slovenia of which you are already a part of The aim is to draw up a directory of missing articles from Slovenian wikipedia, extract what is notable or suitable, and build a team of translators to work at bridging the gaps in knowledge between other wikipedias. Even if you can't contribute much in starting content, your help is much needed to help draw up detailed lists of missing articles for Slovenia in the new project space and help other editors work through lists to build content more fully. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 10:59, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Dermatology

I am working on a new project to improve the coverage of dermatologic content on wikipedia, and wanted to know if you might consider helping me? I will sent you an e-mail with some additional details. Regardless, thank you for your work on wikipedia! ---kilbad (talk) 12:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Bohinj

I disagree with the use of the bare term "Bohinj" in English. "Bohinj" is not transparent to readers without referring to another article (it is not clear whether it refers to a lake, forest, city, or other feature). It is customary to add generic elements to opaque toponyms (Trenta -> the Trenta Valley, Haloze -> the Haloze Hills, Triglav -> Mount Triglav, Banjšice -> the Banjšice Plateau, Boka -> Boka Cave, etc.). The fact that Slovenian lacks the generic element "dolina" (or hribovje, gora, etc.) in the name is irrelevant. Other options include "the Bohinj region", "the Bohinj area", "the Bohinj Basin" (= kotlina). Best regards, Doremo (talk) 17:29, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Geopedia.si

Hi. You'd be best asking an AWBer like Rjwilsmi or Rich Farmbrough if they can add that wording to the existing geopedia links, it is definately not a job to be done manually!! Just ask either of them to see this and ask if they can use AWB to go through Category:Cities, towns and villages in Slovenia and alter all the links! Himalayan 15:46, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Slovene Home Guard

Hey! That article is a mess. I tried to edit it around a year ago, but apparently there are some users who think they own it, and are very sensitive to the issue. I dediced to leave it alone until I get "armed" with all necessary & credible references, and slowly start to edit it. As for the new articles list: thanks for letting me know, I'll list my new edits there. Best, Viator slovenicus (talk) 16:11, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

That I can do. Best, Viator slovenicus (talk) 10:39, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Istrian Spring Trophy

Hi Eleassar. I'm sorry, I simply transcribed the most common version of the palmares found on the internet (the one without "č" and "ž" letters), so I didn't pay attention to the spelling. I will be more careful in the future. Thanks for the correction. LegendK (talk) 12:08, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Rene Krhin

I see that you deleted the above and protected the page - does not the fact that he has made his full international debut versus England make him pass wp:athlete? Paste _{Let’s have a chat.} 14:36, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, after having reviewed the deletion policy I've restored the article. The references should be added though. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 15:00, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Gorica, Puconci

Nočem igrati "Calimera" vendar se mi zdi takšno početje z člankom Gorica, Puconci "pravo" dokazovanje moči tistih, ki to lahko delajo. Ne vem kam to vodi: Na eni strani iz članka skoraj vse izbriše, potem pa napiše, da je škrbina. To me spominja, na moje začetke na slovenski wikipediji, kjer bi skoraj zaradi "teroriziranja" določene osebe skoraj vse vrgel v koruzo. Pozneje pa ste ga tudi ostali spregledali.Tu je naredil povezavo na statistične podatke Slovenije. Le kdo jih bo bral. Povezava je tudi na puconsko občino, kjer je gradivo v slovenščini (Kdo bo razumel). Če je vzrok nepravilna angleščina bi naj le to popravil, sicer pa mi je ta prevod z mojega slovenskega članka delal človek, ki jezik odlično obvlada. Ta človek pač misli drugače. LP --Feri (talk) 20:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I have commented in Slovene on Feri's page since I noticed that he just undid my edits. This was not, as I am sure you are aware, even remotely intended to terrorise ... quite the opposite, I was trying to be considerate and left a comment on the talk page of the article and the user's talk page. Yes, some things could have stayed in the article, but there were no sources whatsoever mentioned and though I had originally intended to just correct the English, ended up reducing the article considerably. The gallery is totally inapproprate as is the german name in the lead, the sections on the location of the village and social activities are unclear and the section on village history contradicts itself when it mentions that written sources from 1365 exist and proceeds to say that the earliest written sources are from 1500. I will not accept semi ironic and dismissive comments like the above about my own work in Wikipedia. I had thought long before deciding to edit the article on how to deal with it and the obviously enthusiastic user that created it in an appropriate way without being discouraging and that is why I commented on both the talk pages. Best regards Kaktus999 (talk) 20:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Re:Free Territory of Trieste

I suppose it just seemed more appropriate. I came along to change "Croatian" to "Serbo-Croatian" (considering the period) and I rearranged the languages as well. Its a completely arbitrary issue... why did you rearrange them that way? :) --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 09:38, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

(Right, you didn't change it sry) Like I said, the issue is arbitrary. We can list arguments towards Italian, Slovene, and SC being "first", and none of them would matter really since the languages had equal status in the Free Territory. "Establishment" is no argument, and neither is "who discussed the place more". However, I can see your point, and I won't object to a revert (of the language order). --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 09:55, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

The motto of Novo mesto gymnasium

Hello,

I have been trying to change the motto of our school from Scientia Vinces to A Successful school of happy and creative people (yes, creative, I got it wrong the first few times). Unfortunately you have changed it back to scientia vinces every time.

I teach English at the gymnasium, so I know what the motto is. For a long time we had no motto. When we made the wikipedia entry some teachers made up scientia vinces because we thought it sounds good. But a year later the majority of my colleagues decided to go for the Successful school (...) motto.

I don't like it, but it IS the motto. You can check it out [on our website][11]. It is in Slovenie, I don't know if you will understand it. It is the text in blue just under the headline, right of the headmistress' photo.

And another thing: the English name of our school is Novo mesto Gymnasium, not Grammar School. Could you correct that please, because I don't know how to edit the title of a Wikipedia article.

Thank you and all the best, Janez Gorenc

The motto of Novo mesto gymnasium

Hello,

I have been trying to change the motto of our school from Scientia Vinces to A Successful school of happy and creative people (yes, creative, I got it wrong the first few times). Unfortunately you have changed it back to scientia vinces every time.

I teach English at the gymnasium, so I know what the motto is. For a long time we had no motto. When we made the wikipedia entry some teachers made up scientia vinces because we thought it sounds good. But a year later the majority of my colleagues decided to go for the Successful school (...) motto.

I don't like it, but it IS the motto. You can check it out [on our website][12]. It is in Slovenie, I don't know if you will understand it. It is the text in blue just under the headline, right of the headmistress' photo.

And another thing: the English name of our school is Novo mesto Gymnasium, not Grammar School. Could you correct that please, because I don't know how to edit the title of a Wikipedia article.

Thank you and all the best, Janez Gorenc —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorencjanez (talk • contribs) 09:20, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello Eleasar,

thank you for the tip about changing the title. As far as the document that explicitly states that the motto of our school is as stated, I'll see what I can do. But as far as I know there is no such document. We took a vote and the decision was made. But perhaps there are minutae of this event. If I find anything, I'll post it here.

Best wishes, Janez —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorencjanez (talk • contribs) 11:02, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Link

Ti veš od tu dodati link na Bodonci.

Bokrači. Tu je povezava. LP --Feri (talk) 14:05, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Pub song

Well Hervardi association mention the fact, as well as some literary work scientists like in the book by Rosandić, Dragutin. Književnost 1 : udžbenik za I. razred gimnazije, II., ponovljeno izdanje, Profil, Zagreb, kolovoza 1997., pages 47. i 48. -- Bugoslav (talk) 20:30, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

The term in Slovene language is napitnica. -- Bugoslav (talk) 20:34, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Hej Slovani

Can you share your thoughts on the issues at the Talk:Hey, Slavs. Thanks. -- Imbris (talk) 17:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Please use WP:DR. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 06:46, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Tourism in Slovenia - External Links

Hi, I'm curious as to why you deleted the external link to Slovenia In Your Pocket that I added to the Tourism in Slovenia page, but continue to allow the Lonely Planet link on the same? The former is locally-produced and constantly updated site with a minimum of advertisements and free downloadable PDF guides, while the latter is a rarely updated international corporate site blanketed in ads - albeit one with wider name-recognition. As a point of disclosure, I am the editor of Slovenia In Your Pocket. Yuribarron (talk) 17:33, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, feel free to remove all the links that do not meet WP:EL. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 07:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I still am unclear why you feel that the content of Slovenia In Your Pocket violates the external linking policy, but Lonely Planet does not. Please feel free to leave all the links the do meet WP:EL. Yuribarron (talk) 09:39, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Both links violate the external linking policy, as they don't deal with the topic 'Tourism in Slovenia' (WP:ELNO, No. 13). I've removed both of them. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 11:29, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Carinthia (province)

I have not been involved in such discussions. Please don't send me such messages. Thanks. Str1977 ^(talk) 18:55, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

diff --Eleassar ^{my talk} 19:14, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Stop it! I posted on the talk page but I was not involved in discussions as you described them on my talk page. I have no intention of commenting or even thinking about it! Str1977 ^(talk) 19:16, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

May I ask why are you replying with exclamation marks? --Eleassar ^{my talk} 07:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

couple things...

Could you add the rating for this new page- HK Celje? Also, if you look here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Maribor_flag.png , there appears to be a category called "Flags of Slovenia", but it does not exist. Could you make it? (LAz17 (talk) 17:36, 15 October 2009 (UTC)).

Friedrich Welwitsch

Hallo, Eleassar,
Would it be asking too much to have a word with your compatriot Hervard123? We try to be civil here, don't we? Somehow I have the feeling that "je idiot" and "what the f..." do not 100% comply with WP etiquette, nor is an edit war sth we really long for, is it?
Best regards and thank you in advance --Marschner (talk) 18:05, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Mátyás Godina

Hočejo brisati članek o Matjažu Godini. Jaz sem že stokrat razpravljal, ker tukaj imam pribl. 20 člankov o slovenskih pisateljih, ampak nanovo se bo že kaj našlo. Doncsecz^znánje 14:47, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Friedrich Welwitsch

You are having a lot of error messages connected with references in this article, Friedrich Welwitsch. I hope you will fix them. Debresser (talk) 12:25, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm actively working on the article. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:30, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Good luck. I just wanted to make sure you knew about these errors. Debresser (talk) 12:53, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Slovenian vs Slovene - revisited

Hi Eleassar,

Although the current project page for 'Wikipedia:Naming Conventions (Slovenian vs Slovene)' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_%28Slovenian_vs_Slovene%29) supports Slovenian over Slovene (e.g. articles with Slovene should redirect to Slovenian), I see that it was decided to move articles from Slovenian to Slovene. Could we please reopen this debate?

In my opinion, the support for the move from Slovenian to Slovene was very weak and counter to actual usage. For instance, while it may be ideal to have one term (Slovene) used to denote ethnicity, with another (Slovenian) to describe nationality, this is not (and I would submit that it never will be) common practice.

Another example of questionable support is the fact that most dictionaries today still list Slovene first, with Slovenian only listed as an alternative term to Slovene. In fact, some smaller or older dictionaries may not even list Slovenian at all. (Actually, some really old or small dictionaries don't even reference Slovenia or Slovene). Well, prior to 1991 most people had never heard of Slovenia or citizens of Slovenia! Yet, in most Slovenian communities in English speaking countries (U.S., Canada, and Australia) commonly referred to themselves and their mother-tongue as Slovenian. Today is a different story as it is not uncommon for the country to be in the news (e.g. Slovenia held the E.U. presidency earlier this year, Slovenian Kopitar leads the NHL in points, etc). Dictionaries are updated every year to include new words (already being used) or change the definition of old ones.

The strongest support for Slovenian over Slovene is that Slovenian is clearly dominant in everyday use and becoming more so, day by day. When Slovenia's own government and major institutions are dropping Slovene, when sports and news channels and papers are saying or writing Slovenian on a daily basis, when operating systems and software offer Slovenian as a language pack, when the dominant search engine Google offers English to Slovenian translation, when a google search for “slovenian” pulls over 50.5 million compared to just 2.5 million for “slovene”... it isn't a stretch to think that slovene will have the word archaic or obsolete attached to it in a decade or so. ;)

* http://translate.google.com/?hl=en#
* http://www.slovenia.si/slovenia_facts/ (Slovenian government's own site calls the Slovenian language Slovenian, and people Slovenian)
* http://www.sazu.si/en/ (Slovenian Academy of Science <- official name)
* http://www.sta.si/en/ (Slovenian Press Agency <- official name)
* http://www.fifa.com
  - http://www.fifa.com/search/index.htmx?q=%22slovenians%22 ("Slovenians" - 15 articles)
  - http://www.fifa.com/search/index.htmx?q=%22slovenes%22 ("Slovenes" - just 1 article from way back in 1996)
  - http://www.fifa.com/search/index.htmx?q=%22slovenian%22 ("Slovenian" - 83 articles)
  - http://www.fifa.com/search/index.htmx?q=%22slovene%22 ("Slovene" - 3 articles)
* http://www.nhl.com (where Kopitar plays)
  - http://www.nhl.com/ice/search.htm?q=%22slovenian%22&tab=news ("Slovenian - 13 articles)
  - http://www.nhl.com/ice/search.htm?q=%22slovene%22&tab=news ("Slovene" - 2 articles)
* http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc195120.aspx  <- Slovenian keyboard layout
* http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html <- Mozilla's Firefox browser is available in "Slovenian"
* http://europa.eu/abc/european_countries/languages/slovenian/index_en.htm?_sl <- the official website of the European Union

Spozzy (talk) 20:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Government of the Republic of Slovenia

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Government of the Republic of Slovenia. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Politics of Slovenia. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Politics of Slovenia - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, 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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Glenfarclas (talk) 10:43, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

• Update: Sorry to bother you with that! --Glenfarclas (talk) 10:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Palško lake <-> Lake Palčje

I used the translation from slovenia.info. Where did you find the "Lake Palčje" version? — Yerpo ^Eh? 12:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I found something similar here. In this case I agree that Lake Palčje sounds better by analogy to Lake Cerknica. — Yerpo ^Eh? 13:25, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

{{med-stub}} icon edit

What was this is aid of, and why wasn't it accompanied by an edit summary? The old icon is significantly less clear on computer displays than the icon version. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Koroška statistical region

Hi Eleassar, any comment on Talk:Koroška statistical region? ... Regards Kaktus999 (talk) 06:44, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Prekmurje/Prekmurian

Hi Eleassar -- any comment on Talk:Prekmurian_dialect#Prekmurje.2C_not_.22Prekmurian.22 would be welcome. I noticed that you commented on the article back in September. Best wishes, Doremo (talk) 05:13, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Eleassar, prosim uslišaj me! Jaz poznam Greenberga in Jesenšeka. Onadva tudi sprejeta ime prekmurian, ker to je dobra slovnična oblika. Kmalu želim prošnjo vložiti, da registrirajo prekmurščino in dobi ISO. V prošnji bom označil ime prekmurian, kot naziv. Doncsecz^talk 17:26, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Triglav

Hey! Since you are one of the most active slovene editors i would like to ask you what to do on the Triglav page. The topic is "Triglav in Slovene contemporary art", where it says that something was performed atop Mount Triglav by the artists Janez Janša, Janez Janša and Janez Janša... The whole section was added by one person and im guessing it was meant as a joke. Any suggestions? Luka666 (talk) 00:49, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

dragonja

please, don't play dumb. take a look at any map. look at the red line between istra and slovenia. that's the border. then look at the blue line which is almost same as the red line. that's the river, it's called dragonja. ergo, dragonja is the border river between croatia and slovenia. so, where's the problem? --93.141.103.163 (talk) 11:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that you have not provided any source explicitely confirming your statement: "Dragonja is partly in Slovenia and partly in Croatia". This is a contentious statement. According to the Slovenian Ministry of Foreign Affairs[13], Dragonja flows only in Slovenia: "Dokument hrvaškega ministrstva za zaščito okolja, ureditev prostora in gradbeništvo iz leta 1991 jasno določa, da slovensko Primorje obsega celotno reko Dragonjo in njen izliv v morje. Meja med Slovenijo in Hrvaško tako ni potekala po reki Dragonji, kar pomeni, da je opisano območje slovensko." Dragonja is also not listed as a border river by the reference site Burger.si [14] --Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

actually, i said that it is the border between croatia and slovenia. istarska enciklopedija -> "Donji tok Dragonje nakon II. svj. rata postaje granica između Hrvatske (bujski kotar) i Slovenije (koparski kotar), a 1991. i osnova državne granične crte." so, how about this for the start of the article.: "Dragonja is the river in Slovenia. It's also the border between Slovenia and Croatia". --93.141.103.163 (talk) 12:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't consider Istarska enciklopedija to have the final word. The statement that Dragonja flows in Slovenia is undisputed. The statement that it is a border river is disputed by Slovenian sources. Therefore, to remain neutral we can only say: "Dragonja is a river in Slovenia. The jurisdiction over its lower part is disputed between Slovenia and Croatia". --Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:59, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

i'm sure that there are more reliable sources, it was just the first thing that i remembered, but ok, i agree with this sentence above. --93.141.103.163 (talk) 13:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

wikEd translation

Hi TadejM/Archive 3, I have updated all wikEd translations to the latest version 0.9.91. Please feel free to check your translation for changes and new additions. You can find general informations on the wikEd translation project page. Cacycle (talk) 22:52, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Cookie

Thank you ! That is my first award :-) -- Prunk (talk) 13:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Zuzemberk

I did. And Kaktus at least replied and said he wanted to finish starting all of the villages first. Don't worry they can gradually be improved, I would just appreciate more inter project communication that's all, evne if you haven't the time to work on the artickes. Regards, Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 13:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Miranda Ruminar Reference

Do you speak slovanian? If so, could you translate [15]? I think I get the gist of it through Google's translate, but not well enough to use it. --Nuujinn (talk) 17:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks! --Nuujinn (talk) 17:53, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Editor vandalism

Hello I am an editor here on wikipedia. There is this other editor cosmic latte who has been vandalising the Michael jackson Page with the last 24 hours he has made over 50 edits to major parts of the article without even discussing with other editors who have been warning him. he has in the passed been guilty of vandalism. Please speak with him. I also believe that he uses other names such as TimothyHorrigan and Rodhullandemu. please speak with this individual he has put block on his vandalism so you cant undo what he has done. This is making wikipedia look really bad as Michael Jackson is one of the most searched article.