Jump to content

User talk:Nikola Smolenski

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tar-Elenion (talk | contribs) at 13:01, 9 March 2007 (→‎Personal insult). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Previous talk archived at /Archive 1, /Archive 2, /Archive 3. Nikola 20:42, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo

e znam da te ne znam. al vidim da si ostavljao neke komentare ranije o kosovu. ajde molim te pomagaj, ja umirem svako vece objasnjavajuci siptarima istoriju. Gianni_ita Gianni ita 15:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Админ.

Поштовање, Никола,

Да ли си ти администратор на енглеској Википедији? Питам јер би добро било имати једног представника српске Википедије као администратора на енглеској Википедији. Ако ниси, хајде да се договоримо око кандидатуре, да смислимо стратегију, добијемо подршку неколико екипа и да те изгласамо за администратора. Имаш доста измена и могао би да прођеш. Поздрав,

--Boris Malagurski ₪ 23:53, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

House of Boshko

I'm afraid that I don't have the time to handle it, so could you?

P. S. This page needs an archive. --HolyRomanEmperor 14:57, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please,

I am very busy. When you have time, see through the history of the History of Kosovo article. There has been a massive removal and altering of the info to the incorrect version...

Also, the third kill, third assimilate and third banish is gone from the NDH and the Ustashas again... --HolyRomanEmperor 17:54, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sad to inform you that your changes on Rudjer Boskovic have been completly reverted to User:Elephantus' version. --HolyRomanEmperor 18:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article Improvement Belgrade

You may wish to vote for Belgrade at the Article Improvement Drive page, here. --estavisti 21:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Hello! I invite you to join the WikiProject Serbia. All the best, --serbiana - talk 02:43, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

?

Do we know each other??? I don't know you.. Your name for some reason sounds familiar, as if you were on sezamnet or sezampro, but I am not sure. Either way, I don't know you and vice versa, but I did hear of your strong oppositions against my addition to Wiki list.. How come? What ever it is that you have against me, or whatever you have (I don't really know what is going on in your head or if you have some issues), but I'd rather hear it from you, since it is coming from you, than from other people.. Oherwise, it's ridicilous to say stuff you said apropos my addition to the list, when you and I have never even spoken to each other?!

Svetlana Miljkovic 08:41, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please vote

Since there is a dispute, please vote on it in the AID talkpage. --Steven 22:30, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Choosing Belgrade

 Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive.
This week Belgrade was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help…

Posted by (^'-')^ Covington 07:23, 1 May 2006 (UTC) on behalf of the the AID Maintenance Team[reply]

Okruzi

Pre svega ja sam se trudio da sredim članke o svim okruzima Srbije (posao još nisam završio) uključujući i ove kosovske i zaista nije lepo da revertuješ SVE moje izmene na tim člancima (a stvarno mrzim kad neko tako uništava moj rad). Ako se ne slažeš sa nekim delom tih članaka, onda promeni te delove, ali nemoj da revertuješ sve. Drugo, mislim da okruzi Srbije na Kosovu više ne postoje ni u zakonskom ni u faktičkom smislu. Pošto je Srbija prihvatila upravu UN na Kosovu, prihvatila je i civilnu UN administraciju, prema tome jedino okruzi koje je uspostavila UN administracija se mogu smatrati zakonskim. Nije mi jasno po kom zakonu ovi okruzi još postoje, ako je Srbija prihvatila civilnu upravu UN na Kosovu?. Prema tome, ako u nekom zakonu i piše da ovi okruzi postoje, to se onda kosi sa drugim zakonom kojim je Srbija prihvatila civilnu upravu UN. Sledeće, ako administracija ovih okruga i dalje funkcioniše izvan Kosova, to ne znači da oni postoje. Mislim da članke ne treba menjati u tom smislu, ali da treba u njih dodati da prema jednom gledištu ti okruzi još uvek zakonski postoje (Naravno ovde se radi o dva suprotna gledišta države Srbije, jer prema drugom gledištu države Srbije prema kom je Srbija prihvatila administraciju UN, ti okruzi ne bi trebali da postoje). I nema tu nikakve albanske propagande, već je to ono što je Milošević potpisao 1999. PANONIAN (talk) 13:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

>I was never on sezamnet or sezampro, but I was on SETNet, and wrote >for Svet kompjutera, maybe yousaw my name there. Anyway, I saw >something you wrote on sr wiki but it turned out that you have just >translated it, that's all.

Regardless of whether I wrote it or translated, because your opinion is different than mine, you are going to stipulate, demand and condition of others my addition to the list? The last time I checked sr. Wikpedia wasn't called Nikola Smolenki's Wikipedia... Don't think I am talking out of nowhere, but rather I know about emails you sent... And if you have some political or personal agendas to push, I suggest that you don't do them on wikipedia..

Svetlana Miljkovic 15:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Дозвола

Видео сам,да си поставио хронологију Београда овде(на енглеску) која је са званичног сајта града,па ме занима да ли имамо дозволу за коришћење њихових материјала или не?

Ако имамо ћорнућу им историју,пошто је наша(на српској) никаква.

Пишем ти овде јер ћеш је овде пре видети,него на нашој(српској),стога и српски језик и ћирилица.Одговори тамо или овде свеједно. CrniBombarder!!! (†) 00:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Odgovor

Zašto bih se čudno ponašao u vezi pitanja Kosova? Ja samo poštujem neke principe i to je sve. Razlog zbog kojeg sam se raspravljao sa Bošnjacima oko Republike Srpske i razlog zbog kojeg editujem članke o Kosovu tako kako editujem je apsolutno isti - smatram da ti članci ne treba da budu uvredljivi za većinu stanovnika ovih teritorija. Ali pošto moji lični stavovi nisu bitni, da pređemo na konkretna pitanja: okruzi su pre svega političko-teritorijalne administrativne jedinice i ako kao takve ne postoje na terenu, onda ne postoje. Na primer, hoćeš li reći da je Tibet nezavisna država samo zato što postoji vlada Tibeta u izgnanstvu? Isti je slučaj i ovde. Što se tiče uprave UN na Kosovu, ona ima ovlašćenja da menja sve. Uprava UN pokriva celokupnu civilnu administraciju na teritoriji Kosova (a okruzi su svakako deo te civilne administracije). Prema tome, ako država Srbija i dalje de jure upravlja ovim okruzima, ona to čini ilegalno, suprotno sporazumu sa UN koji je prihvatila. Ti okruzi postoje na papiru samo zato što su nekom u Srbiji potrebni politički poeni za nove izbore. Znači, nije UNMIK iskoračio iz svojih ovlašćenja, već vlada Srbije, kojoj bi uzgred bilo bolje da se bavi ekonomskim pitanjima i otvaranjem novih radnih mesta nego da troši novce na mlaćenje prazne slame. I kao što sam rekao, ako ovi okruzi ne postoje na terenu, onda ne postoje. Oni postoje samo u fiktivnom smislu, u istom onom smislu u kojem je postojala i Rugovina Republika Kosovo između 1990 i 1999. I sigurno nisam jedina osoba koja smatra da ti okruzi ne postoje. Uostalom, namera mi je bila da tim člancima o bivšim okruzima Kosova poboljšam kvalitet i da ih sačuvam od daljeg vandalizovanja. Ti si naravno revertovao sve moje izmene zato što se ne slažeš sa jednim delom članka, a to baš nije lepo. Ako nemaš vremena da promeniš ono što smatraš netačnim a da sačuvaš moje ostale izmene, onda nemoj ni revertovati dok ne nađeš vremena. Ja uostalom nisam revertovao članke zbog spora oko pitanja da li ti okruzi postoje ili ne, već zbog spora oko generalnog izgleda članaka. Pošto se ne slažem sa tobom oko sadašnjeg statusa ovih okruga ja to neću menjati u člancima, ali neću ni revertovati ako to ti promeniš. Međutim, revertovaću ako ne prihvatiš sadašnji generalni izgled članaka (bez obzira na njihov sadržaj). Toliko. :) PANONIAN (talk) 21:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I said it is 'greatly to be believed the shots came from the Serbian side' because reports have shown that. I did not include the fact that serbian authorities blocked every effort for autopsies to be performed in order to resolve the issues as to who fired the shots (why did they blocked such a thing?). Even though EVERYONE knew who they were by their names, since the media picked up the story, in the morgue, no one even wanted to labele their bodies as such, but just wrote them under numbers (250 and 251), downplaying who they were when burial came about (religious customs were different for both, since she was muslim and he christian).

Difference between you and me (obviously, beside opinions) is that i have NEVER conditioned your addition to the list, as I don't have that right, and you don't either. There are tons of people who have different views on world than me, but I have NEVER, stipulated and conditioned their addition to any such list. Who the hell are you to do such a thing and think that you have that right??? Do you own Wikipedia?

Svetlana Miljkovic 01:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Condemnation of personal attacks

I have noticed a user box on your user page that condemned personal attacks. Without malice, I ask you to please notice that you said, "if you would have anything but hatred in your head, before accusing me..." To me, this sounds critical and inflammatory.


Image:Opensource.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Opensource.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

replaced with PNG version Commons:Image:Opensource.png —MeekMark 05:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Ustase1.png

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Ustase1.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Jkelly 00:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Long talk page

Greetings! Your talk page is getting a bit long in the tooth - please consider archiving your talk page (or ask me and I'll archive it for you). Cheers! BD2412 T 00:19, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polemical Userboxes

Some of your userboxes are divisive and possibly inflammatory. They have nothing to do with the spirit of wikipedia. Please remove them. TheCooler

Invitation to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy

Hi there! I've noticed that you've edited articles pertaining to the Eastern Orthodox Church. I wanted to extend an invitation to you to join the WikiProject dedicated to organizing and improving articles on the subject, which can be found at: WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. This WikiProject was begun because a need was perceived to raise the level of quality of articles on Wikipedia which deal with the Eastern Orthodox Church.

You can find information on the project page about the WikiProject, as well as how to join and how to indicate that you are a member of the project. Additionally, you may be interested in helping out with our collaboration of the month. I hope you'll consider joining and thank you for your contributions thus far! —A.S. Damick talk contribs 12:46, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GOOD DAY MY BROTHER

I AM A PROUD GREEK, JUST WISHING A SERB BROTHER A GOOD DAY. MAY OUR NATIONS LIVE FOR THE NEXT 10000000 YEARS!

University of Priština

Na Simple English Wikipediji nema članka University of Priština.Trebalo bi to iskoristiti da makar tamo napišemo clanak koji,verovatno,neće stalno da menjaju. Ja sam na English i Simple English napisao neke osnovne podatke o Fakultetu umetnosti u Prištini (na kome studiram,a trebalo bi uskoro i da počnem da radim kao saradnik u nastavi),a u članku o Kosovskoj Mitrovici pomenuo otkud naš univerzitet tamo. Andrija

Hey

Postovanje,

Nikola, borim se ja protiv anti-srpskog raspolozenja na svoj nacin, uglavnom pratim "zarista" konflikata na Wikipediji i pomazem ostalima kao sto su Boris, Svetislav,... Pre mislim da bi Boris vise bio za neki "organizovan otpor protiv anti-srpskog raspolozenja", ali za to mu sluzi WikiProjekat Srbija. Prati nase izmene i pomozi tamo gde treba, sloga nam je najjace oruzje. --KOCOBO 18:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sto se tice organizacije... Ne valja da svako vidi sta planiramo i koji su nam ciljevi. Bolje je da je to relativno "skriveno" u prilozima, a ne sve lepo napisano da moze bilo koji siptar da nas prijavi nekom anti-srpskom administratoru (a takvih ima mnogo), pa da nas sve blokiraju zbog sirenja "Srpske genocidno-milosevicevske propagande" (znas vec kako prica ide). Probaj nekako tvoj projekat da ubacis u WikiProjekat Srbija, tj. mozda nekako da se ujedine, a izgleda mnogo bezazlenije administratorima. --KOCOBO 19:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]



hvala na pozivu, prikljucujem se. --Manojlo 21:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

userbox RFC

Just wondering your thoughts of supports of your WikiProject to display the userbox found here? (see last one) // Laughing Man 00:10, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMA Request

Hello Nikola Smolenski. I am Wikiwoohoo and I am a member of the AMA. I am sorry to hear that you are having problems but would like to help resolve those quickly. What I would ask is that you provide me with the full description of the problem, but also name the users involved as well so that I can then contact them asking for their side. This can be through Wikipedia if you wish, either on this talkpage or my own, or by email if you would prefer, since that is private whereas pages on Wikipedia can be accessed by all. I await your response and hope to help you reach a satisfactory outcome with your problem. Wikiwoohoo 19:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see. If you could elaborate on the explanation of the differences between Montenegro and the Montenegrin nation it would be useful, so that I can have some further background of the matter. Thank you for your help. Wikiwoohoo 20:18, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply. Your response is very detailed and I thank you for taking the time to explain the background. The problem I see and I would welcome your correction is whether it can be completely proven as to how Milla Jovovich considers her ethnic background and nationality. Is there perhaps an official website that lists this? I will then contact the user you have mentioned to hear their side. Wikiwoohoo 15:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your further clarification. Unfortunately, due to an increase of pressure outside Wikipedia at my work, I will have to begin to scale back my activities here. However, I would still very much like to help you with your current problem. The reason I am mentioning this is because I will not be able to donate as much time here as I would like and so therefore if you would prefer, I could put you in touch with another advocate who could take over from here. This is however entirely up to you and I will respect your decision. Wikiwoohoo 14:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I've been assigned your case. Do you mind if you tell me which page in parcticular was deleted? Computerjoe's talk 09:03, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I have a few suggestions: the first is to use English on your talk page. This is just so other people can see what's going on and everything's more open. Also, the MfD does seem to have sketchy consensus. Personally, I'd take it to WP:DRV just to see what happens there. Frankly, if it fails on DRV I don't think there's much more that can be done. Computerjoe's talk 13:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps. Computerjoe's talk 13:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cite book

Hi Nikola. I've written something in reply to your post at Template_talk:Cite_book#Coauthors_without_authors. Cheers, --Ligulem 23:32, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject

Nikola, daj da spojimo projekte. Iako sam malo povređen što me nisi pozvao da se pridružim tvom projektu, voljan sam zajedno da radimo na tome, a zajedno smo jači. --Serb talk 21:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Projekt je izbrisan, nadam se da si ga prekopirao negde pre nego sto se ovo desilo. Prebaci sadrzaj na stranicu za razgovor mog Wikiprojecta, pa cu ga organizovati u sablone. --Serb talk 17:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ja STVARNO ne shvatam zasto me ignorises, ali dobro, neka bude tako... Neces moju pomoc, neces je ni dobiti. --Serb talk 03:39, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anti Croat project

I would like to know why some Serb(s) out there has found the need to make Serb Pov edits to all things to with Croatians and Croatia. Someone has deleted Croatian Famous people etc... I don't see Croats doing that to Serb related articles? Why does soemone keep doing that and by doing that add fuel to the fire?

As i see it, Serbs can be found editing most things Croat or Croatian, something like 85% of articles have had Serb Pov added in some shape or form. Croats have little interest in Serb related articles. Why is there such a difference in interest?


HAVE A GOOD DAY Jagoda 1 04:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support

You should support this. Cheers --TheFEARgod (listening) 12:02, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Keep me posted. --HolyRomanEmperor 14:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Косово и Метохија,лице Европе

Поздрав,случајно ми је под руке дош`о диск Косово и Метохија,лице Европе и спазим међу ауторима познато име(твоје).

Контам да би материјал одатле одавно био на Википедијама(ср,ен,фр,...) да сме да се користи,али рек`о шта ме кошта да то проверим.

Дакле,`е л` можемо да га само прекопирамо или га ипак морамо препричавати? CrniBombarder!!! (†) 22:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMA

Hey Nikola,

I haven't heard from you in a few days, so if you I don't here from you with 72 hours I shall close your AMA case (though I'm willing to act as your advocate in the future).

If you need anything, don't hesitate to contact me! Computerjoe's talk 20:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I must agree, consensus was reached. Nice dealing with you! Computerjoe's talk 19:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Norac

Hi

You might help in eliminating this ugly article

enhancement for poem/nowiki

I've posted an enhancement to the poem extension, which makes it work well with nowiki in 1.8, at m:talk:Poem Extension (patch is m:User:Sanbeg/poem-nw.patch). I think this would be useful to have in the SVN. Please let me know what you think. -Steve Sanbeg 21:18, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. I've filed it at bugzilla:7503, so hopefully that will make it through the process. -Steve Sanbeg 14:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dispersed ancestral clans

I noticed that you restored the section "dispersed ancestral clans" in article about "Serb clans" which I had previously removed because of unclearness of this group. Since it is not at all clear what kind of classification principles are used to include them in the list and what character these groups (plemena, bratstva, porodice?) have, could you provide a brief definition of this group? Especially what you mean by 'dispersed' and 'ancestral' (ancestral to whom?). Otherwise I think it would be fair to remove this section. Especially because originally the article was about Montenegro and connection of these groups to Montenegro is unclear.--Bezvardis 07:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV tag on Srebrenica massacre

Dear Nikola. As I explained to the anonymous editor on Talk:Srebrenica massacre, if you add the POV tag, it is expected that you make an effort to address the issues. If you only have a problem with the "criticism" section, then you should use {{POV-section}}. All the best, Jitse Niesen (talk) 00:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Greetings Nikola, what happened to the POV tag on the Srebrenica massacre article? Any plans to get more engaged in it? Know of anyone else who would be interested? Cheers Osli73 21:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mapa

Da, dobra je mapa boja na Kosovu. Znam da sam već negde video takvu mapu (u nekoj knjizi), samo ne mogu sad da se setim gde. Izgleda da su u zadnje vreme svi počeli da crtaju mape. :) PANONIAN (talk) 20:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tools

Hi, I think I fixed the ISBN-tool. The "Schienenwolf"-bug is due to the broken replication of the en database on the toolserver. I can't work around that; I'm waiting for query.php to support "images used in this page". As for the geohack thing - it has never come up. Maybe I'll ask wikitech-l if I should integrate it. Thanks for the feedback! --Magnus Manske

Format

"mada bi trebalo i ti da predjes na SVG"

Zašto? Što je svg bolji od png? PANONIAN (talk) 01:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nikola. I realy don't care about "coalition" or whatsoever but please be cautious, with your last revert you have also deleted my notes (Battle of Kosovo) about the strength of the armies... Lysandros 03:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, kapiram što je svg bolji, ali mape sam prvobitno pravio u ipg, pa je neki lik na sve mape stavio tag da ih treba prebaciti u png ili svg. I sad mi kažeš da sam napravio loš izbor formata? :) Ok, možda počnem da koristim svg ubuduće. :) PANONIAN (talk) 21:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Belgrade Coat of Arms small.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Belgrade Coat of Arms small.svg. However, the copyright tag you've used is deprecated or obsolete, and should not be used. This could be because the tag is inaccurate or misleading, or because it does not adequately specify the copyright status of the image. For a list of copyright tags that are in current use, see the "Public domain", "Free license", and "Fair use" sections of Wikipedia:Image copyright tags.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 13:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Belgrade Coat of Arms medium.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Belgrade Coat of Arms medium.svg. However, the copyright tag you've used is deprecated or obsolete, and should not be used. This could be because the tag is inaccurate or misleading, or because it does not adequately specify the copyright status of the image. For a list of copyright tags that are in current use, see the "Public domain", "Free license", and "Fair use" sections of Wikipedia:Image copyright tags.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grb

Ајде нек остане, али ово је такав провинцијализам. Без тога грб изгледа одлично, складо, а са тим изгледа crap. Totally crap. Шта мисле ти глупани у градској скупштини? Да нико неће знати како се зове град ако не напишу? They've shot themselves in the foot once again. // estavisti 15:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Па дођи не чет онда... --estavisti 15:12, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Колико ја видим ти не одговараш. Нема везе, послаћу ти мејл преко викија. --estavisti 15:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nikola, though we may not agree on all issues you also appear to think that the Srebrenica massacre areticle deserves to be improved (per your comment on my talk page). What would your focus be?KarlXII 09:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wikiproject

As a member of WikiProject Serbia, you should be aware that the project as well as Portal:Serbia is being considered for deletion. If you have the time, please comment on what you feel should be done with the project and the portal. Thank you. // Laughing Man 01:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Education in Serbia

Pogledaj ovo kad budes imao vremena:Talk:Education in Serbia.


Andrija

Gorski Vijenac

You were right to remove the POV tag. Looking at the history, I must have put it there just to placate the guy who was offended, so that he wouldn't remove that paragraph again. --Hadžija 00:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Template:Yugoslav wars

I've begun work on Template:Yugoslav wars. It's a work in progress, but feel free to add anything I've overlooked/haven't got round to yet.--Hadžija 18:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)--[reply]

Authorisation

I authorise my vote against opening of Montenegrin Wikipedia and for closure of Siberian Wikipedia. Nikola 14:25, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Ok, you are ignoring sources... I will be back in day or two with dozens of sources which says there was no local Muslims, but Bosnian government. You people need to start reading! Mythology is obsolete. --HarisM 23:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you ignoring that all the media, forgein politicians and other named that evil local muslims - Bosnian government. Maybe because that government wasn't made only of Muslims? Shake that paranoia! You are pathetic. --HarisM 12:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zdravo

Jesi li stvarno glasao za Srpsku radikalnu stranku? --PaxEquilibrium 13:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/A1_(Serbia)

Zdravo! Molim te pogledaj moj odgovor u diskusiji o brisanju ove stranice, i ako ga smatras dovoljno argumentovanim, izmeni svoj glas. Napomenuo bih da mi nije cilj da po svaku cenu izbrisem sadrzaj koji sadrzi korisne informacije o srpskim autoputevima, vec da uklonimo reference koje ce izazvati da ljudi koriste pogresne informacije sa ove enciklopedije, koja se sve vise smatra referentnom - bas kao sto je to bio slucaj sa izvorom koji si ti naveo u diskusiji. Takodje, s obzirom da me tema zanima, vrlo rado bih ucestvovao u onome sto je Duja nazvao spajanjem sadrzaja koji se moze sacuvati u novi clanak, sto sam ja predlozio i u nominaciji. Medjutim, cvrsto verujem da ove potpuno pogresne i ocigledno zbunjujuce oznake treba ukloniti. Hvala na paznji. Pozdrav, Meelosh 13:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

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) 13:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks there

Thanks for you initial support for the deletion of the external links (part of ). I cinsider myself a consenses editor and will work with you and others to improve this article, Buffadren 18:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still working on Data extension

I looked at your data extension and I was thinking of using it on my wiki. OTOH, as you note, much of the same functionality is available through the semantic wiki project. I'm trying to decide which one to use. Data extension has the advantage of being simpler and probably will work on older software (I have to run PHP4). Semantic clearly has a strong support base, however. So, are you planning on continuing to develop Data? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Israeld (talk • contribs) 17:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, I do intend to develop it further, but I can't give any timetable or anything similar. Nikola 07:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nikola Smolenski/Bernard Cloutier

I've deleted this page, as it contains private information. However, it has been recorded in the OTRS system. Bastiq▼e demandez 21:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

University of Pristina

Pogledaj ovu diskusiju [1] i ukljuci se ako mozes.

Andrija.b 19:25, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Рачак

Јас сум 100% сигурен оној користник Davu.leon је шиптар. Каков американец би сумњел што сторе во Клечка (кога 99% западњаци не го познаваат селото), а да верува со рака на бабин гроб дека све во Рачак се стори исто како западните педераси напишија. Сега почнав една голема расправа со него ама во пораката моја ми ја прати, „живеел таму„, во "Kosova". Просечниот енглез или американец нема појма дека тоа е номинативно Албанското име, нити се бригаат, никој би можел да направи таква грешка, иако цело време се занимава кај шиптарите. Берувај ми, пасправата е за џабе против него, албанец је. Evlekis 10:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Straw poll on Srebrenica massacre

As a result of persistent edit warring on Srebrenica massacre, I have proposed that a straw poll be taken regarding one of the issues involved—namely, how to title the section currently named "Alternative views". This will help us to determine whether there is a consensus on what to title this section, or at least a consensus on what not to call it. The straw poll can be found at Talk:Srebrenica_massacre#Straw poll on "Alternative views" section. I have posted this announcement to each of the 19 users who have made multiple edits to Srebrenica massacre this year. —Psychonaut 13:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fresh start for the Srebrenica massacre article

Hi! Given that the Srebrenica massacre article seems doomed to get stuck on endless discussion on details (such as the current unproductive discussion on the peripheral issue of what to call Mackenzie et al.) I've proposed a 'Fresh Start', setting out some basic principles which should help us to make some real progress with the article. Unfortunately, so far no one seems willing to support such an initiative. I would much appreciate if you took a look at it and gave some comments. RegardsOsli73 10:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images listed for deletion

Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion if you are interested in preserving them.

Thank you. —Remember the dot (t) 17:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning on Slavica Ecclestone

Warning
Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in Slavica Ecclestone. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute 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. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. -- tariqabjotu 16:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nikola

Nikola Smolenski, I don't understand how can you not understand the fallacies of your arguments?
Bosniak, stop trolling. Nikola 11:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Thank you Nikola for helping me in my cause against Tar-Elenion and his sockpuppets. Im not so experienced with Wikipedia with the rules and routines. What can i do against him, as he reverts my edits from several IP:s (all from Australia) which makes him not brake the 3RR rule? One of the IP:s he is using made an accusation on me on the Administrators Board, [2] , his knowledge of the rules clearly reveals that it is a user who is experienced with Wikipedia which clearly makes it a sockpuppet. Paulcicero 16:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

=Kosovo Battle

Hey druze, watch over kosovo battle http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Kosovo&diff=113470091&oldid=113469636 they keep on reverting outcome u must watch 24-7! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.107.220.152 (talk) 02:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Personal insult

Warning
Warning

Please remain civil, the behaviour you just exhibited on Talk:Roger Joseph Boscovich calling me a troll is unacceptable as this is personal insult and pure slander. If you continue with this behaviour I will be forced to report you. Tar-Elenion 13:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nikola_Smolenski&oldid=113821103"