User talk:Kubura

Archive 1 - Edits on "SC language"
Archive 2 - Srijem issues
Archive 3 - W.Herzog, Stjepan and Montenegro issues
Archive 4 - Cro-Ser questions, very interesting discussion, many topic being opened/touched/resolved
Archive 5 - Some Doclea and Dalmatia issues
Archive 6 - Farsi, Diego, NHL, Stjepan
Archive 7 - Republic of Dubrovnik, Haydn, various
Archive 8 - Mostly vandalism dealing, Zadar, Mikalja
Archive 9 - Saborsko, RfARB, prop, ...

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dalmatia

This arbitration case has closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Giovanni Giove and DIREKTOR are each subject to an editing restriction for one year. Each is limited to one revert per page per week (excepting obvious vandalism), and is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. This notice is given by a Clerk on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. Newyorkbrad 01:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marco Polo (and Ghepeu)

Hi Kubura, I'd just like to turn your attention to the Marco Polo article's Birthplace and ethnicity controversy subsection, there are basically two problems here:

Our old pal Ghepeu, insists on saying "most sources support the Venetian theory". And that "Polo was a self-declaring venetian citizen". What this means, really, is "we think most scientists believe this theory" and "Polo says he was born in venice, so the above thingy is stupid". He also insists on uncompromisingly calling Korčula "Curzola", without even the contemporary local word for the island in brackets ().

I seriously suspect a lot of stuff was removed from the Korčula theory arguments subsection. In any case it needs expansion, could you add a sentence or two?

And finally, get this sentence currently in the article:

"..."Pol" is known to be a type of sea bird in the Dalmatian Chakavian dialect of Serbocroatian which was strongly..."

Thnx, DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 08:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, will you lend a hand with the matter? DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 09:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, of course. The "Korčula theory" is a valid historical theory wich has not been disproven in any way (see [1], for example). I'm trying to ensure our "friends" don't make it sound like we're saying Polo was an alien from outer space.
Get this sentence, for example:

"In their new enthusiasm, local Croats from Korčula (in the comical sense) like to say that they have two sculls of Marco Polo in Korčula: one, from the times when he was a child, and one from the times when he was older."

DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 09:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just have a look at the subsection ([2]), its turned into a regular POV-fest. You can see a short list of the problematic statements of fact on the talkpage of the article. The scientifically accepted concept of Marko Polo (possibly) being Korčulan is riddiculed and discredited with weasel words.
Should you decide to give this a article the benefit of your attention, please read the discussion concerning the problematic statements (in two short sections, here [3], and here [4]). DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration enforcement

LoL!! Ja se zajebajen cili dan da reportam giovea, a ti si ga već reporta prije dva dana! U svakom slučaju pokaza sam arbitratorima šta je bilo i Newyorkbrad je reka da će ih požurit tamo u Administrators oticeboard/Arbitration enforcement da šta prije riješe tog lika. DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 01:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your repeated insults

If you do not cease to insult me you will be properly reported. --Giovanni Giove 11:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go on, Giove.
When you go to admins' noticeboard, don't forget to send them my greetings, and don't forget to explain them this Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement#User:Giovanni_Giove.
Have you forgot what was told on the RFARB? Kubura 14:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GiovanniBlock

Kubura, Giove was blocked for six days I think. Why are you saying the admins took no action, I'm confused... DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, but the question is did he violate the ARBCOM restrictions after the six-day block. Da se razumijemo, I believe the guy deserves to be blocked for a much longer period, but this is what the admins will ask. DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 19:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split article

Could you lend a hand with the Split article? Basically I wonder if you know how to remove the annoying "[[Image:|200px|none|]]" text from the new "city infobox" I implemented? DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Problem sa slijom

Yeah, I figured as much. I will try to find a map simmilar to the Zagreb article map. Could you lend a hand? DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 20:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answer

Probably the fact that I live there. I don't contribute to Wikipedia that much anymore so I might as well remove it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keaze (talk • contribs) 15:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ustaše

Maybe I am POV about this but category of this article is Political parties in Croatia ??? They are in category with modern parties of Croatia !! Problem is that I do not know how to delete this category.... Rjecina 18:00, 21 November 2007

I've never heard of them as a political party. They were the political movement. Kubura (talk) 00:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Široka Kula massacre

I don't get it...why is there even a revert war going on for this and the Voćin massacre page? You should contact the admins, you definitely have sources to back up most of your claims, this shouldn't even be happening. Is there something going on that I am missing (besides the fact that the user automatically reverts anything you write)? --Jesuislafete (talk) 07:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll help you monitor that page...his constant reverting cannot go unnoticed for long. If we work together, we can keep the page in its proper form before he reverts again. He cannot revert forever. --Jesuislafete (talk) 23:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know...

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussioni_utente:Giovanni_Giove/personale

AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 23:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha! In an earlier 'contribution' (Wikipedia talk:Suspected sock puppets/Giovanni Giove (4th)) he was on about me being your sockpuppet. If you and I are really the same person, can you lend me 100 euros till next week? Promise to pay you back, honest... :-) AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 15:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should check this out too. Apparently we are "Barbarians":
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussioni_utente:Giovanni_Giove#Thatcher131
AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 16:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Theories on the origin of Croats

I saw your contributions here earlier. This article is totally destroyed. It should be restored at last version before removing Iranian theory. Gothic and Avar theory were empty, I can edit it. Iranian theory was too long it should be shortened but not removed. What do you think? Zenanarh (talk) 15:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A translation

I will try and translate that article in a week or so. Right now I am in the middle of university finals so I apologize if I can not do it too quickly. Nokhodi (talk) 07:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Croatia will enter the European Union, you like it or not

Kubura (or one of your sockpuppets), you are a Croatian nationalist who believes that even in Wikipedia can be done the crazy Balkan wars! Only ridiculous Croats can go down to "Stamp" level and see Italian irredentism menaces on simple stamps!! Your lies are astonishing: you started the attack on Giove in the Italian wiki, successively you wrote to many admins against him until you got him irritated with your group and finally you got him "banned". Now is it my turn? What else in the future....? Tito times are gone, open your fanatical eyes: Croatia is going to be part of the European Union, even if you don't like it! And within the European Union all the opinions (and even our Italian opinions) will be democratically taken in consideration (in one way or another) by the "European Croats" in the future. Be sure of this, even if you don't like it. From today I am no more going to deal with you and your group of fanatics. But I will monitor what you and your group do with the Dalmatian related articles and notify (with precise references about your changes) the authorities & the serious admins of Wikipedia.--Cherso (talk) 00:06, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]