User talk:Rave92

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Template:Montenegrin Wiki

'All conversations before the 4th of January are found in archive.'

Archives

/Archive 1 /Archive 2

Montenegrin language

Rave, Montenegrin is not ISO-recognized language, so Wikipedia agreed earlier in the consensus that until that occur, Serbian remain, as Montenegrin language is officially regarded as Serbian language version. Language is official in Montenegro, but until it is internationally recognized as new language (like Croatian did), it shouldn't be placed on wiki. That is the reason why Montenegrin language Wikipedia was denied! Please, don't place Montenegrin language tags in articles, as those edits will be reverted. If i can help you in any kind, or if i can answer some of your questions, ask me!! :) Also, if you want to change this, only possible way is to place long lasting request on the Montenegro talk page, and make another consensus. Što se mene tiče, ja bi najviše voleo da svako dobije svoje, tako da možeš od mene tražiti pomoć. Ja sam tu da ti pomognem. P.S. Pogledaj članak o Skadarskom jezeru, i ostavi komentar na stranici za razgovor. Predložio sam nešto...

Puno pozdrava, i Srećan Badnji Dan. :) --Tadija (talk) 12:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But I want to see where Wikipedia agreed as it can't be agreed by one person. Why we can't put it as Cyrillic only like some articles had? A da, Srecan Bozic, Nova Godina .... :D. Rave92^(talk) 22:35, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Rave, i didn't know you answered, next time leave me on talk page this note:

Hello, Rave92. You have new messages at Rave92's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

So i can respond on your talk page. It's a bit late now, i will find it for you, as i dont remember where i read that information, but don't worry, tomorrow, or day after that, i'll send you a link! We can even talk to some other admins, they will remember. Be good! --Tadija (talk) 23:46, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, because I suggest adding Cyrillic on pages about Montenegrin cities, and leave Montenegrin language on other Montenegrin related topic. We can't go against official language, and ISO code is just formality as language is learned and spoken in Montenegro. I mean, even the government is using it. Rave92^(talk) 18:03, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but if you just place Cyrillic, that will lead to Cyrillic alphabet, and there is bunch of Unicode ranges, so i really think that the best thing to do is to write on Talk:Montenegrin_language with that question.

Wikipedia Language subcommittee is your best address. They say that ISO 639-1 that Montenegrin don't have is one of the main reasons that Montenegrin Wiki has been rejected. ISO code is by far more then just formality.

I would propose to you to read those.

And here you will see a lot of much older and internationally more recognized languages that are not accepted on en wiki. Be good --Tadija (talk) 18:31, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, you didn't understand me. I am not talking about Montenegrin Wiki. I am talking about Montenegrin language on Wiki articles. Admins didn't have anything against Montenegrin language, just some don't know anything about Balkans and want to interfere into those things. 90% Montenegrin articles have Montenegrin language only and Admins don't have anything against it. That's why your edits were reverted. You got confused with Montenegrin Wiki and Montenegrin language. It's not the same thing. Cheers! Rave92^(talk) 18:37, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know, by that things i told you, there should be no Montenegrin language in Wikipedia. In any articles. That's what am i telling you. Montenegrin wiki was rejected because of Montenegro language. Those two are the same. As i told you, talk to other admins, they will advice you. --Tadija (talk) 22:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Separate wiki isn't the same as having Montenegrin language on articles, and requests for Montenegrin Wiki was 2 years ago or more, when it wasn't even an official language. Rave92^(talk) 11:11, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to tell you that if language was rejected on wiki request, it shouldn't be used in articles at all. It is connected. Try for new request. I will agree with new language only if Wikipedia request is fulfilled. That will help! Be good... --Tadija (talk) 18:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1RR

I saw your post on ANI and responded to it. I'm thinking that based on your recent behavior, the 1RR restriction that I imposed on you might not be necessary at this point. I'm hoping that I could remove it and your behavior wouldn't change. Do you think this would work? Toddst1 (talk) 06:45, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what do you think? To remove that I can revert more then once or...? Rave92^(talk) 11:14, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you would be able to revert more than once, but you really shouldn't - just like I'm not supposed to. Basically, what I'm seeing is constructive engagement on your part and willingness to seek dispute resolution instead of edit warring. You got to this point with the 1RR in place and you seem to be doing really well. My thoughts are if we removed the 1RR, I suspect you could continue operating like you do now and stay out of trouble.

If I removed the 1RR, you wouldn't have the cloud of a sanction over your head, but it's not a license to return to edit warring. You're dealing with some highly emotional topics but the maturity with which you seem to be dealing with them lead me to believe that the 1RR sanction isn't necessary (any longer). If I were in your shoes, I would accept the removal of the 1RR sanction, but I would still limit myself to 1RR - the difference is that you wouldn't be in fear of being blocked. It's an offer of trust. Toddst1 (talk) 16:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I accept it. Also, can you please help with dealing with language issue on noticeboard? Thanks once again! Cheers. Rave92^(talk) 18:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the 1RR on your account and recorded it in both your block log and in this section of ARBMAC. Please don't make this look like a foolish move on my part.

Unfortunately, I don't have a perspective on what should be done with the language issue. I don't have domain knowledge or even context. However, I suspect you'll have difficulty reaching consensus as this is a highly contested issue and I expect that will have to take it back to RFAR. I strongly support your efforts in resolving this in such a constructive manner, as I mentioned on ANI. Please be patient and work through the process. I'll be more than happy to help enforce whatever the consensus or ruling becomes. Best of luck and thanks for your cooperation. Toddst1 (talk) 18:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you. I hope if we reach the consensus, you will help us keeping it that way on Wikipedia, as some probably won't know about it and vandalize the articles once again. Best regards. Rave92^(talk) 23:26, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:MNE Wiki Project

I don't see the need to delete less active members, since everyone's help is appreciated, but you are welcome to update the project page, since it's really outdated. I'll help you with that, but don't have time to get to it right away, maybe in a few days or so. Sideshow Bob 11:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The same is for me. I am not sure what we could do to make it better? Maybe to add Task and those? Rave92^(talk) 12:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Milan Roćen

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Milan Roćen. Our verifiability policy requires that all content be cited to a reliable source. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:11, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Rave92^(talk) 11:11, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Email

I was going to send you one, but you have email disabled. If you want to have the email functionality without giving away your personal email, consider getting a gmail account. I have one for purely wikipedia purposes which allows me communicate with other users while retaining my privacy.--Terrillja _talk 18:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but I don't think I would check that E-mail so often :/. I can change it so you can send me E-mail? Rave92^(talk) 18:55, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More info is here, you can also just use your regular email, however people would then see your email when you reply or if you send them an email though the wikipedia interface (if they send you an email, your address is not known unless you reply). I have Apple Mail, so my email program can download from as many accounts as you have. If you choose not to, that's fine, it's just nice to have when discussing things which could further inflame tensions if discussed in the open.--Terrillja _talk 19:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I turned it on so please just send me message to see your E-mail and then I will answer you. Rave92^(talk) 19:07, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:MNEZGembassy.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:MNEZGembassy.jpg. 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 file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ww2censor (talk) 05:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Famous Montenegrins.png

Thanks for uploading File:Famous Montenegrins.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 09:26, 27 January 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eusebius (talk) 09:26, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is your opinion? Share with us!

We are having problems to reach a stable consensus about removal of visa-free sections from the Passport articles. Please share your opinion with us here: Talk:Passport and here: a request for mediation Thanks. --Ozguroot (talk) 15:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ellis Island passenger record

Hi. I think it should be PD-ineligible or something similar. I don't think it is copyrightable (this is only an opinion). Regards, --Eusebius (talk) 10:59, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PD-text might be more specific. --Eusebius (talk) 11:01, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Rave92. You have new messages at Toddst1's talk page.
Message added 21:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Toddst1 (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Famous Montenegrins.png

Thanks for uploading File:Famous Montenegrins.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 02:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Montenegrin Flags

I'm afraid I don't know. They were up,loaded to the Commons by User:Bugoslav, I just added them to the Wikipedia English section: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flags_of_Montenegro It may be possible they exist and are not used commonly, or maybe they don't exist officially at all. You would have to ask him on his Commons Page. Hope that helps Fry1989 (talk) 20:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gratitude

THANKYOU SO MUCH Mr. Rave92 for your Outstanding Translation effort!

I am overwhelmed with gratitude.

May God Bless you!

(In the future, if you wish to have your favourite article translated into the Chinese language, then I would certainly be glad to help you.)

Yours Sincerely, --Jose77 (talk) 01:21, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have helped translate the article about Montenegrin people into Minnan Wikipedia.

Could you help me fix the grammar and spelling of this article into proper Montenegrin?

The passages were originally based on the English version so if you want, you can also translate directly from the original English version. (this would help make the article sound as Montenegrin as possible)

Thanks in advance. --Jose77 (talk) 03:59, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome my friend, and thanks, if I would need some translation in Chinese, I would sure contact you.

Also thanks for your effort on translation articles about Montenegrins!

I will try to translate that into proper grammar ;-).

Best regards! Rave92^(talk) 14:04, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Constantine Bodin

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Constatine Bodin. 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 several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:43, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please stop edit warring and talk first, it doesn't matter which version is in the article for now. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:43, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was discussed 1000 times before (not on Constantine, but Montenegrin generally). No matter what, vandals still keep it reverting back. Rave92^(talk) 19:09, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Montenegro

I am aware that the Montenegro constitution recognizes the Montenegrin "language" and I am also aware that it did so before the language is even standardized. How does one recognize a language that is not even standardized? Although it has received a "new standard", it is still not internationally recognized, doesn't have an ISO code and is absolutely considered a variant of Serbian by every single serious international linguist - only the Montenegrin government sponsored linguists differ. On that note, this is not the Wikipedia of the Montenegrin government and it can not endorse the views of that government, while disregarding the views of those international factors that actually matter in the case of languages. What if Kosovars tomorrow declared that their language is Kosovian? It's a bit different than the language spoken in Albania, but it's still Albanian. Two or three different words don't make a new language and this is apparent to everyone in the world. Except nationalists who, of course, politicize language crazy agenda (as if Montenegrins can't preserve their culture if they speak Serbian --> do Amerians speak American? Austrians Austrian?). Until the language is internationally recognized, I request that you return the Serbian spelling of the towns in Montenegro, as Montenegrin is merely a dialect of Serbian and it is recognized as such in the world. --Cinéma C 18:12, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let me get some things straight. ISO doesn't mean international recognizing. ISO is bureaucracy thing, which will be granted soon. Also, your opinion doesn't share any embassy or organization accredited in Montenegro. You are saying that this is not Wikipedia of Montenegrin government? Articles which concern Montenegro should respect countries official language. You can't put "it doesn't have ISO" thing here. You can't really compare Kosovars to Montenegrins. Kosovars declare them selfs as Albanians and actually are mad when you refer to them as Kosovars. Also, you are saying you speak Serbo-Croatian? That language officially doesn't have ISO anymore ;-). Avoid "so called" and "made up language" in future discussion. Also I am not reverting to Serbian because in Montenegro we speak Montenegrin, and at least what we can do on Wikipedia is keep our own language on OUR articles. I don't add Montenegrin on Serbian articles, don't see why you should add Serbian on ours. Cheers. Rave92^(talk) 19:51, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Serbo-Croatian is also a made up language, the reason I have that box is merely practical (so I don't list all the next "languages" or whatever people want to call them). The fact of the matter is that when people understand each other and they can use the same words in all their "languages", they're all speaking the same language. Politics leads people to want to call it differently, not the differences in the languages themselves. Consider, for example, the Serbs living in Croatia. They speak exactly the same way the Croats do it that region, but they call their language Serbian, while Croats call it Croatian. So, who can tell me that they're speaking two different languages? You say in Montenegro you speak Montenegrin - how is that different from Serbian? You can force some changes into it, but it's still essentially the same. Take the Bunjevci ethnic group for example. They speak the ikavian dialect, and depending on whether they declare themselves closer to Croats or Serbs, they declare their language as Croatian or Serbian. Some even call it a Bunjevac language, when in fact, they're all speaking the same language, with minor differences (like they call a cookie in Britain - a biscuit.. or the way words are pronounced, written (favor, favour,..).. but it's still English). It's not YOUR article just because you're from Montenegro, and you should look at the bigger picture here, not just blindly follow what the government of Montenegro says. The government is frantically trying to distance Montenegro from Serbia in any way by promoting a new language, church, whatever. Anything so that the people don't think about the real issues, such as their living standard and how Milo is laundering money behind their back. But if you make up a new language, everything will be better, right? So long as you don't have to say that awful "Serbian" word and not speak that awful "Serbian" language you spoke before. --Cinéma C 23:36, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are missing the point. Serb from Croatia speak like Croats (Croatian), Serb from Bosnia speak like Bosniaks etc... but you don't see only Serbian on those articles, but the language which is official in those countries. None is forbidding you to add Serbian on Serbian articles, I don't see why you should do that on Montenegrin one, or you think Montenegrins have less rights than others. About to distance Montenegro from Serbia, I think that is normal when you now live in two separate states, and that's not government doing, it's natural. It's not inventing new language, but just giving it a appropriate name. Adding two letters, it just gives options to respect the rule "Write like you say". Also, I understand that you are Serbian and think we all speak Serbian, that we are all Serbs, but that is not like that in real life. Also talking about Milo laundering money is now politics, and talking about how it's political vandalism, and in the same paragraph mentioning political person like Prime Minister of the country, is just hypocritical. Cheers! Rave92^(talk) 20:57, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If what you're describing is natural, why aren't the Americans speaking American instead of English? Also, who said I was Serbian?! I most certainly am not. I see you didn't at all understand what I wanted to say, so I'm slowly giving up on trying to help you see a different point of view instead of stubbornly holding on to your own (which is the easy way out). Giving an existing language a different name is inventing a new language, I'm baffled as to how you don't see that. It's not about considering Montenegrins as Serbs (I couldn't care less if you call yourself a Serb or Montenegrin or Slovene, most of the people in the Balkans are so mixed up that it's impossible to say who's what), it's about how absurd and silly the Montenegrin government (and the country as well) looks with its attempts to create a new language. For God's sake, even the Austrians, who are also considered a separate ethnic group from Germans by many, still speak German. So what? It's not the end of the world if they do. Why? Because the language they're speaking is GERMAN. Sure they could call it Austrian and make immature claims that it's somehow different (and there are quite a few differences), but they have a bit more consciousness about history and respect for the language they use. If the town of Herceg Novi separated from the rest of Montenegro, should they start speaking Hercegnovian? Of course not, everyone would laugh at that. Montenegro can be independent, it can have its own politics different than Serbia's (and does), but a government does not have the power to invent a new language. You're Montenegrin, you live in Montenegro, nobody can take that away from you. If you don't like your language, speak Italian, because changing the name of the Serbian language just makes you and your country look overly hateful of its Serbian neighbors. Build your identity on something more solid than Ś and Ź. --Cinéma C 07:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because British brought that language with them. Those Americans who made the new nation, were mostly from UK. So that was English. Serbs didn't brought their language here, neither we were their colonies. You want to change my opinion, but why you think that by denying my language and trying to show me that we are inventing something new, it won't help you to change anyones opinion, and don't see why you would want to do that in the first place. Also you can't really compare city with country. Our country exists for long time, to be compared with city. Your comparing with cities shows what you think of Montenegrin nationality. We called the language how it should be called 100 years ago. As soon you all accept that, more there will be peace on Wiki. Also, Serbs don't have monopoly over that language. You want to say ancestors of Montenegrins spoke with hands before 20th century? Do you ever wonder what dialect Vuk Karadzic took for standardizing his language, or from where his parents come from? Montenegrins had enough of stealing their history. Also, Ś and Ź is not making identity, but giving options to people to write like they speak. If you ever visited Montenegro and know how people there speak, you would know that Ś is very often used, but you couldn't write it. You don't need to write it, so it's just democratic option. Rave92^(talk) 09:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ОК. -- Bojan Talk 18:06, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No dble standards please

I reverted you in Praevalitana. Either we keep both Montenegro and Albania country templates, or no one's. Praevalitana was in today's Albania and Montenegro territory, so both templates go IMO. --Sulmues _talk 21:05, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Praevalitana is not on Albanian topics.Rave92^(talk) 21:08, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Tell me why is it under Montenegro and not under Albania. Shkoder was its capital. --Sulmues _talk 21:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure if you are new to Wikipedia, but templates are used to link to topics which can be FOUND on template. I don't say it has nothing to do with Albania, I didn't removed Albania from intro, and neither Albania sub. But if you want to add Albania topics, Praevalitana would need to be there so when you click it, it becomes bold. See at Montenegro topics what I mean. You would need to reorganize Albania topics as Montenegrin one is made different. In Montenegrin one you have Praevalitana, Duklja, Zeta, Kingdom of Montenegro... but in Albanian one you don't have it like that. Do you understand now? Rave92^(talk) 08:54, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

montenegrin language

Hi,

Your objection to the intro wording for Montenegrin was that it should be treated like the other SC standards. But that's exactly what it is, and why I restored that parallel wording. It's only at Croatian where an editor is objecting on the basis of factual error (an editor who does not appear to understand the issue, BTW), but that can be resolved through dispute resolution. I find it funny to imply that Montenegrin is an independent "South Slavic language" when many Montenegrins can't agree on what they speak, and the govt. is on an advertising blitz trying to convince them that it's MN rather than Serbian. A separate literary standard, the way Serbian, Croatian, and Bosnian are separate literary standards, sure. An independent "language" in the normal English use of the term, the way Bulgarian and Slovenian and separate SS languages, no. Also, you've reverted to other things which are not supported, such as 'majority' in the map, when the map is based on pluralities. kwami (talk) 17:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I want to see other 3 (or at least 2) agree on to be "standard of Serbo-Croatian (which by the way, doesn't exists anymore), and I won't be against that. Best is to start discussion on those articles. Rave92^(talk) 18:47, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So far we have de facto acceptance on two. It's only Croatian that's a hold-out. BTW, "Serbo-Croatian" may no longer exist as a political standard in the ex-Yugoslavia, but it is still the only word in English apart from the ridiculous "Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian", which in any case excludes Montenegrin. And it's still commonly used and commonly recognized in English for the language as a whole. In Montenegrin you can just say "our language", but of course that's not an option in English. If the SC phrase for "our language" were to be introduced into English, that would be a nice alternative (we do that with lots of languages!), but meanwhile we're stuck with either "Serbo-Croatian" or "Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian". Ethnologue maintains the term "Serbo-Croatian", even when describing Bosnian. (They don't list Montenegrin.) kwami (talk) 20:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Warning for vandalism

Please stop vandalising Oj, svijetla majska zoro.

Thank you.

Articles in Wikipedia aren't property, so you cannot claim it for your own, because you dont have the write to prevent anyone from contributing them.

Your actions on the article have so far been very non-constructive and damaging to the Wikipedia, treating as if the article is your own possession. You have not only removed an abundance of content and obstructed the article's writing, but also seem to have resorted to lying:

{{quote|You didn't add any refrence|Rave92}]

In that very edit alone you have removed ten sources yourself. You have also falsely characterized my edits as vandalism. I've read Wikipedia:Vandalism and it doesnt fall to that, your actions which include prevention of editing the article and atempts of deceit through false accusation laid out in comments in the Edit summary, also repeating the "non-referenced" (blatantly false) claim. You have also resorted to childlish games mocking my personal Username:

Getting "MNE" in your nick still doesn't change it..
— Rave92

in addition to a meaningless statement mentioning "Serb vandalism", which can only be interpreted as an ethnic slur, and thus a personal insult. You have failed to act politely and in good faith, demanding me to discuss on the talk page - misunderstanding the process in Wikipedia. I don't have to open up a discussion on the talk page discussion the tremendous expansion - it is you who has to write down on the talk page what you dispute about the article. You have failed to present any argument or discontent so far, and all of your actions have been ambiguous statements without any sort of detail, that include (1) false presentation as vandalism, (2) a distorted presentation of your own edits and (3) personal insults of the mockery type that should have no place there.

EW

Oh, come on! I thought we were done with all that crap. Please stop. I really don't feel like blocking you yet again. Toddst1 (talk) 06:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]