User talk:Crovata

Morlachs

- See User talk:Zoupan#Morlachs and User talk:Zoupan#Serbs of Croatia

My intention is not to edit-war, but yours. I certainly do not take your evaluation of me as having lack of knowledge seriously. You do not understand Wikipedia basics. I have expanded it, added sourced material, and done plenty of copyediting, and will continue to do so. You also neglect that the term Morlachs was principally used in Europe as the community in the Dalmatian hinterlands of the 17th century (thus the intro). You have been deliberately removing references suggesting greater connection to Serbs. I have tagged the refs that need better sources, including Dakić. The Croatian Encyclopedia is not a reliable source (see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources). Do not revert my additions, that is uncalled for, instead, from now on, we go through article problems on the talk page, and if not, we have to take it elsewhere.--Zoupan 01:05, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

There is no need for false accusations, there is no wrong intentions from my side, and it's up to you to see why are you not accepting my warnings for using unreliable sources for controversal or unexplained claims, and writing prone to nationalism. The actual majority of your contribution was copyediting from beforehand edited articles, and the use of sources was sparse, what doesn't matter because you had such sources. The "yours" last revision was on May 7, 607545683, with 9,741 bytes, while rewritten by me, 611797848, with new material on June 6 around 21,202 bytes, yet several times like on June 8, 612031978, you reverted it to your previous revision, removing 11,460 bytes of information, and not with sources which only partially mention Morlachs and the text highlight the connection with Serbs, but from scientific sources specifically studying Morlachs and Vlachs, with citatations found in those books and papers, explaining the etymology, its chronology, and more. To further avoid edit claims which identify the term Morlach, or elsewhere, with specific national identity, religion and vice versa, without understanding, or explaining in the article, the historical circumstances until late 19th century, I highly recommend you to read the work of Zef Mirdita and Ivan Mužić on Vlachs. Further reply reading here.

Stop butchering my comments!

[1] I cannot discuss like that! Could you reformat your answer to a single paragraph please? --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 10:29, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

No, then I can not, because that it makes unreadable and a total mess. Respect other editors and the discussion, stop intentionally making it unreadable mess, intenionally ignoring what is already cited, stop personally attacking me and accusing modern academic scholars, and finally read what is cited and those reliable sources (just how many time you spent on your personal POV interference you could already read it several times).--Crovata (talk) 10:52, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

3RR

Could you please stop? You thought you said that you would write something, expand the J-pop article or this article somehow. Do it, start some discussion on the article's talk page, but don't just delete the parts you don't like. It's not constuctive.

Consider this another warning about not going over 3 reverts in 24 hours. --Moscow Connection (talk) 21:12, 6 April 2015 (UTC)