User talk:Dinner for three: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Warning: new section
Line 31: Line 31:


Lucian Boia? Wikipedia is not a science-fiction book.[[User:Dinner for three|Dinner for three]] ([[User talk:Dinner for three#top|talk]]) 13:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Lucian Boia? Wikipedia is not a science-fiction book.[[User:Dinner for three|Dinner for three]] ([[User talk:Dinner for three#top|talk]]) 13:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

== Warning ==

[[Image:Balkan topo en.jpg|30px|alt=|link=]] In a 2007 [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Macedonia#Discretionary_sanctions|arbitration case]], administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing [[Balkans]]-related articles in a disruptive way. If you engage in further inappropriate behaviour in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article/topic ban. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-balkans2--> [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 19:12, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:12, 13 September 2011

September 2011

Please stop your string of reverts, before this issue escalates into an edit war. Given that you are making so many edits in such a short period of time it makes sense to discuss the issues, so as to not make the changes look like vandalism from a newly registered account. On what basis have your 50 or so edits to places in Greece been made? Lunch for Two (talk) 11:40, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I really get enough to revert your vandalism today, falsification of sources, etc. If you check the names in both Bulgarian and Macedonian Wikipedia in the villages you revert you will see that they are the same. What I did in Greece was updating where Bulgarian names already existed and never adding mew ones.

I have to agree. Since Macedonian Slavic *is* Bulgarian, why are we saying it twice? Anyway, this would seem to be the kind of thing to discuss, esp. given the nationalist problems of the Balkans. If you don't like the way it's handled, I suggest you try WP:dispute resolution. I'm going to revert your edits now, as I see not only redundancy but the deletion of Greek from towns in Greece, which would seem to be a bit extreme no matter what the etymology. If I've reverted things you did that aren't in this vein, feel free to restore them, but otherwise please discuss this rather than WP:edit warring. — kwami (talk) 01:50, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my mother, reverted to last version by Lunch for Two?? OK I will feel free to restore them but why I have to waste my time for this nonsense? Better take your attention at such [impudent deletion of source and taking POV] you revert, and such [edit explained as revert but it was not a revert but taking user's POV actually!!]. All these covered POV-pushing by Lunch for Two should be reverted immideately and the reverts in such case are inescapable. To take Latin transliterations in every village where Cyrilic exists is not so easy and fast and they should get back in the page too, as well as the representation of the original Turkish names as Bulgarian should be delted. Dinner for three (talk) 18:12, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:NCGN the foreign names of geographic locations must be ordered alphabetically. Dinner for three (talk) 21:11, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Second Bulgarian Empire

I've reverted your edits to Second Bulgarian Empire:

  1. The long name of the state is Second Bulgarian Empire, the short name Bulgaria is separate from that and does not need to be added to Template:Infobox former country.
  2. The Principality of Bulgaria is a logical successor state, but is not the immediate successor. With an interval of nearly 500 years between them, it is inappropriate for the Principality to be highlighted in the infobox; it should instead be mentioned in the lead paragraph.
  3. Language templates such as {{lang-bg}} should be used wherever possible, as they have the same visual appearance, but add metadata to the HTML in the page, providing better accessibility.
  4. Alphabets other than our Latin alphabet should not be italicised, as is stated in the Text formatting section of the Manual of Style.
  5. We avoid using HTML escapes for Unicode characters on the Wikipedia; there are scripts such as Advisor that allow automated correction of these.
  6. The Encyclopædia Britannica is provided as a source for the name Empire of Vlachs and Bulgars.

Please don't revert these changes again. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 22:34, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

nicode characters on the Wikipedia; there are scripts such as Advisor that allow automated correction of these. Please don't revert these changes again. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 22:34, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize. I didn't knew for the script standarts, but the Principality of Bulgaria as successor should be back. That it was not immediate but logical successor is POV, it was called Bulgaria and used the same language as official. The fact that the two countries were Bulgaria is well-known among the sources and this should be back. Dinner for three (talk) 22:45, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For Empire of Vlachs and Bulgars by Britannica, that was disclaimed in the talk by historical letters, texts, etc. It was only used during Kaloyan's reign altough even then in official letters the state was called Bulgaria or Bulgarian Empire, this name has no place in the intro beacause it was only in a period and not in the entire exsistence of the state.

Warning: You removed Lucian Boia source 3 times today, if you do this again I will report you for breaking 3RR rule. (SamiraJ (talk) 13:29, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lucian Boia? Wikipedia is not a science-fiction book.Dinner for three (talk) 13:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If you engage in further inappropriate behaviour in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article/topic ban. Thank you. Fut.Perf. 19:12, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]