User talk:Bitola/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Kumanovo dispute

This is your only warning. If you revert to the copyvio again you will be blocked for 24 hours. freestylefrappe 17:33, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Bitola, what freestylefrappe is rather tersely saying is that you can't arbitrarily copy text from other sources and paste it into Wikipedia. Your contribution to an article needs to be either something you yourself wrote, or something you got explicit permission to insert -- otherwise you're violating the author's copyright. Glenn Willen (Talk) 17:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Glenn, first of all the Freestylefrappe is not TERSELY saying, he has already blocked me without any warning. Have you seen his version of Kumanovo article? He is talking only about murdering, blood, terrorism and nothing about the city normal life. Of course, there were moments in the Kumanovo’s history when a terrorist attacks took place, but Kumanovo is most of the time a quiet ordinary Macedonian town that doesn’t deserve such descriptions. It is the same as if you write an article about London not mentioning St Paul’s catedral, Westminster, Tower bridge.. and writing only about recent terrorist attacks in the London underground. Talking about copyvios, I noticed that FreeStyleFrappe is using text written by Christopher Deliso.

Bitola -- First of all, I understand your concerns about the articles. But please be careful how you use the word 'vandalism'. Freestylefrappe is making good-faith edits to add what he feels is useful information to articles. As a general rule, wholesale removal of information from an article is frowned upon on Wikipedia, no matter how much you don't think it belongs. Calling an article 'unacceptable' sounds like you believe you get to define what's OK in a Wikipedia article. No individual editor has that decision. Try to see things from his perspective here -- he's been adding what he thinks is useful information, and you've been removing it with basically no comment, and then adding copyright-violating (and thus illegal) material in its place. (As a sidenote, I wanted to write this first, but I'm still looking at the material he added to see if what you say is true. If some specific text of his is a copyvio, could you give me a more specific pointer, e.g. a link to a diff on wikipedia, and the first few words of the paragraph on the other site so I can find it more easily? I'll still look, but it'll be faster if you can show me.) Glenn Willen (Talk) 18:44, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Glenn, it is not true that I’m removing FreeStyleFrappe’s additions all the time. You can simply check this if you visit the History tab on Kumanovo article. His “version” of the page and my info only appended to his info is commented with the following text: OK FreestyleFrappe, I will leave your "violence" texts, yet I'm not sure why it is so important to you to have only bombs, blood and killing in an article for a normal town like Kumanovo). I meant that the things were fine than, but on 8 December 2005 FreestyleFrappe again removed all my additions. I’m trying to understand that everybody has different view on the same thing, but still I cannot understand how somebody wants to describe Kumanovo with the following paragraphs: Econony, Violence, Narcotics!? Not to mention the following “FreestyleFrappe version” sentence: Also notable is the private practice "Otodent", located in Goce Delcev suburb, which offers different medical services like ENT and dentistry. The founder and the director is Dr. Milenko Trendafilovski. (you can simply check this on the current version of Kumanovo article) Does he know how many private dentistry services are present in Kumanovo? Is that npov? Just for your information, I’m now blocked user by his majesty FreestyleFrappe (just because I write similar comment as my first reply to you). Please understand that I’m normal citizen of Macedonia, I have many friends in Kumanovo, they live, study and work there and they are really surprised how his native town is described on Wikipedia.

Bitola, there are two separate issues here. First of all, Wikipedia is hosted in the United States, and you should understand that using someone else's text without their permission is a violation of US law. That is what freestylefrappe means when he says "copyvio". So regardless of the status of his text about drugs and violence, yours can't be used by Wikipedia because you didn't write it. So if he didn't remove it, someone else would have had to do so. If you want to add facts about the town you can do that, but the writing has to be yours. As far as his contributions go, I would suggest you write (once you are unblocked) a comment on the article's talk page about them. Wikipedia is not a fast-paced place. It will hurt nobody if the article contains an offensive (to you) description of the town for a few days, or even weeks. Take some time to get other people to agree with you, and come up with some alternative to freestylefrappe's text. If the two of you just revert back and forth, you will argue forever and get nowhere. Again, I understand that the article may be offensive to you, but you will get it fixed more readily by discussion that by immediate action, which will just get reverted (especially if you are deleting lots of text -- Wikipedia frowns on deleting other people's writing.) Glenn Willen (Talk) 20:00, 12 December 2005 (UTC) Oh, also (and I know you might not know the answer to this), do you know if there's any place that I can go to see that you're blocked, when it happened and who did it? (If Wikipedia gives you a page telling that you're blocked when you try to edit, that page might have a link you could send to me which would indicate how you were blocked and when.) Do you know why you were blocked -- did you edit the article after you were warned about copyright violation? (It doesn't look like it, so what did you do that caused him to decide to block you?) Glenn Willen (Talk) 20:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

You can check the list of blocked users on the following address: [1]

Alright, Freestylefrappe's been blocked for 29 hours, and his IP address has been blocked for 24 hours. However, I'm going to have to ask you to get rid of all the copyright violations on Kumanovo and to put a copyright tag on [[Image:Nagoricane.jpg]]. I'm going to put it on WP:IFD just in case you don't. karmafist 04:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

SCZenz filed a request for arbitration regarding my actions here: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Freestylefrappe. I have listed you as a party involved. freestylefrappe 19:01, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Copyright problems

I noticed that you've copied large chunks of text from http://www.unet.com.mk/ancient-macedonians-part2/nezapirliva-e.htm and http://www.unet.com.mk/ancient-macedonians/lac_a.htm to Republic of Macedonia. This is a fairly obvious copyright violation, and is something that people have already asked you not to do. Please note that Wikipedia:Copyrights says: "In extreme cases of contributors continuing to post copyrighted material after appropriate warnings, such users may be blocked from editing to protect the project." Please don't do this again. -- ChrisO 23:32, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

...And if in any way you don't think this is serious, please read this: Jimbo has declared open season on copyvios. You will be indefinitely blocked if you continue to copy/paste text from websites that aren't clearly public domain. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:53, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don’t know what are you talking about. My only bigger adds to the Republic of Macedonia article are these: [2], [3]. I added very little text and 3 pictures made by myself. I also did another edits after that, but that was done in order to incorporate the pictures in the article (these edits are marked with bolded “m” because are minor edits).My last edit was on 08:57, 28 December 2005 [4]. Since then, I didn’t make any single new edit to the page! I know that the same day someone made a large input to the page using the following anonymous address:212.110.79.199 (If you doubt that I anonymously made these adds, please make any neccessary checks in order to verify that the anonymous address is different from the one I used before). I also noticed the large input to the page but I decided not to involve in the edit war. I just added the following observation on the article talk page:[5]

--Bitola 08:22, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

You're right, Bitola, it was 212.110.79.199 who added [6] the copyvio stuff. I assumed ChrisO had done his homework; guess I was wrong. I'm sorry, really. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:08, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem, Bunchofgrapes, we all make mistakes. Actually, I learned many things from the Kumanovo dispute and I’m trying not to repeat some mistakes I made handling that issue. Happy New Year, see you next year:)--Bitola 16:26, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Architecture.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stan 04:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo.

Ok, I added tags to all my pictures and I hope I will not have any copyright problems in the future. Thanks Bitola 12:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading the following images: Image:Shapka.jpg, Image:Newgostivar.jpg, Image:Tetovo.jpg, Image:Siroksokak2.jpg,Image:Siroksokak.jpg, Image:Mavrovo.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. CLW 13:27, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for reminding me. These pictures are not mine, they were taken from a web sites, but actually I'm removed the pictures from the articles I put before, so feel free to delete it. Bitola 13:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

OK - I'll leave the images until they've had their seven day period, after which I or another administrator will delete them. Regards, CLW 14:03, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Zdravo!

Hello Bitola - you may want to beware Theathenae (talk · contribs). He has a history of pushing Greek POV through edit wars. He had left for a blissful few months (before you came) and now is back :-( Rex^(talk)

Pointer: he POV pushed on Macedonia related articles. Rex^(talk) 15:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Rex. I really don’t know why some Greek editors are so hostile to the Greece neighboring countries, especially Macedonia and I fear we cannot change much about it. However, I hope they will eventually realize that their way of thinking is old-fashioned and that nobody (especially their neighbors) is their enemy.Bitola 16:09, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually they think that all countries in the Balkans except Greece are full of communist propaganda. I have been to Bitola and Lerin: while they speak Macedonian in Bitola and Greek in Lerin, the cities were very similar. They don't get that we are all the same and that under the Turks we were the same! Rex^(talk) 16:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Amazing photo of Ohrid

I've seen [7], but tell me, have you seen this (you might want to join there). Also, are you acquainted with the developments in the Macedonian Wikipedia? You might want to contribute there, as well. Regards --FlavrSavr 23:04, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Looking for articles to work on?

Hello, Bitola. I'm SuggestBot, a Wikipedia bot that helps new members contribute to Wikipedia. You might like to edit these articles I picked for you based on things you've edited in the past. Check it out -- I hope you find it useful. -- SuggestBot 14:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for sorting out Talk:Macedonia. Jkelly 17:51, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

How to link to sections

In order to link to a section of a page, one inserts a hash sign and then the name of the section in the link. [[User talk:Bitola#Amazing photo of Ohrid]] will produce User talk:Bitola#Amazing photo of Ohrid. Clicking on that should take someone to the specific section. I've noticed, however, that this is not entirely reliable. It doesn't work at all in redirect pages, and sometimes fails on very long pages, at least on my browser. Hope this helps. Jkelly 18:23, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if I misunderstood what you were looking for. When one using "section editing" on an article, the name of the section automatically shows up in the edit summary. When I clicked on the "Edit" button next to How to link to sections here on your talk page, my Edit Summary box was immediately filled with "/* How to link to sections */". Jkelly 19:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

just a note

Goodevening Bitola :) Fipresci isn't exactly an international organization (it's an international association of film critics or something like that). With the term "international organization" are described institutions like UNO, IMF etc that have countries as members (fipresci's members aren't countries). talk to +MATIA 19:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

By the way, does Kokino have anything to do with the colour red in your language? talk to +MATIA 19:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Skopje

Colleague, you probably unknowingly created some mess with Skopje after this kid user elmo moved the page into slavic title. You must never use cut and paste in such cases. It is important that the history of edits of the page be preserved. There is a button "Move this page" for article renaming. I moved everything back. Your version is stored in Skopje/temp. Please reintroduce your edits. mikka (t) 23:47, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Page unprotected. mikka (t) 16:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Hectorian

it was nice reading your thought Bitola in the Talk:Macedonians page.u generally seem to have clear views...But i guess u have not found the 'real' reason for the dispute...most of the greeks do not really have a problem weather to consider FYROM been part of the geographical region of Macedonia,nor wheather its people would be called 'Macedonians' or not.the problem derives from the attempt to show that the ancient macedonians were not greeks.cause,although,as u said,there are historians who say that they were not,the majority of them have always said and say that they are.this is the real problem...i can call u however u like,IF u do not have demands from me...that's all.bye for now--Hectorian 01:28, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I appreciated reading your thoughts. Jkelly 22:19, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Of course i am a supporter of good faith between our two countries!it is just a naming conflict,thank God not a dispute and war like in the regions u refeared to:)see u--Hectorian 20:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Портал

OK, сметај на мене :-) Поздрав, Bomac 12:19, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Битола, изгледа ќе имаме мали проблеми со Грците (може и Бугарите) во врска со порталот. Види го разговорот кај корисникот Мискин. По никоја цена не смееме да дозволиме да се преименува во нешто како Република Македонија или слично. За нивниот дел од Македонија нека пишуваат во портал Грција. Толку сега за сега. Bomac 14:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Olive branch

Hi, as you've probably noticed, we've all got into this endless cycle of verbal jabs on talk pages. Take an olive branch of peace and let's stop worrying about these mysterious ancient Macedonians. There is more recent history to discuss, such as the presumed pan Balkan Alliance against the Ottomans First Balkan War - obviously, we can co-operate --Latinus 11:58, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Се сложувам

Да, се сложувам со тебе. Bomac 10:52, 23 February 2006 (UTC)