User talk:Kubura/Archive12

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, ...
Archive 10 - Italianization, Pagania, diacritics...
Archive 11 - Epics of Evlekis, some trolls, puppet theater, campaign of LAZ...

Proposed deletion of Ivan Radočaj

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Ivan Radočaj, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Notability. No significant coverage of the subject outside his murder.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. --aktsu ^(t / c) 08:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Register

Hello Kubura! Thanks for the friendly advice, I might just do that.123.2.59.195 (talk) 00:22, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Have Registed

Hi Kubura just a quick note. Just read the article on Pagania (again) it really needs a serious rewrite.Sir Floyd (talk) 04:34, 4 April 2009 (UTC) (formerly 123.2.59.195)

CSSD

Hi, please discuss it [[1]]. And do watch for your tone, as it's very disdainful at first sight, emanating negative energy. Also, try citing from those books relevant parts, and not your amateurish conclusions. For example, you saying There you'll see that Croatian and Serbian had separate lines of development - I'd really like to know in what scenario have Serbian and Croatian managed to have "separate lines of development", but managed to share 99% of grammar (phonology exactly the same, trivial differences in morphology & syntax). --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 15:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Kubura

Here to say goodbye. Wikipedia seems to have writers of extreme views (Stalin Style) and who are very abusive. Wiki seem to tolerate them. So I’m leaving. Thanks for the surport you gave me. Also could you please thank the writers who supported me with the Wikipedia: Reliable sources/Noticeboard.

Regards Sir Floyd (talk) 11:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Kubura, this is User:Luigi 28, thought you ought to know :). He's "leaving" because his cover's been blown and I told him we'd report him... seems he's trying to draw out some pathetic "victory" by leaving before we get him banned. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 23:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:ANI notification

You're mentioned at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Communist_Croat_gang. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 17:14, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Kubura a communist?? LoL!! xD --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 20:29, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:HARASS

I recommend you calm down. Kubura, I'm starting to think you are trying to harass me. Are you actually simultaneously accusing me of "anti-Croatian edits" while citing an edit restriction I got while I did my best to stop the Italian irredentists from using Italian names for every single Croatian city up to 1918? How weird is that? I'm actually proud of my ARBCOM edit restriction. I took the bullet so that Wiki can see how fanatical those Italian guys like old GG are. He got blocked. All of them got blocked. It can easily be seen from that which side was riddled with nationalist POV, and who was just trying to repair the damage. I just did a massive pile of work de-Hungarianizing the articles on Croatian counties

Now you had best stop following me around in your impotent "rage" over the deletion of a double article. I know hrWiki is crappy and disorganized, but on enWiki we deal in actual existing states, not Croatian fantasies like the famous "Hrvatsko-Ugarska". I have set-out to reform Croatian history articles. This page has been deleted so that we can make a fresh start and create a line of state succession from the Kingdom of the Croats to the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia.

Kubura, I'm here to HELP. Try to understand that. I am NOT, repeat NOT on an "anti-Croatian" agenda. I am here on Croatian history articles to make them less "fantastic" and more factual and up to international standards of objectivity. The Triune Kingdom EXISTED. Nobody "deleted" it! But you CAN NOT have the Kingdom of Croatia (1527-1868), the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia (1868-1918) article and the Triune Kingdom article at the same time. That kind of crap destroys the entire group of Croatian history articles! Ma ja nemogu virovat da me ti jos ne razumis... --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 08:56, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

History of Dalmatia (A Wiki Book)

Hi Kubura just here to inform you (just in case you didn’t know), that there is a book out called History of Dalmatia [2]. It seems to be mostly made from older Wiki articles, yes including Medieval Dalmatian Principalities & others (maps & all). Considering with what speed that some articles can change on Wiki, it’s a bit of a worry. Lets say there are some historical mistakes. I quote from the Pagania Chapter “ The Neretvians were also know as Pagans, because by the time of their Christianization, all Serbs already accepted Christianity”. Regards Sir Floyd (talk) 02:20, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

It's got something to do with free licenses-GFDL & CC (& Wikimedia Foundation team). One of the aspects of free licenses is "Anyone is free to re-use the content either in non-commercial or in commercial settings, so long as they properly attribute the content to its source/authors". I'm carefully considering whether one should put too much time and effort into the content of Wiki-Articles. If Wiki-Articles can be released and then somebody gets profits from it, I then don't see the piont of it all. The words rip off comes to my mind. That photo, what can be said? Considering that Dalmatia is one of the best looking places on the planet, the publishers could have done better.

PS. Thanks for answering. Sir Floyd (talk) 01:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

problemi na hr wiki

You blocked me on the HR wiki. The word "zajebavas" is not a swear word. I was very civil, and undoing edits that were ruining the article. Your information there is totally un-sourced. (LAz17 (talk) 17:18, 28 October 2009 (UTC)). (hockey league article) (LAz17 (talk) 17:18, 28 October 2009 (UTC)).

1) I fixed the hockey stuff. Your informations were partially right, partially wrong. 2) Before you comment on something regarding ceha and me, you should first look into what happened. The guy has made "FRAUD" ethnic maps for Bosnia. This is a big problem, and it is not just me who says that it is a problem. 3) When does the ban on hr wiki expire? (LAz17 (talk) 20:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)). All, zajebavas is in no way an insult or a bad word. Many worse things are said all the time on the english wiki. Banning someone for saying "stop joking with me" is wrong. That is what you were doing, you were joking with me, with unsourced claims. (LAz17 (talk) 20:43, 5 November 2009 (UTC)).

I responded on the article talk page. Also, how long is that block supposed to last? (LAz17 (talk) 06:25, 7 November 2009 (UTC)).

User:Aradic-es

User:Aradic-es posted unblock requests and was denied by 1, 2, 3 other admins. He has since asked the Arbitration Committee, which is the appropriate response. I have been informed of his communication as well and added my own. As to why he was blocked, this attitude is entirely inappropriate. Period. I do not care about truth or falsity, that kind of attitude is inappropriate and not desired here. Also, if you have an issue with User:PRODUCER's choice of userboxes, request that Template:User Serbo-Croatian be listed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion if you feel it does not qualify under policy. Otherwise, drop it. He isn't the only one with that userbox so if you do not want to assume good faith as to him either and conduct yourself similarly, I have no issue handing out discretionary sanctions in a similar manner. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Point them out and they can be warned and blocked as well. If you can't tell from this, the editors in this space have acted poorly enough to be on a short lease. I do not care about how Aradic acts on other wikis. He got himself blocked more than enough to make it clear that whatever he was doing here, it wasn't desired. Last, why are you telling me about users who haven't edited here in years? User:24.86.127.107 is from 2007 and User:24.86.110.10 is from 2008. We don't block IP addresses for long periods of time as it's likely to lead to innocent victims when the address changes, so a few weeks is actual extraordinary. As to your reports to User:Joy, that was years ago as well. I do not care about them and I do not care about Aradic. There are enough editors here who can act mature enough to be productive. He chose not to and he was blocked for that. 3 other admins declined and the Arbitration Committee is considering it as well. I should suggest you talk to them as I have no further interest in discussing this. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Aradic was not blocked exclusively for his insults. This is what I reported him for [3]. Please carefully read the stuff about Srebrenica/Mladic and consider if it is appropriate to add this to Bosniaks. Also the recent block was for edit warring after this. Aradic had escalating blocks for edit warring. first 24 hours, then 48 hours, then 2 weeks. He still continued to insult and edit war and so now has an indef. Where next? He takes no advice, the only action is a ban. I am sorry it came to that because I know Aradic isn't always wrong but the level of unpleasantness and warring had become too much. Polargeo (talk) 09:36, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Croatia in personal union with Hungary

The article has been redirected. The talk page should follow as well. Otherwise, we'll have confusion over where any discussion is taking place. You can link to prior versions of the talk page if you want or better yet, copy the information to Talk:Croatia in personal union with Hungary/Archive 1 and link to that. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:20, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I think we can't reach an agreement

Hi Kubura! Thanks for support and for an opinion about the personal union issue, but I think others don't won't to solve the problem, only flame it. As much I bend and let it thear way, they only push harder and more aggressive. Regards, Kebeta (talk) 14:50, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Reply

This is no doubt aradic and this is the only reason you care. I've opened plenty of SPI's on him to know its him and it's the same article and the same editing. All he did was copy and paste a bunch of text from hr wiki, remove the cyrillic version, and add his broken english. If you even bothered to check up on your friend you would have seen that it was aradic the last 50 times. This isn't the first time that you've defended aradic and your only helping him evade his block. ◅ P R O D U C E R _(TALK) 07:27, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

A little help?

Hello. I was hoping you could help me with a little issue on the Croatia national basketball team's page... There have been some edits by this dude recently, and as you can clearly see on the history page, he has no plans to suspend them any time soon... So I decided to contact you since I have absolutely no experience in this kinda stuff (I know it's kinda silly but i really don't...)... Would you please be kind enough to take a look? Thanks in advance. Malez

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Kubura! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 317 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Vinko Begović - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Stanko Poklepović - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Tonka Tomicic - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 16:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Liburnia

Tnx Kubura. I've already used it for Medieval Liburnia section. But there is another problem here. Prehistory of the Western Balkans in general is extremely poorly covered in the English literature. Just take a look at the articles here in en.wiki, or google it to notice the same elsewhere. So, any quality change / step forward I make on that topic here is like fighting the windmills. There are some ejucated people here who, unconcious of their ignorance which is not their fault, are "believing in" or "thinking" something, making a barrier to any developement. Too bad so many cro users left en.wiki in last few yrs for similar reasons. I think I'm becoming the next one, I have no nerves for that, nor free time. Zenanarh (talk) 10:07, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:Pagania

Hi Kubura! There are some changes happening on the Pagania article. You might like to contribute as you were involved in the original consensus-concerning Slavs vs. Serbs/Link. Regards Sir Floyd (talk) 10:06, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

John Zapolya

Hello! You may be interested in Talk:János Szapolyai#Move to John Zapolya. Regards, Surtsicna (talk) 17:40, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

South Slavic languages

I don't know if you're reading the talk page. That last edit was close to vandalism. See WP:point. You can be WP:blocked for that kind of thing. Again, please bring your specific concerns to the talk page, rather than reverting other editors. kwami (talk) 02:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Disrupting and messing into things you don't understand

I am very disappointed that you feel the need to talk trash to me. If you have anything factual to contribute on this matter, please feel free to include it in the article and/or point it out at Talk:Bulcsú László, where it might actually be appropriate. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:08, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Please stop with your silly and nonsensical abuse on my talk page. Thank you. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:14, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Fausto Veranzio or Faust Vrančić

You were involved on similar language issues so I thought this may interest you. regards --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 11:59, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Posušje

I was just surfing wikipedia and I came across this page and found it had an ongoing edit war for months now. One of the user's is User:PRODUCER and the other is and IP user. I also found your comment to him about this back in January. I'm wondering if he replied to you as I can find one. Thanks.--Everyone Dies In the End (talk) 13:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

New Fausto Veranzio RM

You voted here on the first RM so I imagine you might be interested in the new requested move as well. Best regards. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 01:28, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Leaving apart this ugly attempt of canvassing and votestaking, I have a question for you. I saw looking around you had been an editor on it.wiki, until a year ago. I see there were someone who didn't welcome you in the best way, but I also see there were some proficuos collaborations like with Presbite or other users. Why did you give up? I hope not for the language skill, it seems your Italian was enough good to let you give an hand on the project. If you have some good materials, pictures, sources or ideas, please contact me, I can copyedit your contributions in Italian if you want and if you need. Please just remember that in Italian language there's no need to argue about which toponyms or which name we have to use, so it's by far more easy to work, putting everybody's knowledge together in the box.. Let me know if you agree. - Theirrulez (talk) 12:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

I know what you mean, I read your past discussion, I found ridicoulous and a bit manipulatory to accuse you about your Italian level (more than decent that time), and I know which idef users you mean. Anyways, I'm on it.wiki sometimes, so if you want to write something new, maybe translating a Croatian article into Italian for it.wiki, or just to give your contribute to an article, and you think your Italian isn't as good as some time ago, you can ask me and I'll be glad to copy-edit it for you. Cheers, - Theirrulez (talk) 10:40, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Requests for mediation/Novak Djokovic

Hi, as I see you are a decorated user from Croatia, so I am kindly asking you to check the Novak Djokovic talk page where users from Serbia are disputing references from Croatia daily newspapers. Are those referenes reliable ones or not? Could you please help solve this problem. Thank you. With regards, --Eversman (talk) 19:40, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Why I talked to Mir Haven and other issues

User:Kwamikagami filed a wikiquette alert about Mir Harven calling him crazy. You're welcome to do the same thing on Ivan Štambuk. I honestly don't care about the content of the Croatian language article. If you can provide diffs of current behavior problems, then go on and take them to Wikiquette alerts, instead of hassling me because I responded to a wikiquette alert filed on one of your buddies. On the subject of current behavior, the message I left on that IP's talk page was a result of frustration from a dishonest editor lying to a bunch of his occult group on facebook, resulting in this AfD and its talk page being flooded with idiots with persecution complexes. Multiple admins saw the whole situation, and although my actions were not correct, they were completely understandable. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:33, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Warning

Your recent articles such as Defense of Krk airport and Battle of Gospić are highly non-neutral in tone and content. You really must make more of an effort at describing events from a neutral perspective. Unfortunately they are also written in very poor English, which makes them even more difficult to fix.

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. ☼ 10:27, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

You seriously don't realize your writing is non-neutral? Then we have a problem. I have no time to teach you the basics. If you are truly unable to recognize biased language as glaringly obvious as what you have been writing, frankly, you may not be the right person for this project. Wikipedia expects every contributor to make an effort to strive for neutrality.

As for the grammar, I realize of course this is no fault of yours, but it is objectively true that your English is so broken the articles are almost unreadable, which makes correcting their contents and NPOV more difficult than it would otherwise be. There are a few very frequent, recurrent errors, and I hope you can make it a habit to monitor your own writing for these:

1. Missing articles. There are very few occasions in English where you can have a noun phrase with no initial "the" or "a". I count eight missing articles in the five sentences of the lead of Battle of Gospić alone.
2. Tense use: historical narrative in English never uses the present perfect ("has done", "has been given", rather than "did", "was given", etc.) Just make it a habit, after you draft a sentence, to go through it again and weed out any use of "have"+verb. In 95% of all cases it is wrong and it will be an improvement to replace them with the simple past tense form.
3. Contracted verb forms: never use forms like "'ll", "'ve", "'s" in formal writing. And avoid using such forms after any preceding words other than simple pronouns.

I know some of these errors are very common among writers with Serbian/Croatian as their first language. But it's too easy to just say "nobody's perfect, somebody will correct it". In fact, many of the errors remain uncorrected (Hundred Years' Croatian–Ottoman War, written three months ago, is still in the same sorry state). You really must make a visible effort to monitor and correct your own writing, now that these things have been pointed out to you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:38, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Defense of Krk airport

I have nominated Defense of Krk airport, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Defense of Krk airport. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:57, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

uuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Little help needed with this new page, pažalusta druzya, Croatian Inline Hockey League (LAz17 (talk) 01:45, 7 August 2010 (UTC)).

Gregor helped fix the page big time. There's no way that I would have found the 2008 info. But now the question is... if there is a 2008 winner... then who won the league in 2009? I suppose that 2010 is not yet finished?

Yeah, why not. I wonder if it is that one link that mentioned hockey in ww2 croatia... I saw that once. At any rate, any of these old national competitions in a the first decade of the yugo league after ww2 existed as qualifiers for the yugoslav championship. So, it's not fair to for example put the champion of slovenia in together with their league that was formed in 1991. The Croatian wiki page ought to fix this. Which reminds me, I have not finished adding data for individual croatian hockey league seasons. (LAz17 (talk) 12:04, 11 August 2010 (UTC)).

Uh, I'll start with the latter part of the message and then go on to the former part.

I'm not into inline hockey too much actually. Barely if at all. It just is not that popular... I look at it as a game that hockey players would play to keep in shape during summer time - that is, in countries that do not have rinks open in the summer. We see that situation in the former yugo. Now, regardless of that, I think that there oughta be more information about these things. Simply said there is a major lack of information and archives about hockey in the former yugo that it outright disturbes me. For example, we had a second division of hockey in the former yugo, but information about that is very scarce!

That is interesting about the players. I bet that they do it to keep in shape. But to be honest, I never really kept track of players. The reason why is a bit troubling. You see, the clubs in the former yugoslavia have foreigners on their teams as their best players. In fact, the only reason why partizan and medvescak won titles in the yugo leave in the 1980s was because they bought off slovenian players. Similarly, nowadays we have the same problem. Only it's not slovenian, but other foreign hockey players, as the market is a bit bigger. Even the slovenian teams have to turn to the lower leagues of better hockey countries in order to get their best players. Hence, I do not keep track of them. :/ Sad, isn't it? Serbia's national hockey team started doing some weird stuff... giving citizenship to a few foreign hockey players. So all of a sudden their national team is better - yet their best players are a few canadians and a russian! The situation is similar in croatia... medvescak's Austrian league team is comprised of two lines of foreign players. Those are their best two lines. The lower lines are the croatian players. Hence, when medvescak players in the national league, Mladost does better against them - because the national league limits only 3 foreign players, I think. This is the sad truth, that it's all about money. So how will hockey ever develop?? What is more disturbing is how partizan and medvescak are trying to take all the best players - what does that leave other clubs with? We have seen the fattening of these two clubs at the expense of our leagues.

The early croatian championship has nothing to do with the current hockey league of croatia. As your link said, it was part of the yugoslav league. Hence it was a small part of something bigger. Therefore you can not clump that in together with the croatian hockey league which started in 1991. I don't think it's even fair to mention medvescak and this old varazdin club... medvescak was formed in 1961. Your old varazdin club has nothing to do with the croatian ice hockey league. The league had only these four teams. If we are lucky who know,s maybe we will one day see KHL Karlovac join in. But man, we lack rinks in the balkans and money too... and then these big clubs take all the tallent away from smaller teams. But anyways, back to the point - if you want we could make pages about individual yugoslav hockey league seasons. That is what your republic championships were under. They were merely a small part of the bigger competition. It has nothing to do with the croatian ice hockey league which was formed in 1991. (LAz17 (talk) 06:05, 15 August 2010 (UTC)).

You think you can find the winner of the 2009 Croatian Inline Hockey League?? (LAz17 (talk) 06:13, 15 August 2010 (UTC)).

Well, I don't think that Croatia's team was that strong to manage to stay in the first division for long. They were always at the bottom of the first division, but at the top of the second division. Serbia for example came up to the first division, but fell out quickly. Man the way I look at it is plan for the worst but hope for the best. Hopefully KHL Karlovac will be able to be in the league by leaving that slovenian minor league.

I guess it's nice to see some foreigners come. What's really nice is that they are of croatian background, rather than total foreigners like serbia is doing. But, if only these guys would join other teams too. Imagine if only three of them were on Karlovac's team! Just imagine how much that could do for that club!

Can you find results for the 2009 inline competition?

The last point... I dunno man. I don't get what the issue is anymore. The Croatian Hockey league was established in 1991. It's just silly to put results from decades ago into that. Come on, think about how that looks like - it's some sort of nationalism, isn't it? The best thing is to put these old results into the Yugoslav Hockey League. At any rate, I am done with this discussion with you - take it to the talk page or to the wiki hockey group - they will give you the same answer as me, as it is ridiculous to include these old results in something into a league that BEGAN in 1991. As for the soccer/nogomet point that you make - you can see on their official website that you are wrong, [4]. (LAz17 (talk) 04:32, 17 August 2010 (UTC)).

I suggest that you bring up your concern here, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey. That way edit warring and associated problems with that can be avoided. Through that page you can get a concensus to keep that there or to keep it out. (LAz17 (talk) 04:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)).

See my last message on the cro wiki, regarding that site and some stuff that I got from it. (LAz17 (talk) 17:55, 20 August 2010 (UTC)).

LAz-e17, here we've been insulted on national basis. And noone gets punished for that. Kubura (talk) 02:29, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Svetozar Boroević

Vidim da si bio aktivan na ovome članku u razgovoru. Naveo sam izvor da je bio Hrvat pravoslavac, i to stoji već nekoliko dana. Molio bih te da paziš da tako i ostane, jer naveo sam dobar izvor. Pravoslavac ne znači automatski Srbin, stoga moramo čuvat ovako kako sad stoji :D .

Puno mahanja iz Duvna.--Wustefuchs (talk) 23:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Nitko nema dva života pa nemam ni ja. Kubura (talk) 03:15, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Future Perfect

I noticed your complaint to Lar about the conduct of FuturePerfect here. So I have reviewed FuturePerfect's actions to see if they were excessive. I happen to agree that both of the articles you started were very one sided. I understand that you do not see them that way but to someone who is not on any particular side they looked like they were written entirely from a Croat perspective. Please take this advice to heart because on wikipedia WP:NPOV is very important. Do not worry too much about FuturePerfect's warning, it is a standard warning that should be given to any editors of Balkans articles. Polargeo (talk) 06:45, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

"Laughing stock"

Kubura, I just noticed you called me a "deluded laughing stock" in Croatian here a while ago ("zavarani predmet podsmijeha"). Please apologize, diga si mi tlak s tim. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 10:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Please, don't lie. I haven't called you a "deluded laughing stock".
Read carefully. "Tko te zavaravao i činio te predmetom podsmijeha?".
No "deluded", no "zavarani". I said "Who tricked you and made a laughing stock out of you?".
I'm sorry if even that form hurt you. But it's not me who's giving the material for the persons that laugh at you/your work.
But, who's gonna apologize to me for being accused for the words I haven't written at all?
Tko će se meni ispričati za sve one uvride na nacionalnoj osnovi koje san istrpia ovdi? Za sva ona omalovažavanja hrvatskog naroda i hrvatskog jezika? I za sve ove nacional-zatiračke tekstove usmjerene protiv Hrvata?
Ti kao da si plaćen za proguravat ovo šta pišeš, što dulje izdrži na wiki-prostoru, to te dulje plaćaju.
Ti kao da si dobio zadaću potkopati "hrvatsku stranu". Kao, tobože glumiš netkog iz Hrvatske, kao, nekog Hrvata, a zapravo, predstavljaš "Hrvata" koji pleše kako "jedna druga strana" želi, na način da slabiš stav hrvatske strane i onda, kao, ispada, da je druga strana u pravu. Jednom davno sam ti napisao User_talk:DIREKTOR/Archive_2#Istria_2.
"DIREKTOR; you must calm down. Control your temper. Otherwise, you're giving arguments to opponents' side. Even if they are the worst and most perfidious kind of POV-izers, propagandists, vandals, trolls, disruptors...
Sometimes you ran into such situations (or your behaviour took you there), that I suspected that you're a strawpuppet. Kubura 20:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)"
Ponia si se kao iz definicije slamena lutka. Možeš se ne slagat sa mnom, ali to je to. Umisto na bolje, ti greš u gore. Kubura (talk) 02:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

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

WQA issue

Hey there. Thanks for your report there, but please use more civil language when discussing with other users. Having disagreements with other users is fine, but please attempt to resolve them in a civil manner and not attack each other. Thanks. Netalarm^talk 20:29, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Netalarm.
I've seen your message [5].
"... but please use more civil language when discussing with other users. Having disagreements with other users is fine, but please attempt to resolve them in a civil manner and not attack each other."
Štambuk's message [6] was from September 3.
Here's the history of edits in Talk:Croatian language [7].
My messages after his message were these [8] (Sep 18) and (restoring of deleted message) [9] (Sep 28).
Where did I used the phrases like "sod off" "nazi-pedia" (Štambuk used that phrase in some other messages) and equalized his sources with Stormfront?
It's not fair to equalize me with him [10]. I was polite, he was rude.
Regarding "that case was already reported by Kubura" - it wasn't.
Here're my messages in the Wikipedia section [11].
I haven't posted that. Kubura (talk) 02:55, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Netalarm, you gave [12] on Wikiquette alert this link to talk:Croatian language gives this (Lynn Compton, edit from 22:08, 15 February 2006 ???? [13]). What kind of "stale"? How does Lynn Compton has something with the Štambuk's "sod off"? Kubura (talk) 03:12, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

BTW, I see that you're not an admin ([14]). How come that you appeared on that WQA? Kubura (talk) 03:15, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

This issue was already directed to WP:ANI, so another thread at WQA is redundant and unnecessary. Regarding the stale issue, the posts your gave us were timestamped September 3, and upon further checking, we found that the issue had already been directed to ANI. If you wish to discuss this, please reply to the ANI thread (it may already be closed, in which case, there's no need to bring it up elsewhere). Netalarm^talk 03:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

This wasn't his first time.
I'm sorry if someone else reported that. I didn't know, it's hard to find it in the forest of reportings about Štambuk's bad behaviour on en.wiki. It takes time for a page to load.
And I was very busy maintaining my homewiki these months, so I haven't reacted promptly. Finally, I don't believe that that IP knows the complaint procedures on Wikipedia, so I reported Štambuk instead of him.
Also, my message (a kind of report) was written on Sep 18th. After Kwamikagami's message, I posted a message on WQA. Kubura (talk) 03:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Here're some of his attacks (that appeared on WP:ANI, eather him being the reporter or reported).
[15] (7 July 2009) "Vandalism by several IP address, in what appears to be several PoV pushers in Croatian academic institutions." Štambuk's attitude "it's so because I say so". Academic institutions don't matter, they aren't proper source, according to Štambuk??? Who does he think he is?
"Almost all of them (note by Kubura:contributors of Novi Plamen)would probably call their language srpskohrvatski, as it was officially called before 1991". What's this? A clairvoyancy? Second, "srpskohrvatski" (note by Kubura:political name for Serbian language) wasn't official in whole ex-YU).
"...not these ridiculous nationalist fabrications such as "Croatian language", "Serbian language" or "Bosnian language" (and soon-coming in the fall 2009 "Montenegrin language")." This is heavy insult on national basis.
[16] (6 August 2009) He was the reporter here, but see his phrases: "Croatian nationalist bigots ". Ricky81682 already warned him "Try looking a bit less biased in your namecalling.".
Please see some of my previous attempts of communication with him from 28 April 2010[17] [18] [19].
[20] "you insolent nationalist troll" "bigoted nationalist" (25 April 2010)
[21] "Proven hardline Croatian nationalist" (6 October 2009)
I've checked all pages that link [[user:Ivan Štambuk]] to Wikipedia space, I've checked all WP:ANI's [22]. I've used searchbox [23] . I haven't seen any report against Ivan Štambuk because of his "sod off" and comparisons with Stormfront.
I really want to see where was that alleged reporting, we cannot rely on Kwamikagami's memory.
I want to see the link (diff). "...and upon further checking, we found that the issue had already been directed to ANI." Where? Please, give me the diff. Bye, Kubura (talk) 05:27, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

also these etnic insults here :[24]--78.3.89.202 (talk) 08:09, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

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

Croatian language

The problem with your claim of "scientific discussion" is that not a single Croat at Talk:Croatian language has bothered to produce a shred of verifiable reliable evidence in support of their position. The linguists have provided dozens of reliable linguistic sources to back up our statements, but the only thing that the Croats have bothered to do is say, "I speak this language". Look at Wikipedia's requirements for reliable sources and you will see that "I speak this language" constitutes unacceptable original research. If you want a polite scientific discussion, then provide proper scientific sources on the Talk Page. --Taivo (talk) 04:09, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, what I was writing on the talkpages (see the archives) Talk:Croatian language, Talk:Croatian grammar, Talk:Serbo-Croatian language, Talk:Central South Slavic diasystem... Kubura (talk) 05:09, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Translation request

In an effort to get some Croatian linguists' perspectives, I thought it might be a good idea to understand a quote made by Alemko Gluhak in this news article. He says: "Da odmah na početku razriješim dvojbu i kažem da srpsko-hrvatski jezik ne postoji. Na razini standardnog jezika on ne postoji, zato treba biti oprezan. Ovdje se radi o tome da prvo ide širi pojam s oba jezika, a poslije se koristi ili srpski ili hrvatski." Google translate does a good enough job to tell me this is relevant to Taivo's question about potential alternatives to the term "Serbo-Croatian" but not a good enough job for me to understand the nuances. How would you translate this quote? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 17:49, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Let me translate another excerpt from that article for you:

Ipak, mislim da stranci ne reagiraju na ovo i da se ne opterećuju takvim stvarima, jednako kao što i Hrvati ne reagiraju na razlike američkog i britanskog jezika

In translation:

Regardless, I don't think that foreigners react to this and don't bother themselves with such things, just like Croats don't react to the differences between American and British language.

Yep, this nutjob Alemko Gluhak thinks that American and British are two different languages. In fact, his very comparison of the situation among B/C/S/M standards to that of American/British English only demonstrates more how the former differences are null in practical linguistic terms. Opinions of people like him shouldn't count much, because they are ignorant and/or intellectually dishonest. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 09:09, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, but what's he saying in the quote that I asked about? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 14:19, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Wait, one by one.
"Da odmah na početku razriješim dvojbu i kažem da srpsko-hrvatski jezik ne postoji. Na razini standardnog jezika on ne postoji, zato treba biti oprezan. Ovdje se radi o tome da prvo ide širi pojam s oba jezika, a poslije se koristi ili srpski ili hrvatski.""
Translation:
"Let me, at the very beginning, solve the doubt and say that Serbo-Croatian does not exist. At the level of standard language he does not exist, and that's why one must be careful. Here's the matter about that that first goes the wider term with both languages, a later is used or Serbian or Croatian".
Sorry for any losses in translation.
About the second one:
"Ipak, mislim da stranci ne reagiraju na ovo i da se ne opterećuju takvim stvarima, jednako kao što i Hrvati ne reagiraju na razlike američkog i britanskog jezika."
Translation:
"But, I think that foreigners do not react at this and that they do not burden themselves with such things, the same way as Croats do not react to differences between American and British language."
Gluhak is eminent Croatian linguist. In this context, he spoke about American English and British English. These are "američki" and "britanski jezik" he spoke about. Bye, Kubura (talk) 03:45, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

A question for Štambuk: what is a "nutjob"? Please, write the definion here.
Remember WP:BLP and WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not a place for anonymous insulting of living persons. Kubura (talk) 03:45, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Kubara. I'm having difficulty seeing how the phrase "američkog i britanskog jezika" indicates that this scholar sees American and British as separate languages. Wouldn't it have to be "američkog i britanskog jȅzīkā" or is Wiktionary failing me? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 15:53, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

"Jȅzīkā" is plural. In this case, singular was used.
You can say in Croatian:
"Govornik sam engleskog, kineskog, hindskog, francuskog, škotskog jezika." (singular for "jezik"). But
"Govornik sam ovih jȅzīkā: engleskog, kineskog, hindskog, francuskog i škotskog". (plural).
There you go. Kubura (talk) 21:29, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Interesting, so the singular can be used when the plural is understood from context. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 15:18, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Advice

Kubura. I know it is frustrating when you don't get the propper attention to an issue that you simply know is wrong and needs to be fixed. If an Administrator was involved in an edit war and improperly used his power, you should bring that to ANI again. I'd find that a terrible offense. I don't know how exactly I could help you, but if I can just let me know. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Talk? )} 09:02, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

More advice

After your failure to acknowledge your error in issuing edit war warnings to a pending changes reviewer, I suggest you keep your non-constructive and disruptive editing away from my talk page. I have no interest in your squabbles. Keristrasza (talk) 09:54, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Very interesting is which side you took. How come that you've appeared on the topic you don't know anything about and enabled some persons to evade 3RR? How come that you haven't reverted on the other side's version? How do you know which one is correct?
Anyway, why giving warnings. See example: I warned you [25], you removed that [26] and later the other member of edit-war team removed it [27].
Regarding "squabbles", be WP:CIVIL. Kubura (talk) 21:42, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Let's get this straight -

• there was no 1RR in place when I contributed to that page
• I have not breached 3RR
• I reported the page to WP:RPP to prevent edit warring on it
• I attempted to prevent edit warring on it by asking interested parties to discuss changes on the talk page in order to find a compromise/consensus
• my contributions to that page were as a reviewer to pending changes
• it is pure luck of the draw that I prevented further edit warring on that page while it was in one state and not another - had I reviewed it minutes later I would have reverted the next state change, leaving it in the form in which you prefer it
• I have taken no side in that discussion - note that despite it being on my watch list I have added nothing to the RfC or the discussion about which version is more accurate - that is because (a) I am not a linguist and (b)I don't care!
• You say "I warned you" and I removed it - yes, because your "warning" was bullshit, and should not have been on my page anyway. You gave that "warning" simply to make a WP:POINT
• That others have also reverted your trash from my page is neither here nor there - you obviously have gained yourself followers who track your edits and they must also see the pathetic nature of your "warning" for what it actually is - WP:POINT!
• This is my final word on this - in future I shall simply remove your edits from my talk page without bothering to reply. Keristrasza (talk) 22:00, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

And Keristrasza, Kubura was careful to post warnings on everyone's page who disagrees with his POV. His Croatian friends were not warned ;) --Taivo (talk) 00:16, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Notice of WP:ARBMAC

Please note that the article Croatian language and other articles relating to the Balkans fall under the ruling of WP:ARBMAC. Note in particular Wikipedia:ARBMAC#Discretionary sanctions, which states

"Any uninvolved administrator may, on their own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if that editor fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, the expected standards of behavior, or the normal editorial process. The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; restrictions on reverts; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project. Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision."

Repeated blanket reversions, repeatedly and knowingly restoring material with large amounts of poor English and grammatical errors, and repeated introduction of material rejected by consensus all fall below the expected standards of behaviour at this project. Kubura (talk) 23:30, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Since I'm sure you were too busy placing these silly warnings on all the pages of those who don't share your unscientific POV, I went ahead and copied them to your friend's pages for them. I'm sure you would have posted to their pages eventually. --Taivo (talk) 00:25, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Kubura, I'll give you a piece of free and friendly advice: don't indiscriminately paste complaints or notices about 3RR, ARBMAC on talk pages of people who either don't agree with you or whom you believe to have some sort of administrative power. It weakens your credibility with relatively impartial participants and makes you look like desperate.

By the way, thanks for actually putting forth at least a modicum of evidence of non-Shtokavian influence in BCMS/SC on the Croatian talk page. While we cannot ignore it entirely (e.g. a relatively high-frequency word such as tjedan), it is still difficult to see if Croatian is practically tri-dialectal as you and others from Croatian Wikipedia have claimed unless one takes a HYPER-literal interpretation (which would be questionable on any level) and ignores mutual intelligibility and overarching, overwhelming and significant similarities in phonology, morphology, and lexis. Vput (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:30, 11 October 2010 (UTC).

Note About ANI

This is just a note to notify you about a discussion, which you are partially involved though not the subject, has been brought to ANI. You may find it here. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:15, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

ANI notification

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Keristrasza (talk) 11:58, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Balkans sanctions warning

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose, at their own discretion, sanctions on any editor working on pages broadly related to the Balkans if the editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban. The committee's full decision can be read at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Macedonia#Final decision.

I am giving you and everybody else involved in the Croatian disputes notice that I intend to crack down on the incivility that fills the current disputes. Any comment that attributes bad motives to an editor or otherwise insults an editor is going to draw a block. This will happen even if the incivility is in response to incivility from another editor. The appropriate response to that is to complain, not to respond in kind. I intend to apply this to everybody involved. According to the WP:ARBMAC sanctions, editors can only be blocked if they have been notified of the sanctions. You can find a list of the editors who have been notified at WP:ARBMAC#Log of warnings. If I have missed anybody, please bring it to my intention. I am very serious about this. Looie496 (talk) 02:42, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

(Note: sorry for repeating the notification template, but to be enforceable the warning has to be given by an uninvolved admin (such as me) and has to be logged, as I am about to do. Looie496 (talk) 02:42, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

and here we go again!--78.3.94.49 (talk) 07:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Re Storm

Hi Kubura. Just noticed some of the stuff on the Storm article, and I think you should put back the prosecution's position. The best thing you can do to remedy some of the nonsense therein is to simply present the defense's position re Storm as well. The whole country is going nuts about this but, as Wikipedians, we should be the neutral parties that present the raw facts only. The Brijuni transcripts are very damning indeed, but for Tudman, not Gotovina. I have opposed this in the past, but it seems quite accurate at this point that the ethnic cleansing of 200,000 people was in fact one of the intended goals. How this was pinned on that poor uneducated incompetent "general" (who being only trained as a sergeant had zero understanding of strategic command) is beyond me.. Anyway, be OBJECTIVE. Don't get blocked. Regards, --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:13, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Neutral parties, nicely said. One of intended goals? Where did you get that? The sole intended goal was to liberate occupied parts of Croatia. I've argumented that with bunch of links and sources. USA officials don't confirm someone's position just like that US Ambassador Galbraith: There was no ethnic cleansing. Especially few days after tribunal's verdict.
USA's most confidential person for that area, that was there in the most sensible time, doesn't say such words just like that. Although he's not the ambassador here anymore, he's still under the obligation.
Finally, have in mind that all of those that have reported the crimes weren't saints.
These people were properly picked by their employers. They were there on purpose.
Do you know what it means: pyromaniac fireman? The fireman that is, "somehow", always the first to report the fire?
How many of those "innocent neutral reporters" (that were able to freely wonder around the freshly liberated areas and that were beyond the reach of Croatian legal system!) perpetraded those crimes, just to denigrate Croatia? How many of them was smuggled by those "neutrals"? Maybe none. Maybe...?
How many reported what they really saw? Someone in Croatian uniforms did something... Simple, isn't it? Put a particular uniform on and do something in front of proper eyes, and even the mostly neutral observer buys a fraud.
Therefore, there's a possibility of the infiltration of particular units (whose employes is not Croatia) that do the dirty job. They get into the country (legally or not), infiltrate into the target area... Hit and run.
Special intelligence forces do such things. That's what's their job.
And there're many countries and political forces that were and still are openly anti-Croatian.
And that they have resources and centuries of experience for such denigrating actions.
Have in mind that the Poles weren't the ones that attacked the border station in Gleiwitz.
It was someone that was dressed as Poles.
I don't exclude the possibility of existence of local dogs of war, neither the personal vendetta (that took off control) of Croats or Serbs (someone used the opportunity, and the blame was put on Croats), but I also do not exclude this possibility.
I believe that there're Serb whitnesses that know about this, but they're afraid for their lives or their families (but they're afraid from the Serb criminals and/or the special forces I've talked you about), so they don't want to testify or even to acknowledge that they know anything about this.
War of Croatian Independence was full of international intelligence actions, both of us know that. Therefore, we cannot exclude all these possibilities. Kubura (talk) 02:00, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Topic ban

About a year ago I warned you against disruptive tendentious editing on topics related to the Yugoslav wars (see above on this page). I now notice that you have persisted in the same type of tendentious editing, including very recent edits of a blatantly non-neutral kind on Battle of the Dalmatian channels ([28] and Log Revolution ([29]). The edits to "Log Revolution" are also objectionable under a copyright/plagiarism perspective, as they were inserting large amount very closely paraphrased material from a copyrighted source. Other recent edits were also problematic [30].

Under the discretionary sanctions rule of WP:ARBMAC, I am therefore topic-banning you from all article edits to topics related to the breakup of Yugoslavia and the Yugoslav Wars, for a period of 6 months. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:14, 14 October 2011 (UTC)