User talk:SrbIzLike

Hi! I've noticed some of your posts so I came here to check you out. Then I've seen your contributions. You poor poor man. I mean, I can't even get angry at you, it's so pitiful. Maybe you should find yourself a woman or do some community work, it will do you good. This poison will just destroy you. --Zmaj 09:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Share Webpages

I recently created a subpage where Wikipedians can post any websites they want! If you would like to post some websites for other Wikipedians to visit, go HERE. Thanks! --S-man 19:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Impostor

He's blocked- actually someone blocked him a couple minutes before I did. Obvious troll. CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 22:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain your edits

Hi. You reverted my edit here without providing explanation either through edit summary or on the talk page. Could you please explain what you find problematic about the article, as I have explained my position on the talk page of the article at length? Thanks. --Elephantus 20:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Impersonator

Oh, I see. Yes, You are right, some idiot was impersonating You. Well, as far as i know my pals, I found it highly unlikely that any of them did this. You know, there are idiots with all kinds of political orientation, and one of them propably didn't like changes You made :).

But, I can assure You, this idiot was not sock-puppet of any of us. You can chose to believe me or not, it's up to You.

Wikipedia is a big place, there is a lot of background noise in any communication. This idiot was good example of that.

I don't know if this means anything to You, but there was a user called Cp6иja, and I warned him that it wasn't such a good idea to use such a name regarding the changes he made.

--Ante Perkovic 03:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Danke Deutschland

I started discussion on Talk:Danke Deutschland (song). I still didn't revert the text so You have time to explain your changes before someone else of "my pals" revert it.

If noone reacts to my questions, I'll have to revert it later.

--Ante Perkovic 05:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's problem with "southernmost"?

Hi,

I could make quite of long list of diff that prove that you don't actually read other people edits but just make blind reverts. Reverting "southernmost" to "most southern" is one god example (see here).

This blind editing exactly what you accussed "my pals" to do. One day, we'll have to call someone to judge on behaviours on both parties in dispute and, believe me, this won't look good for You.

So, I would kindly ask You one more time: do not make blind reverts. This is for your own good.

Regards, Ante Perkovic 05:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spomenik Juri Francetiću

Vidio sam tvoj edit na stranici o neo-nacizmu u kojem si napisao da je u Sinju podignut spomenik Juri Francetiću pa bi te molio da mi kažeš odkud ti ta informacija. Ne kažem da nije istina (budući da nisam iz Sinja pa se ne mogu zaklet), ali mi to zvuči čudno jer je kod nas u Hrvatskoj itekako zabranjeno isticanje ikakvih nacističkih simbola (eto baš su u subotu privedeni neki Bad Blue Boysi jer su roštiljali sa zastavom sa kukastim križem). Pošto nisam siguran da je to laž, nisam revertao, ali ako se pokaže da si ti to izmislio i stavio na Wikipediju, ja ti obećavam da će mi jedino što ću radit na Wiklipediji biti revertanje svakog i jednog tvog edita. Hvala. Jakiša Tomić 19:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eto, sjetio sam se tog incidenta i provjerio na googlu. Nije u Sinju nego u Slunju. Stavljen je dvaput i policija ga je maknula dvaput. Dakle, pišeš polovične i neprecizne informacije. Jakiša Tomić 19:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then add what you found. I have corrected the city already. 19:20, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks. I nije bio osobni napad nego želja da se pišu točne informacije. Dapače, nisam htio ni revertat nego sam se prvo javio tebi (za razliku od onog što bi većina napravila). A možeš li mi usput objasnit šta bi značio komentar "Sinjska alka"? Jakiša Tomić 19:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is Slunj, not Sinj, I have already corrected it before you attacked me and started to threaten me with wikistalking. That IS a very serious thing! SrbIzLike 19:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dobro je, ne moraš glumit sad da ti prijetim. Mogu ja prevest sve što sam rekao na engleski, ali mi se ne da. Samo te pristojno pitam zašto si napisao komentar "Sinjska Alka" dok si mislio da je to Sinj? To nije prijetnja. Nemoj bespotrebno glumit žrtvu. Jakiša Tomić 19:44, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I ono, ne volim kad mi se napada moju državu onako paušalno sa polu-informacijama. Vjerujem da si čuo i da je ploča sklonjena, ali ti je bilo teško to napisat iz meni nepoznatih razloga. A taj komentar "Sinjska Alka" si stavio samo iz ismijavanja. Nemoj to više radit jer stvarno nije lijepo. A ovo što sad praviš scene da sam ti ko zna šta rekao samo da bi oni koji ne znaju ni srpski ni hrvatski dobili krivu sliku, to neću ni komentirat. Daj se ponašaj kao čovjek. Ako već želiš pisat o Ustašama, traži prave informacije. Na moju veliku žalost, ima materijala za pisat o njima. Pozdrav Jakiša Tomić 19:55, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I am not playing victim. You said that you might revert every post of mine in your first post, and accused me of inventing the whole thing. But at that time, I have already corrected the mistake - Slunj instead of Sinj. Someone was already wikistalking me, see the fake account User:SrblzLike, that was created to impersonate me, and revert every edit I make. So I think that such threats were out of place, and it is a serious thing. As for what you say about the Slunj and Sinj, the plaque had writting "Croatian knight" on it. Sinjska alka is about Croatian knights. So, sorry if I hurt your feelings by making an ironic comment, but it is not my fault that some Croats think that Francetic is a knight. You would be better off being insulted by such displays, than by repulsion that they cause. For Serbs, calling a Serb-murderer a knight is extremely insultive, and I hope you can understand that we Serbs view such displays with a hit of sarcasm. SrbIzLike 10:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is insultive for Serbs. I am very sad about the fact some in Croats are proud about Francetic but I am proud with fact that our police reacted very very promptly. After your explanation about fake account it is clear to me why you reacted that way. I accused you for inventing the whole thing becouse, as I saw your edit, I tought you say that there is some plaque in Sinj and I made an effort to remember what are you talking about. After a while, I remebered about that incident in Slunj years ago (meanwhile you corrected your mistake) and it was clear to me you didn't invented that. But, I was ofended becouse of your comment (but you explained it now) and by the fact you haven't put comment about police reaction (which I think you should becouse it is very very different thing if facism is clarified by Croatian goverment and if it is not). Sorry about being rude to you. I sori zbog totalnih gramatičkih pogrešaka kad se trudim pisat engleski. Jakiša Tomić 17:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did not know about the police reaction when I first saw it on the net, and I saw it with a mistake, Sinj not Slunj. However, then I found on the page on Francetic that it was Slunj, and promptly changed it, before you contacted me. The next sentence said that from 2002 such displays were removed, so the fact that the plaqe was removed was already there. However, the plaque was removed four years after it was put, not imediately, as you can see from Jure Francetic. SrbIzLike 03:25, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that both of You are right. As I recall, the monument was removed after 4 years. After few days, it was replaced by another copy, but this time, it was removed after just 1 or 2 days. I still remember 20-30 policemans and special forces securing the site and removing the monument in 4 a.m.. SrbIzLike, if you have some spare time, and if You are interestedf in subject, could you please investigate this and correct the article.

Regards, Ante Perkovic 10:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Austria, not Croatia

I proved that picture Image:Lipadom.jpg was not taken in Croatia, but You reverted my edits. I have a feeling that you are trying to hide what I discovered.

Please, answer here: Talk:Neo-Fascism in Croatia.

--Ante Perkovic 10:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wherever the picture is taken, it shows a Croatian family in Ustasha uniforms, a horrible fact that Croatian children are rised in Ustashe tradition. I have a feeling you are trying to obscure that by long caption with contraversial claims ("massacre of Croatians"). The source can be left, but dont change the captions! SrbIzLike 03:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "massacre" is not controversial. The graves of theese people are found and properly marked. The only controversial thing is the number of people slaughtered. --Ante Perkovic 10:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The part "Croatians", rather than "Ustashi", is conraversial. The claim that there were innocent civilians there is highly contraversial. There was massacre of Ustashi and execution of war criminals, not a massacre of Croatian civilians. Nevertheless, its a crime, one of the many commited by communists. However, not as big crime as it is suggested by Croatians nowadays. SrbIzLike 09:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of cours some of them were Ustashi, but only some of them, not majority.I believe You might be grossly misinformed about this, but I won't change it until I find a proper reference. --Ante Perkovic 10:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever the case in Bleiburg, the people on picture were clearly in Ustashe uniforms, and that of some of the worst Serb-killers - Black Legion. So, I think that is the main point here, not the Bleiburg issue. It is fair to say where the picture is taken, but not to sidetrack the issue. There were other instances of black uniforms in Croatia, and it is clear that some people in Croatia think it is OK to wear the uniforms and identify Black Legion as heroes or even victims, not murderers they were. Jure Francetic was called "Croatian Knight" and plaque existed with this encription for 4 years in present day Croatia. Demonstrators against Gotovina handover wear ustashe caps in Zadar. There was a defile of people in ustasha uniforms there too. That you (or many in Croatia) might think that Bleiburg was worse than Jasenovac speaks much about Croatian withewash campagn, but does not make sources more reliable - if Pavelic cousin in 1990 claimed that in Bleiburg killed consisted of 10 000 Ustashi and domobran, how come that turned into hundreds of thousands of civilians few years later. Im highly suspicious of Croatian sources about this. In fact, in 1980s man who claimed that Brits were responsible for deaths of Croat soldiers (Ustashi etc) killed in Bleiburg lost libel suit and was subject to punishment for his outrageous claims, and that is the only non-Croatian source, and before 1990 only Ustashe talked about Bleiburg (in much less contraversial terms than is now official propaganda in Croatia) SrbIzLike 10:22, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I repeat - I don't want to discuss total number, I just want to say that great precentage of killed people were civilians. Regarding uniformes, I read somewhere that people were takne from homes and forced to wear black uniformes, and then taken to Bleiburg. I do not say that this is true, but You shouldn't be to sure in Your version of the story. In any case, the references will be found soon. --Ante Perkovic 10:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User EurowikiJ

Hi. I have trouble with User:EurowikiJ who is engaged in many revert wars, in fact he only reverts and never discusses. I have a trouble with him regarding removal of well sourced material from page Tourism_in_Croatia about attacks on tourists from former Yugoslavia (Bosnia, Montenegro, Republika Srpska, Vojvodina, Serbia), that were well sourced, and otherwise simply deletes data he does not like. He even removes warnings from the talk page not to do so. Any help with dealing with this vandal, who refuses to engage in discussion, would be much appreciated. Thanks! Mostssa 13:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of Croatia

Why did You put Jasenovac camp in category:History of Croatia when it doesn't belong there but to NDH category? --Ante Perkovic 16:36, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation: putting Jasenovac in category:History of Croatia, while other, better, category exist, would be something like "disrupting a wikipedia to prove a point". Anyway, please try not to make blind reverts, even when your oponents do so. --Ante Perkovic 22:54, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Croatian War of Independence

Hi SrbIzLike,

I noticed you put a POV-check on the Croatian War of Independence article. Can you please put an explanatory note in the discussion section, noting what needs to be changed so that the article conforms to NPOV.

Thanking you,

croatian_quoll 01:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

July 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Croatian nation and ethnic cleansing, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Ros0709 (talk) 22:12, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]