User talk:Stefke

Welcome!

Hello, Stefke, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Sideshow Bob 23:17, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please use edit summaries

Hello. Please be courteous to other editors and use edit summaries when updating articles. The Mathbot tool shows your usage of edit summaries to be extremely low:

Edit summary usage for Stefke: 0% for major edits and 0% for minor edits. Based on the last 14 major and 0 minor edits in the article namespace.

Using edit summaries helps other editors quickly understand your edits, which is especially useful when you make changes to articles that are on others' watchlists. Thanks and happy editing! --Kralizec! (talk) 02:43, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:Grb petrovic njegosa.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Grb petrovic njegosa.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Cs-cg rs.PNG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Cs-cg rs.PNG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 21:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi, there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot 00:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Britps111.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Britps111.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:55, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2004 flag

Well why was then the new flag adopted by DPS in 2004 precisely, for which reason? --PaxEquilibrium 16:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No one gave me that right - thus, I'm not calling them irregular. The session of the assembly that adopted it was. I know a lot of people from Serbia who had that kind of opinion before the Bulldozer Revolution when they talking about parties not belonging to the Red-Black Coalition (SPS and SRS).

The symbols are awaiting to become legal in the true sense - while this may not count in the case of the national anthem, which is particular because in 2004 the law was enacted for the first time, not being able to reach a consensus as far as 1993 - the case is not with the flag and the coat of arms. Both already constitutionally exist, and there's here a glitch in Montenegrin Law - technically, a two-third supermajority would be needed for that. Instead, the symbols were adopted in an irregular session and by a simple majority rather.

No, I am not aware that I am insulting Montenegrin symbols - in fact I am sure I'm not. I'm not the one who says what's regular and what's not - but remember that the very Speaker Ranko Krivokapic scheduled an irregular session intentionally informing the ruling coalition, and not the opposition - in an attempt to evade the controversy and cunningly overcome it.

What principality are you talking about? When?

Not true. Both are de facto equal in both MNE and SERB, but Latin is favored in Montenegro ever since 2004. Do you have another explanation why DPS (and even opposition SNP) then changed their party names to Latin, and why the "Maternal Tongue" is taught primarily in Latin? Also, you should be aware that the true proponents of the Montenegrin language (e.g. the Doclean Academy of Sciences and Arts) support Latin completely.

Are you sure it should be only about the State Flags? --PaxEquilibrium 11:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, who actually confirmed the (strategy of) favoring of Latin script in this very post of yours. :)))

I agree with you on the flags issue.

However, I could also say that AFAIK MNE is direct successor of the Communist Montenegrin state - and the Axis puppet-state (by some opinion) the furthest. In most cases (MNE could be excluded in this one) in 1945 modern Yugoslavian states were created. I disagree with you - MNE is also (in the same manner) a direct successor of the theocratic state that existed, and through that it's successor of the Ottoman Sanjak of Montenegro, i.e. the Crnojevics' Zeta (but perhaps not beyond that, although we could with thin lines proceed over to the Zeta of the Balsics and thereof). The only reason why I included that data is because it seems inappropriate at the List of... article - so where should I keep the info then? --PaxEquilibrium 12:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First of all there is no discrimination of Cyrillic, but it's being greatly pushed out of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia (it's dead in Croatia already).

It's funny how you say that after countless Montenegrin users (even User:CrnaGora) tried to point out at the Montenegrin language article that the Montenegrin language will only use Cyrillic in the future, to differ it from Serbian. ;)))

Really? Oh god, User:Sideshow Bob said that wasn't the case - then we have to delete all those images. --PaxEquilibrium 12:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.s. It's funny how Montenegrin students at the University of Belgrade have completely forgotten Cyrillic and most need a refresher course from me. :) --PaxEquilibrium 13:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. BTW the CANU has up to only recently opposed the replacement of Serbian language, but from what I've heard opinion of academic individuals are now largely divided, with the pro-Montenegrin slightly dominating over the pro-Serbian side. But you should now that it actually doesn't mostly depend on MASA - but on Matica Crnogorska and the Ministry for Education (Government) primarily, but international recognition (which yes, includes the Board for Standardizing of the Serbian language) too to an extent (compare the situations in which Moldovan and Macedonian languages are).

And you won't. They're both gone from Wikipedia. :)

I never said discrimination of Cyrillic is MNE... it's only a little different from the situation in Serbia (heck, if the law didn't proclaim just Cyrillic official, I reckon the situation would be pretty much similar). --PaxEquilibrium 21:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Montenegro

Why did you remove the historical section of Flag of Montenegro? Corvus cornix 04:33, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) It always helps when you use edit summaries to explain your edits. Corvus cornix 04:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you actually count SDP? --PaxEquilibrium 11:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Language

Yes, I know. The situation seems very hilarious. :))) --PaxEquilibrium 11:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SOCs

Yes, and I forgot: the official names (prior to the unification of 1918/1920) of the Churches of Serbia and Montenegro were Orthodox Church in the Kingdom of Serbia and Serb-Orthodox Church in Montenegro. Ironic... :))) --PaxEquilibrium 13:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete this? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:55, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another interesting controversial thing of the MOC is that they do not celebrate Saint Sava, which is completely nonsensical if they claim they're not a new invention from 1993. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know and yet it claims continuation with the old Metropolitanate - for which Abbas was one of the greatest Saints. I wasn't referring to slavas at all, but to general marking. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

By the way, how would character "ś" be in Cyrillic?
P.S. Well Montenegro has yet to become a true democracy like the other 5 ex-Yugoslavian republics, yes. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MNE

OK.

By the way, Serbia also adopted illegally its flag, anthem and coat of arms in 2004. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year and all the best in the new 2008!!! --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

His Grbovnik is loaded with errors, and also how come is it free of copyright? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:40, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Mnecoanicholasi.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Mnecoanicholasi.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:50, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Mnecoadaniloibasi.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Mnecoadaniloibasi.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Historical Montenegrin Coat-of-Arms

Thank you for your addition of historical Montenegrin Coat-of-Arms. However, you do realise that half of them will get eventually deleted, don't you? --Prevalis (talk) 17:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, Happy New Year's. Wish you all the best. --Prevalis (talk) 17:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stefke, I, honestly, am glad to see that a lot of the historical Montenegrin Coat-of-Arms are being uploaded and all, but I only have two objections to what you are doing.

1. Wikipedia isn't some sort of vexillological site, but rather an encyclopedia.

2. Most of the Coat-of-Arms you are uploading look blurry and hard to see. It would be nice, however, if you uploaded more clearer images.

Otherwise, you are doing pretty well and see that you heavily research Montenegrin vexillology (the study of flags) and heraldry (the study of coat-of-arms). I have an interesting suggestion for you. Why not create a site dedicated to Montenegrin vexillology and heraldry and the history of all the Montenegrin flags and coat-of-arms you can find. --Prevalis (talk) 23:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you're talking about websites, then I do. There is one very popular one, Flags of the World (FOTW), which included many historical Montenegrin flags and coat-of-arms from the 19th and 20th Century, however, most of those have disappeared from the site for unknown reasons. However, FOTW also has MANY mirror sites, which are not frequently updated, so you may check out some flags there, too (possibly including those flags that have disappeared from the official FOTW). --Prevalis (talk) 00:08, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it is the same for both cases. Examples: List of Norwegian coats of arms, List of coats of arms of Spain, List of coats of arms of Germany. They even have separate lists for first-level divisions of some nations, like Germany. --Prevalis (talk) 00:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I'll get started with the introduction of the article and fill it with all the necessary information before you can add all your contributions to the page itself, which should be by the time you log back on. --Prevalis (talk) 06:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've created the article, List of coats of arms of Montenegro. Overall, I've incorporated many of the Montenegrin coat-of-arms that I could already find on Wikipedia into the article/list. You may now feel free to add any necessary images to the article/list. --Prevalis (talk) 20:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Crnojeviccoa.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Crnojeviccoa.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mnecoadaniloi.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Mnecoadaniloi.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Files missing description details

Dear uploader: The media files you uploaded as:

are missing a description and/or other details on their image description pages. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the images, and they will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the images may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 01:31, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Balsici1.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:46, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another one of your uploads, File:Balsici2.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:45, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Srcg3.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Srcg3.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:PrincedomMNEdi.PNG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:PrincedomMNEdi.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Mnecoakingdom.jpg

The file File:Mnecoakingdom.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Mnecoaprincedom.jpg

The file File:Mnecoaprincedom.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Mnecoadaniloibasi.jpg

The file File:Mnecoadaniloibasi.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:KingdomMNEflag.png

The file File:KingdomMNEflag.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Crnojevicdjuradjcoa.jpg

The file File:Crnojevicdjuradjcoa.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Superseded by c:File:Coat of arms Djuradj Crnojevic.svg

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 09:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Crnojevicivancoa.jpg

The file File:Crnojevicivancoa.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Superseded by c:File:Coat of Arms of Crnojević dynasty.svg

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:42, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Krstasbarjak11.png

The file File:Krstasbarjak11.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Redundant to files at c:Category:Historical military flags of Montenegro

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Matr1x-101 _{(Ping me when replying)} {_{user page} ^{(@ commons)} - _talk} 13:06, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]