Talk:Borče Sredojević

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Borče Sredojević. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091018161425/http://www.boracbl.net:80/intervju/f_sredojevicborce.html to http://www.boracbl.net/intervju/f_sredojevicborce.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:36, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Risky editing on BLP
Before User:FkpCascais take any of the steps provided by Wikipedia guidelines, user should take notice of the fact that they are editing on WP:BLP as well, and that sources User:FkpCascais talking about are extremely scarce, biased and unreliable for article of such intended scope: unreliable and biased (Sportlive.ba), extremely politically biased (Glas Srpske), and self-published (Non-FIFA News agency - last time they published in 2012 were hosted at blogger.com). So, yes, I removed and User:FkpCascais reverted to a version with extremely unreliable sources and claims it supposedly verifies - on BLP. Next time User:FkpCascais or anyone else decide to revert to version containing such an extraordinary claims, referenced only by unreliable and biased sources (in Republika Srpska national football team(s) using even above mentioned reference with self-published source WP:SELFPUB), user(s) should consult WP:BLP first.

Further, User:FkpCascais rationalization of their revert of my edits, expressed in edit-summary, is dishonest and misleading simply because nothing is ever agreed on pushing for ethnic adherence of persons (footballers, coaches, etc.) in the lead of Bosnia (and/or Balkan) football and sport BLP's, simply because it is unacceptable to go against Wikipedia guidelines, namely WP:OPENPARA, WP:Lead, MOS:BLPLEAD and WikiProject Football/Players MOS, just to conform with Serbian, Croatian, Bosniak, Albanian, or any other editors' ethnic and/or national(ist) feelings.

Not to mention that User:FkpCascais (and few other) are pushing extremely biased view on nature of team(s) organized by Republika Srpska association, all the while going against WP:NOTA, WP:NFOOTY, WP:SPORTBASIC and especially WP:FOOTYN for pushing a POV on notability, without reliable sources as explained above. Basically, what creator and all editors willing to fight over this article are doing is pushing for a team that is a regional exhibition team at best to be included in Wikipedia as "national" team (now renamed into "official" team !?). Even when and if they played on few occasion in last 25+ years, and we don't have any sources for confirmation, according to what is written in articles, they played mostly against each others between generations (something like: Republika Srpska Under-14 against Republika Srpska Under-12).

In complete disregard of assuming WP:GF User:FkpCascais started reporting my edits primarily describing it and speaking of political motivations, alluding actually ethno-national motives, and such - so, when we are at it, I would like to know on what WP grounds User:FkpCascais, or anyone else for that matter, defends indefensible: creation and maintenance of non-existing Republika Srpska national football team(s), and a bundle of several affiliated articles/pages and categories, mostly on youth teams U-23 and U-21, at least three individual players, and several categories. Apart from failing on both general and football notability, entire bundle of articles-categories wrapped around an idea that this team(s) exists as a "national" team fail on WP:VERIFY completely - there are no references to confirm such idea and anything written based on it, and if there is a few, these are mostly unreliable and/or self-published.

Meanwhile, articles on affiliated players failing across the board as well, most importantly on WP:BLP, than on WikiProject Football/Players MOS, giving its readers some WP:UNDUE information based on unreferenced pushing of ethnic adherence of these player(s) into lead and first sentence, regardless to WP:OPENPARA; WP:Lead; MOS:BLPLEAD and WikiProject Football/Players.

It should be noted some clever notability masking (WP:MASK) by moving articles Republika Srpska national football team to Republika Srpska "official" football team (whatever that is supposed to mean).

So, go ahead, do what ever esteemed colleague editor(s) think they should do, but know about that Wikipedia-phenomenon called WP:BUNGEE too.-- ౪ Santa ౪ 99°  10:16, 1 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Folks should additionally see Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. Halo Jerk1 (talk) 03:47, 2 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I restored the cotent which is perfectly fine. That editor is engaged in an attempt to delete all information and categories regarding Republika Srpska official team, and he has no consensus for any of that. We do include data about non-FIFA teams representing nations or regions, there are special tournaments for them, and usually only nationalistic editors opposing those teams are making problems.


 * Regarding the info he removed claiming unreliable sources (what?), I edit football in the region for over a decade, and the source are perfectly fine. If the user believes some is ureliabe,can he explain exactly why? Thank you. FkpCascais (talk) 12:56, 2 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Glas Srpske is certainly not unreliable, and sportsport.ba is one of the main Bosnian sports websites. They are very reliable when it comes to data about local league. The editor complains exactly about what? FkpCascais (talk) 13:03, 2 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Easy pal, easy, don't make these misleading claims, nothing is "perfectly fine" in this article which is now discussed on BLP Noticeboard for breach of several WP guidelines, while discussion over categories at this moment is at 2:1 for deletion, including my nomination 3:1 (this 1 is your vote), and everything I did with this article can be easily checked in "diff's". Now I am going to repeat myself, but with more details - here's my contentions, again:
 * - Glas Srpske is the local ideologically driven media outlet, based in Srpska entity, and run by Serbs exclusively, who are closely affiliated to entity government and ruling party of SNSD and their boss Milorad Dodik, whose separatist rhetoric is naturally mirrored in Glas Srpske for decades, and it is disturbing enough for OHR, Peace Implementation Council, US govt, European Commission and Parliament and all its representatives in Bosnia-Herzegovina - in other words, everything they write should be taken with a grain of salt size of a mountain - even half of Srpska political, cultural and media establishment (especially those around SDS, Brčko Distrikt, Bjeljina and Semberija region) thinks their angle is extreme and biased one;
 * - I never removed Sportsport.ba for two reason: first, they are relatively reliable and medium-quality sport media outlet, and as such recognized across the region (former Yugoslavia); and second, simply because the claim this source is supposed to validate is retained within my version, it was just moved to another place within the article, re-formated per MOS;
 * - this can't be said for the Sportlive.ba portal, I would be surprised if they are able to function still; however, of all Balkan's high-quality sport portals editor includes this obscure portal because it confirms its article claim, which can't be found anywhere else - and as the article claim itself is extraordinary so it demands high-quality source, not some obscure Internet site;
 * - but even if we agree to use this obscure Sportlive.ba, and this biased and ideologically driven Glas Srpske, and if they are really giving us neutral and reliable information which can be used for article statements confirmation, than, it shouldn't be problem to find same information in all those high-quality media outlets too, or at least these sourced information should be widely disseminated through other media as well, if they are really valid (notable and verifiable), but trouble is there are no other sources for such information whatsoever, whether low or high-quality;
 * - ethnicity shouldn't be used in lead and first sentence, only nationality per WP:OPENPARA, WP:Lead, MOS:BLPLEAD, WP:BLP, and WikiProject Football/Players MOS, not to mention that pushing of ethnic adherence of these player(s) is always unreferenced and WP:UNDUE.


 * I am tired of including all guidelins links again and again - all relevant for this discussion are already linked in post above.-- ౪ Santa ౪ 99°  16:05, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

While waiting resolution in Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard, and since User:FkpCascais didn't reply on last TP discussion (just above), where I put forward exact points, disputing couple of article statements and its references (as well as breach of WikiProject Football/Players MOS), which user sort of asked me to elaborate, and which they also indicated as reason for their reverts, I'm returning version much more compliant to WP guidelines concerning WP:BLP, MOS:BLPLEAD, WP:V, WP:NOTA, WP:OPENPARA, WP:Lead & WikiProject Football/Players MOS.-- ౪ Santa ౪ 99°  16:09, 3 August 2019 (UTC)