User talk:Amanuensis Balkanicus/Archive 4

"Karađorđe"
Serbian is much less well-known than major languages like French, Spanish, German. The great difficulty with such diacritics is that they are meaningless to most English-speaking readers. No doubt that’s why they are not used in general interest books in English, and only rarely in reliable sources. Perhaps we need a discussion somewhere on the whole subject. Moonraker (talk) 19:07, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * By all means. The article talk page would be appropriate for such a discussion. Best. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 19:08, 17 November 2020 (UTC)


 * , thanks for the reply. I was meaning on the whole subject of Serbian diacritics being used everywhere in the English Wikipedia, not just on the "Karađorđe" page. Can you suggest a place for that, please? Moonraker (talk) 06:02, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh. This would be a major change indeed. Perhaps take any ideas and concerns you may have to WP:RfC? I'm sure you'll get plenty of input. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:24, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

If you wish to communicate privately, I'd suggest that you do so by email. 331dot (talk) 01:28, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't believe we've met. Why would we do so by email? Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 01:29, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I had Sadko's talk page in my watchlist. 331dot (talk) 01:30, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I do, too. Small world! Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 01:33, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject Newcomer and Historian of the Year awards now open
G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Voting for "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" closing
G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 12:01, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Albanian–Yugoslav border incident (September 1998)
Hello. i saw you left a comment on the battle of Kosare talk page which addressed me. i had been restricted from editing do to our war but I can now respond to your complaint. The casualties which I put there came from the source listed which i based the article off when i created it. you should note that wounded are classified as casualties hence why i added the wounded under the number of casualties. Durraz0 (talk) 08:29, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sami (chimpanzee)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sami (chimpanzee) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:22, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sami (chimpanzee)
The article Sami (chimpanzee) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sami (chimpanzee) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:02, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Sami (chimpanzee) at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with db-g7, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 18:23, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Sami (chimpanzee)
—valereee (talk) 00:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Unification of Albania and Kosovo
Hallo dear, I saw you last edit/revert in this page and your edit is without source. Please write your discussion on Talk. - Kreshnik Prizreni (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Comoros
How am I being disruptive? The content is sourced and it clearly states (if you can read in French) that Comoros would like to establish diplomatic relations with Kosovo and the foreign minister states kosovo as an independent country Albaniakosova14 (talk) 13:45, 8 February 2021 (UTC) sockpuppet of Arianasmithy74

Srbinda?
Hello, Amanuensis Balkanicus. I see that you removed much of the content from Srbinda, leaving the edit summary "FRINGE". I also note, though, that the bits you removed did cite sources. It strikes me that the article, and Wikipedia, might be better served by referring to more mainstream analyses, and noting that these historians are outliers, if indeed that is the case.

I did a little searching on JSTOR, and it looks to me as though Marko Živković is a fairly mainstream scholar (although it is possible I looked at the wrong person; there seem to be several scholars of that name). Is the work you objected to perhaps an "alternative theoretical formulation", rather than "pseudoscience", as described at WP:FRINGE? In that case, adding context is probably a more appropriate approach than removing the material.

Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 00:31, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, . Sorry for the late response. Živković is used to cite the mere existence of the word srbenda. Nowhere does Živković write that srbenda is etymologically derived from srbinda. That's a matter of WP:SYNTH by the person who wrote the paragraph. The other sources are from 1934 (WP:AGEMATTERS) and a pseudohistorian (Draško Šćekić). I hope that puts things into context. Happy editing! Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Battle_of_Vrbanja_Bridge casualties?
Hello, Amanuensis Balkanicus. I see that you removed much of the content from Battle_of_Vrbanja_Bridge about the casualties, setting the page to the number of French casualties. I also note, though, that the bits you removed did cite sources. As I have exposed it to Peacemaker67 in the talk page, there no enough credible source to have the "3 french casualties" prevails, and all serious and credible sources have the "2 casualties" version. Could you please cite your sources unless I have to revert your changes (please cite the name, unit and date of the third french soldier deceased). regards BihacVet — Preceding unsigned comment added by BihacVet (talk • contribs) 14:49, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, . The article in question is a Featured Article. All edits must be made using reliable sources, must not be redundant and must adhere to the high standards of FAs. The sources currently used state 3 dead. If you wish to change this, please present unimpeachable sources that state otherwise. For the record, I wasn't the major contributor (that would be ). If you have any questions or recommendations, I suggest you take them to him. Thanks. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:51, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Banja Luka Zalužani Airfield
Dear, kindly check my reply to your comment on my talk page. Jan olieslagers (talk) 16:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Checked. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

"Headquarters of the United States meditation room" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Headquarters of the United States meditation room. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 18 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Kawnhr (talk) 18:53, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

History of Croatia
I edited 'Croatia in the Habsburg Monarcy (1527-1918)' as 'Croatia in the Habsburg Monarchy (1527–1918) and Ottoman Empire (1492-1791 and 1809-1810)'. Because Ottoman Empire ruled parts of Croatia like Habsburg and Republic of Venice. But, it was reverted unfairly. Existence of Republic of Venice in Croatia was limited in western Istria and Dalmatia. Before taking remnant of Hungarian Croatia in 1527, one of Habsburg Monarcy in was limited in eastern Istria. But, they had sections in this page. Existence of Ottoman Empire in Croatia was lasted three hundred years and sometime most of it was part of her. But, she hadn't any section in this page. Why ? As if there was an Anti-Turk sentiment on it. Please, you finish this sentiment and add an Ottoman Empire section in this page, please. Yours sincerely

Warning
Per this discussion at AE, you are formally warned about about editing tendentiously -- In actu (Guerillero) Parlez Moi 01:58, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Revert of Albanian Civil War
In your revert of Albanian Civil War, I understand your comment, however WP:MOS, WP:DATE and other Wikipedia guidelines are to always include the year in a date. The reasoning is that, should someone take an excerpt of the article (or only read a portion of it), there is no confusion as to when the event took place. If the date(s) in the excerpted section(s) don't include the year, the user of that excerpt would be confused as to when the event occurred. This has been a long-standing guideline, at least as long as the 14+ years that I have been editing Wikipedia. Would you please reconsider your revert. Thanks! Truthanado (talk) 21:05, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, . Thanks for reaching out. I've raised several articles to FA status and no one has ever complained about the year not being included in each and every sentence. As per WP:DATE, it is permissible to omit the year when there is no risk of ambiguity. Since all the events of the civil war took place in 1997, and since this is already mentioned in the article, there is no such risk here. I'm looking over WP:MOS and WP:DATE, and I'm not seeing where it says "[i]f the date(s) in the excerpted section(s) don't include the year, the user of that excerpt would be confused as to when the event occurred." Maybe I'm missing something? Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 13:29, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 26
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Austro-Hungarian occupation of Serbia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page South Slavic.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mihajlo Petrović (pilot)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mihajlo Petrović (pilot) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JPxG -- JPxG (talk) 20:21, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mihajlo Petrovi? (pilot)
The article Mihajlo Petrovi? (pilot) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Mihajlo Petrovi? (pilot) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JPxG -- JPxG (talk) 20:21, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mihajlo Petrović (pilot)
The article Mihajlo Petrović (pilot) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Mihajlo Petrović (pilot) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JPxG -- JPxG (talk) 00:41, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive
Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive and create a worklist at WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:22, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Mihajlo Petrović (pilot)
Hello! Your submission of Mihajlo Petrović (pilot) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

April 2021
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made&#32;to Nikola Kavaja: you may already know about them, but you might find Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned.   Hockeycatcat (talk) 08:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Mihajlo Petrović (pilot)
— Maile (talk) 12:01, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Albanian Civil War - Revert
I understand why you believe the year added to date in Albanian Civil War that you reverted is redundant, but that does not mean the year added to the date is not worthwhile. Wikipedia guidelines encourage the inclusion of the year on a date so that the reader is clear when the dated event occurred. Not everyone reads an entire article, and in this article (with the years added), if someone just looks at the paragraph starting "All major population centres ...", they would have no context of when the events in that paragraph happened. Further, if the year is redundant, why does a paragraph start "By January 1997, ..." instead of "By January, ..."? Would you please consider undoing your revert. Simply put, there is nothing in the article that clearly informs the reader that the Civil War ONLY happened in 1997, and including the year on each date DOES make that clear. Thanks for your time. Truthanado (talk) 00:33, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Gerda! Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 14:12, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Mitrovica / Banja Luka controversy
Good Day "Amanuensis Balkanicus",

It seems like, that you dont want to understand.

The city of Mitrovica is not twinned to the city of Banja Luka. For you information, they might be twinned with the northern part of Mitrovica but not with the rest of it (the main southern part).

You seem to be confused due to the page of Banja Luka not mentioning the word "North" while refering to be "twinned" with Mitrovica.

I understand your confusion. Your uncertainty is reasonable.

You should be aware that Bosnia officially does not recongize the independence of Kosovo, and especially its province of Rep. Srpska with the capital *Banja Luka*.

Since they dont recognize the independence of the country in which Mitrovica is situated in, they dont recognize the split governance of it either.

Especially the Rep. Srspka with its capital in Banja Luka dont. They support the claim of the country of serbia on the Rep. of Kosovo. As such, they claim the whole city of Mitrovica as serbian and as one single part.

This has also been shown on their page, which refers to Mitrovica as Kosovska Mitrovica with a *serbian* flag!

Either way, it makes logical sense, that a city doesnt/wont twin itself with a city of a country that does not recongize its state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by InNeed95 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

I hope you understand the problem now.

Best regards,

--InNeed95 (talk) 19:01, 28 May 2021 (UTC)


 * We go by what the sources say. You would need to find a reference that explicitly says North Mitrovica only. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:47, 24 May 2021 (UTC)


 * it makes logical sense, that a city doesnt/wont twin itself with a city of a country that does not recongize its state. If its to hard for you to understand simple politics, you shouldnt interfere. This is not meant as a insult. I am sorry if you feel like it was.

Before you change something, just answer me these questions.

Why and how would a city of a country twin itself with another city of another country, whose country does not recognize the existence of its counterpart? There are no diplomatic relations between the states of Kosovo and Bosnia. So how are two cities suppose to twin up?

Why does the page of the city of Banja Luka show a serbian flag instead of the Kosovan one, than both countries are supposed to be twinned/have relations?

Best Regards,

--InNeed95 (talk) 19:01, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kruščica concentration camp
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kruščica concentration camp you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tomobe03 -- Tomobe03 (talk) 08:01, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kruš?ica concentration camp
The article Kruš?ica concentration camp you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Kruš?ica concentration camp for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tomobe03 -- Tomobe03 (talk) 08:01, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Đakovo internment camp
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Đakovo internment camp you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 09:21, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of ?akovo internment camp
The article ?akovo internment camp you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:?akovo internment camp for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 09:22, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Revisions to Kosovo War
I was aware of allegations of 'support' iro Battle of Košare and on some other occasions. That doesn't change my request - "do you have a source for the country (as opposed to Albanians) being actively combatants?". Claims - especially contested ones - about providing 'support' don't turn someone into a 'combatant' otherwise nations providing all kinds of support would be listed in the various Yugoslav wars. I just relooked briefly at the Battle of Košare article, the only source there for Albanian Army involvement is a Serbian Ministry of Defence statement from 2018, which is hardly neutral nor reliable, though I appreciate there was some level of more active Albanian involvement there. Regardless of what exactly happened at Košare or elsewhere, AFAIK nobody writing about the war lists Albania as a 'combatant'. Pincrete (talk) 17:35, 13 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I must say I'm somewhat puzzled by your response. I provided four reliable sources describing the Albanian military's involvement in the conflict, and yet, you chose to respond with the non sequitur of the Serbian Ministry of Defence website, which wasn't one of the references I cited.


 * I don't agree with your slippery slope argument that by listing Albania in the infobox we would have to list all countries that provided any level of support to the warring parties. If engaging in direct combat on multiple occasions doesn't make one a combatant, I'm not sure what does. The fact is that Albania has been listed as a combatant in the infobox for nearly a decade and there are reliable sources to back up this classification. Given all this, the onus is on you to explain why the sources I provided aren't reliable or why we should choose to ignore them. Thanks. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 14:33, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Put simply, if it is generally acknowledged and stated explicitly that a particular nation or group were 'combatants' in this conflict - it goes in the infobox, if it isn't, it doesn't. It is WP:OR to extrapolate from sources the role or extent of involvement and would be misleading to imply in an infobox that a group or state was GENERALLY involved - when they might have had only a disputed and/or very tentative role in a small number of peripheral events, which especially if they are border events, are often fairly problematic and disputed anyway. BTW the source you supplied here speaks only of Albanian helicopters flying in Albanian airspace - admittedly carrying wounded KLA members who had returned to Albania, but that would not be generally regarded as military engagement or them being 'combatants'. I'm not the only one editing there, some editors are much more knowledgeable than I, but if you don't agree you are welcome to go to the talk page or to an RfC or RSN. Pincrete (talk) 15:18, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I think an RfC might be appropriate. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 13:24, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict...please fill out my survey?
Hello :)

I am writing my MA dissertation on Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. I will be looking at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article.

For more information, you can check out my meta-wiki research page, where I will be posting my findings when I am done.

I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out this quick survey before 8 AUGUST 2021!

Thanks so much,

~ Sarabnas (talk) 19:04, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Statement or agreement?
Would you be kind enough to send me the entire original text of, as you say, the Konculj Agreement? Thank you.--Savasampion (talk) 08:34, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Why would I do that? Reliable secondary sources refer to it as the Končulj Agreement.    Even academic websites that host the PDF of the original document refer to it as such.  So your contention that Končulj Agreement isn't the WP:COMMONNAME is WP:OR. Moreover, your edit summaries, such as "in fact it is true"   and "the fact is that Milosevic had a bad policy" , have nothing to do with what reliable secondary sources call the agreement. I would also advise you not to use the dispute over the naming to insert the names of people who most certainly weren't military commanders into the infobox, as you did here..


 * Please read Wikipedia's policies regarding original research and dispute resolution to avoid situations like this in the future. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 12:37, 1 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Well maybe ... because what matters is what the document is called by reading the title! So you claim that this (https://www.peaceagreements.org/viewmasterdocument/1430) is the original document. Okay, if it's an agreement, who are the signatories?--Savasampion (talk) 14:19, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * You need to read WP:COMMONNAME, WP:OR and WP:PRIMARY before edit warring and leaving passive aggressive messages on my talk page. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 19:03, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Co-nom?
G'day AB, I hope you are well? Do you fancy co-nomming Uroš Drenović for FAC with me? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 20:40, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, PM. I must say this comes as something of a surprise after that tussle a few months back. Needless to say, I always appreciated your high-quality contributions to the topic area, and after the AE thing I lamented that we wouldn't work together again. But I certainly welcome the opportunity. Now that you ask, I'm doing OK. How are things in Australia? An FA nom is long overdue for that one. I reckon we could pull it off. I'll have some free time over the next few days, so I'll get started working on it then. All the best to you and yours. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 03:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It's only reasonable given you've put a fair amount of work into the article. I enjoyed working on Kragujevac massacre with you, and while we might have had our disagreements at AE regarding Sadko, I feel you have the best interests of the encyclopaedia at heart. Pleased to hear you are doing ok, things here are actually not too bad (the eastern states not so much). Let me know when you think it is ready? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:21, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello AB
Hello AB. I know we had our differences in the past and started off on the wrong foot (mainly blame on my end), but I hope you will except my apology. I can be bold and brash at times. I can see from your recent edit history that you take the encyclopedia seriously through Reliable Sources, defeating vandals and creating positive contributions to articles. I hope that we can perhaps work on article and collaborate in the future. Hope you are doing well in your part of the globe. Things are still ridiculous here in the USA. Stay well. OyMosby (talk) 09:16, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, OM. Thanks for reaching out. I welcome any and all constructive contributions and will keep an open mind. Stay safe. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 01:16, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of David Albala
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article David Albala you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Luxtaythe2nd -- Luxtaythe2nd (talk) 20:01, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nomination period closing soon
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:42, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election voting has commenced
Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:37, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

about sock Orchomen ‎
He added unsourced content in Medieval Monuments in Kosovo stated by his sock Pipsally without any consensus. Its ok to revert he? Thank you. Aquinasthomes1 (talk) 11:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, you could cite WP:BANREVERT and WP:DENY to return the article to the status quo as it was before the summer of 2021. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 14:07, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Could you help me with the account user:InNeed95?Because he still vandalizes and gamingAquinasthomes1 (talk) 14:10, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * See Template:Noticeboard links. I'm not familiar with the details of your dispute, but I guess you could file a complaint at WP:DRN. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 14:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of David Albala
The article David Albala you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:David Albala for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Luxtaythe2nd -- Luxtaythe2nd (talk) 08:21, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Promotion of Uroš Drenović

 * Nice one! Thanks for the co-nom and your work on the article. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:46, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks, likewise! Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 02:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations

 * Thanks, Gog! Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 20:54, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting period closing soon
Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Requesting some article expansion help
Greetings,

Came across your profile while browsing short story 'the slave girl' of Ivo Andric.

Requesting visit to article Draft:Avret Esir Pazarları – an article about the state of non-elite common women slavery in Ottoman times.

If topic interests you please do help the draft expansion.

Thanks and warm regards

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 04:32, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I'm not very well acquainted with the history of the Ottoman slave trade. Perhaps you can ask someone over at WP:WikiProject Turkey. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 21:47, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

It's okay, that way I was looking for references from East European languages hence trying to reach out to East European users. That way I am trying since reasonable time. Idk how do I improve my approach. In due course if you happen to come across any other East European interested in topic please do recommend them to help out the article.

Thanks and warm regards

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 02:16, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK for David Albala
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

mikola22 violates topic ban ip
, ; He is edit warring now — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.206.36.42 (talk) 03:56, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for copyedits
Thank you for taking time to copyedit Armistice of Belgrade. Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 21:58, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
 * No worries, happy to help. Good work on expanding the article. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:16, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Bosnians article deleting sourced text
Please do not erase sourced text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chule87 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Survey about History on Wikipedia
I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, paposto@ncsu.edu Apolo1991 (talk) 09:53, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
All the best wishes to you, your family and friends !!! Theonewithreason (talk) 31.December 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you, . To you, as well. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 21:01, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

ce
Hi HB, Thank you for your message, big fan of your work so I’ll definitely keep your offer in mind! All my Best Aeengath (talk) 15:52, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Fadil Hoxha
No, we didn't talk about this. I added that he died in Kosovo under UN administration. What you returned creates confusion that it was an absolutely controlled part of Serbia, that is, Yugoslavia from Belgrade. There was no Yugoslav army, no police, no institution, as there is today. I have not added before that it is under the UN. Kosovo was then, and probably still is, an entity under international administration. I added a footnote.--Savasampion (talk) 11:29, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Uroš Drenović scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Uroš Drenović article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 27, 2022. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/April 27, 2022, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

We suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me?  15:52, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Kosovo note
I announced at the talk page the above.--Savasampion (talk) 13:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Outing notice
Please review WP:OUTING. Attempted outing is grounds for an immediate block. I won't do so for the recent interaction, but please be advised that other outing attempts will result in block with or without warning. 331dot (talk) 21:36, 26 March 2022 (UTC)