User talk:Bbik/Archive 2

(← Golubac fortress archive | Archive 2 | Smederevo fortress archive →)

Katherine Anna Kang
Hate you. :P I just got around to editing Kang's page, only to find you got there literally minutes before me. Well, you did a nice job anyways. Cheers. SavantEdge 17:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh, that's been happening to me on just about every page I try to fix up. There's still plenty to do though!  Even aside from the lack of inline references, several of the bits I added are little more than copy/paste from the websites, and they still have more info that I don't have time to sort through. -Bbik 18:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Golubac fortress
You could post your question at Portal:Serbia or WikiProject Languages were someone with better serbian can help and perhaps provide with other sources. Remember that the sources in an article can be of any language !!

Regarding content direct copied from another source into wikipedia see Copyrights. It is not allowed and either the article has to be deleted or re-written. Happy editing, STTW (talk)  08:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Friedrich Hopfner
I forgot about adding an infobox. Sorry if you feel your time was wasted! This is a good example of why improvements to an article should be made piecemeal and in situ, and not worked on separately in user pages. I have done my best with technical terms but some cannot be translated confidently without access to a university library (and mine is shut for the weekend). Xanthoxyl 12:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Serif
Hi, I noticed that you diambig'd "Gothic". But you got the wrong link. The "Gothic" mentioned in that article does not mean "blackletter". Japanese gothic typeface might be the closest correct disambiguated link for the correct sense; unfortunately no one seems to be convinced that "Japanese gothic typeface" should be renamed to drop the "Japanese" connotation.—Gniw (Wing) 03:46, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, this is very sad, because it illustrates that knowledge can get lost. With Wikipedia's sometimes bizzare policies, things can only get worse. What happens is:
 * The word "Gothic" is an early term for "sans serif" because the "type colour" (usually called font weight nowadays) is similar to Blackletters which are also called "Gothic"
 * The Far East borrowed the name "Gothic" for sans serif
 * Gradually, the term "Gothic" got fallen into disuse in the West (probably because it is ambiguous, not because it is "incorrect")
 * However, in the Far East (especially Japan) the name is still being used
 * As a result, lots of people in the west does not know that they invented the name "Gothic" themselves, thinking that the term originated in Japan (they first encounter the term "gothic" when they see Japanese font names on their computer…)
 * The fact is, "gothic" meaning "sans serif" had never been a Japanese thing. I just cited a Chinese book on the talk page of Japanese gothic typeface, and if I try very hard I should be able to prove once and for all that "Gothic" is a Western term. But unfortunately all the new books are useless and old books are hard to find.
 * Even currently practising typographers sometimes have incorrect information (by which I actually had to prove to some typographer working on an article that "gothic" was invented in the West, not in Japan), probably because the term had fallen into disuse for too long, people forgot what their old books say. And the software companies have too much power nowadays.
 * This is, IMHO, a sad state of affairs. The name "Gothic" is not "wrong" per say; it has fallen into disuse, but you can't say it's wrong when you still have fonts with the word "Gothic" which are just sans serif.
 * As I say, don't believe everything you read on Wikipedia. Maybe I'm too pessimistic, but I can't imagine how I can be optimistic if I can't even get such small things corrected.—Gniw (Wing) 05:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Xyz (disambiguation)
Please do not try to disambiguate links to "Xyz (disambiguation)" type redirects to disambuguation pages. They are there for a reason, that is to prevent false disambiguation. See: Serif and Gothic (disambiguation) -- Petri Krohn 08:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I would appreciate if you could revert your edits, if you deleted any more of these. -- Petri Krohn 08:38, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks :-)  -- Petri Krohn 07:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Digging through deleted pages
Nish was originally a redirect to Nis (later Niš) that was hijacked by a comedian for a personal article, and then deleted as an advertisement/vanity page; I've re-created it as a redirect to Niš.

Horon...man, what a mess. Anyway: Everything now in the Horon section of the Hora article was also in the deleted Horon article, so it was probably copied over, as you suspected.

And it looks like it's still a copyright problem; the paragraph beginning "Authentic Pontic dance is characterized by small, quick, precise steps..." was on this page as far back as 1999, according to the Internet Archive.

Looking at formatting of the older versions, the "Types of horon" list was obviously cut and pasted from the chart at (weird tabs and spacing, etc.), so that should probably be removed too.

If you need any more help, just let me know. &mdash;tregoweth (talk) 06:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Infobox
Hi Bbik ! Too may infoboxes and very little text firstly is a bad idea. Usually infoboxes bring along predefined space/location parameters and the text around them has to adjust itself. So here I would advise to expand the article and the infoboxes would behave the way you want. Happy editing, STTW (talk)  18:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Translation
Here is the title and first paragraph from the polih web-page:

A Karaim legend About a red and white rose or about a bad thorn bush

Many, many years ago, in Crimea, in the capital of the Chans, lived famous young Babakaj. However fame, beauty and youth were not the treasure of Babakaj. His treasure was Bijana of marvelous beauty, and the knight Babakaj was the treasure of Bijana.

It doesn't seem to me that this has any relationship to the Babakaj stone at Golubac castle, neither does the other quoted page.

Syrenab 14:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the catch on my criteria application page, I appreciate it. I thought it was a good idea to do that because I included a lot of relevant links in the WP space, pretty helpful to a GA (and Wikipedia) newcomer was my thought process. Plus it really cuts down on questions about reviews. Thanks again. IvoShandor 04:15, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Most editors apply the criteria differently, in their own picky ways, usually. But in all the idea is to make the encyclopedia better, so it helps, what did you nominate, I will give it a look tomorrow morning when I get off work. IvoShandor 04:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Also I am prone to overlook minor problems if the article is good. IvoShandor 04:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * If on my computer, I am usually on the Wiki. : ) For now, work calls me back. I shall check the article in the morn. IvoShandor 04:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Golubac fortress,

At a glance:
 * Convert the lists to prose.
 * Expand the lead to conform to WP:LEAD.
 * Either stub or lose the red links.
 * The location and history section is long. It should either be divided up into two sections, "Location" and "History." Or use WP:SUMMARY in an appropriate fashion.
 * In recent years belongs under "History".
 * I wonder, is their any conservation and/or protection effort here.
 * Split up the Notes and references sections.
 * External links sections go last, after everything else.

These are just a few things that will need to be fixed to pass GAC (probably). I can go through the prose and do a more in depth assessment too, but these should probably be addressed first. IvoShandor 08:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I have placed the article on hold. Further comments can be found at: User:IvoShandor/Notes on Gobulac. I copied the above comments to the article talk page as well. Feel free to edit the Notes page in my user space as tasks are complete or as discussion may arise. I have found the templates done and not done useful in the past, as opposed to striking out finished tasks. IvoShandor 09:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Just wanted you to know that if you think that all of the above is going to take more than seven days I can fail it now and before you renominate it take a look, evaluate and, eventually pass. I must say it is an interesting article on an interesting subject and once it's up to the criteria it will make an excellent addition to Good articles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by IvoShandor (talk • contribs) 13:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC).


 * Done blathering now. Feel free to edit the comments page. IvoShandor 09:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The red links should so not be a big deal. Just remove them, you can drop them in your user space, for self reference and then add them to the article as they are created, as it is, with a lot of red links, it is massively distracting to the reader. Links should enhance the experience not hinder it. Just my POV. Also, I haven't had a chance to look at the article yet. Or really respond to much. : ) IvoShandor 12:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course, if you stub them or whatever, that's fine too, I am okay with a couple, they encourage the wiki. IvoShandor 12:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


 * A citation or two in the significance section wouldn't hurt. IvoShandor 07:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I went ahead and passed the article, see talk page. Good work and congrats. IvoShandor 07:52, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I know you are, that's why I passed it, as the outstanding issues are minor considering the citations do exist elsewhere and you are working on adding them. Again, good work on the article and way to bounce back from my critical assessment. You've earned the GA and this: The Resilient Barnstar

Our Chalet
Thank you for helping with Our Chalet. If you'd like, you're welcome to join the Scouting Project at WP:SCOUT and it's GG/GS task force. As for your change to See also, I changed it back as Gilwell is the premier boy scout international center, like Our Chalet. The other WAGGGS cetners are already in the lead and linked there and when articles are linked in the body, it is wiki policy not to re list them in See also. If you could find a nice free photo of the main building, that'd be awesome. Rlevse 11:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Answered some of your questions, put notes inline in a few spots, see my talk page too.Rlevse 23:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I've made a round through your questions and comments. Feel free to copyedit, etc. There are two basic problems with info for this article:
 * the book WAGGGS sent me for it ends in 1999 and much of it is various people's recollections, vice background info, so it doesn't lend itself to encyclopedia info, such as it says "the first Quo Vadis..." but doesn't tell you what it is. In summer 2006 I got a similar book from Gilwell Park and it was much better for this purpose as it told you the history and background of everything, so we got that article to FA in only about 6 weeks (starting as a stub).
 * There is far more info avail on Gilwell than Our Chalet, do google searches and you'll see what I mean.
 * I truly appreciate all your help. I'd like to get this to at least GA.Rlevse 13:04, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Awards
I put a sample of how I do mine on you your user page, just an option to consider. When you list them this way one after another, they line up rather nicely. Look at my page for more detail.Rlevse 11:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I was wondering how you do that. With just the one, however, I'm going to stick to how I have it now.  But if I ever end up needing it, at least I can go find the code in the history. -Bbik 19:04, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I made this!
In case you need to wikilink this man, I've just made the article. Just a small break to my wikibreak ;-). See you. Duja ► 12:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Possible red link elimination is a good thing. I'll give it a quick copyedit when I'm a bit less out of it.  Does this mean you're actually taking that break now, though, so questions that come up likely won't get answered for a while?  Or just that you're actually taking a break from working on articles now? -Bbik 01:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * FYI, I've already been on a break for two weeks or so -- if you check my recent contribs, they're all related with... your work :-). I'm going to Smederevo on Friday so I hope I'll have some pictures for you afterwards. Duja ► 06:47, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh, I had noticed that. Wasn't quite sure if that meant you were ignoring the break or what, though -- I'd been thinking "break" meant not editting at all, rather than just not much.  And yay for pictures!  Any chance you can get some of the specifically mentioned parts (Inscription tower, maybe palace/hall/whatever those others in there are)? -Bbik 01:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

New translation
Bbik, you know if I had the time, I'd help you :). But right now I'm swamped. I have several obligations pressing down on me, and I doubt I'll be free anytime soon. Work, work, work... Deeply sorry mate. I'm officially passing the torch to Duja. -- xompanthy 16:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Eye color protection
I've semi-protected eye color. (Who would guess that an article about eye color would attract vandalism?)

Let me know if you need any more help. :) &mdash;tregoweth (talk) 00:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It's currently set on "infinite" semi-protection (the page will be protected unless someone removes the protection). Page protection can be set to expire after a certain time, but as this page seems to attract many dubious edits, leaving the protection on may be best. &mdash;tregoweth (talk) 00:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Just about every high school article I've seen is riddled with vandalism -- they should probably be semi-protected by default. :) &mdash;tregoweth (talk) 02:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Raymond Cheung vandal
Got 'em, thanks for the heads up. Let me know if any more pop up. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Re:Questions
Back in the second half of the 14th century the Serbian Empire had existed under the sense of being a single state, but de facto the feudal lords maintained numerous independent states (some of the major ones were Principality of Moravian Serbia, Lordship of Kosovo, Kingdom of Macedonia, Principality of Zeta, Realm of the Hum, etc.). The feudal nobles even fought wars among themselves, or even beyond the Imperial borders, but one thing was always common for them - they all new and always pointed out that they were subject to the very same Emperor and part of a single, united Empire (as it was before in the 1340s-1360s). The conscience about the unwritten "Imperial authority" have stood strong, even after the last emperor died heirless in 1371. The Balsha family was one of the first to start to wrest from central imperial control (what it was still strong).

Thus, all families (despite Slavic, Vlach or Greek origin; Catholic or Orthodox) in such a realm were "Serbian dynasties" (perhaps "dynasties of Serbia" is more clearer to you?). Balshich's Zetan princely fief never in truth considered itself an independent realm; which is especially shown as in the end when Serbia was restored after many sufferings as a Despotate, they worked together as one state since the 15th century, and the Serbian ruling family inherited Zeta as the Balshichs died out in 1421 (reunification).

Well if You must know, I was born in Croatia, but am not of local descent, but from Montenegro.

I know CrnaGora, but he never told me he was a war refugee. Something's strange there - maybe he made a mistake? --PaxEquilibrium 11:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I copyed Pax's layout on his userpage and accidentally forgot to renove the war refugee part. --CG 17:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok. Thanks for clearing that up. :) -Bbik 19:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * There's a perfect explanation - see House of Crnojević (there were too Late Medieval dynasties in Zeta that always fought among themselves for control). You see, in the later 14th century the Crnojevics always kept fighting the Balsics for control over the Serbian seaside, and succeeded through allying with the Republic of Venice in becoming an important political factor along the coastline, that never recognized central rule, imperial or otherwise. After the die-out of the Balshichs the Crnojevics were free to seize all of Zeta (until then they were unimportant irrelevant weak feudal lords that could not threaten a single knight should he stand on their way). With the temporary occupation of the Serbian Despotate in 1439, Ze(n)ta became the only free part of Serbia, and with the eventual diminishing of a tiny Despotate dependent on either Hungary or Turkey (or even Bosnia for that matter), the Crnojevics gathered and united entire Zeta under their firm and strong control. Their "Principality of Zeta", which as the late 15th century was passing became known more frequently as "Principality of Montenegro" was a totally independent realm, but frequently relying on the Most Serene Republic of Venice's, or Saint Abbas' Duchy's or even Ottoman Empire's aid.
 * This Montenegrin little principality remained the very last free and independent realm of the Balkan peninsular and served as a safe heaven for countless Serb and other refugees (families, feudal lords, peasants, whole infrastructures and tribes moved to Zeta/Montenegro) until finally the Ottomans invaded and abolished the Montenegrin realm (very last free piece of the Balkans) in 1496, fully conquering it. The Ottomans maintained it as a puppet-state with fictional vassalage until they transformed the Principality into a Sanjak (an Ottoman administrative unit); after meeting and quelling some fierce resistance, the Ottoman Turks even abolished the little they had ("Sanjak of Montenegro" that was under administration by Crnojevics that converted to Islam), by annexing the Montenegrin Sanjak to the main greater Sanjak of Shkoder. --PaxEquilibrium
 * Am I imagining or are You actually interested in this? ;))) --PaxEquilibrium 21:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey. I just wrote a long reply to You and it got deleted. :X
 * I'm a little tired of re-typing, so don't wonder if I'm swift - I'll have it by June (not earlier).
 * P.S. It's good that You like asking history-type questions, I like answering them (especially if it's Slavic and/or Balkan history). :))) --PaxEquilibrium 12:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I didn't know that. ;)
 * The historical manipulations in these arias are mostly made by nationalist claims of the four "grand Balkan nations" - Croats, Serbs, Albanians and Bosniaks (whereas since recently their nationalist ideologies find "collision zones" and cause wars, and are bent on destroying and quelling countless "lesser Balkan nations", i.e. Bosniacs, Slavic Muslims, Pomaks, Macedonians, Montenegrins, Ragusians, Dalmatians, Shoktzs, Carasevans, Ianyevs, Gorans, Docleans, Tribals, Zachlumians, Slavonians, Torlaks, Bunyevs, Narentines, Moravians, Timokians,... the list goes on countless).
 * The main problem is that there were 2 main elements - Serb and Croat - and as they collided, a South Slavic nation couldn't've been formed (and all others came out of them as "collateral damage" in inner conflicts between the two peoples). So with these Slavs, a different thing from the Poles happened - the tiny tribe of "Polish people" assimilated countless Slavic tribes and now there are Poles - the same is with the Czechs. But in here, there were 2: Serbs and Croats, and as even one tried to assimilate the other, this only caused more rifts, hatred and trouble.
 * ...and all Balkan controversies lie in there. :) If a tiny people known as White Serbs didn't came to the Balkans, most of the Balkan peninsular would be a Slavic unified "Croatia". Had there not been for the White Croats, this all would've been a greater "Serbia". Then again, if neither of the two tiny tribes came to the Balkans, we would've all been Bulgarians probably... and without the Bulgarians too, Slavs would've probably ended up like the Kashubians in modern-day Germany. ;) --PaxEquilibrium 22:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * There is no difference between "Bosniac" and "Bosniak" darn it, it's just mispelling! :D
 * Croats are Roman Catholic Christians and Serbs are Eastern Orthodox Christians (at least today).
 * Nothing else (at least today).
 * Theories such as Greater Serbia and Greater Croatia arose. While the Montenegrins traditionally took up Serb nationality, the Croats wanted them too. The Dalmatian Catholic population was very ambiguous, with both Serbs and Croats. The late Republic of Ragusa (all Catholics) listed Serbs in majority and produced some of the most prominent 19th century Serbs (Medo Pucić); Croatian influence elsewhere was much stronger and prevailed in the end (with even the Catholic in the Bay of Cattaro becoming Croats). Orthodoxes Serbs styled as as Croats like Svetozar Boroević started to emerge less and less. Catholic Croats self-styled as Ivo Andrić no longer appeared. The Carasevans were Orthodox Slavs that settled in the Romanian Banate. They all converted to Catholicism, and gradually became Croats, rather than Serbs; I don't even need to begin with the lesser cases controversy. After 1054 and the Great Schism all Croats and relatively most Serbs became Catholic Christians. Over the time Serbs converted more and more to Eastern Orthodoxy until they "found God" in it and created a Serbian Orthodox Church in 1219. This created the nationalist theory (Catholic=Croat) that most Serbs are really converted Croats - the population of Herzegovina was Catholic and then Orthodox (yet know Catholic Croats are the largest group again, but this has to do with birth rate and migration, rather than conversion which was frequent for Bosnia and Herzegovina).
 * You can't imagine what happened when a 3rd element, Islam, was introduced into the whole mess-up by the Turks (Bosnia and all).
 * Now finally the two nations have been indisputably formed with "firm" religious-based borders separating them (although I can't say the same thing for the poor "lesser" Bosniacs, Macedoniand and Montenegrins). --PaxEquilibrium 00:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Not Bosniaks; Bulgarians.
 * Simply because they became Catholics. No other reason (do you see know?)
 * Huh? Who converted back to Orthodoxy? Sorry, you got me lost on this one. ;) --PaxEquilibrium 00:47, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Serb=Orthodox and Croat=Catholic.

They became Catholic Christians became the Church drifted. They did not convert from Orthodoxy, it was just created with the Schism (1054).

The Croat=Catholic and Serb=Orthodox split was strong only since the 20th and is formalized only since just recently. ;)
 * Another example - many Catholic Serbs in Montenegro considered themselves Croats a while ago.

Nothing else. That's what I was saying. Oh, unless you don't count that there were state called "Serbia" and "Croatia". That contributed to it greatly. ;))) --PaxEquilibrium 09:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Just Christian, of course. But then again, the people was hardly religious again (baptized at birth and praying to Gods and sacrificing animals on altars). ;)
 * I'll have the first book by June. If ya need it earlier, you can try with someone else. --PaxEquilibrium 11:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Re:
Jesus, sorry about that mistake (referring to the Barnstar's text's contents)! :X --PaxEquilibrium 23:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

RE: Random request
Hi. Thanks for the feedback -- I'll try. I usually defer to 'comment' or similar when I'm insubstantially changing a comment I originally left, but generally prior to someone's response to it. I know I should use the 'Show preview' feature more, but sometimes I am eager. :) Is there a specific topic that prompted you to contact me?  Corticopia 03:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, OK. I tend to be a perfectionist when writing, so I often do that.  I'll try to be more observant, though.  Anyhow, I hope the solution I've arrived at holds. :)  Merci!  Corticopia 03:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I generally concur with you, but act differently -- e.g., making a number of edits/comments (multiple ephiphanies?) in quick succession through my dial-up connection! Of course, that doesn't avoid edit conflicts.
 * However, I think it better to have a subsection for 'Antiquity' for a couple of reasons: (1) those entries may not be readily apparent on some monitors (given that they are underneath the entires of 'modernity'), but are easily clickable/accessible through the table of contents; (2) it allows us and visitors to sift through the forest from the trees.  :)  Anyhow, thanks!  Corticopia 03:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Montenegrins
And what do you think on the Montenegrin history/issue? --PaxEquilibrium 13:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The region comes from Latin "Zenta". It was just a small, tiny territorial unit of the medieval realm of Doclea. The two terms ("Dioclea" and "Zeta") overlapped, but Zeta prevailed in the end (as a state was forged on the very tiny smallened bit of the Doclean realm). The name "Crna Gora" was just a geographical name for a part (btw in the medieval Serbian lands there were around 12 Montenegros) that fully replaced "Zeta" in the 15th century. The "Crnojevic" is, how to say, "both a coincidence and not", if you understand what I mean. :) --PaxEquilibrium 19:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, and that means "Black Man" and "of the Black Man". --PaxEquilibrium 20:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That would be yes, but at one point it was even larger than New England for example (like the time that it included the whole Balkan peninsula. Here are some maps.
 * Serbia in 7th-10th century
 * Serbia in late 11th and early 12th century
 * Serbia in second half of 12th century and early 13th century
 * Serbia in late 13th and early 14th century
 * 14th century Serbian Empire
 * I cannot find maps of the Despotate online, but they are almost identical to the maps of the 2003-2006 State Union of Serbia and Montenegro
 * Could you elaborate the 2nd half of your post please? I didn't get it. --PaxEquilibrium 20:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, one for example still bears its name to this very day - "Skopska Crna Gora", i.e. "Skopje Monte Negro", representing a geographical compact region centered at... well, Skopje, ;). --PaxEquilibrium 07:51, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Welcome
No worries Bbik -- thanks for your work on the cursive script! I think it looks great and really adds to the article =) AWN AWN2 02:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I really feel the need :)
Amazing work man. Truly. We need more people like you. -- xompanthy 13:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

MOC/SOC, MNE
Did you hear 'bout this? --PaxEquilibrium 18:53, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Kurów
Could you please write a stub about my hometown on Hessisch Dialekt here - just a few sentences based on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kur%C3%B3w or DE wiki? Only 3-5 sentences enough. Please.

PS. Article about Kurów is already on 171 languages. If your village/town/city hasn't on PL wiki, I can do article about it. (I'm first author of requests) Pietras1988   TALK  20:18, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I want do article about Kurow on all languages because I love Kurów and I want that Kurów will more famous. Pietras1988   TALK  04:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Of all the people...
Translating something written in 1496 or 1786 isn't very easy (although in the 19th century is considerably easier). ;)

BTW I never ever translated verses from old works written in Old Slavonic or Slavoserbian, because the point is lost in the translation (lol, just like that movie's title).

Cheers! --PaxEquilibrium 15:38, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, I translated for you at the talk pages. ;)
 * Now here's the hard bit (Đurađ IV Crnojević's word): ..and out of that cause, I leave to thee Metropolitan Germanius, and by him the future Metropolitans, all the so far, until the God concludes for the servian people different. Germanius is the general father and *Arch???*, and this is thy general church and monasterycraft, in whom He dwells; who can, so, better and more heartedly for thine good do more than thy spiritual father?
 * That's it (except that word).
 * Please don't make me do it again (often). ;) --PaxEquilibrium 16:13, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Nope, neither of the two.
 * It's a title of priests (not "big dude" titles or anythin'), but I can't really translate it (I do not think it can be translated)... --PaxEquilibrium 12:28, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Londonderry High School
I saw your updates to the Londonderry High School Page. I must say, having more than a thumbnail on the main page seems to be overkill. If you want the original pictures, I can give them to you, I just spliced them using the bundled software, though the pictures don't line up perfectly due in part to the bright light washing out the cameras display and me not having a tripod. Let me know your email address. cheque_some 23:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Russian cursive
That picture added to the article is actually mine, and was a bad copy of the previous removed images. Comments on the antecedent image seemed to imply that the style was an older system and not popular today. I know not a thing about Russian, I just wanted a free alternative to the other one. Just a note, because I think its presence will provoke many Russians' indignance that their beautiful cursive is represented by a horrible fascimile! ALTON  .ıl  05:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, thanks for the optimistic view! To be honest, I try to avoid comments like this (neither encouraging nor optimistic) as much as possible, so I want to be as sure as possible that my contributions are appropriate. ALTON   .ıl  07:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * That's probably the best explanation of Wiki I've ever received.
 * Thanks again. ALTON   .ıl  22:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:van Canto
Hi Bbik, the video link is already on the official site, so I removed it because of redundancy. Actually, I discovered this page when I was browsing Special:Linksearch to check pages with links to youtube, you're correct that youtube links are generally avoided due to copyrights problems. For the article in question, the link is on official site, so I suppose it doesn't violate WP:C. However, WP:EL lays down clearly that "Links should be kept to a minimum" (see here since you're curious =)), it doesn't help to include a link which repeats itself.

Have a beautiful day (or night). Best regards, PeaceNT 08:27, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * :-) PeaceNT 05:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Smederevo (/Crusade of Varna)
Why don't you deal with the Smederevo fortress?

Considering that there are much, much, much more sources for and how brilliantly you dealt with the less famous Golubac fortress...

Cheers! --PaxEquilibrium 20:55, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Crusade of Varna

As far as I understood, the actual Crusade was launched on initiative of Despot Djuradj Brankovic, the alleged "richest European". However there's nothing in there (he wasn't even mentioned before I put him under the list of crusader commanders). That's odd. --PaxEquilibrium 21:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Right, I've just checked the whole thing. Despot George lost in 1439 Smederevo, so he fled to Hungary. Unable to impose his son as the successor to the Hungarian throne through marriage, he found refuge in the the Republic of Ragusa. The last major Serbian city, Novo Brdo, fell in 1441. The same year he tried to organize resistance in Zeta, but failed; ending up with two of his sons in turkish prisons blinded. He retired back to Hungary, while Zeta (Stefanica Crnojević) found a new protector in the great Bosnian nobleman from the Hum, Stephen Vukchich Kosacha.
 * It is thus that in 1443 the expelled Despot tried heavily to urge for a Crusade to liberate Serbia. Using his personal connections and the immense wealth he amassed (according to which he was one of the wealthiest noblemen in Europe), he succeeded in organizing a Crusade, for which he had Pope Eugene IV's approval. King Wladyslaw III together with Janos Hunyadi led the Crusaders along with George Brankovic. By 1444 they managed to reach Sophia, but harsh winter disabled them from eliminating Ottoman Turkish presence in Europe. It is then that the Despot returned to his occupied country and a treaty signed in Edirne (Peace of Szeged) ended the war, restoring the Serbian Despotate with 24 cities, as a vassal to the Ottomans (taxes and military aid).
 * However, the Crusaders just months later broke the treaty and invaded Ottoman Turkey, but lost at the Battle of Varna - this became known as the "Crusade of Varna". They invited Despot George to participate in the Crusade, but he refused, deciding to remain a loyal vassal to Sultan Mehmed II.
 * In 1456 the Crusaders met their end after successfully defending Belgrade - in plague.
 * So it's because of the Crusaders' existence/presence that I consider the whole 1443-1456 events as a "Crusade". ;) Did I clear it up? --PaxEquilibrium 11:29, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that makes perfect sense.
 * OMG I just reread the part about your "computer traumas"!!! ;(
 * Why don't you take wikibreaks? --PaxEquilibrium 21:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * We can, but can't remember of a certain name.
 * Serbian historians call it "Crusade for Serbia", but that is just because Djuradj Brankovic initiated it and is in no way a "formal" name. I'm lost on this one. --PaxEquilibrium 22:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ragusian historian Mauro Orbini wrote a lot about it (seen here), but I don't have time for translating right now. --PaxEquilibrium 15:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

DYK
Peace of Szeged DYK (As an Ottomanist/Turcologist, it's always nice to see something from that region turning up on the front page) --BigHaz - Schreit mich an 05:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Crusade of Varna
I've had a quick go at slapping a DYK nom together for it. It's not great, and I may have slightly misinterpreted the sentence in question, but at least there's now something there. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 07:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Serbs & Croats
Don't you think that the supposed 12 million Serbs and 9 million Croats worldwide seem like a drastically insane over-generalization? --PaxEquilibrium 22:34, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Nah, I just asked. ;0)
 * The real figure is 5 million for Croats, and 9 million for Serbs (the constantly repeated 10 million figure is slightly unrealistic). --PaxEquilibrium 08:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * They are cited by insane sources. The so-called "Croatian World Congress" just wrote on its main title that there are as much Croats abroad as in the homelands of Croatia and Herzeg-Bosnia. User:Afrika paprika produced this figure by calculating all Croats in both states, then simply multiplying it by 2, receiving - and putting - a 9 million figure. And he put the sentence in the CWC as a source ;D. I guess since he's trolling tired most of us, no one really notices his additions any longer... I haven't watched the Serbs article, but I believe a similar issue is there present.
 * Because I'm plainly reverting vandalism. ;0) --PaxEquilibrium 18:32, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

DYK
Crusade of Varna DYK --Smee 10:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

RE: Wider Ops
Yeah, Wider Ops are now called Destinations apparently, I didn't know we had an article on them, but there is a small bit on them in the Girl Scouts of the USA article. I never actually went on one, but a friend of mine did. They are high adventure programs through GSUSA, some have stuff like hiking or SCUBA diving in them and they travel all over the place. I can find more information on them if you want.  Darth Griz98  03:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I did a stream restoration to slow some of the erosion and make the stream deeper for the fish. Heh, all the other girls that got there's this year did some kind of save the children projects, I saved the fish. I'm not sure how much Wider Ops (call me old fashioned but I refuse to call them Destinations)has changed, they seem to change the program every year much to our dismay. I would check out the GSUSA home page.  Darth  Griz98  14:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Your DYK nomination for Society for the Reformation of Manners was successful
DYK. Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 20:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Slovak Paradise National Park DYK. Thanks again Bbik. Blnguyen (cranky admin anniversary) 02:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Chief Yellow Horse DYK. Thanks again Bbik, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

King Arthur and King Cornwall
I responded at the talk page and at DYK. I hope that clears it up.--Cúchullain t/ c 01:58, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Your DYK nomination for Meon Valley Railway was successful
DYK. Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 23:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Aranthalawa Massacre DYK. Thanks for your hard work Bbik. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

King Arthur and King Cornwall DYK. Thanks again.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Serbia
Maybe my english is not very bad so you can explain to me what this UN resolution is saying ? Demands that Serbia and Montenegro and Serbian forces in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina immediately cease their aggressive acts and hostility and comply fully

There is only 2 options for that article. There will be writen about Serbia aggresion on Bosnia (which is confirmed by UN) or it will not be anything spoken about wars in Croatia and Bosnia. 3rd solution do not exist !

--Rjecina 16:10, 6 june 2007 (UTC)
 * Sigismung of Hungary has declared Đurađ Branković baron. Year for now is not know. Problem about that is PANONIAN refusal to accept that baron is hereditary title, so that his heirs has been barons of Hungary. He write that they have ruled parts Vojvodina like vassals and not like barons because of which in his thinking Vojvodina is part of Serbia in XV century. In the end I have come to conclusion that PANONIAN is fundamentalist which live in his world but I will not give up like many others which has let PANONIAN to write what he want (examples on discussion pages: Greater Serbia, Vojvodina, Greater Serbia, Greater Croatia, History of Serbia....)  You will not believe but I feel sorry for him. He is product of Slobodan Milošević school sistem and war propaganda.--Rjecina 01:51, 15 june 2007 (UTC)
 * I have ulmost forget. He has inherited parts of Vojvodina because Sigismund has given to Stefan Lazarević in 1404 lands in this province but not title. Đurađ has inherited lands of Stefan and Sigismund has created him baron (year not known). --Rjecina 02:11, 15 june 2007 (UTC)

Please can you look article Borders before and after Yugoslavia and write on discussion page your thinking if it is for wikipedia or not. Until now 3 users (and I) support this page but user PANONIAN is deleting this article. I do not know what is his problem but in my thinking he do not like that somebody write what territory has today independent states recieved and what have lost in Yugoslavia (question of Vojvodina ??).--Rjecina 04:21, 15 june 2007 (UTC)
 * In my thinking users which are making useful changes are supporting article. This have been Alaibot (question about category), CrnaGora (which has write in better english) and Kingstone93-cro (discussion on his discussion page). User CrnaGora has worked on this article under another name (now is Administrative divisions of Yugoslavia) because PANONIAN has kidnaped this article (deleted text, put another name and another text) so I have used text from that old page and created new. You can say anything you want but he is not having right to deleted article ! --Rjecina 05:20, 15 june 2007 (UTC)

Notability tag
As on Notability (academics) is written: "If an academic/professor meets any one of the following conditions... 6. The person has received a notable award or honor..." and Tatjana Aparac-Jelušić has received a notable award of honor Thompson ISI’s Outstanding Information Science Teacher of the Year - from American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST) – so is it enough for putting away notability tag, or is there something else? --Josip65 23:44, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

German Charles-Ferdinand University
The hole artikel were changed. You should check it, before you relauch the clean-up button. --Bauernfreund 12:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Skopje protection
No problem. Be sure to let me know, or report to WP:RFPP when the disagreements are resolved, or the discussion has stopped. Thanks, Nishkid64 (talk) 23:45, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

User ot-# templates
Hi! I noticed the UCfD for the related categories when I saw a red link on my user page, and have just gone through fixing the template links to those categories (Incidentally, any idea when the remaining categories will be deleted?). However, it seems there's also a User ot-0 template, though no category, and the new merged category doesn't really apply to that one. Any idea how it should be fixed?

Likewise, I noticed User ot-N is now included in the translators category, but the template doesn't actually say anything about translating, nor is there any need to learn more languages if the claim is that all are already known. Is there a better category/link for that one? -Bbik ★ 04:55, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Trying to go through your questions in order:
 * 1.)("Someone" - myself, or someone else - will hopfully get around to it soon.)
 * 2.) the "0" category is/was also known as a "not" category, and was likely deleted when many of those were.
 * 3.) The presumption is that "if" one knows all languages, one then should be able to translate between those languages. However, as the presumption is incredibly unlikely in this case, the category should probably just be removed. (And since I added it, I should probably take a moment and remove it : )
 * Incidental note: Just because a userbox exists, doesn't mean that the userbox must have an associated category. See Userboxes and Userboxes for more information about this, and (possibly) your other questions.


 * I hope I answered all your questions. If you would like further clarification, or have more to ask, or even if you would like to say "hi", feel free : ) - jc37 12:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, that's certainly a unique way of responding! Do you want me to reply here, or on my talk page, so you don't have to copy things over?


 * I see Avoid categorizing "not"-based userboxes, but if there's no category whatsoever, wouldn't a bot come along tagging it as needing a category? Should the ot-0 template at least be in this one (and the ot-N one keep that category, based on This is a category for all templates beginning with "User". These templates are not encyclopedic and are not part of the encyclopedic content.), so the bots are happy, but not include any categories that would be added to user pages? -Bbik ★ 15:44, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see your confusion (or perhaps mine). Yes, there is a difference between the category a template is categorised in, and the pages which are categorised according to where the template is transcluded to.
 * To make certain that a Userbox is categorised, simply categorise it in some sub-category of Category:User templates, within noinclude tags.
 * And yes, I tend to respond on a user's page this way out of politeness, and to keep the discussion unified, per WP:TALK. And of course, I keep an eye on their talk page : )
 * Anyway, I hope that deals with your questions, concerns, etc. If not, feel free to ask : ) - jc37 03:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yup, it does this time. Thanks :)
 * Another related (and very minor) question, though -- why are ot/ot-1 through ot-4 listed as "Learn more languages, Wikipedians who would like to" rather than "ot-#"? I'm guessing it has to do with keeping them separate from specific languages, but it ends up splitting off the other two templates (since that classification doesn't apply), and seems rather counterintuitive if someone's looking for the template through the categories.  Or at least, I'd check "U(ser)" and "o(t-#)" first, rather than "L(earn)". -Bbik ★ 10:40, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * What you're quoting (I think) is the alphabetic sorting of where they will appear as categorised, and has nothing to do with searching for templates (I think?) - jc37 11:43, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

(undent) Yeah, that's what I was talking about. Perhaps the better question is, is there some sort of complete catalogue of user templates, aside from the categories (exluding whatever templates forget to have categories added)? I know there's a list of a ton pages at Userboxes, but those pages are hardly complete. Is there anything else like that, but with all the templates?

The reason I ask is because if there's not, I would imagine at least some people find their templates by hunting the categories, rather than the pages. And it seems like that hunting would be facilitated by keeping similar templates together, and sorted alphabetically by something obvious, rather than a word in the middle of a somewhat arbitrary phrase. Basically, I'm wondering why those templates are even being sorted under L in the first place, rather than o or U. Is there a guideline that clarifies why templates get sorted how they do, within a given category? (And as a side note, I'm sure this group of templates isn't the only one that appears to have somewhat strange sorting, but it's the only one I know about, right now.) -Bbik ★ 14:20, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * There are several templates which link to pages of categories, but they're only as complete as people add the userboxes to them.
 * As someone who regularly has to hunt for templates, I understand your thought. What's happened is that there are several "galleries". Some as subpages of Userboxes, and several more in userspace.
 * As for naming conventions, check out Userboxes and its sub-sections.
 * And for sorting, just look for the first "useful" or "unique" word. You don't want to have them all under a namespace, like T for template, or U for user; nor do you want them sorted by W, for Wikipedians or WikiProject. You also don't want to sort by the word after "who" (who want, who like, who enjoy, etc). So in this case, L for "Learn" was the first useful word (for the category name). If categorising a box called "User ot", then obviously it would be sorted by "o". Typically just sort by the first word after "user".
 * And if there's a disparity in naming, the solution is to either create a "naming convention", and potentially enforce adherence, or just accept that they have different names.
 * Does this better clarify? - jc37 09:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yup, that helps. Clarifies some parts, confirms a few other assumptions I'd made, and fills in some gaps.  Always works better when the question actually makes sense!  Thanks :) -Bbik ★ 22:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Language page links
It looks like that page is part of a userbox, which is why a bunch of userpages link to it. I'll see how many of those are substed, I can certainly change the userbox link but if a bunch are substed I may see if I can get a bot cleanup. There was only one redirect I found, that's been deleted as a redirect to a nonexistent page. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:05, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Got the templates, but there are a ton more direct links. I asked Cyde about doing it by bot, I believe his bot has done similar tasks in the past. They'd be rather a pain to do by hand. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, those being done, it looks like about it. It looks like several other pages do have direct links, but it's up to the editors of those pages how they want to handle that. So, guess no need for a bot after all. Seraphimblade Talk to me 12:53, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

English (reply)
Hello Bbik. Sorry for the "slightly" late reply but back then I was on exams and later on vacations. I hope you still remember our case. I don't think anything worthy will come out of a discussion on how well-written those sentences in the Kosovo War article are. My point was that those statements looked like they were put there in a hurry without much thought and research behind. The person that put those statements there did certainly not precede its actions with a discussion post, so I see no reason why I should waste your time and mine on them. I will not edit the article, I will respect Wikipedia's guidelines to the fullest. But know that to this summer our Albanian coast is ruined by thousands of poor Kosovars that come here for their summer vacations, and this practice started exactly after the exodus of 1999. My mother has worked for months with the refugees on account of a foreign NGO (ICMC if I remember correctly, but I'm not sure since she left that job for another job almost immediately after the crisis fearing that their mission would soon be over and she would remain unemployed). And I used to visit the Kosovars from time to time and thats the only time I have seen extreme poverty; people with nothing, no spare clothes, no money, no food; and hundreds of thousands of them. The West brought food for them, since us Albanians were quite poor ourselves to support the Kosovars. They'd cook on huge boilers and eat in groups of hundreds right there, 20 meters away from the sea, between the trees to escape the summer sun. My mother's job was to think of and organize leisure activities for them, especially for the children.

One of those barbarians that caused that goes to the article, clicks on "Edit", writes "There was other evidence of the refugee crisis having been deliberately manufactured" without bothering to provide the evidence or at least talk about it first; and we have to have a long discussion on what we should do with that insulting statement?! Won't do it. I have to much respect for you and myself to do that. To hell with Serbia and Kosovo and all the average Joes that think this is a good place to express their opinions and do funny pranks by writing directly on the articles. Wikipedia's all theirs. Outsid3r 01:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello. Thank you for the encouraging reply.
 * Unfortunately the text in bold was purely sarcastic. many refugees reported that their identity cards had been confiscated by security forces the exact verb he intended here was probably "claimed", not "reported", since he makes it pretty clear the next sentence that the purpose of that paragraph was to show that the crisis was a fake.
 * Indeed, since the conflict ended Serbian sources have claimed that many of those who joined the refugee return were in fact Albanians from outside Kosovo. After the conflict? Serbian sources? It would have been politically correct if he wrote "Serbs have claimed", although you're probably going to object this by saying that it is "grammatically correct" :)
 * I'll do some light edits to the article right away. I'll also remove that other unsourced paragraph that states that the Albanians have killed gypsies, which is like saying "Americans have killed Jews". For your curiosity:
 * You probably know that gypsies are discriminated throughout the world. And I'd guess even more so in Serbia since they're diametrically opposite races. But Albania is full of gypsies. Their intelligence and education level is below that of average person, but there have never been conflicts of between the natives and them; its unthinkable! The perfect analogy would be the Greeks in America. If America started a war with Canada, would they start killing Greeks? The guy who wrote that statement had absolutely no idea what he was talking about; "We hate gypsies, they probably hate gypsies too, so I'll write they killed gypsies. Yeah, thats what everybody says." Outsid3r 03:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I just readded the statement about the killing of the gypsies. I still find it very hard to accept it, although I do believe it. Even though I am Albanian, I have no sympathy for KLA or most of Kosovars in general and I strongly condemn their crimes. All those years in poverty and illiteracy have made them no better men then the barbarians they fought against. Killing the Roma People though, is the most disgusting act I've heard of them doing. That makes them much worse than even the Serbians.
 * As for their claims of their IDs missing, I need to read an article where it states that. I was 14 back then and wasn't very keen on listening to the news, so I don't remember anything so far up high on political level. But even if we accept that as a fact, that most refugees did indeed not have their IDs anymore, is this enough to claim that there was no crisis, that the vast majority of the refugees were Albanians who left their homes and jobs and lied in the sand for months to make Serbia look evil? Of course its not; it might be enough to raise doubts, but the Serbs did not pretend the situation was doubtful; they pretended there was no doubt that the crisis was all a fake. They say about 200.000+ Serbs fled their homes, so why is it unlikely that 500.000 Kosovars fled theirs? Did Kosovo have a mightier army than Serbia? No, Kosovo had no army at all.
 * I know "Serbs" and "Serbian sources" is not the same. What I meant is that the claim of the crisis being made up does not come from any credible Serbian source; its just popular belief among the Serbs. Its like saying "American sources claim the war in Iraq is wrong" when the right form would be "Americans claim the war in Iraq is wrong". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Outsid3r (talk • contribs) 14:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)