User talk:BranoDD/Archive

Slovak regions
Hi, first of all thanks for accepting in templates the addition coat of arms. I have been inspired that polish and other region templates. Secondly I would suggest, to save the other language names in region pages as it was before. These are relevant informations and official names. The additional language names are placed also in polish, austrian or romanian regions, especially where there live the respective language speakers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aakmaros (talk • contribs) 10:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

The templates are not that good, not that bad, but they cold be better. Secondly, the question is then in how many languages the region information should be posted, it could be 20 or more, so where is the end of possible language chaos? The Slovak region names in other language were there just three months, not more. Then I read Lower Austria and Masovian Voivodship articles and what you wrote is simply lie or desinformation. I ask you to stop vandalisng in Slovak region names.--BranoDD (talk) 10:36, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

See Upper_Austria, Carinthia_(state), Pomeranian_Voivodeship, Harghita_County for example. Aakmaros (talk) 16:57, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

So what is your point? In vast majority of the country regions in Europe are in English verion used offical national names. Those are just a rare examples.--BranoDD (talk) 17:18, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree with Aakmaros, it is nice that you improve info boxes, but why do you keep removing names in other languages? K &oelig;rte F  a   { ταλκ }  03:32, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

It have been already explained, just read carefully what I wrote.--BranoDD (talk) 04:55, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You should also read carefully what the general guidelines of Wikipedia say about alternative names . Cheers, K &oelig;rte F  a   { ταλκ }  02:32, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

There are archaic names, it it clearly stated there. Listen, this dicussion is pointless, the Slovak municipalities articles are purposed for English speaking community and foremost for the people with no, or limited information on the subject, not for the ones pushing their point of view, vandalising and often breaking Wikipedia neutrality guidelines.--BranoDD (talk) 13:23, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Please, note that "alternative" names are not the same as "archaic" names (and even archaic names should be provided). Otherwise, it seems that we agree: I also think that Wikipedia is not for those who push their POV, for example, by removing information they do not like. Take care, K &oelig;rte F  a   { ταλκ }  04:23, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

In the articles had been missing the very basic informmation, often they were written as a soapbox. And since we on other matters do not agree, I urgently ask you to stop disturbing my discussion page, you can use general forum, or article discussion page.--BranoDD (talk) 19:29, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Warning
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Plešivec, Slovakia, you may be blocked from editing. The content in question is the Hungarian name and/or details pertaining to the (Hungarian) history of villages and regions in general. Consider this as a last warning before getting referred to WP:ANI for your disruptive editing. The reason for this is the fact that you've continued your "dehungarianizing" campaign even after being warned about this by other editors above (and the fact that you do it systematically at a rapid pace of up to several dozens of edits per day). You arguments (about the terms being "archaic" and so forth) are misleading especially due to the fact that most of the articles you've edited deal with a settlement's present AND past alike. Having a strong opinion about historical facts is fine, but projecting it into the articles (in fact trying your best to form the articles to reflect any kind of bias) is completely unacceptable. And this applies to all the articles, not only for Plešivec, Slovakia. -- CoolKoon (talk) 13:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)