User talk:Ceha/ Archive 2

Consent of the West
Mogao bih navesti ozvor, koji je uostalom vec poznata knjiga Death of Yugoslavia. Ne diram clanak dok ne odgovorite. --VKokielov 02:53, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Croatian Krajina  --VKokielov 22:22, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:B 2005.GIF
Thanks for uploading Image:B 2005.GIF. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 13:40, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:BiH95.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:BiH95.JPG. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 13:47, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi. you mentioned that the image described here (as well as the other Bosnian War front line maps are based on the book written by Erich Rathfalder. Can you provide more detailed reference eg. title, ISBN, year? Thank you.

Image Tagging Image:Bih Stan 1991.GIF
Thanks for uploading Image:Bih Stan 1991.GIF. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 13:49, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Coutillier.GIF
Thanks for uploading Image:Coutillier.GIF. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 14:21, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Bos_towns_change_1991_2005.GIF
Thanks for uploading Image:Bos_towns_change_1991_2005.GIF. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Image legality questions. 22:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Elections_of_1990.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Elections_of_1990.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Image legality questions. 09:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

your post on my user page
yes I doubt the theory of evolution, but because it is simply a theory, and people have now taken it on as a new religion, substituting it for the other religions and following it just as fundamentally and attacking people for not believing the same thing as them. I do think that for the most part it is true, but as they say nothing comes from nothing and so, how can you evolve from not existing? there still has to be a beginning, which evolution does not explain. I am a deist, believing that something created us then we evolved from then on into what we are now. IN this way, I am more agnostic, as the Theory of Evolution has instead of providing an alternative to religion, has become a religion in itself to some people.

Also, I would prefer if you do not attack me for my beliefs, and call em derogatory names.

--Jadger 18:30, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I never stated it attacked religion originally, I know that very well, Darwin had originally planned to be a minister.

''Why would almity [sic] being needed to create a miracle, when it can just pair few mothers and fathers create a mutation which helps that specices to better adapt to its enviroment? Ceha 10:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)'' where would these fathers and mothers come from? there must be a beginning, they simply didn't poof exist. nothing comes from nothing

If you would read my above statement, I am a deist, I believe something more powerful created the world, and the world has evolved from this beginning. This act of evolving would also have had to of been created by the more powerful being.

--Jadger 19:48, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:B change 1991 2005.GIF
Thanks for uploading Image:B change 1991 2005.GIF. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sue Anne 04:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:BiHInv.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:BiHInv.gif. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Hetar 08:03, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Vojvodina
Why have you been arguing over Vojvodina so much? --HolyRomanEmperor 18:25, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


 * So, you won't give me any specifics, eh? ;) --HolyRomanEmperor 21:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:1991_S_towns.GIF
Thanks for uploading Image:1991_S_towns.GIF. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 07:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Maps of BiH
While the information on the population statistics cannot be copyrighted, the map themselves can be. Since you said you created those images, I replaced "PD-inelligible" with "PD-self". Subst:nsd 09:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Problem
Mislim da si ti kod članka o Sremskoj Mitrovici napisao da je između 1929 i 1931 bila deo Drinske banovine. Međutim pogledaj ovo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Banovine_kj.jpg Tu piše da je ta mapa nacrtana 1930, što znači da je Mitrovica već tada pripadala Dunavskoj banovini. Odakle ti podatak da je pripadala Drinskoj banovini? PANONIAN  (talk)  22:59, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Evo ti i originalni izvor za tu mapu gde kaže da ona pokazuje granice iz 1929 (a ja ne vidim da Mitrovica tu pripada Drinskoj banovini): http://pubwww.srce.hr/hpm/p0259002.htm PANONIAN   (talk)  23:01, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

OK
Odgovaram - naljutio sam se samo zato sto si mahinalno izbrisao mnogo recenica. Nema frke. --HolyRomanEmperor 18:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

E, samo nemoj stavljati tvoju verziju - mislim, jednostavno je uklanjanje je ipak vandalizam. --HolyRomanEmperor 18:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Evo - uno momento (ajd' vidi tamo). E i da, nije Srpska Pravoslava Crkva dala meni info - vec Rimokatolicka (Vatikan) :) --HolyRomanEmperor 23:01, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Your contribution to Municipal election in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1990
Thank you for your contributions to this article. However, I must suggest that you refrain from referring to yourself directly on the article (as you did while adding image comments). It goes against encyclopedical tone. Regards. --Hús ö nd 20:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Demografija
Pozdrav. Hoću nešto da te pitam u vezi ove tvoje mape: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:1991_BiH_towns.GIF Da li imaš detaljne podatke o etničkom sastavu gradova Doboj i Bosanski Brod po popisu iz 1991? Znači podatke koliko je ukupno stanovnika bilo u gradu i koliko je od toga Srba, Hrvata, Muslimana, Jugoslovena, itd. Ako imaš te podatke, bilo bi lepo da ih napišemo u člancima o ta dva grada. PANONIAN  (talk)  13:53, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok, znači tako si dobio podatke? Hm, mislim da to baš nije najtačniji metod. Znam već za taj veb sajt odakle si uzimao podatke, ali problem je u tome što ako je na primer neko naselje u opštini Doboj označeno slovom g, to samo znači da je to naselje gradskog tipa, a ne da je deo samog grada Doboja. U toj opštini su slovom g označena sledeća naselja: Bare, Centar, Čaršija, Doboj Novi, Donji Grad, Orašje i Usora. Ne mora da znači da su sve ovo delovi grada Doboja, već je možda neko od njih posebno gradsko naselje u dobojskoj opštini. Znam sigurno da su na popisu iz 2002 u Srbiji slovom g označavana i takva naselja. Na primer u opštini Novi Sad, slovom g su označena naselja Novi Sad, Petrovaradin, Sremska Kamenica i Futog, a od toga su samo prva tri deo gradskog područja Novog Sada, dok je Futog potpuno posebno gradsko naselje. Dakle, jesi li siguran da su sve ono delovi grada Doboja a ne posebna gradska naselja? PANONIAN   (talk)  22:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject South Park
I have thought of creating a WikiProject for South Park since it is now near its' 10th anniversary and has more articles than ever. I feel we could all do the following things through this project: I have seen your South Park fan template and wondered if you were interested in joining. If so reply to my talk page and I'll get back to you as quick as I can. Thanks, Mr. Garrison
 * Cleanup any short/poorly written/unformatted articles
 * Merge/lengthen the many character articles
 * Improve the South Park main page

WikiProject South Park page
We have our own page! WikiProject South Park. Be sure to list your name in the members section. Mr. Garrison 18:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Juraj Julije Klović
Hello. Go to the talk page of Juraj Julije Klović and help out with the discussion. A fanatical Italian user keeps on inserting his POV/nationalism into the article, and has now requested the page be moved to "Giorgio Giulio Clovio" - which is false as the man was a Croat and was born in Croatia. There is a vote on the rename happening on the talk page. Please help, as he is canvassing for votes from other Italian users.

I ne samo Klović
Ne znam da li si primjetio ili bilo tko drugi ali talijanski nacionalist Giovanni Giove i njegov dezurni zastitnik i mecena Aldux rade ogromnu reviziju clanaka hrvatskih povijesnih licnosti iz Dalmacije, ponajprije onih koji su radili i djelovali u Dubrovackoj Republici i Mlecanskoj Dalmaciji. Pogledaj samo listu: Frane Petrić, Andrija Medulić, Benedikt Kotruljević, Stjepan Gradić, Ivan Lučić, Ivan Duknović, Joakim Stulli, Ivan Lupis, Juraj Dalmatinac, Rudjer Josip Bošković...itd, lista se nastavlja. Tko je sljedeci? Junije Palmotić? Ivan Gundulić? Faust Vrančić? Marin Držić? Marko Marulić? --Anon

Tenks Promijenio sam par stvari, a ako i ti vidiš nešto, evo ti par preporuka u čemu su direktno protiv wikipedijine politike. 1)Imena. Ako je neki autor znan bolje pod hrvatskim imenom u engleskom govornom području, upotrebljava se hrvatsko ime. Isto vrijedi i za gradove. Ne može ti neko pisat svako malo Zara... Može staviti na početku da je grad tada bio poznat kao Zara, no na svakom sljedećem pojavljivanju mora pisati Zadar. 2)Ne mogu stavljati Italian painter itd, ako nemaju dokaza o talijanskoj etničkoj pripadnosti. Mogu staviti painter of Italian renessance (tako je napravljeno na Jurju Dalmatincu).(Pripazi kako su s druge strane svi autori iz Dubrovnika stavljeni pod Ragusan, a ne pod Croat, što je isto ne viđeno licemjerje...) 3)Venecijska republika nije talijanska pokrajina! U sastavu tog entiteta su bili djelovi današnje Turske, Cipra, Grčke, Albanije, Crne Gore i Hrvatske. Sve osobe koje su s rodile u njoj nisu Talijani! Kada se stavlja ime grada može se staviti da je tada bio dio venecijske Dalmacije, a nikako frazu koju oni koriste (which is now in Croatia). Nije ovo što je sad prolazno>:) 4)Tražiti potkrepu bilo koje promjene koju rade. Neki verificirani link

To bi manje više bilo to. Ne može te neko nazvati nacionalistom, a sam biti talijanski irendetist. Za imena manje-više ne znam, al isto ne daj se navuči da te isprovociraju u neku raspravu za koju nisi spreman (vidio sam da je Aldux izbrisao na Francescu Patrizziu Factanistino i samo spominjanje hrvatskog imena Petrić, što je ...) Ak vidiš što, obavijesti me:) Ceha 0:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Pa recimo problem je u tome da se radi o licimjerju. Ako je npr. Joakim Stulli "Ragusan" onda je i Franciscus Patricius "Venetian", ne mozemo biti selektivni. Uostalom Patriciusa sami Mlecani nazivaju Hrvatom. Meldolla takodjer isto tako, covjek je uzeo nadimak "Il Schiavone" sto znaci "Slaven", ovaj to mijenja u "Dalmatinac" sto je smijesno. To je ono sto me smeta. Ako se isti kriterj primjenjuje na clancima Marko Polo i Julije Klovic onda se to treba isto primjenjivati svuda. Dakle radi se o sljedecem: spomenuti clanci trebaju imati sljedece: hrvatsku verziju imena i hrvatske kategorije (ex: Croatian painter stub, itd.) i naravno maknuti reference tipa 'Italian' ili 'Croatian' i staviti 'Venetian' ili 'Ragusan' ili ih maknuti uopce ako je to problem. Dakle samo se treba primjenjivati isto pravilo kao i kod Polo i Clovio clanaka. I ovog Giove'a treba sprijeciti vec vise, covjek je poznati rasist sa news grupa, ponajprije sam ga susretao na soc.culture.croatia gdje je redovno pljuvao po Hrvatima i opcenito po slavenima. Covjek je fasist. -Anon
 * Potpuno se slažem. Treba se primjentiti ono što se dogovorilo i to je to. A taj lik je zbilja pun bisera...

Ceha 0:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

For Khoikhoi
{unblock|I am not nobody's sockpuppet. I'm on wikipedia since 2005 and I can not see how somebody can accuse me of something and just block me out without any valid reason. My entrence to Internet is via modem and my internet provider is through college of computer and electronics in Zagreb. Could that explain similar IP adressess?} Khoikhoi has reverted all of my contributions about Croatians in Dalmatia, my contributions on the talk pages, why were some pages reverted, and then he blockes me out of his page, so I coud not tell him anything which I think about. And all of this with explanation that I am an "sockpuppet of banned user Afrika paprika, based on contributions" I've been on wikipedia (which can been seen from my contributions since November 2005). How can somebody just come and turn me off? Ceha 23:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I've contacted Khoikhoi and asked for clarification. Your account being actually older than that of Afrika paprika himself does make me doubt, I must say. Fut.Perf. ☼ 01:21, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Conditional unblock
I suppose I should give you a second chance, but please be aware that you were blocked in the first place because your contributions closely resembled that of the banned user Afrika paprika. As I discussed with Fut.Perf., WP:SOCK states:

"The Arbitration Committee has ruled that, for the purpose of dispute resolution, when there is uncertainty whether a party is one user with sock puppets, or several users acting as meatpuppets, they may be treated as one individual."

However, on the condition that you not revert the articles anymore, and you to get consensus for your edits, and not revert the articles that you've been edit warring on, I will unblock you. Agreed? Khoikhoi 07:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Deal. As you can see from my earlier contributions I always wanted to have some kind of agreement with others. Also I would like to ask you for your help (or point me to my error, if my behavior is contrary to the wikipedian rules).

Most of the things which I edited had something to do with Croatians in Dalmatia. In the talk pages of Giulio Clovio we disscused and agreed to use the name which is mostly known in english speaking world. Is that rule ok? Why are those cities called in their Italian names, when they are mostly known in english under their Croatian ones (which are also very old?)

Just a few thoughts... Ceha 11:28, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay, as per the "deal", I'm unblocking (as Khoikhoi is probably not online this time of the day.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)