User talk:Dijxtra/Archive 3

Vandalism
Some user from 212.2.181.217 removed part on Nikola Tesla article. I've reverted it. Jakiša Tomić 15:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Put one of those vandalism warnings to his talk page. If he does that again, put another one, threathning to block him. If he does that for the 3rd time, drop a note here, and I'll block the guy. --Dijxtra 16:04, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Multiple Accounts
I liked what you proposed about the distinction between people who use multiple accounts and do not violate Wikipedia Policies and Guidelines and those who use multiple accounts for the purpose of of violate Wikipedia Policies and Guidelines. Too many users take the position that any use of multiple accounts is something to be persecuted. Here is an example. PoolGuy 04:16, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * A consensus of editors is behind your proposed action. The time is right to move ahead. As per the talk page discussion, I am placing the following table on the Sock puppetry page. Please help edit it and the rest of the page to match.


 * Thanks, Dragon&#39;s Blood 03:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. You've made some great improvements to the policy. Distinctions are now clearer without reducing information about the spirit of the law. FT2 has proposed a table that clarifies things even more. A few of us are working on it at his talk page. We would appreciate your input: User_talk:FT2. --Dragon&#39;s Blood 16:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm updating the WP:SOCK page with FT2's table, so just make any changes there. --Dragon&#39;s Blood 17:14, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

RFCU
(From my talk page.) I can't speak to your being referred to WP:RFCU; that's outside my knowledge. As to your request, we've got certain procedures about CheckUser. For one, we don't like revealing IP addresses as a matter of privacy. We make an exception only in cases of egregious policy violations. Your request didn't cite such violations. If you can demonstrate such I'll naturally reconsider. Furthermore, the user in question has admitted that he and the IP are one in the same. In such open and shut cases a checkuser really isn't needed. Mackensen (talk) 23:53, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * So, shall we put this one to WP:RFCU? --Dijxtra 12:16, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Is that a message for me? I thought RFCU was last resort, no? - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 14:05, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's a message for you. CheckUser is a last resort, but the accused states that he did not engage in sockpupperty and says he's ready for CU... so, I think we need to drop the charges or take him to CU. --Dijxtra 14:28, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * OK... Well, he admits it on the IP's talk page, in plain sight. But I can take him to CU. Not really sure how to, but I bet I can follow instructions... - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 20:17, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Done, though I don't understand why that was necessary. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 20:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * We'll the thing is that he might be right: there is a possibility that he used that IP only once (as a dinamic IP) and that he didn't use it for sockpuppetry. Therefore, we need a CU... --Dijxtra 20:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry for my formatting errors, I am relatively new to wikipedia editing. Max 15:55, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Frys104 and Socks
Hi Dijxtra, I appreciate the time you took with me in regards to the case of Frys104 and possible sockpuppetry. Although you did take time to review the case, I felt the situation was not moving along quickly enough (the vandalism and sockpuppetry started back in February and continued off and on until now), and eventually asked another admin. The case is now, as far as I can tell, closed, with the other admin deciding "looks like a clear sock and fair number malicious edits". User is now blocked. I thought I'd let you know so you didn't spend any additional time on a case that's now wrapped. Thanks.--Firsfron 09:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Hipi Zdhripi
Nije Duja imao probleme s njim koliko ja - zaprijetio je da ce mi bombardirati kucu i pobiti roditelje. Plus to, rekao je da treba istrebiti Srbe i sve koji staju na put Albanskom Kosovu. I jeste - njegov sockpuppet je blokiran (User:Zhdripi Hipi), kao i on (User:Hipi Zhdripi). Evo jos jednog sockpuppeta: User:Kanuni, onda tu je valjda jos i User:Kurac, User:HashimLopa (koji je nazivao Albance Turcima i pitao sto oni hoce od srpskoga Kosova, a onda nastavio znas-vec-sto). Mislim da je User:Ejte najnoviji nick Hipijev. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:27, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Could you semi-protect my user and talk pages? Hipi Zhdripi is stalking me again... --Asterion talk to me 13:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you. He is really a pain... Regards, --Asterion talk to me 13:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. But, I must inform you that protection of talk pages is done only for short periods of time. Therefore I'd like to ask you to ask me to unprotect your talk page in a week or so (I'm 100% sure I won't remember to do that by myself). What you can do is email me in a week and I'll silently unprotect the talk page. If you decide to do that, then you should remove the template from the top of your talk page right now so he doesn't notice any change when I unprotect your talk page... --Dijxtra 13:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. I will. I think I managed to clear things a bit with him anyway. Regards, --Asterion talk to me 17:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Question about Hipi's sockpuppets
I noticed last night he has been removing sockpuppet tags from some of the accounts he was charged with using. Is there any way these accounts could be permanently tagged and blocked? (Well, not sure if it really matters) Which ones are the usernames he was found to be using? Also, isn't User:Kurac an obvious candidate? I have suspicions there are some new ones (throwaway accounts). As he has left me alone and did not reinstate his personal attacks on his userpage, I am not too bothered but I still find this quite disruptive. Thanks, E   Asterion  u talking to me? 07:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, it's time for me to do something useful. Lets see...
 * User:Kurac is blocked indefinetly
 * User:HashimLopa - blocked him indef right now...
 * Hmmmm... now, I see that User:Hipi Zhdripi is unblocked. Therefore, I cannot block on basis of somebody being his sock puppet... Can we find any firm arguments to block his sock puppets? --Dijxtra 20:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


 * To be honest, he has been editing as an unsigned IP for a while. Aside a comment with a racist overtone here and some personal attacks, there is nothing new. There is another sock today called User:KOSOVA active only in the Serbia article, doing page blanking. As usual, a throwaway sockpuppet account, so no point on asking for a checkuser. I have serious suspicions about tag-teaming too but things are so messed up that I do not want to get involved on pointing my finger to anyone. Thanks, E   Asterion  u talking to me? 23:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


 * User:KOSOVA got blocked indefinetly... so things are moving. When you spot a new account, please alert me, and I will block it if it is obvious vandal...


 * Cheers, E   Asterion  u talking to me? 07:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Nikola, Hipi is back to his old manners... I really can't see the point of reminding him again about NPA. How on earth can this guy be an admin on Sq.wikipedia?  E   Asterion  u talking to me? 20:34, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked. Keep me posted... --Dijxtra 20:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I surely will. E   Asterion  u talking to me? 20:59, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Serbs of Croatia - problem with Jacov
Hi,

I see You are one of the admins.

Well, I have the problem with user Luka Jačov, and since I saw You comunicating with him, I would kinfly ask You to bring him to senses.

On page Serbs of Croatia, I proved that only 7,000 people in Croatia on 2001 census declared them self as speakers of Serbo-Croatian, and since the same census showed that there are more than 200,000 Serbs in Croatia, I believe it's quite wrong to say that Serbs in Croatia speak serbo-croatian. Most of them reported to speak croatian and some of them speak serbian (that is proven fact, not my interpretation).

Please, help bring this issue to an end.

I see that you also list your self as speaker of serbo-croatian, but I hope that your will not put your personal political views before facts.

Regards and thanks in advance!

--Ante Perkovic 15:15, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * See, the thing is: Luka is rather hard to talk to. He wrote some nice articles and he seems to be quite an inteligent guy, but he also seems to have problems with Wikipedia being founded on WP:CITE. And this kind of guys are hard to talk to. I will ask him to stop the edit warring, but I don't think that will influence him. What you can do is try to use Wikipedia policies against him. He seems to be eager to break some of them: I notice you both broke WP:3RR on Serbs of Croatia and I notice he did some personal attacks (calling you an idiot). I will now: 1) ask him to stop removing references and attacking ad hominem, 2) report you both (it wouldn't be fair to report only him, right?) to for breaking WP:3RR (I will not block you myself since you were kind enough to talk to me, I'll leave to others to decide if you should be blocked) 3) start watching the article and protect it if you two do not stop edit warring. I know that's not what you wanted me to do, but me taking part in edit war on Serbo-Croatian language is enough edit waring for this week... --Dijxtra 15:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi. Ante Here. You did the right thing, I do not object to what you did. And, I will not make any changes to articles until my blockin expires.


 * But, I don't really understand how it is possible that I was being blocked, and JAcov, who laso broke WP:3RR, who did some personal attacks and who have the problem with Wikipedia being founded on WP:CITE is not blocked. That is really hard to understand.


 * He is blocked. See here:.


 * Other thing... since You said that Jacov has the problem with WP:CITE, I believe that You, as an admin, don't have that problem, so I would kindly ask You to REV Serbs of Croatia and change the article according to cited sources. I would do it myself, but I can't.


 * Elephantus did that for you ;-) If Luka persists in edit-waring after his block expires, I'll take further meassures. --Dijxtra 20:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Regards, Ante P.

172.173.1.89. Evo ti Hipijev sockpuppet - potvrdjen. Mozes li to srijedit? --HolyRomanEmperor 19:16, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Rijeseno. Obzirom da je IP, blokirao sam ga samo na 24 sata. Rado bih blockao i ostale njegove sockove, no jednostavno nemam vremena sve ih prouciti... BTW, "e" u "srediti" nije refleks glasa jat, tako da se ne reflektira u "ije" u Hrvatskom, nego osta je "e" ;-)

An appology
I owe you an appology. The Suspected sock puppets project just got started and I'm the only admin taking part in this project. There fore, it's all up to me to decide. And I don't want to make any hasty decissions. That's how I do things. Slowly but thoroughly. And I sometimes do it a bit to thoroughly. I mean, I don't want to make wrong decissions. I needed to persuade myself that the guy is a sock, but I might be asking to much. Now I know that I should ask for fewer evidence and that I shouldn't hesitate to block so much. Therefore, I appologise to you for taking so much of your time and I promise I'll try to not to be such a pain in the ass in the future ;-)

If it is of any comfort for you, this case has made me understand that I need another hand at this project. Therefore I'll now embark on a search for an admin who will be willing to help me and who will make sure we do not get in situations like this anymore. Sorry for the mess I caused... --Dijxtra 13:40, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Please don't apologise for being one of the few admins to actually look over the case (the case was originally skipped on every page I originally listed it). I think it's good you're thorough, so that a good user doesn't get accidentally blocked. In this case, however, a quick search thru any of the "three" users' histories would have shown many patterns of abuse (legal threats, page blankings, removals of warnings, impersonation, vandalism) to the same ten or so pages at nearly the same times, a clear sign of sockpuppetry. I'm just really glad the case has been resolved, at long last! However, this user is clearly persistant, and since there are at least three other questionable accounts that edited those pages, which I may monitor, this saga may yet not be over.
 * Good luck with the sockpuppet pages, and I hope you're able to find an admin to help you. There's a lot of abuse at WP, and with over a million pages on .en, we've all gotta keep a vigilant eye on abuse. Good luck! --Firsfron 21:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

TW, "e" u "srediti" nije refleks glasa jat, tako da se ne reflektira u "ije" u Hrvatskom, nego osta je "e" ;-)


 * Eh, zar nijesi cuo za Crnogorski (uvIJEk naj-najprenaglasena ijekavica)? ;) --HolyRomanEmperor 21:51, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Suspected Sockpuppets....
I was trying to fix the Martin Van Buren sockpuppet case. Being that a Checkuser was requested and was proven to have been on the same IP. So if you would close the case (However you do that) It would be appreciated! Sorry for the inconvience, Mahoga ny


 * No problem, I just sloces it ;-) --Dijxtra 22:24, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Request for Investigation
Hi, I removed your request for investigation from WP:AN since it appears to have been settled. Here's a copy if you want to archive it: I'm not sure if this is the right place, but I'll give it a shot: I'm not sure if this guy is vandalising or not. All he does is put links to external links section. Which is fine, but he puts only one, same, web site. Which is not fine, but then again, his links in fact are relevant. Sooo, I'd like some more expirienced admin to take a look at his contribs and tell me whether I should warn him not to do that and revert his work or leave the guy alone? If this is not a place to ask advice on whether something is vandalism or not, please direct me to such place... thanks, Dijxtra 22:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

* This is spam. The links should be removed and the user warned. If he wants to contribute, he is better off contributing with prose, not links to his website. --ZsinjTalk 00:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

WP:SUSPSOCK
Sure, I'd love to help out. Looking at the current open case about Oldwindybear and Stillstudying: I personally think (s)he, Oldwindybear, is not a sock puppet of Stillstudying, but my guess is as good as anybody else's. I think, personally, that the only way to confirm whether or not Stillstudying is a sockpuppet is to finally go to CheckUser. Let me know what you think; if it's easier for you to reply here, then reply here. Thanks,  K ilo-Lima|(talk) 17:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I won't open up a RFCU until you have contacted me beforehand and, if it goes to it, the decision of other admins. Thanks,  K ilo-Lima|(talk) 11:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Hm, after some thinking I came to conclusion that we should probably just close this case without the CheckUser. The evidence is pretty weak and only thing User:Stillstudying did was discussing. In case of future abuse we should take those two to RfCU and se if they are the same person. But for now I think we might just drop the case. Do you agree? I mean, if we both think that he's not a sock puppet, then I think we shouldn't bother the CheckUser guys and just close it. --Dijxtra 12:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, then I will just close it as inclonclusive and contact the two of them. Thanks,  K ilo-Lima|(talk) 12:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

C-c-c-c
Take a look at User: C-c-c-c. See his user-boxes just for example but you can take a look at other of his "contributions". He doesn't understand warnings about personal attack and he keeps removing it constantly. Can you give him a warning as admin? Jakiša Tomić 09:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Noup, I can't. For 2 reasons:
 * Unfortunately, removing warning templates is not considered vandalism. Yes, I know, that is a real shame, and if you ask me, I'd block people for removing warning templates from their talk pages. But I can't since some people think you can do whatever you wish with your talk page.
 * You made a personal attack on him. And now you are asking me to warn him about personal attacks. No way. Sorry. --Dijxtra 10:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Of course, my personal attack after bounch of his is same as his personal attacks.
 * You really didn't need that ad hominem attack. The point is: if you are civil, and he isn't, then everybody will be on your side. If you're not civil, people won't look good at you. It's as simple as that.
 * Može se kako ubit akaunt na Wikipediji, jer bi ja to svome napravio? Jakiša Tomić 11:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * U kojem smislu ubit? Mozes zamolit admina da ti obrise user page, talk page i da te blocka indefinetly. Al, ja ti to nebi preporucio. Ukoliko te zanima moj savijet, evo ga: nemoj raditi ono sto te zivcira. Ima ljudi koji ce revertati velikosrpske vandale. Ja to recimo uopce ne radim, makar me uzasno iritiraju. Jer znam da ima ljudi koji se manje zivciraju od mene i koji ce to raditi umjesto mene. Vrlo rijetko ulazim u edit warove jer znam da kad jednom udjem u tako nesto, nema izlaska. Zato ti je moj savjet da se maknes od Balkana. I da pises o matematici, Letu 3, Toy Dollsima, o mjestu u kojem zivis, o bilo cemu zanimljivom sto nije Balkan. Da suradjujes sa singapurcima, brazilcima i juznoafrikancima na clancima u koje se nece uplest razni ultranacionalisti i zivcirat te. Wikipedija je super stvar, steta je odreci se osjecaja da si napravio nesto zbilja korisno samo zato jer neka se hrpa budala ima potrebu svadjati oko broja zrtava na Blajburgu i u Jasenovcu. Ko da ce to ista promjeniti. Nemoj trositi zivce. Ima ljudi koji imaju deblje zivce od tebe i koji ce nastaviti boriti tvoje "bitke" i ako ti odes pisati clanke o autohtonim vrstama bilja u Velebitskom podrucju. Ljudi cesto zivot shvacaju previse ozbiljno. Nemoj i ti biti medju ljudima koji rade tu gresku ;-) --Dijxtra 13:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, Dijxtra - mislim da nijesi ovo do sada znao - uklanjanje warnings-a sa svoje stranice jest verzija vandalizma. User:Croatian_historian je mnogo puta blokiran zbog toga, a User:Ilir_pz je primio dosta upozorenja - u oba slucaja su admini vracali warnings-e i dodavali nove. Znaci, ti C-c-c-c-a mozes slobodno blokirati ako nastavi da sklanja upozorenja (ukljucujuci i tvoje upozorenje na to). Bog! --HolyRomanEmperor 18:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Smile!


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!

WP:SOCK reversion and protection
You might want to notice that your entire revision of WP:SOCK has been reverted and the page protected. --Philosophus T 19:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Please notice, also, that the non-admins who tried to stop her were called sock puppets and banned without any evidence. --4.238.85.76 17:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC) [ User:Dragon's Blood ] P.S. See also my comments on AN/I.

error
You are in huge error! About Josip Broz you have a wrong point of view! Do you know how many children from Croatia Broz killed in Bleiburg?
 * Broz was never on Bleiburg. Nor he ordered executions. If you have sources confirming otherwise, please cite them.

If you are communist is natural our incomprehension!--Jxy 18:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Your lack of good faith is disturbing. I'm not a communist, but even if I was that wouldn't matter. You submit a lot of historicaly incorect data to Wikipedia. You provide no references. Please read WP:CITE and stick to it. Thanks. --Dijxtra 18:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Problem with AIDbot
Hi there. I've just been running the (usually wonderful) AIDbot, and had a problem with it. I ran it at approximately 22.30 UTC on 16 May. Four articles had "stays until" dates of 16 May, and it told me that "nomination expired 1 day(s) ago", when they were going to expire 90 minutes later. Perhaps its not using the correct time zone? Cheers, Pruneau 23:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, that must be it, it's probably because of the timezone on my server. I'll fix it when I catch time... Thanks for the note. --Dijxtra 23:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I've actually found another, more serious bug. The bot failed to notice that the nomination for Željko Ražnatović had elapsed yesterday. It might be the weird letters in the name. Pruneau 18:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

inventions
Your historic data are inventions, not mine! Study history, you don't know history!--Jxy 00:01, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

WP:SOCK
Hi Dijxtra, I saw your apology on the talk page. Don't feel bad about it because Zephram is very good at what he does. I've been taken in at least twice by him: once when he posted a sad, romantic story about a lost love of his and I wrote to thank him for sharing it (when, of course, it was made up, as was the persona); and a second time when I blocked one of his sockpuppets only to have him engage me in e-mail correspondence, complete with what he said was his real name, all of it very convincing, so I unblocked him, and it later transpired it was him after all. :-) SlimVirgin <sup style="color:purple;">(talk) 00:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, Dijextra, I just came to your page because I felt you must have had a frustrating few hours fighting a battle on your own. Although I was (and am) on the "other side", I want to assure you that nobody thinks you're the problem; the problem is Zephram. Hopefully, things will be a bit calmer tomorrow. :-)  AnnH <b style="font-size:medium;">♫</b> 01:12, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you both. It is nice to see that although I lost my temper, you decided to drop me a kind note. I appreciate it and assure you that I have learned a lot from the episode which happened yesterday. --Dijxtra 10:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note, but truly, don't worry about it. I'm sorry about the time you invested in it. Perhaps if you come back to the talk page with the proposal, we can all look at it together to make sure any Zephram-Starkisms are removed. :-) SlimVirgin <sup style="color:purple;">(talk) 10:12, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

As above. I'm sorry Zephram wasted your time like that; he's very manipulative and often quite convincing, so don't feel bad. I'm sure there was some value in your work, and perhaps we can work to re-introduce those specific elements. Jayjg <small style="color:darkgreen;">(talk) 17:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I do not plan reopening this discussion, but I'd like to state that Zephram didn't influence me all that much... If you read through my RfA, you'll see that I had some missunderstanding over sock puppet terminology with editors other than User:Dragon's Blood. So, he didn't have to persuade me. And he didn't persuade me, I decided to propose changes in policy on my own, because I thought that WP:SOCK needs some fixing. And I still think that WP:SOCK needs rephrasing and that the changes I proposed are excelent. And I'll propose those again, unchanged. The bit where I was wrong was:
 * not contacting people on enwiki mailing list and on WP:AN/I and informing them of my proposal (hence lack of consensus)
 * not monitoring changes to WP:SOCK (hence this sad, sad episode with Zephram rewriting the policy after I did the initial rewrite)
 * Both errors were result of my misconception that people who are interested in policy read the talk page of the policy and watch the policy page... Therefore, Zephram didn't manipulate me, I'm quite hard to manipulate (or at least I like to think that way), he just sneaked in unnoticed. I'm still quite sad that everybody seems to think that I was manipulated and that Zephram did a trick on me, but I'm affraid that my effort to clear that out would do much more harm than good (and further degrade my already dammaged reputation, instead of restoring it). But, oh, well, sometimes life's not fair, I learned that quite some time ago... --Dijxtra 17:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Problem with organised gang of serbian vandals
Hi,

I'm trying to deal with serbian vandals, but they just don't want to discuss enything. We are dealing with 2 or 3 vandals and 4 or 5 sock-puppets. Can I relly on You to help us deal with it. If You will, I'll make sure to represent You entire case.

Please, help me stop vandalism. I'm being patient with them, but endless reverting is no good to noone.

Can You help? If You don't have time, I will understand :(.

Regards, Ante Perkovic


 * Please, do present me with the case. I assure you that I'll try to help you. Only problem is that I'm going on a trip Friday morning and will be back on Monday. So, I'll do what I can before I leave, and will continue helping you after I return. But during the weekend I won't be able to help you. Now, please present me with your problems... --Dijxtra 09:11, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, here it is...

Druing the last few days (week, at most), there is a much greater activity of the anti-croatian propaganda, and all of the contributors are "new" users with good understanding of wikipedia.

All of those new users exibit the same patterns of behaviour:


 * The edit are limited to very small number of articles dealing with Croatia, where they trying to push some highly POV ideas
 * 90% of their edits are reverts
 * they don't wany to discuss their changes (reverts) on talk pages and their explanations are limited to coments visible on history listing
 * their edits are full of weasell and peacock words
 * they don't read other people's edits, but revert them to their last version, even if there is some new, undisputed contribution
 * Some of uswrs showed quite a formidable knowledge of wikipedia rules just 24 hours after first log! (sock-puppet?)

About 1 or 2 of users of this type apear daily, so it would be reasonable to suspect that we are dealing with 2 or 3 vandals and around 10 sockpuppets. This type of activity is rissen enourmously in last weeks (sinced 12 or 13yh of May), so it must be coordinated within small group of vandals with extra spare time.

I suspect that Bormalagurski (who has the history of sock-puppeting) is in this team, or in contact with them. Ther is also possible that we are dealing with a few sepparate groups, but equaly stubborn ;).

Anyway, let's see personal profiles of those sockpuppets:


 * - First log 14 February 2006, then almost silent until 13 May 2006. Since then, he made almost 30 edits and all of them were REV's. Only 2 non-REV edits were strange complains to Elephantus accusing him for personal attack (unsourced, plase see links Serpen provided). Hi never discusse any of his revers on any talk page! Very stubborn in POV pishing at Minefields in Croatia, but unwilling to discuss it.
 * - first log 10 March 2006, then completely silent (!!!) until 14 May 2006. This user is limited to reverts. He never discuss his reverts.
 * - first log 26 April 2006, quite active since 10 May 2006, limited almost solely to rev's, never discuss on talk pages.
 * - first log 15 May 2006. He did some edits unrelated to Croatia, but most of edits are of type described above (see Serpen). He also never discuss anything on talk pages, but just make endless reverts. Hi showed quite a god knowledge of wiki rules, when he reported my 3RR less then 18 hours after his first edit. He learns fast, don't You think ;)? Yet another sock-puppet, I suppose.
 * - first log 16 February 2006. Keeps trying to push very POV things on Minefields in Croatia. Somewhat willing to talk. However, ignored recent discussion on Talk:Minefields in Croatia.
 * - first log 15 May 2006 - limited solely to reverts, never comments his edits.
 * - first log 10 March 2006, reactivated 13 May 2006 - bunch of reverts, unwilling to discus any of his changes, avoids talk pages... typical.
 * - first log 16 May 2006 - vandalising Battle of Vukovar

That would be it regarding the worst of the vandals and their sock-puppets. As You can see, ther campaign started around 13th of May (4 days ago), and they keep popping out daily. So, this must be either coordinated, or we are dealnig wit bunch of sockpuppets (more propable).

There are some more in my list, but their vandalism is ussualy limited to 1 or 2 articles, so I don't want to bother you (yet).

The list of pages being vandalised is very long:


 * Aloysius Cardinal Stepinac
 * Ban Jelačić Square
 * Battle of Vukovar
 * Croatian Spring
 * Čapljina
 * Dalmatia
 * Danke Deutschland (song)
 * Knin
 * Milan Nedić
 * Minefields in Croatia
 * Nedić's Serbia
 * Rudjer Boscovich
 * Serbophobia
 * Vladimir Žerjavić

As You can see in talk pages of these attacked pages, we (me, Elephatnus, Zmaj, FirstLine, Mir Harven...) wasted quite a lot time trying to discuss subjects, but other side is practicaly ignoiring us. I believe their only purpoise here is to spread dirty lies about Croatia. We really need attention of an admin, be it You or someone else. The laest think an admin can do is to analyse their contribution and warn them that revs and changes must be discussed, and not endlesly repeated without nay explanation.

We need to get rid of these vandals, so we can continue to write articles and contibute to wikipedia in ussual way. Bunch of frustrated serbian teenage vandals who avoids any kinf of discussion is certainly not the most appreciated type od users here. I hope.

I thing it would be very bad for wikipedia if this teenage gang succeds in proving that stubborn reverting and POV pushing works if You just mennage to gather enough sick people who will follow you.

There is 2 more (or just one, if the other is sock-puppet) users trying to hide serbian crimes from WW2):
 * - first log 14 May 2006, works on Nedić's Serbia (which he tried to hide with unrelated redirect) and ZBOR, where
 * - first log 16 May 2006, propably the same person as user:Respos. Just compare the contributions!

Thanks for your time!! :) --Ante Perkovic 11:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Just went thorught the things you noted, and I must agree we have a problem here. If you can wait until Monday (I'm leaving tommorrow morning and I have to go to sleep now), please do, and then you and I can present this problem to WP:AN and ask what to do. If you can't wait, you can do it yourself... your call... I'm sorry for being so slow, but the trip I'm taking tommorrow needed some preparation so I don't have any free time on my hands. Sorry for that. --Dijxtra 22:09, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


 * In the meantime, I'm trying to deal with this through civilised discussion. I don't expect to solve all the problems, but I hope to decreas the amont of job You or some admin will have to do. Some of these people seams willing to talk, after cooling their heads :). I was about to propose that You leave this issue to me until at least monday. Have a nice weekend :)! --Ante Perkovic 05:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, by the way, some of these users (that I believe to be sock-puppets) stoped their activities after I made this detailed analisys and not even one new "user" popped out. I like to believe that i made this happen :)). --Ante Perkovic 05:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


 * But, just for the short time. I did some research and found more than 30 potetnial sock-puppets, most of them active just that particular day. So, this avalanche of anti-croatian sock-puppets (or individual vandals, whatever) continues...
 * On the other side, we managed to find a compromise on small number of pages, but many pages are still attacked on daily bases.
 * Ante Perkovic 11:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Socks
Hey man, I don't really have much time right now. I've sock'd the puppets user page. I will be keeping an eye on that to make sure he does not remove it. Should the edit warring get more out of hand (particularly if its clear that he is using the system to violate the 3RR or something) I will take it to RfCU. I have readded the disputed tag. The article could still do with a lot of cleanup though, "bestial" isn't particularly encyclopaedic writing ;) - FrancisTyers 13:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Just to add to this, he is still going at it on various pages adding the exact same information. I have warned him twice on his user page, but he is still not willing to discuss anything. I have contacted another moderator and got the initial page locked down, but the user simply adds the same info on the other pages. I really think he has been given ample warnings about this, and should be banned (either permanently or for a cooling off period). Thanks --Zivan56 19:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Wrap around issue
Hi Dijxtra,

After adding more information on the Croatian coat of arms page, I notice that now some of the text is not wrapping around & is behind the NDH CoA picture. I do not know how to fix this. Can you offer any advice?

Thanks in advance, croatian_quoll 02:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * How about now? --Dijxtra 08:22, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject Former Yugoslavia
Hey Nikola,

I was just wondering if you were willing to put some time and effort into reviving our WikiProject. It needs some serious CPR. I suspect revising our article improvement drive system could help, and also trying to engage people in some interesting topics which are easy to research, but not covered adequately, would be a good new start. E.g. we did a great job on Ante Marković. Cheers --dcabrilo 05:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

sock-puppet
Hi,

Please chack if these two are the same nad block them both, if needed:

Regards, --Ante Perkovic 11:00, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Pantherarosa
Hi, this user has been making numerous personal attacks against me. The situation started with Pantherarosa making attacks on another user, to which they brought it to the attention of WP:PAIN. Pantherarosa began attacking me when I asked him/her to not remove warnings from his/her talk page. However the admin who looked at the case pretty much tossed it out the window because he felt I wasn't nice enough when asking Pantherarosa to stop attacking users. The situation has continued to escalate, so I'd like another admin to take a look at it given the fact that the admin's conduct was inappropriate to the extent that I've brought the matter to WP:AN/I. The user has already created sockpuppets (one of which has been indef banned) and has made personal attacks on WP:AN/I as well. Given the persistance of this user and the number of blatant attacks after being warned, I ask that a stronger ban than what a minor personal attacker would receive, as I think it's fairly safe to assume Pantherarosa will continue if (s)he receives just a slap on the wrist.

The following are the diffs of personal attacks made by Pantherarosa: edit summary     blatant attack

Paul Cyr 20:23, 27 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I see you reported the guy to WP:AN/I and that there's a discussion going on there. And that the guy is making personal attacks even there. Therefore, he will surely be blocked, but I don't think it'd be OK to block him now since his case is currently discussed (if I block him, he won't be able to discuss). But, I'm quite sure he'll get blocked now that the case is on WP:AN/I... --Dijxtra 20:34, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, I'm just starting to get concerned because the discussion has been going on for days without admin input on my original complain. Paul Cyr 20:42, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Tributaries of Danube
Hi! I wouldn't mind the template getting deleted, it is indeed quite uselss and it's very hard to determine what's a major tributary and what is not. The list+category seems like a better idea, but I just added them although I knew for the discussion, just to make the template more comprehensive for the time it survives :) Todor Bozh inov    → 10:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Pozdrav. U vezi sa pritokama Dunava, reke do koje dužine stavljas na listu?
 * Ja sam krenuo logikom da one do 50-100 km stavljam na talk page, a vece od toga u listu (jos nisam imao rijeku izmedju 50 i 100 km). Ne znam, mozemo uzeti za sad limit od 100 km, pa onda poslje dodavati i krace. Moj cilj je mozda napraviti featured listu, a ako budemo isli na rijeke krace od 100 km, mislim da bi moglo ispasti da nam fali previse rijeka...
 * U Hrvatskoj imaš Karašicu (81 km) a u Srbiji Mostongu (70 km) i Porečku reku (50 km).
 * Hajd ih dodaj na talk page, pa cemo vidjeti sta s njima...
 * Inače, Vernic se uliva u Nemačkoj sa leve strane, između Ilera i Leha, Abens takođe u Nemačkoj, sa desne strane između Leha i Altmila (ali je vrlo kratak), Trajzen se uliva u Austriji, sa desne strane, između Ibsa i Morave, Kamp takođe u Austriji, ali sa leve strane, odmah posle Trajzena a Černa se uliva u Dunav na Đerdapu, sa leve, rumunske strane, PajaBG 20:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Bil ti bio problem dodati to u listu? Ja sad ne stignem, obavit cu ja to sutra ako ti ne uzmognes...
 * Nego, imas li ti ideju gdje bi mogli naci neke reference za sve ove podatke? Ima li neka dobra knjiga o rijekama gdje bi se ti svi podatci mogli potvrditi? Trebat ce nam reference ako cemo gurati ovu listu do featured statusa (sto bih ja bas jako zelio)... --Dijxtra 20:41, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Pretpostavio sam da je 100 km u pitanju...OK, pošto si ti započeo, necemo da ti zatrpavamo listu :o) Ove reke ti još ne bih dodavao na listu jer ni za jednu u stvari ne znam koliko su duge (da li preko 100 km uopšte). Što se tiče referenci, dodao sam one knjige koje ja najviše koristim...za ostatak Evrope ne bih znao, ja sam svojevremo kupio podatke iz Britanike, CD izdanje za 2002...Inače, ako si zainteresovan, pogledaj Rivers of Serbia koje sam ja postavio i već neko vreme sređujem redom malo po malo. Pozdrav PajaBG 22:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Ma, ja se inace nikad nisam previse interesirao za rijeke... no sad me nesto lupilo i odlucio sam sloziti tu listu pritoka Dunava, pa sam onda vidio kako Austrijanci imaju fino slozeno Rivers of Austria, pa Francuzi List of rivers of France, i sad bi ja tako nesto za Hrvatsku slozio mozda... no, vidjet cu jos, moram prvo iskopati neku knjigu o rijekama. Lijepo si to uredio za Srbiju, BTW... --Dijxtra 07:32, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Štovatelj ustaša
User:Da_Croatian_Sensation. Can you see his userpage and contributions? I think he deserves to be blocked. Jakiša Tomić 07:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


 * D'oh, I forgot to answer. I blocked him indefinetly. --Dijxtra 22:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Translation?
Thanks for translating the message left by Bormalagurski - do you understand the Cyrillic message on his userpage? It was put there to replace some offensive nationalist links, and I'm suspicious about the content. --ajn (talk) 21:32, 2 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I understand cyrillic script. The message is quite benign. Something about the place where he lives, things he does and his history on Wikipedia. If you wish, I'll provide a full translation. What concernes me is the edit summary of his last edit on his talk page... And just now I've stumbled on this one. So much anger here on Wikipedia, especially among people from Balcans... sad, sad, really sad... --Dijxtra 21:51, 2 June 2006 (UTC)


 * That's fine, thanks. I think he's uptight because in drawing attention to a Croatian nationalist he's also drawn attention to his own userpage.  I try to stay out of this sort of area normally, but this was too egregious to pass by.  As you say, a very sad situation and really not helped by idiots on all sides deliberately provoking each other.  --ajn (talk) 22:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, quite. I think that in some time we will need a dedicated task-force to quell the war... the situation on Balcans-related articles is just about to explode. Radical Albanians, Croats and Serbs (sorted alfabeticaly, no hard feelings to anybody; note also I didn't say all Albanians, Croats and Serbs are radical) are just getting more and more heated. There are some rational users with which it is easy to collaborate (or at least not to hard) and I'm really happy to see that, but OTOH, there's quite a bunch of users which do not understand that if they do not collaborate with the other side, we're not going to prosper. If you do not take your "opponents" seriously and just revert them or flame them - you're not going to do anything. And nobody seems to understand that. They're just keep reverting each other, insulting each other, reporting each other to admins, getting blocked, engaging in sockpuppetry... but what this kind of users don't understand is that we're not moving. They have entrenched in their points of view, they refuse to discuss and just battle each other. The future as I see it is quite sinister. I'm afraid. I hope I'm wrong. --Dijxtra 22:18, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Danube
The box talks about drainage basins! The drainage basin of the Danube includes a part of Montenegro. See. -- ran (talk) 21:57, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * My appologies, I didn't realise it was talking about drainage basins. Sorry. --Dijxtra 09:00, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

rijeke
Bok,

Vidim da spominjes rijeke u Hrvatskoj. Na hrv. wikipeidji imas hr:Popis rijeka u BiH (popis je kompletan, radjen prema vrlo detaljnoj karti), a hr:Popis rijeka u Hrvatskoj je nedovrsen jer nedostaju rijeke u Slavoniji tj. sve istocno od Zagreba. Dalmacija, Istra, Lika i sve do Karlovca je popisano. --Ante Perkovic 10:11, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Hoho! Hvala ti puno za ovu informaciju, sada cu definitivno krenuti u sredjivanje nasih i Bosanskih rijeka na en Wikipediji... Hvala! --Dijxtra 11:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Literatura: Karta Hrvatske i BiH 1: 500 000 :))). BiH je sredjena, a kod Hrvatske sam zapeo negdje kod Zagreba. Za svaki slucaj, ako zelis dovrsiti Hrvatsku, pocni od Save i idi prema sjeveru. Nabrojio sam dio uz Slovensku granicu, ali za svaki slucaj, da sto ne propustis, kreni od Save. Ako se sjetim gdje sam tocno stao, javim ti. --Ante Perkovic 12:11, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Re:
You can see it at Vandalism. Search for "removing warnings". --HolyRomanEmperor 19:58, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: Your ethnicity
I'm more confused by the actual question - rather than insulted. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Hm. Now I'm confused :-) The question is pretty simple. I think that every person I know knows the ethnicity of his/her grandparents, and from that it's rather simple to figure out your own. But, never mind that, I still think it's rather naughty to ask a question like that. Something like "are you gay?" or "why the hell you dress like that?". We're here to write an encyclopaedia, mind the NPOV and mind our own business. That's how I see it. --Dijxtra 15:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I do not know what to answer. Should I say my mother's ethnicity - or my fathers? If I say my mother's ethnicty - I would be utterly wrong, since both of her parents weren't of that ethnicity - and if I say my father's, well - it creates a whole weird image, as there are no followers of that religion of his ethnicity and his last name (which I also bear) - is yet another totally different story (the nth ethnicity - of which I very little blood - or none at all, possibly). --HolyRomanEmperor 18:02, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Then you say "I'm half this and half that". But, as you can see from my user page, I'm not a fan of ethnicities. So, don't get me wrong, I don't think you are obliged to answer that question, just that it's a fairly easy one to answer. --Dijxtra 20:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * What dost thou think of Montenegro? --HolyRomanEmperor 18:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * As a separte state or as a separate language edition of wikipedia? --Dijxtra 20:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * both. --HolyRomanEmperor 12:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


 * As for separate state, I don't really care. Seems to me that Montenegrins (as in citisens of Montenegro) would be better off in a larger state (now Montenegrin students have to go abroad to study on Belgrade University, for example), but then again, I understand the urge to have a sovereign state (not that I ever felt something like that, but I can understand it).
 * As for separate language wikipedia... if you ask me, I'd shut down bs, hr and sr and leave only sh operational, but I understand that's not posible because not everybody thinks the way I do and shuting down other people's things is fascism (which I consider to be a bad thing). Therefore, if Bosniaks, Croats, Montenegrins and Serbs want their own wikipedia to work on it, or Serbo-Croatian wikipedia to work on it... fine by me. Give it to them, not that it'll hurt me if they have their separate wikipedias. The only problem here is that we have Bosniaks, Croats and Serbians who wish to work on their local wikipedias, and we have some other guys who wish to work on Serbo-Croatian wikipedia... but I'm not sure we have Montenegrins who wish to work on their local wikipedia. At least not the number sufficient to make anything useful of it in some reasonable time.
 * And, now a question for you. What do you think of this two issues? --Dijxtra 12:57, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

You sound more and more reasonable by every passing moment. ;)

My attitude? Well, firstly, I disagree with the actual way by which Montenegro became independent. The Montenegrin political leadership that pushed for Montenegro's independence so heavily in the past few days is the same (read: same) political leadership of Miloshevich's regime - the same that invaded Dubrovnik, fought over Yugoslav wars and the key element in the Yugoslav wars. Milo Djukanovich (once overseed the Western Front himself in Chetnik clothes) betrayed his "mentor" S. Miloshevich - and I dislike traitors even more. The basic concept of Milo and his Bloc lies in the fact that they have been saved from the Hague by betraying Belgrade in 1999. Milo continues to practise Miloshevich's tactics (rigging voting, propaganda, "extraordinary" means to complete an end) - and soon, Montenegro is about to become the most capitalistic state in the world (where money can buy anything - even lives; already you can pay your military service or any obligation to the state with funds). Although, I admire Milo's genius - the mere fact that he pushed/accepted a 55% majority - and the fact that the actual outcome of 55.5% on the referendum - showed that everything was planned/known already in advance. The fact remains that 90,000 voters of the Montenegrin diaspora were allowed to vote - and 300,000 of montenegrins in Serbia weren't. Aside from that, Milo's Miloshevich-style propaganda was/is greatly in practise in Montenegro. By cunning means, Milo crossed from the Political leadership to the Opposition - crushing the top of the former political leadership & by numerious political intrigues he won every "battle" without a single opponent - playing out the European Union, the Serbian element in Montenegro, the Albanian, Moslem & Croat minorities in Montenegro and most of all, Belgrade.

Aside from this, I am glad that the Union broke - it was disfunctional and gradualy damaging (especially to Serbia). The referendum in Belgrade showed over 90% voters for independent Serbia. I think the main problem is that the Montenegrin political leadership is no longer in control over the union like it was throughout the 1990s. After Miloshevich's fall, Serbian politicians took over - and this was unbearable to Milo and his company. The recent Union between Serbia and Montenegro was once more led by Montenegrins - but the fear that the next President would probably be a Serbian - and not from Milo's bloc - was unbearable. Tell me, which state has a man that wants nothing but it's dissolution for 3 years?

As for the Montenegrin wikipedia - I agree with your attitude; but I will oppose any questions for a Montenegrin wikipedia until the Montenegrin language is standardized/declared/recognized. After that, naturally, I'll support it.

Satisfied? ;) --HolyRomanEmperor 15:33, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Pretty much, yes. Thanks. As for me being reasonable... that's because I study logic ;-) --Dijxtra 15:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Next person that makes undiscussed revert will be blocked for 24 hours.
Ante Perković made undisscussed edit[]. Now you do what you say you would do. Luka Jačov 19:01, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * There. I did what I promised to do. --Dijxtra 15:24, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

help with Neo-Nazism in Croatia please
Please see Talk:Neo-Nazism in Croatia and tell me if I'm being unreasonable or just beating my head against the wall with people who don't accept compromise. --Joy &#91;shallot] 11:14, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Edit war on Serbs of Croatia
Can you please tell me did you even bother to analyse entire edit-war or you just went to "keep your promise".

Because, I have never seen someone being blocked for such a bisare reason. It took me quite a long time just to find your "promise" and Zmaj propably would never find it if you didn't provide the link.

Did you even analysed my changes prior to "uncommented" change? Did you noticed that I commented previous 3 changes with alltogehter 6 comments, only to skip changing talk page while making 4th change because Jacov was constantly ignoring my questions (and I even wrote that in short comment!!!)?

Did you noticed that Jacov didn't even bother to answer my question and that he patiently made unrelated commnets in the anticipation of me brekaing this forgoten "rule" of yours?

Let me ask hippotetical question - if some new user came there and made a revert without explicitely changing the talk page, would you block him to?

Do you expect people to read a talk page of every article before changing them just to make sure that there are no some specila rules?

I agree with you in one thing - you have been manipulated by Jacov.

I apologise for the tone, but I must I would never expect that you could be so easily manipulated by someone like Jacov.

--Ante Perkovic 16:13, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I went through the whole history. And, as you noted yourself: tehnicaly you where the one that broke the rule I set. So I blocked you. Did you deserve it? Where you so ill-behaved that I just had to block you? No, you didn't do anything terribly wrong. But the thing is, I set that (really useless and quite stupid, I understand now) rule. And I had to act on it to remain consistent. I fell into my own pitt, as our people would say. I set the rule to stop Luka from edit warring, and he outsmarted me, so you got blocked. But if I decided not to block you, that would mean I broke my own rule, which is not good. So I had to decide: either I will break my own rule and accomplish nothing (by not acting at all) or I will impose the block I promised and maybe make this edit war stop. So you got blocked. Remember, that doesn't mean I think you are a bad person. Just that I had to act and you were the first who didn't discuss... --Dijxtra 16:33, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey, no problem :). No hard feelings :). You made mistake whrn you invented the rule, but You couldn't possibly think that you will be dealing with such a weasel :). When I saw Jacov's request, I knew that you will have to do what you did.

Nisam ljut na tebe, ali mi je trebalo da se malo ispusem :). Sorry, ako sam bio prezestok :(.

Pozdrav, -Ante Perkovic 16:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Jel trazim puno ako te pitam da nesto slicno napises i na "incidents" (vrlo kratko). Vidim da se neki tip tamo (Andrew Norman) nabrusio na sve nas "balkance", ocito misleci da su opet u pitanju nekakvi balkanski plemenski sukobi u kojima su svi isti (mrzim takve predrasude o Hrvatima ili Srbima).

--Ante Perkovic 16:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

AIDbot (again)
Hi! I recently realised that people (including me) very often forget to remove the AIDnom template from the talk pages for AID candidates with expired nominations. Would it be possible to change the message the bot gives, and tell whomever is doing the maintenance to remove the tag? Thanks a lot, Pruneau plum 13:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Alka tournament, Sinj, Croatia.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Alka tournament, Sinj, Croatia.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation 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 Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 18:06, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Prepare..
...to hear me contradicting myself:


 * I strongly support your enforcement of compromise on Serbs of Croatia


 * I object your blocking of Ante Perkovic




 * HRE, it's OK, it's allready been discuses. He did the right thing and, in the process, we all learned how to recognise a manipulator. --Ante Perkovic 21:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I shot myself in the foot. Ko radi - griješi. But, it's nice to see that the problem of Balcan related articles have gained attention of other administrators (check out the WP:AN here). Things are moving somewhere. We need a concensus on what to do with all this mess with Croatia-Serbia-Kosovo topics. --Dijxtra 22:08, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi,

Jacov is trying to became living example of WP:POINT. Please, try to explain him that what he does is wrong. Or just block him, if you don't want to make futile attempt to bring him to reason. Please, this is becoming silly. --Ante Perkovic 22:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

siroti :)
I tend to do that... it's relaxing :) --Joy &#91;shallot] 16:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Removals
I removed albanian namesfrom the city of giannena because it is not a language spoken there.It is not an official language.Would you like if i put the greek name of Zagreb?I did the same for thessaloniki.You'd better leave greeks edit the article about greece because we know better.

Thank you for your points. Yours, MetroStar

Request for partial protection
Hi! Please, can you protect the article Plitvice Lakes from unregistered users? This is the background: there had been an edit war about whether there were mines in the national park. It was established in the discussion on the talk page that the mines were outside the park, but inside the municipality, which is duly reflected in the article Plitvice Lakes (municipality). Now some anonymous users are attempting to restart the edit war, although the issue has been resolved. This is why partial protection is needed. --Zmaj 10:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, done. --Dijxtra 18:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Good work
This is mostly in relation to the article Serbs of Croatia. You have shown great temper, calm and justfull action in regard to those who would try to impose their own nationalistic views (Serbian AND Croatian) to Wipikedia.

For that, I salute you.

Also, I implore you to continue this great work, thus making it more livable here on Wikipedia for us Balkanians who are ashamed of our neighbours actions and those of our own fellow countrymen.


 * Tjah. Thanks, but I'm not very glad about this barnstar as it reminds me of the fact that Balkans is an always will be a barrel of gunpowder. And my actions to prevent this war on Wikipedia hav proven to be quite futile... But anyways, thanks for the star.


 * And, don't be ashamed of your countrymen. It's not that you are responsible for their education. You did nothing wrong, so you've got nothing to be ashamed of...

On a more personal note: Smatram da su svi oni odreda panjevi koji se svađaju oko gluposti koje ne zavrijeđuju niti približno toliko vremena, truda ili pozornosti. Ajmo se sad svađat tko je čiji bio, pa revertat unedogled, pa zašto ne bi na kraju izvadili malo oružje i poubijali se kao zadnja stoka, jer toga nismo dovoljno imali zadnjih godina.

Ajmo još. Baš na fali.

-- xompanthy 21:46, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Ma, jasta, da se mene pita, cim nastupi neka svadja oko neceg, fino se ostave samo podatci oko kojim se svi slazu, pa makar to bio samo datum rodjenja i umjesto da se kace, ocu pisat o energetskoj vrijednosti kravljeg sira. Bilo sta konstruktivno radit. Il pustit cigane i zapit se rakije. Mesto da jebu jedan drugog u mozak, pardon my french. --Dijxtra 08:46, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

sucessions box on Macedonian denar
Hi, I see that you added a succession box to the Macedonian denar. I'm going to have to suppress that for now. The reasons are --Chochopk 21:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) There is a set of better succession templates for currencies. See Template:N-start/Instructions
 * 2) Currencies of former Yugoslav republics are kind of complicated. See WikiProject Numismatics/Sandbox/Succession for the current draft. You can help! You are much more proficient on the Balkans than I am. I'm focusing on getting the currency related templates and standardized format out.


 * I don't understand what's point 2 got to do with Macedonian denar. The data in succession box was prefectly fine... I'll take a look at Template:N-start this afternoon and then convert all of dinar/denar boxes to the new format... --Dijxtra 07:03, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Da Croatian Sensation
You say here that a blocked Serbian editor may have been responsible for "Da Croatian Sensation". C-c-c-c's talk page has just been edited by an anon, whose only other edits (earlier today) were to the Science reference desk. The anon claims to be Bormalagurski, but the Science reference desk is the only non-Balkan page C-c-c-c has ever edited (and Bormalagurski hasn't ever touched it as far as I can see). Is C-c-c-c the blocked Serb you mentioned? --ajn (talk) 21:49, 17 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Nice work :-) Yeah, some guy emailed me and claimed that he got blocked as a side-effect of blocking of C-c-c-c (the IP autoblock thing, they obviously shared the same ISP), and said that happened already once when C-c-c-c got blocked. Which means that the guy who mailed me, C-c-c-c and Da Croatian Sensation share the same ISP and probaly live in the same geographical area as ISPs tend to group their IP ranges geographicaly. So, go figure. :-) BTW, if the anonimous guy claimed to be Bormalagurski, this is a nice reason to put C-c-c-c, Da Croatian Sensation and Bormalagurski to CheckUser. Then it will be proven that C-c-c-c and Da Croatian Sensation are the same person and C-c-c-c has another problem in his life (sockpuppetry is a nice reason to get blocked) and if it turns out that Bormalagurski and C-c-c-c are the same person... well... we just got rid of 2 of most offensive users. :-) But I reckon that's highly unlikely, but worth a shot... --Dijxtra 11:22, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Wording in case of fair use rationale
Hi there fellow programmer. The OrphanBot just informed me that my newly uploaded image lacks rationale, which is a nice shot, but a bit not precise. I understand that OrphanBot analises wording of the rationale provided and decides if it is legitimate... which is nice, but, if it finds out that the rationale is not legitimate, then it shouldn't say there's no rationale, but that rationale doesn't seem to be valid. An example:. The image had a rationale. Now, we can discuss if it is a good one (I'd say it is, but then again, I uploaded the image, so I'm supposed to think the rationale is a good one), but it is sure as hell an existent one. Therefore, I got a bit annoyed when the bot informed me the image lacked rationale... and I think a bit of rewording of the message wouldn't hurt. ;-)

The second thing I wanted to point out is the fact that OrphanBot reacts in no time. I for instance uploded the image and only then provided the rationale. Maybe a 5 minute offset wouldn't be so bad... --Dijxtra 18:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


 * It looks like you added the rationale between when the bot checked for a rationale and when it applied the tag, since you managed to include several of the words that OrphanBot's looking for. This is the first time I've seen that happen since OrphanBot started checking fair-use images, but I'll see what I can do about preventing it.  If you've got better wording for the message, I'm open to suggestions.


 * Aham, OK, then it wasn't that the rationale was invalid. So the wording is OK. Fine.


 * As for reaction time, OrphanBot processes images in a batch of 150 every hour, ignoring the 20 most recent uploads. You uploaded the image right before OrphanBot started checking, and probably right before someone uploaded a whole bunch, thus the quick reaction by the bot. --Carnildo 05:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, I see, then I reckon the case like mine is pretty rare. Then ignore my complaint :-) --Dijxtra 11:26, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Massacres
Out of sheer curiosity: was your appearance on Talk:Munich massacre a byproduct of wikistalking my contributions :-) or result of browsing through WP:RM (as I stumbled upon it)? Duja 15:14, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I have that article on my watchlist because I'm interested in the topic. I converted all of the references on that article, for instance: . I got interested in the topic quite some time ago, then I read this article, and got even more interested, then I saw (and recorded) a BBC documentary about Munich massacre (Ehud Barak and some other high profile guys took part in it) and decided that I had to improve the article... but didn't get enough time. The recording of the documentary still sits in my VCR and waits for me to find some time... so, to answer your question: no, it was not wikistalking ;-) --Dijxtra 16:16, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Request to ban a sock puppet
Hi! I am contacting you because an admin is needed to enforce the ban on a sock puppet of Purger, identified by WP:RFCU. This page has the request with explanation and the Checkuser's confirmation: Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Purger. Yesterday ChrisO blocked Purger for a month and banned the sock puppets Romaine and Oesterling, but somehow missed banning the confirmed sock puppet 64.18.16.251, which was actually the most active one. Can you ban it? --Zmaj 06:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

NOTE: This sock puppet wrote on his user page: This IP address is not a single user address - rather a proxy server IP address used by many people. Do not fall for his tricks. Firstly, he was identified as Purger's sock puppet by CheckUser. Secondly, a simple review of his contributions shows it is a single user with exactly the same agenda as Purger. --Zmaj 06:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Done. --Dijxtra 07:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you. --Zmaj 08:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually you shouldn't block IP addresses indefinitely unless they're open proxies. I've reduced the block to 29 days, to coincide with the 30 day block I gave Purger yesterday. -- ChrisO 21:26, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but the thing is this IP is obviously his static IP... but, right, the policy says not to block indefinetly... then I'll just watch the Ip after 30 days. --Dijxtra 21:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Slovenia and Montenegro
TV news last night said Slovenia recognized Montenegro on Tuesday, and established relations Wednesday. Zocky | picture popups 10:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Quoting from the Slovene Wikipedia: ''Islandija je kot prva država priznala Črno goro za samostojno in neodvisno državo 8. junija 2006[2]. Temu so sledili še Švica, Ruska federacija (11. junij [3]), Hrvaška, Makedonija, Turčija, Bolgarija, Združene države Amerike (12. junij[4]). Slovenija je Črno goro priznala 20. junija 2006[5], naslednji dan, 21. junija, pa je bila sprejeta v OVSE[6].''

So yes, Slovenia recognised Montenegro on 20. 6. 2006 :) --Missmarple 12:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

IPA
Are you, by any chance, skilled with IPA? --HolyRomanEmperor 14:28, 1 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately not. But I'd like to learn, currently I'm trying to find somebody to teach me. I think Duja is familiar, but he didn't respond when I asked him. --Dijxtra 14:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Adminship
''Holy, I hope this oppose vote of mine won't prevent you and me from collaborating in the future no matter what happens to this RfA. If it becomes successful, I will congratulate you as soon as I get online and will treat you just as I treat any other fellow admin. If it fails, I hope it won't get between you and me and that you won't get mad at me. --Dijxtra 18:14, 2 July 2006 (UTC)''


 * I wouldn't mind in a million years - nor will our collaboration stop at any moment. However, please let me point out several issues that you have/might have misjudged about me:

But, his actions to prevent radical Serbian nationalists are... well... hard for me to find. Please refer to my swift protection of Dalmatia, Tourism of Croatia and similiar Croat-related articles that were contiously being pushed with Serbian nationalist POV. Also, see the Rudjer Boskovic article and open its history (note my last edits). I have made a balanced compromise - Rudjer Boskovic was being invaded for ages by Serbian POV (including from my own brother's). One funny thing is that I haven't combated Albanian nationalism as much as you presented. :) ALl the things that I did was to "restore to the light" a little <not intending to insult the User in subject> - but now a good contributor - User:Ilir_pz. --HolyRomanEmperor 18:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

About the "betraying my own nation" part - publicly, I deny to identify myself more Serbian than Croatian - since I am currently Serbian, but Croatian by birth. Indeed, I have betrayed both of my (or one, Yugoslav) nations to enforce NPOV - on one article I supported a compromise orchestrated by Serbs and on the other by Croats (the same users) - eventually leading to the fact that both sides have me in grim memory (that's why I've had both Serb and Croat opposes in my last RfA).


 * And essentially - when I edit articles, I deal strictly with bot-like translations from books, encyclopediae, or the Croatian or Serbian wikipedias. This means that my edits must seem POV - see for instance Serbian Lands, an article translated from the Serbian wikipedia. However, I have no intention of enforcing the POV that stands there - and always pull the discussion to the talk page when I am interested in discussing. --HolyRomanEmperor 18:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I kinda responded to this on the RfA page... --Dijxtra 21:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Essentially - your opinion is very important to my RfA. Taken these explainations, could you express your opinion here - because on your behalf, I would be glad to pull the nomination - with you Opposing, I'm not really sure if the person in question is entitled to be an administrator at all. All the best, my always-will-be-good-friend! --HolyRomanEmperor 18:45, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


 * No, I do not suggest you should pull the nomination. I have been known to err even more than once, which implies that I'm, unfortunately, not perfect. And I'm quite aware of that, but luckily for all of us, I do not decide on RfA's, the community does. If the community decides that you are ready to became a sysop, you should become a sysop. --Dijxtra 21:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

P. S. I noticed that Duja sometimes doesn't reply posts. I wonder why's that? :) --HolyRomanEmperor 18:45, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Dunno. Yes, I noticed he sometimes doesn't respond, but hey, he doesn't get paid for responding to posts. I for sure won't get offended by that. It's not like anything depends on him. This is the beauty of Wikipedia, you can leave whenever you wish, ignore the whole thing completely, and chances are that when you return, not only nothing will fall apart, but it will probably be improved. I really like the relaxed nature of Wikipedia. One of building blocks of that relaxed nature is that you don't have to do anything, including replying to posts on your talk page... --Dijxtra 21:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


 * If I may answer: I realize it's not polite; in most cases (if it's not simple forgeting), I don't answer when I feel that I can't contribute much to the subject in question, i.e. have nothing intelligent to say. For example, if you refer to this suggestion of yours, my answer would be mu. I noticed that war between you and Emir Arven, and answered here, but I know so little about medieval Bosnian royalty that I was unable to say anything smart. So I said nothing.
 * As for your RfA, my absence is deliberate this time... I think it's too early again, and I'm not sure what I'd vote. I mostly agree with Dijxtra's remarks there, but I'm not sure what is my honest opinion and I somehow feel I couldn't suppress my personal bias either way. So, I'd prefer to stay out for this time. Duja 10:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

HRE is now in a better place
Greetings. I am HRE's cousin. I have a sad news to announce (as per his brother's wish) - my dear brother-by-aunt is no more in the world of the living... It pains me enough to write this - so I'm just going to point you to HRE's talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:HolyRomanEmperor#As_per_Your_.28Our.29_brother.27s_request. --Sad News 20:47, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: HRE
If his account has been hijacked, all the more reason for it to be blocked (he wouldn't be able to log into it anyway). See also my reply on WT:RFA. --W.marsh 23:29, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Translation help
Could you help me translate comments towards me on sr:Разговор са корисником:HRE so I can respond to users? I have an account on there and I am trying to talk to HRE from there. Can you help? — <font color="CD2626">The King of Kings 15:05 July 04 '06
 * The guy said "feel free to post (as in, drop a note) here if some help is needed". No, I don't understand either what the guy wanted to say with that. :-( Maybe it was a message for HRE. --Dijxtra 17:06, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, ok. Thanks Dijxtra. :D — <font color="CD2626">The King of Kings 06:52 July 05 '06

HRE
Hi, I just made a bullshit erroneously. I was trying to repair the damage after "HolyRomanEmperor" and moved Metohija to Move back. And I can't move it really back where it belongs. Would you please fix it? Duja 13:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Forget it, already fixed by someone else... Duja 14:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Slavko Kvaternik picture
The picture came from the Crna Legija web site. Vodomar 21:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Insulting user name
Hi,

Please see:
 * this and
 * this

I believe this username should be blocked indefinitely.

My guess is that this is the work of the same idiot, but I have no proof, so blacking this username indefinitely should be enough. He had just 1 edit (vandalism) anyway. --Ante Perkovic 12:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Done. --Dijxtra 12:14, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

And again ... --Ante Perkovic 13:34, 8 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmmm... man, whay don't they just go and play ball or watch TV or something and leave us alone... there, blocked him. --Dijxtra 13:38, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

WPFY has a new look!
Check out WP:FY. If you wish, you can add WPFY to your user or talk page to keep in touch with the project. Zocky | picture popups 17:51, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Maps of Bosnia
Hi,

user:Dado has created some new Bosnia locator maps, but without entities marked (except badly visible inter-entity line). I think this is a bad idea, so I created my own maps, with separate colors for each entity (we have that already, but those maps are in low resolution and small).

I couldn't reach a compromise with Dado, and I believe we need third opinion.

Please, see:
 * Image talk:BHMunicipalities.png (talk page of Dado's map)
 * Image talk:BH municipality location.gif (talk page of my map)

Could you please find some spare time to comment this. --Ante Perkovic 23:08, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

FOTW flags
Can you tell me what kind of flags from Croatia and Serbia and Montenregro that you are looking for to use? While I cannot give permission, I can perhaps make SVG versions of them that I can license myself. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * This one, for instance. If you could do this one, I'll go and see if I need others... Thanks! --Dijxtra 19:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Gibraltar
Hello Djixtra

We would appreciate your outside opinion in the following RfC! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Gibnews

Thanks alot! --Burgas00 11:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Sigh
...because I'm technicly a new used and User_talk:HolyRomanEmperor is semi-protected. There is no possibility for me to edit that.


 * I oversaw the whole process and I think you fall into the category of those who that this was just some sick joke of mine... --HRE 08:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, quite. Because we have lots of gaps you failed to fill. But, don't worry, you know me, I'll change my mind as soon as you clear everything out... --Dijxtra 08:15, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually - you might just lend me a hand in that. I'm trying to make a summary to actually understand what happened in the first place. --HRE 10:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Pozdrav
Nadam se da si ziv stigao kuci i da si se lepo proveo u Srbiji i Beogradu. Meni je veoma drago da smo se upoznali, a nadam se da cemo se uskoro opet videti! --dcabrilo 21:12, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Ma, jao, ubi mi zeludac ta vasa Vojvodina. Samo dan duze da sam osto i zeludac bi mi se raspuko :-) Sad sam doma samo na siru, vrhnju (pavlaci ;-) ) i raznim travama. Sljedeci put nosim gastale sa sobom u Srbiju :-) --Dijxtra 18:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * ...mmmm... travama... jel' mogu i ja da dobijem? Duja 20:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism of Roma People
Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. DoubleSpacing 15:35, 22 July 2006 (UTC) The image you put on 'Roma People' is not verifiable. It has not been verifiable since it was uploaded over seven months ago. The rules are the rules.


 * How verifiable should it be? Should we find the girls and ask them if they are Roma? --Dijxtra 21:23, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Mirko Norac
It looks good. You should renominate it, if you have to say anything respond on my talk page. Also, you should archive this talk.. Getting quite long.. Alvin6226 talk 19:36, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Linux
A new wikiproject. Thought you might be interested. - User:Samsara (talk • contribs) 17:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

AID/M bot
Hi Dijxtra, thanks for the WP:AID/M bot. It works brilliantly, although complains about some minor issues every so often - lets not worry about that for now. What I thought I should tell you is that, for each expired nomination, it says to move to '/History'. According to the AID/M page, expired noms should in fact be moved to /Removed and only sucessful ones should be moved to /History. This isn't a major issue, but may confuse newcomers (which newcomer would be taking care of AID/M, I'll never know). --Draicone (talk) 08:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Ilok
Pogledaj ovo: Talk:Ilok. Ako znaš nešto više o tome da li su porodice Gorjanski i Iločki bili Hrvati ili Mađari, molim te da napišeš tamo. PANONIAN  (talk)  13:04, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Hm, nažalost, o Iloku ne znam apsolutno ništa. A nemam niti nekih izvora iz kojih bih to provjerio... izvini... --Dijxtra 12:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

AIDbot
At the suggestion of Davodd (and a general feeling at what remains of COTW) I've merged the AID and the COTW into WP:ARCAID, which operates under the same rule structure but overhauls all articles, including stubs and feature-length articles. I think the AIDbot will need to be reset to operate at this new page adress, but otherwise I've left everything as it was. Hope this doesn't mess anything up too badly. -Litefantastic 01:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Mirko Norac
I'm responding to your message on my talk page. I looked at the article. It needed a bit of language clean up, so I did that. It looks great and I think it's a GA now, but now I'm also too biased. I think you should renominate it. In fact, I'll do that myself. --<font face="Arial">The Talking Sock talk contribs 14:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Sneaky POV by user:PANONIAN
Hi,

Looks like user:PANONIAN keeps changing links to Homeland War. i find it very sneaky. Can you stop him? --Ante Perkovic 00:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure I can. --Dijxtra 11:31, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for notifying me, Nikola; I've replied on AN/I. -- ChrisO 19:12, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Panonian
Hi Dijxtra, I perfectly know that the name was voted over a while ago (I did vote for the current name at the time indeed). Panonian stopped changing the links once I asked him to bring the issue to the talk page for discussion. But I have to say that it is impossible to have a debate on this if people keep on namecalling and failing to assume good faith (I am not talking about you, of course). Yes, consensus was reached before but if there are editors who are not happy with the outcome (and were not aware of the previous debate, as this is the case with Panonian), I reckon that we should revisit the discussion and maybe even going that far as giving the informal vote a straw poll legitimacy. Panonian is NOT an edit warrior: IMHO, there is no need for blocks and so on. Regards, E   <font color="Blue">Asterion  <font color="Green">u talking to me? 23:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


 * To be frank, I'm glad you entered this discussion. And, why is that? Because I know that you know that I'm not some crazy Ustaša, and I know that PANONIAN will listen to you. And maybe you can then reason with him and explain to him that I really acted in good faith.


 * Now, please remember that I have a reputation of a sane person. Of a person which is not nationalist, in fact, I'm the guy who blocked Croatian editors when it was needed. Please, remember that I'm no anti-Serb editor. Now that you have remembered this, I'll tell you few things: I realise that the name of the article is problematic. I even more: I'm not even sure for which name I'd vote. Croatian editors probably will not be happy about this, but have I ever minded what other editors think, whether they are Croatian or Serbian? No. I always acted on my own judgement, and so will I on this matter. As you can see here, I didn't vote yet. That's very important to notice, I didn't oppose to the proposed name.


 * Second very important thing is that I tried to start a discussion. I really did. I didn't just said "there is no name-change, PANONIAN", no, I said, "let us discuss, and then we'll see". You see, Wikipedia has rules. And you should have realised by now that I always play by the rules. He wants to change a name? Fine. There's a rule about how to do that. If he plays by the rules, I won't say one thing.


 * BTW, now that I mentioned rules, he probably won't listen to me and he will probably say that I'm disrupting his idea, but there's one important thing about his poll: he didn't follow the procedure stated at Requested moves. If you want to play with Wikipedia, you have to follow the rules of Wikipedia. Good thing about that is if he plays by the rules, and the voters decide to change the name, nobody, not even ArbCom, can stop him from changing the name since he played by the rules. Please try to explain to him that the vote is not advertised at WP:RQM and therefore is not obligatory, and Croatian POV warriors will use that. (and while we're at it, you could mention to him that it is not in good faith to conduct a pole now that lots of editors are on holidays...)


 * Third, and most important thing is: he broke the rules. All of the neutral admins supported my decission that he is disrupting. He not only didn't follow procedure at WP:RQM, he went one step further, he disrupted Wikipedia. Now, I understand he is a fine editor. He has been here for quite some time and has a quite a number of edits. And, belive it or not, my personal oppinion of him is not negative. I don't hate him. I don't wish he leaves Wikipedia. He is a good contributor. But, in this case he made a mistake. I reverted him, told him no to do that, started a discussion. He reverted me back without ever trying to discuss. I could have just warned him that I'll block him if he does that again. But, no, I presented hiscase to WP:ANI before I warned him. See, I did everything I could to make sure my step is understood as good faith. I told him that he is disrupting Wikipedia (without mentioning the block). He then reverted me (even though he knew that I'm an admin), I then mentioned the block. See? I didn't just say "hey man, don't do that, I'll block you". I first implied he is disrupting, and then mentioned the block just after he reverted. And I didn't mention the block because I didn't like the new name. No, I did it because he, very simple, broke the rules. And every admin agrees. He shouldn't have done that. And, what is more important, I was right to warn him. I will ignore the fact that my admin career is flawless except that one incident when I blocked Croatian editors and that he threathened that my admin misconduct will be under investigation. That, my friend, sure as hell is not good faith.


 * Now, to conclude, if you go through my comments which I wrote before you wrote to me, you will see that I already agreed with what you are now saying to me. I already agreed that there are some respected editors which do not agree with current name and that we need to discuss a new name. I agree to that before this incident and I will support the discussion in the future. About the legitimacy of the informal vote... well, I didn't say nothing against it up until this moment. If you ask me, I'd maybe even given the vote the legitimacy... but the problem is that Croatian POV warriors wont. Therefore, I think it is better to follow the rules on WP:RQM because then nobody will be able to contest the result of the vote. Nobody will be able to say "the vote is invalid". So, the only problem I had with PANONIAN is his little bit of disrupiton, not his idea that the article should be renamed.


 * I thank you on your attempt to mediate in this case. I feel we need a mediator which will help us overcome this incident. I would like PANONIAN to know that I'm ready to live in peace with him, as long as we don't threaten each other and as long as we both play by the rules. Because, rules of Wikipedia take care of everything. And I, you can be sure of that, can live in peace with anybody, no matter what his nationality or point of view is, as long as we both have good faith. --Dijxtra 09:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks Dijxtra for your long reply. I wasn't really blaming you for anything. Even more, I think you're one of the more level-headed admins I've ever encountered . I simply wanted you to put yourself on his skin at the time. Last night, I was a little bit annoyed with the roll-on effect comments from other admins (i.e. ajn's), which I found excessively harsh (P's no crazy editwarrior). I feel responsible for the fact that I suggested Panonian to bring the issue up for discussion to the article's talk page but neither did I then take part on the actual debate myself, nor did I fully explain the whole WP:RQM procedure to him. I'm not sure if he's going to listen to me now, as he's already indicated that he longer wishes to take part on any discussion. I'm willing to properly format the RQM and place it myself once things cool down -I would keep my own opinion for myself-, but I share your concerns about people being on holiday and so on (I don't think Panonian was being 'sneaky' here either, just having more wikitime to spare and following my ill-advise). Thanks and regards, E   <font color="Blue">Asterion  <font color="Green">u talking to me? 09:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree about waiting. I just think that the last bout of reverts in quite disruptive and would like it to stop somehow. Hope you're doing well. E   <font color="Blue">Asterion  <font color="Green">u talking to me? 10:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Hm. I just somehow missed your reply of 25 August. Wasn't aware of it. Sorry... anyway, I'm aware that PANONIAN is no bad guy. We all sometimes get upset, and not all of good editors (such as PANONIAN) are coolblooded bastards capable of keeping their eyes on policies and guidelines at all times (that's the way I like to perceive myself). So he got upset and overreacted, and then I used the harsh way of reminding him about the way Wikipedia works. No hard feelings from me.
 * As for the war article... well, the shit finaly hit the fan (I was amased to see the article edit-war-free for such a long time) and we have to learn to live with that. Stoping the reverts and disruptions is... well, I'd put my money on "impossible". So, what we need is to enforce the rules. Play by the book. That's my proposal. When things get nasty, we protect it. After a week, we unprotect it. Then we protect it again when the war reinitiates. If somebody wants to move the article, he has to make decent RQM. And so on. And if things don't cool down after saaay 2 months, we do some RFCing, and then some RFMing and then some RFArbing and then we live happily ever after. Well, at least those who played by the book. Then, when the thing finally settles down and when I promote List of inhabited islands of Croatia to FL, I get myself few real, fat books on the war (both from Croatian and Serbian POV) and we do some WP:CITE and WP:V. That's the general idea I have about the article. What say you? :-) --Dijxtra 10:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah! No problem, I usually miss replies myself too. Yes, I have faith on Wikipedia rules but it's kind of sad having to go that route (RFC, RFM, RFA...) when things could well work out if people talk to each other (in an ideal world). I think these periods come and go. Can you remember the edit warring on Plitvice lakes (relatively quiet since I put together Plitvice Lakes (municipality) as a legit content fork) and Borovo Selo raid (quite settled after ChrisO's rewrite)? I guess we have to live with it. Hopefully everything will work out without having to go down the Kosovo route. Cheers, E   <font color="Blue">Asterion  <font color="Green">u talking to me? 19:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

re: NASA WorldWind
Usually you just download the Windows app that you run on your computer...

Or do you mean you want the URLs for specific textures that the application downloads as you explore the globes? If that's what you mean, I could probably get those from Ethereal if you knew exactly which ones you're looking for. (or are you looking for something else entirely like the National Map Server or the Blue Marble images?) --Interiot 09:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Ahh, you're the one looking for images of the Croatian islands. Yeah, download the app is probably the best route.  It may need a fast computer and broadband internet connection...  if you have any issues, I'd be happy to grab the maps for you.  --Interiot 09:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Stop vandalizing Talk:Mirko_Norac!


Please, do be reasonable! Your point of view does not give you any right to modify anything in my text nor remove it from the talk page!!!

Croatian War Of Independance
Yes the Croats did overrun the Krajina forces, but in doping so they only got back wat was rightly their's. The whole of Croatia (Including Krajina) secceeded from Yugoslavia. and then the Serbs and JNA attacked Croataia to cease that from occuring. That was the war of Croatian Independance. And i believe it so tremendously stupid to put Serbian Propaganda by claiming that it was a civil war. Mr Dijxtra do u want to tell me Croats and Serbs are the Same people?


 * No. "A civil war is a war in which parties within the same culture, society or nationality fight for political power or control of an area." What I'm trying to say is that Serbs didn't dome from Serbia and attack Croatia. They already were in Croatia. They were part of Croatian society. So, the Serb part of Croatian society and Croat part of Croatian society fought for control of an area. That is a civil war. So, the war started as the war of independece. But, after some time, when JNA retreated from Croatia, it was civil war in which Croatian Serbs fought Croatian Croats. Yes, Croatian Serbs did have help of Serbian Serbs, but that still doesn't mean that Serbia invaded Croatia. Understand what I mean? --Dijxtra 09:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes however, the initial beginning of the war who attacked who. and yes they are Croatian Serbs but ethnically they are still SERBS they fought against Croatians and were backed by the SERB Serbs AND JNA there is no way this is a civil war


 * Who does the fact that it was Serbs who fought Croats make the war not-civil? Those Serbs were citizens of Croatia (well, most of them). The Croats fighting the war were citizens of Croatia too. Therefore, all of them were citizens of Croatia. Ergo -> civil war. Now, of course, Serbs outside of Croatia helped a lot. But, for that part of discussion, see my answer to Ante. --Dijxtra 10:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Serbia-controled JNA occupied parts of Croatian and then, when confronted with lack of support from international community, they decided to let the weapons to the local Serbs, give them some generals, like Mladic, thet were paid from Belgrade and continued the war.
 * So, weapons were sent from Belgrade, generals were from Serbia, money was comming from Belgrade ... and still, this was civil war with Serbia blissfuly detached from everything?
 * Brilliant thinking. --Ante Perkovic 10:12, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Ante, Ante, don't do that. I didn't say Serbia was "blissfuly detached from everything". In fact, I said "Croatian Serbs did have help of Serbian Serbs", which is quite the opposite. Please, keep your head cool. If you and I have different points of view, that doesn't mean we have to insult each other, discussing will be enough ;-) Now, back to the topic: it maybe is not the best implementation of civil war definition ever, but you must agree, on the other hand, that Serbia didn't invade Croatia. It was Serbs who already lived here who rebelled. Sure, Slobodan helped them a bunch. But, that doesn't mean it wasn't Serbs of Croatia who rebelled, now does it?


 * We all agree that it was war of independence before the JNA retreated. Unfortunately, the war didn't stop then, but continued in a different manner. JNA left the weapons to the Serbs, Milošević sent them money, arms and words of reashurance that all of the Serbs are with them and then the second phase of the war started (well, it didn't start qute then, it started when JNA was still in RH, but you know what I mean). So, now we have two options. The second phase of the war was either i) civil war between rebeling Croatian Serbs (well, most of them) and legaly elected Croatian government supported by Croatian Croats (well, most of them), ii) invasion of Croatia executed by Serbia. What I'm trying to say is that reality is far much closer to the first option (or, so it seems to me).


 * At the end I'd like to remind you that I never stated that the article should change its name. I merely stated that the discussion is a better way than edit warring and that I myself am not confident if the name of the war is the best possible. --Dijxtra 10:33, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Please have a look at AN/I noticeboard. I reverted some flaming comments left at Ante Perkovic's talk page by . He denies any knowledge and thinks his account may have been hacked? Thanks a lot, E   <font color="Blue">Asterion  <font color="Green">u talking to me? 20:21, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, as I already said on WP:ANI, that account seems to be compromised... --Dijxtra 20:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Pozdrav
ma ništa zato, vishe ni ja ne znam kako treba a kako ne, samo samo hteo da ljudima bude preglednije... aj ziveo!

Legal questions
I've answered your questions. AaronSw 20:39, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Ditto. --evrik 22:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * So have I. Alex756 04:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

M
Hi Dijxtra, Can you have a look at the comments he left on my talk page? (Someone reverted them thinking they were vandalism) I already asked him to change his password. I don't know what else can we do. Cheers, E   <font color="Blue">Asterion  <font color="Green">u talking to me? 18:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)