User talk:Dordevic milan

Kiril Peychinovich
Hi, Wikipedia prohibits drawing your personal knowledge without citing reliable sources. So, please instead of citing yourself, try finding a reliable sources of your claims or your statements may be removed. Regards! --StanProg (talk) 16:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

--->>> I am a researcher (demonstrator on the Faculty of Theology in Skopje, Macedonia) and my quotations are officially published articles - and that is what in the scientific world is called a "reliable source"! A guess in Wikipedia also! Or it's not allowed for authors to write articles on Wikipedia???

I am expecting your answer before I paste the article again. If you plan to continue erasing my texts - don't forget that you are breaking the rules of posting and moderating of articles in Wikipedia.


 * OK, so when you are researcher, you've based your researches on other (reliable?) sources, right? So you just have to cite them, not your "original researches". This is a basic rule here in Wikipedia. Even academics cite their sources in their works. --StanProg (talk) 17:08, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * A Note: another rule is that you cannot revert an article more than 3 times. It's pointless, because it could be easily solved with a discussion, not revert war. :) Regards! --StanProg (talk) 17:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Every research work that is published in a specialized research magazine is a "source". If academics (or anybody else) write their own articles directly on Wikipedia - they must quote their sources. But if they are quoting a work from any researcher (including themselves) - it is a quote for itself and an "original research"! Or maybe you have another standard??? I think Wikipedia doesn't.


 * By the way, you are doing the same (and worse) not telling that the positions in the beginning of the second chapter are positions of the Bulgarian researchers, and not positions accepted from all. The only thing I do is that I add that who's position that is (what is the only scientifically correct method of quoting such texts). And you erase that... (???)


 * At the end, why are you erasing the Serbian transcription of the name of Fr. Kilil? He alone has used this transcription when signing all his works.


 * I think you got me wrong. I'm not telling you what I think. I'm citing you the basic rules of Wikipedia:

"Citing oneself This policy does not prohibit editors with specialist knowledge from adding their knowledge to Wikipedia, but it does prohibit them from drawing on their personal knowledge without citing reliable sources".


 * Even if the Pope edits Wikipedia, he has to put a reliable sources, because the reliable sources are the foundation of Wikipedia. Did you use a reliable sources when you wrote your articles for those magazines? If yes, why don't you just point them? Furthermore, as far as I understood, you're a theologian (recently got a diploma). How does it make you a reliable source? All we have here are your words, and references from your articles from two local Macedonian religion/spiritual related magazines (are they even scientific?), one of them from an unrecognised church and the other is unknown to me. See I've written articles for magazines too, and I have a bachelor and master degree. Does it make me a reliable source for everything I write? I haven't "researched" Peychinovich for 5 years as you claim, but as far as I know, he never signed as "Кирил Пеjчиновић". He never used the letter "j". He signed as "Күриллъ Пейчиновићь" according to the rules of the Bulgarian language in which he wrote his works and this is indicated in the article. You added "According to the Bulgarian researchers", but did you prove that only Bulgarian researches consider this? On the other hand citing your own words you didn't point that this is only your personal opinion (original research), based on no reliable sources (you still haven't pointed even one). There's no place in Wikipedia for original research - for this there are magazines, where you can publish your thoughts and promote your ideas. Regards! --StanProg (talk) 19:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)