User talk:Potočnik/Archive 1

File:Grb kotromanica.gif listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Grb kotromanica.gif, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:37, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Yugoslav Wars Montage.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Yugoslav Wars Montage.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Morgan Kevin J (talk) 21:33, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Bosnian
Zdravo, I presume? The POV-tag stays, you are not entitled to remove it until disputes have been settled, or moderators will be included and lock the article at the last version agreed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.230.54.125 (talk) 23:09, 10 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I have only now, after being inactive for 1 year, discovered the extent of the work you and your likes have done on Wikipedia with reintroducing Serbo-Croatian despite 200.000 casualties between 92-95. I personally gladly welcome the grand project of renouncing "Serbo-Croatian" to its actual place in the shadow and replacing it with the accurate B/S/C. We shall have a great endevour together. 90.230.54.125 (talk) 23:27, 10 January 2012 (UTC)


 * If you intend to discuss the matter seriously on the talkpage of the article then I advise you to drop the nationalist rhetoric. Citing Srebrenica and faulty casualty figures from the war will get you absolutely nowhere. Note your reliance on the Bosnian war as arguments to a language dispute, your "7 years of experience", as you put it on Taivo's talkpage, and the fact that you have been "inactive for 1 year", lead me to believe you are User:Bosniak. -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 00:13, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Which direction a discussion chooses to assume is not subject to any restriction. Parallels with the armed conflict in Bosnia may be appropriate since this conflict, among other, led to the dissolution of a language you claim to still exist. Thank you for your notice, I will counter-file a report in due time. All the best. MarcRey (talk) 18:00, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Chetniks, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Split and Prozor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

List of Prime Ministers of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Hello PRODUCER,

I'm glad other people deal with our complex politics. I'm confused here, about this article. How come Ahmet Alipašić isn't 5th and 7th PM but 5th and again 5th? Was there some agreement in Federation according to wich elected persons just switched over the mandates, similiar like in B-H Presidency? --Wusten fuchs 14:19, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

DRN
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Template:Yugoslav Axis collaborationism". Thank you. --BoDu (talk) 10:04, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Alajbegović
What's with "rv also Muslim from Bosnia and Herzegovina"? Where is the problem? --Wusten fuchs 19:07, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The problem is you removing categories which also apply. -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 19:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It wasn't my intention. --Wusten fuchs 20:13, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * SAO Bosanska Krajina (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Constitution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Prnjavor, SDS and Serbian Democratic Party

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

AP
Just to let you know. I do agree Tomasevich and Pawlowitch are reliable, but I just want to reference the articles like in Mladen Lorković or Mehmed Alajbegović articles. --Wusten fuchs 22:40, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh ok, then by all means. -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 22:50, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Yugoslav Axis collaborationism
Template:Yugoslav Axis collaborationism has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. BoDu (talk) 16:28, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Pavle Đurišić (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Partisans


 * Third Enemy Offensive (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Croatian Home Guard

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Refrain
May you refrain your POV very much disruptions inside Broz's article?--Alojow (talk) 13:43, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

First of all, I inserted only few sources: adding many others needed about Broz's crimes! Sources are realible very much in English and Croatian versions! I read related talk for consensus: did you see here?--Alojow (talk) 11:18, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Discussion on Salvio giuliano talk page
Answer regarding this comment. I wonder what is the reason you didn't mention that my personal attack came after his personal attack? Concerning the "falsification" of sources, the first time I provided wrong page number (you have no proof it was intentional), but the second time I provided correct page number according to Dobroslav Jevđević article. There, you can see the following statement: "In autumn of 1942, despite having a strong hostility to the Muslims, Jevđević took a radically different approach from other Chetnik leaders and favoured collaborating with them against the Ustaša and the Partisans and forming Muslim Chetnik units". This information is attributed to Hoare, Marko Attila (2006). Genocide and Resistance in Hitler's Bosnia: The Partisans and the Chetniks. Oxford University Press. p. 308. BoDu (talk) 16:47, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Buddy, I have the book and I inserted the information. Anyone can make a mistake the first time, I can sympathize with that, but when you give another page number that does not state what you are claiming then you are misrepresenting the source. It does not state that he actually fought against the Ustase and, in the discussion where this matter was brought up, even if he did it wouldn't matter because resistance does not somehow exonerate collaboration. -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 17:07, 15 March 2012 (UTC)


 * 1. Even if I misrepresented the source, that does not mean I acted in bad faith(I have no history of misrepresenting the sources). It can be seen as a personal attack if bad faith motives are alleged without clear evidence that the others' action is actually in bad faith and harassment if done repeatedly. DIREKTOR's claim that I blatantly falsified the information is accusation of bad faith. A user can unintentionaly misrepresent a source, and there is no proof that I did intentionaly.
 * 2. Resistance does not exonerate collaboration, but neither collaboration exonerate resistance. BoDu (talk) 16:19, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Alhamijado
Where is the problem with sources of Alhamijado literature? There was islamization of Croats, and you say that those Croats weren't part of Bosnian Muslim corpus? Where is problem with the source of mine? I don't understand. How you can say it's unreliable? It's your claim or you have a source for that? --Wusten fuchs 15:00, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

1RR at Serbia (Territory of the German Military Commander)
Per the discretionary sanctions authorized in the Digwuren case, this article is subject to 1RR. Reverting more than one time in a 24-hour period may result in a block or a ban from this article and its talk page. All reverts should be discussed on the talk page. This is a bright line, not an entitlement, and reverting exactly once per day is considered disruption, and users doing so are subject to being blocked. Please see this notice about recent edit warring. Editors wishing to make controversial edits are strongly advised to discuss them first. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 01:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Peacemaker64 vs Peacemaker67 at AE
Hi PRODUCER. I'll get to putting something on AE tomorrow (evening here now), but wanted to suggest, for clarity, that you check the refs to me and make sure they all read Peacemaker67 rather than some reading Peacemaker64. Cheers. Peacemaker67 (talk) 09:35, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. I've corrected it. -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 09:37, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: Forum
Please warn the user at their user talk page using e.g. uw-forum and uw-balkans. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 07:15, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Pecanac
Do you reckon his article can be brought up to GA? If so, I'm happy to help out whereever I can. Cheers. Peacemaker67 (talk) 23:00, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see why not. We managed to pull Djurisic and Jevdjevic up to GA. -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 10:26, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * That's me done as far as refs I have, or can access online. It needs some tidying up after the major expansion, which I can do whilst mobile over the next days or so. Just wondering what your thoughts are about his allegiances. Remember what we did with Djurisic in the infobox? Pecanac made arrangements with the Germans before the Nedic regime was even put in power. Peacemaker67 (talk) 11:42, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

GA nomination - really?
Hi PRODUCER, are you sure about this? If you are just responding to DT (or their US lawyer/friend, or whatever) having another go, could we look at some long-ish semiprotection instead? I'm willing to enact another semi-prot there, as the issues have been discussed and the problem is long-running. On the other hand, if you seriously think it qualifies as a good article despite no serious work being done on it for quite a while, that's fine too. But making the nom as a form of battle, I really don't think is a good idea. Regards! Franamax (talk) 00:50, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:FLAG & Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Yugoslavia
And I thought the U.S. Politics articles were drama-fests! Best of luck to you, and thanks for your sensible suggestions. Cheers, JoeSperrazza (talk) 21:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Producer, I've watched that page for some time now. I want to commend you on your expertise in the subject of Yugoslavian history, and also on your remarkable patience in the face of the abusive comments that have been repeatedly aimed at you, not least in the RfC. Writegeist (talk) 03:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

June 2012
This is message is to notify you that there is currently a thread on WP:ANI that may concern you. Regards, -- Director  ( talk ) 20:51, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Goran Hadžić
Hi Producer, it's good to see that the Hadžić article is still receiving your attention. The underlining and bolding are in the cited ICTY indictment which this section of text is quoting verbatim. My view is that therefore it is correct to replicate it in the quote. It's very rare that I disagree with you about the content of these articles, so I am curious to know the reason(s) for your view that the underlining and bolding should be excluded from the quote. Please can you clarify this for me? Thank you! Best wishes, Writegeist (talk) 01:38, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Rankovićism
As an editor who has contributed on a certain article, you may be interested to apply your views on Articles for deletion/Rankovićism. Thanks. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 18:01, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

RfC on WikiProject Yugoslavia
Since you have taken part in substantial discussion on this matter, I am informing you that an RfC has been opened on WP Yugoslavia, here: .--R-41 (talk) 17:36, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Zaharije Ostojić
G'day PRODUCER. Any chance you have access to a source for Zaharije Ostojić's early life? I have been unable to find anything in English (or on Serbian Wikipedia, so I assume it would have to be in Serbo-Croat. Peacemaker67 (talk) 09:02, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll see if I can dig something up. -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 11:27, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28
Hi. When you recently edited Pavle Đurišić, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grahovo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

GA nomination
Talk:Report about Case Srebrenica/GA1 - --<font face="Old English Text MT"><font size="3" color="Black">Wusten <font size="3" color="Dimgray">fuchs 18:23, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Please, let me know when you think you have finished the article. --<font face="Old English Text MT"><font size="3" color="Black">Wusten <font size="3" color="Dimgray">fuchs 20:18, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I promoted the article. --<font face="Old English Text MT"><font size="3" color="Black">Wusten <font size="3" color="Dimgray">fuchs 20:46, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

re: A-Class review
Seems like a deal. Let me know what you'd like to have reviewed, currently I have Stanisław Koniecpolski at A-class review. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with Piotr's review that I just saw, but we discourage offering to trade reviews, as it sets a precedent that usually winds up getting people in trouble of one sort or another. If you review other people's articles at A-class or FAC, they will notice and review your articles. (Milhist articles for sure, but to some extent, any article reviewing at A-class or FAC gets noticed.) - Dank (push to talk) 14:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I worded the matter as neutrally as possible. My nomination had been going on since May 16 so I'd recommend lowering the standards to meet the supply of reviews. -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 16:14, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
&#9733; Oliverlyc &#9733; ✈✈✈  Pop me a message!  14:28, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

re:July 2012
You can see in the article itself that the Ustashe fought against Chetniks during Operation Trio. How can they be on the same side in the infobox? Also, the commander of all Chetnik units of Eastern Bosnia, Jezdimir Dangić, was captured by the Germans during that operation, which means that the Germans also fought against the Chetniks during that operation. Therefore, they can't be on the same side in the infobox. Which means, my edits were correct, DIREKTOR's undoings of my edits were wrong. --Calapone (talk) 11:31, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * P.S. This photo was made during the operation. Jure Francetić commands the Black Legion artillery during the attack on Chetnik positions near Han Pijesak.--Calapone (talk) 11:38, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm giving you sources, and you are removing them. Why?--Calapone (talk) 12:00, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Project Bosnia
Dear Producer,

I'd be most delighted to join. Thank you for the invitation! Best, Praxis Icosahedron (talk) 16:01, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Bosnian-Croatian relations article
Hello,

PRODUCER, are you able to create a new infobox map in the article Bosnia and Herzegovina-Croatia relations. All maps dealing with bilateral relations have an image where the countries are placed by the alphabetical order, the first one (in this case Bosnia and Herzegovina) should be green and on the left side, while Croatia ond the right one. If you are unable, then never mind. --<font face="Old English Text MT"><font size="3" color="Black">Wusten <font size="3" color="Dimgray">fuchs 14:27, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

A-Class assessment
Hi, just curious, can you point me to where those country projects have agreed to accept the MilHist A-Class assessment? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Ian, I was going to do that myself, but PRODUCER beat me to it. Doesn't a bot do that anyway? It seems to with GA.
 * My mistake, sorry Ian. PRODUCER, after Ian's question I asked about this here and have moved Pavle Đurišić back to GA for the other WikiProjects. I will seek assessment from those other WikiProjects. Peacemaker67 (talk) 10:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No prob. Obviously as a coordinator on the MilHist project I think the general thoroughness and maturity of our A-Class Reviews can save other project the trouble of their own A-Class process, but it's up to those projects to accept the MilHist assessment. I notice you're requesting input along those lines for one particular article on that article's talk page. Another approach would be to ask on the relevant projects' talk pages if they'd like to become partner projects with MilHist and simply accept our A-Class assessments as a matter of course. For instance, both the Ships and the Aviation projects have agreed through past discussions to accept MilHist A-Class assessments, so whenever a ship- or aviation-related military article gets promoted to MilHist A-Class, we update the article's Ships or Aviation project banners to A-Class at the same time we update the MilHist project assessment. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ian, I'm sure you know we navigate treacherous waters in the Balkans (sorry about the inappropriate metaphor for a largely landlocked region...). I agree with the general approach WP:Ships etc have taken, and I'd like to negotiate similar provisions for the Balkan country projects, but we'll see how we go with Pavle Đurišić and re-assess then. Peacemaker67 (talk) 13:22, 20 July 2012 (UTC)


 * In all my time here on Wiki, I have never once seen any of these former Yugoslav Wikiprojects engage in a review of an article. Notice not one of the Wikiprojects has a A-class article. I really don't think that the additional input of eight other editors is necessary. It simply complicates matters. It was difficult enough trying to gather enough user reviews in the WP:MH review for passage and that ended up lasting 2 months. If you look at the quality scale of the Yugoslav wikiprojects you will see that the requirement for A-class is having the article "reviewed by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere" which has been achieved. Also note it even points to WP:MH for guidance. All the requirements have been met for A-class assessment across all Wikiprojects unless you, Peacemaker, are suggesting that the Yugoslav Wikiprojects (of all things) have more stringent requirements. -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 15:17, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * With respect, PRODUCER (and I really mean that), I am interested in what will now transpire. I believe that this is an opportunity for the related Balkans WikiProjects to show what they are made of. I have advertised this to each WikiProject, and I will be very interested in the responses (if any). OK, if it is POV rubbish, you will be vindicated, but given my limited experience here on Wiki, I want to see what happens, and I think that is fair enough. We might be surprised, we might not. But if we set low expectations and expect them to be met, we will always be satisfied. I am not comfortable with that approach. I want to see if Balkans WikiProjects can raise their eyes to the horizon. If they can't, we can always work in WP:MILHIST land and get articles promoted as they should be. You have been here much longer than me, and have reason to be cynical. I get that. Let's see for now. Peacemaker67 (talk) 15:37, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Given the pot-holed road we've just travelled, I think a wholehearted mea culpa is appropriate. With recent experience, while I think some of the comments/observations that came out of trying my approach did result in some improvements to Pavle Đurišić, I'm not sure whether the value added through the ping-pong match was worth the aggravation. I've learnt a fair bit from going through the FAC process, and reckon in future I think I'll be happy with MILHIST A-class for most articles, and if the article is up to the mark, a drive for FAC. I'm happy to forego engagement with the various Balkans WikiProjects in an attempt to get them to promote any article to A-class. Again, good call on the Pandora's Cardboard Box... I should have left it in the corner. That's what comes from being so familiar with the damn things, it breeds contempt. I probably I moved 20 times in my career. Peacemaker67 (talk) 11:46, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You just don't stop in bat country, it's a minefield there. I won't lie, my urge to tell you "I told you so" was strong. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 12:58, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep, TMRP-6 country actually. Nasty little buggers. Peacemaker67 (talk) 13:08, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * All this mine talk reminds of a movie you might be interested in: No Man's Land. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 14:05, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Pavle Đurišić/archive1
G'day again PRODUCER, Could you have a look at the couple of questions about Đurišić's early life in the peer review? I was wondering if the ref had more info on those matters. I'll deal with the rest. I wanted to get a wider perspective on the article before nominating it as a FA candidate. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (talk) 00:19, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Image issue
And again. Could you look at and comment on the other pic he mentions, as you uploaded it? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (talk) 09:00, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * my mistake with the image. I'll change it to reflect what I think we discussed, if you wouldn't mind having a look once I'm done and confirm that is your understanding of it too? Peacemaker67 (talk) 10:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, go ahead. -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 11:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm done there. Once you've checked it I reckon it's ready for FAC. Peacemaker67 (talk) 12:42, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. Let's carry onward. -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 13:45, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

ANI notification
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. GiantSnowman 10:54, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry...
Hi PRODUCER. Didn't mean to steal the show, just didn't know how to add you... Peacemaker67 (talk) 11:32, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries. -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 12:05, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Pavle Djurisic image file
G'day again, regarding the non-wikipedia source for the image, appears to be a newspaper using the image, but I lack the language skills. Could you have a look and see if we could use it? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (talk) 04:06, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The image is also in Pajovic's book who you see on the right and wrote the article you linked. I've seen nothing thus far that would suggest that this image is copyrighted in Pajovic's book (it's amongst others in a gallery), your linked article, or this article. Surely if it was copyrighted someone would have pointed this out in at least one of these three sources, right? You'd expect a little "(c)" beside the image at very least, right? --  ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 17:53, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Bosnian War in Bijeljina
Question is pretty simple: why do you lie? Your statement is your personal POV based on so called "references" written by some foreign newspaper articles. Were you there, in Bijeljina when war started? Ah, look, I was there and my whole family. Muslim forces started the war in Bijeljina and that is fact, and you have my promise, I will do my best so that one day your power of enforcing lies regarding this article is taken from you, if I need to write to the creators of wikipedia because I tried to offer compromise but you are obviously not opened for compromise. Muslim forces started the war in Bijeljina and that is fact, on the night the war started they took strategic positions in Bijeljina and THAN came Arkan, his forces came AFTER Muslim forces started enforcing the control in Bijeljina so Muslim population couldn't be attacked when their forces already started the war! This article had a compromise in past, somebody wrote that "Serbian forces lead by Arkan attacked Bijeljina" but you are now going even further with your lies, it was not enough for you to stay on this level so you wrote or allowed text which was written by somebody else in which you needed to mention that Muslim population was attacked by Serbian population and that is pure lie because the truth is that in happened other way around. Obviously compromise is not possible, you will do your best to enforce your POV by mean of administrating power you have and I plan even to get some signatures of the citizens of Bijeljina and to send it to somebody who is above you and you have somebody above you who will stop you in spreading lies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.108.111.50 (talk) 15:26, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * So, how's that petition coming? :-) HammerFilmFan (talk) 15:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Enver Čolaković
Look, source says clearly Croatian. Stop reverting this. I know linguists who disagree with you. Stop with removal of the source and pushing your POV into the article. --<font face="Old English Text MT"><font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs 01:50, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Croat–Bosniak War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prozor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Cheers!
For all your persistence, resilience and outstanding collaborative work on the Pavle Đurišić article to get it to Featured Article status, thanks and well done. It's been a long road, and it's 'my shout'. Here is a virtual glass of Coonawarra red as a token of my appreciation. Looking forward to working with you in future. Regards, Peacemaker67 (talk) 09:38, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, at last the coveted Coonawarra award. Cheers! I look forward to further collabs as well. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 12:58, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Ping
You have a reply at Talk:Enver Čolaković in response to your ping of this editor to the article's talkpage.--Amadscientist (talk) 23:29, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Parties
Yes I know that. But it's hard when you see, say Party of Democratic Action, and then bellow it says SDA... how can anyone tell what party is the SDA? It's fine though to do that in some article where you can add the abbreviations... or we could this in the template..., though it would take to much space. --<font face="Old English Text MT"><font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs 20:59, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually the majority of the template needs to scrapped. This is a list of political parties not of every seat every party has. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 21:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Pavelić
There are few paragraphs that I added few months ago and are now unsourced, even though they were earlier or I forgot to add source for some of them. I'll just find sources one more time, just to let you know you don't erase those... --<font face="Old English Text MT"><font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs 23:36, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Notification
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Peacemaker67 (talk) 07:22, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Notification
Hello. There is a report at WP:AE with which you have been involved. Thanks. Peacemaker67 (talk) 02:44, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

 * Thanks! -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 17:02, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

 * Cheers! -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 17:02, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Radoje Pajovic
G'day PRODUCER. Can you confirm that Pajovic states Djurisic was awarded the Iron Cross on p78? Peacemaker67 (talk) 11:20, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Serbian source
Just wondering if this is of any value? . Could you have a look? It might be available through a resource request, but there is no DOI on the page. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (talk) 22:30, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Invasion of Yugoslavia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Slovene (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina
I would like to see your oppinion here at the bottom of the talk page. --<font face="Old English Text MT"><font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs 13:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Potential A-Class article nomination
G'day, which of Jevdjevic and Pecanac do you think is the best candidate for MILHIST A-Class? I've got one at FAC and one about to be put up for GAN, but it doesn't seem fair not to have one at ACR... Peacemaker67 (talk) 03:30, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd go with Jevdjevic. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 18:40, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, are you happy to co-nominate? I have some additional material from Redzic and Ramet's 3Y to add before it goes up, not much but a bit here and there. Are you happy with using Redzic? Peacemaker67 (talk) 09:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes on both counts. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 09:45, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll let you know when I put it up. Peacemaker67 (talk) 09:53, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we request your participation in the discussion to help find a resolution. The thread is "Talk:Boris Malagurski, Talk:The Weight of Chains". Thank you! EarwigBot   operator  /  talk 19:08, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Preserving references and removing copyright violations
Thanks for removing the links to apparently copyright-infringing material at Boris Malagurski. The copies of the newspaper articles on that website were indeed probably reproduced without permission. However, I don't think there's any doubt that the original newspaper articles themselves exist, nor has anyone raised an objection to the reliability of the newspapers in which they appear. A better course of action would therefore have been to simply remove the problematic link within the reference instead of the entire reference. Can I suggest that you reinsert the references you've removed, minus the problematic links? —Psychonaut (talk) 20:21, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I spoke too soon about the reliability issue—I just noticed your post referring to them as tabloids. If you were removing them on those grounds, it would have been helpful to mention this in the edit summary.  Your edit summary and warning notice addressed only the copyright issue. —Psychonaut (talk) 20:29, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I intend to look at all the sources one by one in due time. Just like we can't have UrbanVillager inserting copyright infringing links while berating others for the same, we can't have a double standard with regards to the reliability of sources. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 21:30, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.255.57.233 (talk) 10:28, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution
Hello, I have filed a Dispute_resolution_noticeboard case for Talk:Boris Malagurski and Talk:The Weight of Chains. Feel free to comment. Regards, --UrbanVillager (talk) 19:09, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Apologies for getting your name wrong ... I will amend and (I hope you don't mind) remove your 'chuckle' remark ... Only in the interests of clear argument on the DR page. Also I've added my response to the sponsors issue on the WoC talk page, which is (partial) agreement with you.Pincrete (talk) 09:11, 9 November 2012 (UTC)


 * No harm done. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 20:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Further apologies, I hope that you understand that my MAIN POINT was that any infringement was 'technical' and part of an ongoing discussion anyway and that all info was available to everyone. I will correct my statement ASAP. Thanks also for points about links.Pincrete (talk) 11:51, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Bormalagurski etc.
Thanks for sorting out the link. Opbeith (talk) 18:03, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

You seem to be one of the many people round the world who take an interest in the heritage of the famous Malagurski surname. You may have seen the Malagurski (no first name) article created by Mr BM at the Serbian WP. It has an informative edit summary in February last year when the banning of Boris Malagurski on the English Wikipedia resulted in the link to an English article on the surname being removed - http://sr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%9C%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B3%D1%83%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8&diff=3130873&oldid=2655471

The article's talk page has only three not very recent messages, one of them by someone who seems to have a similar slightly tongue in cheek expectation that BM may still be interested. There are supposedly a whole 20 previous archives of the Talk page but oddly when you try to open them, they've entirely disappeared - http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%80:%D0%9C%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B3%D1%83%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8

I also came across an entertaining talk page for the deleted Boris Malagurski article on the Croatian Wikipedia - UrbanVillager was offering to provide a million links for Boris to prove his importance so the article wouldn't have to go. I've posted the reference at the Sockpuppet discussion - http://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razgovor:Boris_Malagurski Opbeith (talk) 22:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Source
Where is that source? -- WhiteWriterspeaks 19:43, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "Where is that source?" Not entirely sure what you mean... a proper sentence would be appreciated. I'll be expanding the article anyway so please sit tight. FWIW it definitely simply says "Supreme Court in Bijelo Polje" and FRY was already previously mentioned. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 20:10, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * But where is that exact source? Can you please cite the fact on which you reverted the article? -- WhiteWriterspeaks 20:19, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I just did cite the fact. It's on page 3. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 12:28, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Kosta Pećanac
G'day PRODUCER, I know you've been doing the heavy lifting on the Jevdjevic ACR, but could you have a look at the photograph licensing issues Grandiose has raised on the Kosta Pećanac ACR? I'm struggling with what needs to be done... Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:36, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I think I've resolved the matter. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 13:15, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

?
Hi Producer. Of course it is political entity of Bosnia and Herzegovina but I don't know what does this fact have to do with my contribution? Best Regards --MirkoS18 (talk) 13:29, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Of course it is not necessary that WP:Serbia cover all topics associated with Serbs but it is good that this WP cover as much as possible of those topics because editors of this project may be interested in editing of these articles. As for Kosovo, I guess that rational explanation is fact that there is WP Kosovo, although I do not see why anyone would have anything against to add WP Albania if editors from that project may be interested to contribute at that article. Also, articles that I added to WP Serbia are interesting for those editors. I'm afraid you misunderstood my editing because obviously there is some misinterpretations of WP at articles talk pages from your side? We are not talking about any kind of precedent, pretension, political action or expression of political opinion in any way, it is simply a very common practice on Wikipedia. To show you that this is so here are few examples: Talk:Serbs of Croatia, Talk:Åland Islands, Talk:Democratic Party of Albanians, Talk:Székely Land... There is indeed a huge number of examples and there are just few of them. For this reason I plan to return my contributions if you don't have some objective complaint. Sve najbolje i sorry zbog lošeg engleskog, nadam se da se razumije (: --MirkoS18 (talk) 13:57, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I do not see why it would be absurd, do you think that editors of WP Serbia are not interested in these articles at all? I am convinced that this is not true and that they would like to edit articles relatod to Republika Srpska. I do not know if I should give you more examples that it is not absurd: Talk:Joint Council of Municipalities, Talk:Crimean peninsula, Talk:Sevastopol, Talk:Sarych, Talk:Autonomous Republic Crimea, Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Talk:Flag of Nagorno-Karabakh, Talk:Emblem of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Talk:Northern Ireland, Talk:Politics of Northern Ireland, Talk:Secretary of State for Northern Ireland...--MirkoS18 (talk) 14:42, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, since you do not want to talk I will consider that we agreed. If in the meantime you find justified complaints/advices we can reconsider this solution (for example, if in the meantime some editors start new WP Republika Srpska than we can consider such solution not to be a perfect one and if then you will insist that WP Serbia shall not appear at all for some reason that only you know, I will not insist then). Best regards and good luck in work.--MirkoS18 (talk) 15:16, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Firstly I did not say that some Serbs or Montenegrins (that you added) want to edit this articles, I said members of WP Serbia, and that is not the same. Secondly, it is unacceptable attempt to discredit me by unfounded accusations of nationalism. Thirdly, my examples are relevant. And fourth, I do not know any one rule that I broke my contribution.--MirkoS18 (talk) 15:34, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I forgot to answer the part of bargain. I showed good will and explained my position, I do not see why should I bargain with you, we are all free editors and I do not need to ask your permission do give my contribution. Best Regards.--MirkoS18 (talk) 15:37, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Map making
Do you have any idea which software is frequently used by Wikipedians? Thanks in advance. Praxis Icosahedron (talk) 21:46, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe Inkscape (free) is the most popular. There's also Adobe Illustrator and CorelDRAW. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 22:25, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Case White, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Jablanica and Prozor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:39, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Template:Yugoslavia topics
As per this request Template:Yugoslavia topics has been protected for a period of 2 weeks. I suggest that you try and discuss on the talk page with the other editors involved to resolve the war for the sake of the template.  ·Add§hore·  <sup style="color:black;">T alk T o M e ! 00:27, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Yugoslavia topics, flag or not
Sir, can we have your input about the question of a flag on the template "Yugoslavia topics"? As an editor involved in that slow editwar, we like your effort to resolve that case. You can give your input at Template talk:Yugoslavia topics. Thanks in advance. <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 15:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Template:Yugoslavia timeline

 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AYugoslavia_timeline&diff=524837857&oldid=524517179

Hello, PRODUCER! I'm intrigued to discover what is better about the version of the template you restored. Here, on a Firefox-based browser, it's very very large and has a lot of small text spread across it, with wide gaps between wrapped lines, making it more difficult to see Yugoslavia's evolution overall. (Or, to put it another way, there's just too much "wood obscuring the trees" in the template's body.) There are also some small squiggly characters that aren't easy to see – are they arrowheads? If so, it's not clear from where they're pointing. Please let me know what you think. Best wishes, 213.246.94.204 (talk) 23:48, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Whichever way you arrange the information it's difficult to keep it simple yet comprehensive. I don't think shoving most of it into citations was an improvement nor was separating Socialist Yugoslavia due its name changes. Regarding the text size, it could be a browser or screen resolution thing. I believe those are arrows and are admittedly difficult to see even on my side... they should probably be gotten rid of. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 19:40, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, the template you added to the  Template:Yugoslavia timeline is creating some problems. I moved the note into the template and there is no longer red cite error messages appearing in the article, however the pages are all still appearing in the Category:Pages with missing references list. I'm not sure what the problem is or how to fix it, apart from maybe removing the note from the template altogether. Do you think you can fix it, or would you be OK with me putting in a manual note with a a for example and removing the. Thanks, Sarahj2107 (talk) 20:00, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I have no clue why it's giving that error. I'll look into and see if I can come up with something to fix it, if not then your solution should be sufficient. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 20:13, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts, PRODUCER. There was a lot of material in the footnotes, but I suggest that's because it's detail beyond the primary purpose of the template: to give an overview of Yugoslavia's formation and ninety or so years' existence. Much of that detail only relates to a few years of that existence, so I suggest that including it in the main body of the template detracts from the template's primary purpose. As regards the text size, line spacing and arrows, is it worth my trying to amend those here to see what you make of it where you are? 213.246.94.204 (talk) 22:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

...Anybody there? 213.246.94.204 (talk) 03:55, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I've been preoccupied with ACRs. Yes, go ahead and configure the text. I'll have a look afterwards. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 13:15, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * That's okay – glad you're okay, too. I'll see what I can do. 213.246.94.204 (talk) 05:09, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Update
Hello again, PRODUCER. (Happy New Year!) It's been a while, but below is my attempt to balance the amount of text within and outside the template. The densest text is the notes associated with the Republic of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina – footnotes b and c in the below – which I think will need to remain footnotes. (The template body already seems overloaded, especially the pre-1918 and 1938–1945 columns.)


 * It looks very good and it's a large improvement. The only issues I have is with the font size of the dates on the first row and the lack of a Kosovo flag (the kosovo-footnote is already in place and we should be consistent). Again good job and a happy new year to you too. -- ◅ PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 14:41, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, the years' font-size was still too large, so I've reduced it in the version that's now live. I've also added the Kosovo flag. Thanks for your guidance. I feel I've learnt a bit more about the Balkans (which was the other reason I decided to edit the template). Best wishes, 213.246.118.196 (talk) 07:54, 8 January 2013 (UTC)