User talk:Santasa99/Archive 1

Neretva - birth pangs (porođajne muke)
The names you added were nicknames of the three fishes, I removed them because it was confusing. PRODUCER (talk) 20:51, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

This is English wiki thus I have to respond in English. I'm not against you, I'm rewording sentences you added since they sound a bit awkward. I preferred using the scientific names for consistency, if you wish to use the "common name" of the fish feel free to, but don't list two names when referring to one fish it confuses the reader and creates red links. PRODUCER (talk) 21:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

What do you think of this?

The river Neretva and its tributaries represent the main drainage system in the east Adriatic watershed and the foremost ichthyofaunal habitat of the region. Salmonidae fishes from the Neretva basin show considerable variation in morphology, ecology and behaviour. Neretva also has many other endemic and fragile life forms that are near extinction. Among most endangered are three endemic species of Neretva trout: Neretvanska Mekousna, Zubatak and Glavatica.

I fixed the image problem if you see any edit i did wrong just undo it. PRODUCER (talk) 17:14, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Tell me when you are finished adding information to Neretva so I can go ahead and revise it. PRODUCER (talk) 16:45, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Uniqueness, beauty, diversity
- Old discussion on nonsensical, unnecessary issue((Moja (stara) rasprava sa ovim levatom - iz Marta 2009 !)).-

My edit summary got cut off, but what I was trying to say about my edit is that beauty is subjective and, under WP:NPOV, isn't an attribute that can be expressed as fact in a Wikipedia article. If there are reliable sources (WP:RS) that make it clear that the river is known by many for its beauty, it can be stated that people consider it to be so. As for uniqueness: this is not the only beautiful or diverse river in the world, so calling the Neretva unique for having these qualities is simply false. —Largo Plazo (talk) 21:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I've just replaced the previously restored uniqueness reference. As I wrote in my edit summary, the fact that someone else fallaciously used the word "unique" doesn't mean that it's factually unique. Yes, it may be unique in the sense that, as Santasa99 said to me, every person is unique, but in that sense, it isn't then worth mentioning. In that case, every article on every river, every country, every forest, every city, and every person could mention that the topic was "unique", but then there wouldn't be any point in mentioning it; it would be like writing somewhere, in every biographical article, "X has unique fingerprints", as though that were interesting. There isn't any point in saying something's unique unless it's unique in the sense that it's different from everything else in some remarkable way. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Upper Neretva - (Gornja Neretva)
(Old action, before I manged to write enough text to compose a defensible article.) A tag has been placed on (Upper Neretva - Gornja Neretva) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Nan oha A's Yu ri    Talk, My master 22:41, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

-- --

Your edits to Israel and the apartheid analogy (Not in relation to Neretva article !)
Your edits are unhelpful. We are having a hard enough time even keeping this article in Wikipedia at all -- its deletion has been proposed eight times so far. And every edit which attempts to detail Israel's apartheid-like practices has to be defended against people who fight tooth-and-nail to remove them, and to present Israel as a liberal democracy. Please don't make this more difficult, by making blatantly propagandist edits. As you can see, the apartheid wall is discussed in the article; and indeed, a picture is right at the top. If you want to improve these references, or make other edits to Wikipedia, please look at policies, and study the history of the pages you edit. Otherwise, your efforts are likely to have the opposite effect to your intentions. Thank you RolandR (talk) 22:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC) I've temporarily suspended your editing privileges. Tom Harrison Talk 22:55, 4 September 2008 (UTC) -- --