User talk:Vanjagenije/Archive 2

Municipalities of Serbia
Hi, thanks for the good work on Municipalities of Serbia. However, I think that (due to city reorganization), the article is missing information about new cities (Subotica, Novi Pazar). Did the new cities stop being municipalities, or did they become cities and municipalities?

In any case, I think the information about the two types should be merged in the same article; it may be renamed into Municipalities and Cities of Serbia, because that's basically the same level of local autonomy. On the other hand, the article List of cities in Serbia has misleading title and should be renamed then, because it is not about administrative cities, but about cities and towns (as opposed to villages).

So, I propose:
 * 1) Merge information about Subotica, Novi Pazar etc. into Municipalities of Serbia
 * 2) Move Municipalities of Serbia to Municipalities and cities of Serbia
 * 3) Move List of cities in Serbia to List of cities and towns in Serbia

What do you think? (Please reply here) No such user (talk) 16:12, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Add deserved award
Tadija (talk) 13:24, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Ti uzvrati kada se ukaže prilika! :) Ti si još kako zaslužio! :) Tadija (talk)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Cultural Property of Great Importance
Hello! Please, join WikiProject Cultural Property of Great Importance, and expend Serbia related Articles, and help creation of new and better Wikipedia, with WP:CPGI high on the list.

Also, you can invite new members, that will help WP even more.

All best, Tadija (talk) 13:30, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Your ideas? Click me! :) Tadija (talk) 19:51, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * See new Main page! Impressions on talk page! --Tadija (talk) 17:52, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter - November and December 2009
Note: the Newsletter is "collapsed" for convenience. To see the full letter, click on the "show" button at the right end of the gray bar. If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list. This Newsletter was delivered by  xenobot  14:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Saint Sava
Поздрав! Јел си располоен да у наредном периоду (недеље, месеци у скалду са слободним временом) радимо на чланку о светом Сави. Ја сам у гугл преводилац убацио једна текст који сам поодавно написао на српском језику (User:Vojvodaen/Saint Sava). Имам и референце и литературу. Не знам да ли је проблематично ако се користи искључиво (или готово искључиво) литература на јеном неенглексом језику :) али ми се чини да је то најбоље (а често и једино решење) када је у питању нека национална тема. Све најбоље,--Vojvodae please be free to write :) 10:25, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Vojvodaen/Saint_Sava Izvolete :) Da napomenem da je ovaj tekst samo prošao gugl prevodilac tako da su mnoga značenje zamućena i izgubljena. Pošto će se, prilikom sredjivanja, javiti mnoge nejasnoće, slobodno piši. Baza članka bi po mojoj zamisli bio tekst koji sam satavio za moj sajt Istorijska biblitoteka uz prepravke, dopune izmene i sve to je neophodno. Takodje ću pokušati da kontaktiram nekog sa engleskog govornog područja za pomoć u veze sa jezičkim finesama i da bi članak dobio sadržaj prijemčiviji nekom sa engleskog govornog područja (pošto ja, svesno ili nesvesno, pretpostavljam da neko ko čita srpski već zna neke osnovne stvari koje bi možda engleskom čitaocu trebalo dodatno razjasniti). Pozdrav,--Vojvodae please be free to write :) 16:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Погледајте: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zakonopravilo, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomocanon и http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE (Законоправило на српском). Уредио сам ове стране скоро у потпуности и подаци су проверени. Нека вам буду основа за даљу надградњу и побољшање страница о Светом Сави (и на српском и на енглеском). Поздрав! :) (Пера ложач) (talk) 17:18, 2 May 2010 (UTC))

Barnstar

 * mozda bi mogao meni da das ovaj barnstar, vanja?

User...
You can use it if you want, but if not, just leave it here! :)

All best, --Tadija (talk) 11:54, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter - January and February 2010
Note: the Newsletter is "collapsed" for convenience. To see the full letter, click on the "show" button at the right end of the gray bar. If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list. This Newsletter was delivered by  xenobot  14:10, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Queen WikiProject
Hello, I am leaving you this message as part of a personal effort to revive the Queen WikiProject of which you are listed as a participant. If you are not interested in committing yourself to contributing to Queen related articles please go about removing yourself from the participants list on the project page. On the other hand if you are interested in the project and do wish to contribute, I encourage you to head over to the project's talk page to work towards outstanding tasks and share ideas on how Queen-related articles may be improved.

Thanks for reading this, and I look forward to your response. Such a legendary group deserves to be honoured with quality articles on Wikipedia and it is a great shame such a project has gone inactive.

 The Stig  20:52, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Manual of Style proposal
Hi Vanjagenije. It's a minor detail, but in your comment on the proposed Manual of Style for Kosovo-related articles, you may want to replace the word policy in "I do not agree with this part of the policy ", "So, this policy can not" & "This policy claims that the rule" with the word proposal, to avoid any possible confusions about the current status of that proposal (so that nobody mistakes it for an actual approved policy). - Best, Ev (talk) 14:05, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Hvala!
Ovo zaista vredi! HVALA!! You are the man! :) -- Tadijaspeaks 20:14, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards. - Ev (talk) 18:14, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

About Saint Sava article
The word Zakonopravilo should remain bold. It is the original title, so it should be noted at first sight. Please, don't change it. Thanks. I hope the references will be appropriate. It's a true constitution that regulated all spheres of social and spiritual life. That could be checked in those references. I believe we'll have mutual understanding about this subject. I wish you all the best! :) (Пера ложач) (talk) 17:06, 2 May 2010 (UTC))

У вези чланка NOMOCANON
Ја максимално радим на уређивању чланка ZAKONOPRAVILO на енглеском и ЗАКОНОПРАВИЛО на српском. Драго ми је што ти се допада. Још увек радим на њиховом побољшавању. Желим да нагласим да нисам саботирао чланак NOMOCANON на енглеском. Ја на њему само уређујем део Saint Sava's Nomocanon. Брисање увода и историје византијских номоканона је урадио Algebraist на моје велико изненађење. Ово можеш и да провериш. Ја не радим такве ствари. Мислио сам да је он неки амерички администратор, чим се одлучио на тако радикалан потез. Чланак је на њиховом језику, па нисам хтео да се мешам, него сам му предложио да, кад су чланци сада идентични, уради redirect на ZAKONOPRAVILO, јер је то оригинални назив овог правног акта. И ово можеш да провериш у разговору с њим. Изгледа да тај тип сакати чланке по својој вољи. Напиши му нешто, опомени га. На жалост, ти си обрисао и сва моја побољшања оног дела који говори о Савином Законоправилу. Срећом, измене чувам ископиране у WORD-u па ћу их вратити. Ти си видео да сам ја ноћас вршио измене (али то су само била козметичка улепшавања дела о Савином Законоправилу, која иначе радим) и помислио си (логично) да сам ја обрисао целу прву половину чланка. Да ствар буде још луђа планирао сам да допуним и део о византијским номоканонима, јер се на њима и заснива Савин. Надам се да се сад разумемо. ПОЗДРАВ! :) Пера ложач (talk) 11:03, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Све је у реду. Нећу претеривати. ОК, не мора део о Савином Законоправилу у Номоканону да буде идентичан Законоправилу, али ћу га мало дотерати. Треба ту и неки линк и тако... Добро, тежиште стављам на ЗАКОНОПРАВИЛО (енг и срб). ПОЗ! Пера ложач (talk) 11:16, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Завршио сам сређивање страница: ЗАКОНОПРАВИЛО (српски), ZAKONOPRAVILO (english), NOMOCANON (english). Мислим да сада све три изгледају солидно. Погледај их кад имаш времена и надам се да ћеш се сложити са мном. :)

У вези са овим чланцима имам једну молбу и једну напомену. МОЛБА: Ја сам релативно нов на Википедији и још учим. Нисам знао како да поставим САДРЖАЈ (CONTENTS) на страни ZAKONOPRAVILO (english), па те молим да га ти поставиш после прве две уводне реченице. Некако ми је логично да чланак има садржај, па макар имао само три поднаслова, од којих је само први главни текст.

НАПОМЕНА: У чланку NOMOCANON (english) сам приметио да је први поднаслов HISTORY у потпуности прекопиран са сајта http://www.search.com/reference/Nomocanon. Мислим да то није у реду, јер сам схватио да коришћење туђих садржаја, без напомене о цитирању, нарушава ауторска права аутора тих садржаја. Зато сам ову адресу поставио као референцу. Поднаслов сам преименовао у, по мом мишљењу, логичнији назив који упућује на порекло ове материје. Тако је сада први поднаслов BYZANTINE NOMOCANONS. Садржину овог поднаслова сам мало уредио и додао још мало проверених података. Главна референца у томе ми је била http://www.alanwatson.org/sr/petarzoric.pdf. Одлучио сам да уклоним последње две реченице из овог поднаслова за које мислим да се не уклапају у садржину овог чланка. Молио бих да тако остане, јер сматрам да имам оправдане и логичне разлоге. Једна реченица је у вези номоканона који је настао средином 13. века у Антиохији. Његова појава је самостална у односу на развој византијских номоканона. Имао је за циљ регулисање односа међу Арапима хришћанима у Сирији, који су били под влашћу Султаната Рум (муслиманска држава Турака Селџука). Друга реченица је у вези номоканона који је штампан у Русији средином 17. века. Ова реченица је последица руске пропаганде која упорно прећуткује који су то номоканон они штампали у 17. веку. '''Избегава се саопштавање главног податка: да је велика Русија у 17. веку штампала Законоправило светог Саве из мале Србије, које је тамо стигло у облику рукописа још у 13. веку'''. Ја тај податак ионако саопштавам у поднаслову ST. SAVA'S NOMOCANON. Поднаслов о Савином Законоправилу сам смањио на разумну меру (по твом савету) да бих избегао дуплирање садржине са целокупним чланком ZAKONOPRAVILO.

Надам се да ће ти се сва три чланка допасти овакви какви су сада. Отворен сам за критике и савете. Очекујем твоје (надам се позитивно) мишљење. ПОЗДРАВ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Пера ложач (talk • contribs) 23:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Ćao!
Zdravo, Vanja. Reci mi, znaš kako da prevedem ovaj šablon sa naše viki?

sr:Шаблон:СК-САНУ Ovo nam treba mnogo u WikiProjektu. Ajde pokušaj, molim te! :) Pozz... -- Tadijaspeaks 13:50, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Потребна су побољшања
Намера ми је била да историју Србије представим у најбољем светлу. Желео сам да сви подаци које изнесем буду засновани на истинитој и аргументованој основи. Сматрао сам да треба саопштити податке који су признати у целом свету и у свим епохама. Ти подаци треба да говоре о напредном и цивилизованом друштву. Одлучио сам да допуним чланке који говоре о српској правној историји. Правни акти једног народа говоре много о његовој развијености. Имамо и чиме да будемо поносни. На моју жалост, видео сам да су чланци на ову тему неоправдано сиромашни, упркос богатој грађи о којој се може писати. Такође, чланци који би требало само да спомену ове важне документе, не говоре ништа о њима. Чланци нису довољно линковани ни категоризовани. Представљају "слепа црева" или "острва" на Википедији. Може их наћи само онај ко тражи само одређену тему и иде директно на њу. Чланок би требало да буде као на "ветрометини". Да буде у многим категоријама, да је линкован на многим другим странама, и обрнуто. Тако човек сурфујући по Википедији може и случајно да сазна нешто ново, занимљиво и лепо о Србима.

Аутори многих чланака везаних за српску историју су сматрали да је довољан доказ о српским вредностима у историји: писање о биткама које су водили Срби и манастирима које су градили Срби. Све што сам навео се односи подједнако на чланке на српском и на енглеском. Жалосно је што племенита намера неких аутора да преко Википедије представе Србију у најлепшем светлу у свету потпуно промашује циљ. Утисак који може да стекне странац, па чак и Србин, који жели да сазна нешто о Србима може да буде: "Ови Срби су само водили битке, а у паузама су се молили Богу по манастирима." То су радили сви народи у свету. Не желим да умањујем вредност манастира, па и битака. Многи манастири су бисери духовности и уметности под заштитом Унеска. Многе битке су одлучивале судбину Европе, а не смо Србије.

Имамо ли ми нешто више од тога чиме можемо да се дичимо? ДА! Шта народ чини цивилизованим? На првом месту град. Латинска реч "цивилизација" потиче од речи "CIVES" што значи грађанин. Људи су од номадских дивљака постали цивилизовани када су почели да живе у трајним насељима - градовима. Имамо ли познате градове у историји? ДА! Нпр. Ново Брдо је у 14. веку имало 50.000 становника (у време кад је Лондон имао 10.000), било је потпуно утврђено и снабдевало је 20% европских потреба за племенитим металима (сребро и злато). Може се писати о томе и то оставља јак утисак на свакога. Србин ће бити поносан на своју државу и прошлост и неће за сопствени народ причати са пријатељима: "Да смо свиње и да заслужујемо све што нам се дешава." Странац ће бити задивљен Србима и схватиће да су га медији из политичких разлога хушкали против тог народа. Београд је у 15. веку, за време владавине деспота Стефана Лазаревића, имао 100.000 хиљада становника и био је средиште културе. Смедерево је највећа очувана тврђава у Европи. Требало би да има сталну поставку са глумцима, као Дизниленд. Жао ми је што су чланци на српском о Смедереву и Српској Деспотовини знатно сиромашнији од истих на енглеском. Добро, нека, бар, странци нешто сазнају о српској ренесанси, јер Срби, наводно, о томе већ све знају, па нису осећали потребу да то и документују. Петроварадин је познат као "Гибралтар на Дунаву". Изградио га је аустријски принц Еуген Савојски после победе над Турцима код Сланкамена 1690, где су европски хришћани коначно зауставили продор муслимана у централну Европу. Сви су чули за EXIT на петроварадинској тврђави, али би било лепо да знају и ових пар реченица о тој тврђави. Може се испричати још много о многим градовима Србије. Дајем предлог да се на томе ради.

Ја сам одлучио да дам свој допринос у истицању српске цивилизованости у другом важном обележју сваке цивилизације - праву. Још у комунизму, када је вера забрањивана, па се зато у школама избегавало причати о светом Сави (колико се могло), сам од учитељице сазнао да је Сава написао први српски устав - Савин Номоканон још далеке 1219. године. Професор Миодраг Петровић се изборио за употрбу правог назива овог дела, онаквог како га је назвао свети Сава - Законоправило. Срби су први у Европи добили устав пре 800 година, ако не рачунамо Велику Повељу Слобода (Magna Carta Libertatum) из Енглеске (1215), која је на једном папирусу и има само једну сврху: огрничавање тираније краља Јована без Земље (John Lockland). Када сам пожелео да видим шта на Википедији има о Законоправилу - шокирао сам се! Скоро ништа. Решио сам да дам свој допринос у вези Савиног Законоправила, Душановог законика, Српског грађанског законика и Јустинијановог зборника (на коме се заснивају ови акти), и на српском и на енглеском језику. Прво сам уређивао стране на енглеском, рачунајући да на српским странама ипак има нешто о томе. Пишем ја унајвеће о првом српском уставу, чак сам се "мачевао" са енглеским администратором кад сам податак о Законоправилу ставио на страну Constitution, где сам написао да је: "Правни акт заснован на Јустинијановом зборнику и који је уређивао све области световног и духовног живота развијенији од Magne Carte, која је само уређивала ограничавање краљеве власти". Тражио је цитат на енглеском из Законоправила који ово потврђује или да уклоним тај део. Тешка срца сам пристао на уклањање, јер нема енглеског превода. Кад сам Законоправило на српском логично ставио у катргорију Српски устави, погледао сам стране из те категорије: Устави Србије и Уставна историја Србије. Нисам могао да поверујем да је за ауторе тих чланака први српски устав - Сретењски устав. Јесте, али савремени. Важно је напоменути и средњовековне уставе: Законоправило и Законик. Треба нагласити традицију и корене. Многи се бусају у националне груди, а не знају скоро ништа о свом народу и не знају шта су праве вредности које треба истаћи!

И још само коментар енглеских чланака о Србима, који су ваљда намењени енглеском говорном подручју, а које су писали принаучени и полуписмени познаваоци енглеског језика, који не знају да превод не сме да буде дослован него у духу изражавања језика на који се преводи. Свети Сава је назван "LAW GIVER", што је требало да буде енглески превод српске речи "ЗАКОНОДАВАЦ". Јадно. Права реч је "LEGISLATOR". За владавину српских владара се користи израз који није потпуно исправан ни у српском, а камоли у енглеском, а то је: "ПОД ВЛАШЋУ" преведено као "UNDER RULE". Требало би: "ЗА ВРЕМЕ ВЛАДАВИНЕ" преведено као "DURING THE RULE". Било би смешно да није страшно, поготово што су ти текстови намењени људима којима је енглески матерњи језик. Згрозио сам се над одвратном неистином, на енглеској Википедији, да је Србија за време цара Душана била највећа земља у Европи. Само летимичан поглед на било коју историјску карту Европе из 1350. године говори о нетачности тог податка. На Википедији треба да се прикажу чињенице, а не болесна националистичка пропаганда српских мегаломанијака.

Ја сам свој допринос дао и позивам друге да ми се придруже у том подухвату. Сада морам да се посветим личним обавезама. Поздрав! Пера ложач (talk) 14:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Language changes
In Kosovo, Turkish language was official language till 1999. As you might know. After the Kosovo War, this situation gets worse. Now Turkish is regional official language in many municipality. Its first fact. That's see another fact... Second fact says that Kosovo towns has got their own Turkish name forms. I didn't put unused forms. So, Wikipedia is free, open. I searched and found these forms. I did it for adding new information. Nowadays in Kosovo, there are Turkish inhabited towns and villages. If you are interested in Kosovo, you should now. For example, Priština, Prizren, Vučitrn, Kosovska Mitrovica, Mamuša, Gnjilane, Janjevo... So, these all situations are reasons. Dear friend. You can search, look about it. Then you'll find truth. I see, you are from Serbia. But it doesn't matter. Because its know a encyclopedia for Serbia, its for all, for world. We don't have to be political. Its an encyclopedia, free encyclopedia. Gently. You should undo your changes. Or I'll have to do it dear wikipedist. In Serbian thats try to say. Треба да будеш објективни :) Is it right? TrueInfo (talk) 22:02, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

OK. I know that Turks are living there. Also I don't want to argue. I didn't say any percentages about population. Because I just want to tell that in Kosovo, Turkish are also secondary status official language dear friend. We can control it. So thats see something:

Constitution of Republic of Kosovo: Article 5 [Languages]

1. The official languages in the Republic of Kosovo are Albanian and Serbian.

2. Turkish, Bosnian and Roma languages have the status of official languages at the municipal level or will be in official use at all levels as provided by law.

And I know that Turkish language is official in these municipalities. Also you can controlled: Prizren, Mamusa, Pristina, Mitrovica, Vucitrn, Gnjilane. These municipalities are where Turkish is official. Maybe you will check it. If there was any changings, I will be glad to learn it. So, it was my issue. TrueInfo (talk) 19:33, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Žač
I made Žač just now. Perhaps you could improve the article a bit? (LAz17 (talk) 17:10, 22 May 2010 (UTC)).

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 01:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Caos
Hi. Listen, I saw some edits you did on FK Sevojno and related articles regarding the change of name. I just corrected a minor issue, that is that Sevojno didn´t merged into Sloboda, but they merged together. If you say that Sevojno merged into Sloboda, that would mean that Sloboda still exists and Sevojno was merged into them. From sports perspective, the issue is even quite the oposite, since it was Sevojno thet earned a spot in the Superliga where they will compete, but even so, I think that the two clubs just merged equally (50-50). I hope you understand what I mean :) I knew about this, I just waited to see how are things going to progess, and what name will be more commonly used in a short version (I doubt that the press will allways use the entire "Sloboda Point Sevojno" naming). I beleave you know that there was also a few days ago a name change in Kragujevac, where the awfull name FK Šumadija Radnički 1923 was officially replaced by FK Radnički 1923. They are the result of the merge that occured last summer between the historical FK Radnički Kragujevac (that links to the article) and our 2nd oldest club in Serbia, FK Šumadija 1903, and because of it, the resulting name was the one they choused to simplify now. I´ll try to fix the articles these days. Best regards Vanja. FkpCascais (talk) 22:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

P.S.:Honestly, I hate this name changes, because the clubs are already not so known outside Serbia, and if they keep on changing their names, the chances of people knowing them, and associating them to the past, is even minor. The sponsors also don´t help to this by demanding to have their name included in the club name. For instance, historically Radnički Beograd (they used to play in Belgrade side of Sava before they moved to Novi Beograd) named Radnički Jugopetrol lost the link with the past when they competed allways in the first or second leagues in the Kingdom period and afterwords. Other exemple, Čukarički Stankom didn´t had any problems, because Cukaricki helps in the association, but the exemple I consider more negative is FK Spartak Zlatibor Voda. You know, I live in Portugal, and I have here some Portuguese friends that have already been on hollydays to Zlatibor, so they asked me if the club was from there (!!!). I had to explain to them that it is not, and that is in the completely oposite location inside Serbia (nije mogao biti udaljeniji od Zlatibora. Subotica!). Also, people that know football may remember Spartak Subotica from the past, but when they see now Spartak Zlatibor Voda, they don´t associate it to them... I don´t know, sorry to bother you with this. FkpCascais (talk) 22:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmmmm... you pointed out the most important aspect in the heritage part that you bolded. What do you think about the articles, link to Sloboda, link to Sevojno or make a new one? FkpCascais (talk) 23:10, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, there is no rush... Let me know if you decide something, and I will do the same to you. I usually support the "continuity" when possible, but in this case we may end up having then the FK Sevojno article useless (categorised, as extinct clubs), but maybe we should. On the other hand, maybe we could make a new article that will concentrate on the events from now on, and leave the other two articles for each club linking the historic section of the new one to them. Sloboda has quite a rich history, and I had already wished, some time ago before this merge, to translate and complete the historical part of the club found on the site. We have also the issue of the categories Category:FK Sevojno players and Category:FK Sloboda Užice players. They have just a few players listed because they were just recently created, but they will be completed with time. We´ll keep in touch. FkpCascais (talk) 23:27, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

"No free equivalent" Provision
Hi.

I've noticed that you've marked for deletion several images I've uploaded that are promotional photos or screen shots from films. Each time, the criterion for deletion has been a violation of the "No free equivalent" provision. That is, that the image does not "illustrate a subject [1] for which a free image might reasonably be found or created that adequately provides the same information, or [2] which could be adequately covered with text alone."

Could you clarify, please? Are you mostly concerned about the first or second part of that criterion? Because it seems to me that each of these images (1) are unique ones that cannot be found for free anywhere (and there are no equivalent free substitutes) and (2) are essential for the criticism/commentary of a visual medium (that is, text alone is not adequate).

Is Wikipedia setting a policy that no promotional photographs or screen shots may be used in articles? If so, then WP:FUC should explicitly say so.

Regards, --Jeremy Butler 12:57, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the response (on my talk page). Regarding the photos of Ken Kwapis: Mr. Kwapis provided those images to me and gave his permission for their use. Does that make a difference? And regarding the Rules of the Game screen shot: You're right. A public domain image might be found to illustrate deep focus. However, the director of that film, Jean Renoir, is particularly known for his use of deep focus, as is Orson Welles (and a screen shot from one of his films is in that same article). Thus, I would make the argument that images from their films illustrate the concept in a way that a public-domain film does not, because they show how deep focus has fit into cinema history. Regards, --Jeremy Butler 15:14, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Serbian honours (Only Serbia (national team))
http://www.olympic.org/en/content/National-Olympic-Committees/serbia/

--Jolo Buki Original (talk) 14:54, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter - March through July 2010
Note: the Newsletter is "collapsed" for convenience. To see the full letter, click on the "show" button at the right end of the gray bar. If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of CT Cooper at 19:49, 2 August 2010 (UTC).

Meša Selimović
Your recent edit to article on Meša Selimović makes me think about content and form. Whilst you have a valid point about his writings being in Serbo-Croatian language too, the fact is also that the link Serbo-Croatian Cyrillic redirects to Serbian Cyrillic article and that poses some issue of redirects to the least. General guideline, as you may know, is that links shouldn't point to redirects but to their respective articles. So unless you intend to write Serbo-Croatian Cyrillic article, your edit is somewhat controversial and even biased - towards Serbo-Croatian Cyrillic being different than Serbian Cyrillic, which it isn't. Maybe a better solution would be to rename Serbian Cyrillic article to Vuk's Cyrillic alphabet as is the case with the link Serbian Latin alphabet - it is a redirect to Gaj's Latin alphabet. What do you say? --Best regards, Biblbroks (talk) 18:23, 4 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry for butting in (accidentally had Vanjagenije's talkpage on my watchlist): it is not true that "General guideline, as you may know, is that links shouldn't point to redirects but to their respective articles." See WP:NOTBROKEN. While I'm here, as for that particular edit by Vanja's, I don't have strong opinion either way, but "Serbo-Croatian" phrasing can be perceived more neutral in this particular situation, I don't see particular reason why it shouldn't be used. The title of Gaj's Latin alphabet article is sort of rotten compromise in order not to ascribe any (supra-)national label to the alphabet, and does not conform to WP:COMMONNAME. No such user (talk) 07:00, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I posted a message on No such user's talk page in order to bring the discussion to one place - and in my opinion the best would be to the article's talk page. --Biblbroks (talk) 09:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Balkanik Park of Peace
Please see my recent edits in Balkanik Park of Peace and potentially retire the rename proposal. --  S undefined ulmues (talk) 22:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Infobox Country
I notice that you reversed my edit on Republic of Cabinda. I removed that infobox because it is clearly called "Infobox Country" and is used on every recognised nation's article. If we use that infobox on an article like Republic of Cabinda, then we are tacitly recognising such a country as official and that is a clear violation of neutrality policies. The two examples you cited (Abkhazia andf Northern Cyprus) do at least enjoy partial recognition (even if it is just Turkey for the Northern Cypriots). If you can demonstrate that the Republic of Cabinda enjoys recognition from any other country in the world (other than fellow unrecognised countries), then I will withdraw my objections to using the Infobox Country template. I accept that it has a government-in-exile, but that does not mean the republic exists.

I would also point out that it does not matter if a whole host of unrecognised countries articles use Infobox Country. You will note in the parameters for Infobox Country, there are such items as population, currency, GINI, etc. That alone should tell you that the infobox is not for unrecognised countries. I believe there is a clear case for a new template just for unrecognised countries. I will try to work on something. Green Giant (talk) 17:01, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, the "Infobox Country" is used on many pages for "countries" that do not have any kind of international recognition. You should check for example Transnistria and Somaliland. It is also used for sub-national units that are not even claiming to be independent (see: New Caledonia and Adjara). Those parameters in the infobox that you mentioned, do not need to be used necessarily. There are many sovereign nations which do not have their own currency (Zimbabwe for example), and there are many unrecognized countries who does have the currency (Somaliland shilling for example). So, you cannot delete the template from the Republic of Cabinda article and not to delete it from those other articles. If you want to delete this template from all the articles on unrecognized countries, you should start a discussion on the template's talk page. You shouldn't make the R. of Cabinda article different from all the other articles. By the way, the first sentence in the "Infobox country" template documentation says: "This Infobox template is used to generate a righthand infobox in articles of 2 specific types: Country/territory or Geopolitical organisation." So, You see, it is not just for countries. I guess Geopolitical organisations do not have a population and a currency, but this template is still used. If You think it's wrong, go on and start a discussion, but don't delete the template from the article just because You think it's wrong.


 * Your idea to create a new infobox for unrecognized countries is, I believe, bad, because I don't really see what would make this infobox different from the "Infobox country". Vanjagenije (talk) 17:17, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If you check my contributions, you will see I have spent some time removing the template from many places where it was inappropriately added. I just haven't gotten as far as Transnistria and the others you mention. I am not singling Republic of Cabinda out; in fact it is vital to have such an article. My problem with the use of that infobox is that it clearly implies that Wikipedia treats unrecognised states as recognised states. That means we are breaking "neutrality", which is a fundamental tenet of Wikipedia. I do not need to start discussions on the template page, because this is not a template problem but a policy problem.
 * A separate template is needed because the wording should be neutral - i.e. something like Infobox unrecognised country which would be unambiguously aimed at articles like Republic of Cabinda and the others you mention above.
 * As far as the organisations, that is not a problem because Infobox geopolitical organization was merged into Infobox Country some time ago, and yes some organisations have both populations and currencies - see European Union for an example. You might also want to note that Zimbabwe did indeed have a currency until early 2009 - Zimbabwean dollar. Green Giant (talk) 17:37, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * You can simple create Template:Infobox unrecognised country and make it a redirect to Template:Infobox country. That would be neutral? Vanjagenije (talk) 17:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It would still have parameters like flag and government which would give the impression of being a recognised state. I would rather it was a separate template, limited to parameters like "proposed" flag, CoA, area, population estimates, and leaders as well as a map. We don't really need Gini, established dates, what side of the road cars drive on, internet domains etc. Green Giant (talk) 18:42, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Get Low (film) reference contents and the Balkans War
Hi Vanjagenije,

I noticed there were only a handful of references/external links about Get Low, the Sony Pictures Classics small budget film currently in release.

There is a video editorial online on Get Low that may interest Wikipedia in referencing the content. The editorial, if you screen the video in its entirety, references the Balkans War, so that may interest you more so.

http://midnighttracks.net/2010/getlowvid

Hope this helps in some way.

CinemaFanCA

--76.170.118.23 (talk) 07:39, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Image tagging
Why did you tag File:Tito jovanka svecano.jpg with di-no license when it includes the PD-Yugoslavia copyright license tag? --Geniac (talk) 23:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The PD-Yugoslavia tag may not be used on it's own. It just explains how the copyrights of former Yugoslavia are divided between successor states, but it says nothing about the actual copyright status of the image. (see: COMMONS:Template:PD-Yugoslavia) Vanjagenije (talk) 11:18, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. The problem may be that it looks like and is named like a regular license tag. I've copied the explanatory text from the one on Commons. --Geniac (talk) 15:11, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Location of of Pančić's Peak
Please see my comment at Talk:Pančić's Peak. --Bejnar (talk) 20:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Redundant user tags.
Hi,

I notice you have left template message on User talk:Zuull about so of their image uploads. You may have missed the "Copyright problems with most all of your image uploads" message and the OTRS discussions that followed. Also all of the images have been tagged already and have and otrs pending tag. Thank you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 18:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I haven't noticed. Thank You very much. Vanjagenije 18:28, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

National Symbols
Vanja, maybe we can use something from here? Some of those are quite ok? What do you say? -- WhiteWriter speaks 11:37, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Vanja, my friend, did you see my question? :) -- WhiteWriter speaks 17:29, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I saw the question, but didn't really understand. To use what? Vanjagenije 19:45, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Something from Jebacz entry. I would love to leave his edits. They seems good to me, with minor fixes... -- WhiteWriter speaks 10:11, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Your sig
Vanjagenije, Wikipedia's signature policy requires that your signature have a link to your user page, talk page, or contributions page. Please revise your signature so it link to one of those places, as your name is a tough one to type in the search box. I suspect you've made a custom wikitext signature - but in case your just typing your name and date manually on every post, typing ~ instead will automatically generate a time and date signature that meets all requirements. Thank you, D O N D E groovily   Talk to me  14:41, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't know what's going on. I've always signed my posts with ~, and everything was OK, but since few days ago, they not linked any more. Maybe I accidentally changed some preferences. What should I do? Vanjagenije 10:54, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I fixed it! I found the problem. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:00, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Failed States
Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I reverted your edits to failed state because the flag of Burma just changed on October 21. If you had a different reason for changing the flag, please let me know. ethansmith &#124; talk to me. 23:15, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes I had. The flag of Burma was changed in October 2010, and the lists in this article refer to the period of 2005-2010. In this period Burma was using the old flag, and so it should be presented in the list. When using the flag to indicate the country, the flag of the particular period treated in the article should be used. For example, in the article on the Olympic Games, in the hosts section, the old flags of Greece and Germany are used for 1896 and 1936 Olympics, because those flags were in use in the particular period which the article treats. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:26, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, makes sense. I changed the flags back. Sorry! ethansmith &#124; talk to me. 00:46, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Editing Fails
I would like to know the reason why you removed some of the pictures in the Gjeravica Article, and i think that it should be better to leave those articles to people who actually live in the region and who have visited that place such as i did, i've meet lots of villagers there who don't speak Serbian, they actually speak Albanian, which is their main language, next thing i would like to address is that names should be decided by the majority and the people who live and use these names more than others so it would be better to use the Albanian names in Kosovo Related Articles, since Kosovo has been declared an Independent State since two years, i don't want to make an political conflict through wikipedia but i know that people would be more happy with the Albanian names in wikipedia which are even easier to spell for english speaking people. Kind Regards User:Heroidshehu —Preceding undated comment added 23:31, 8 November 2010 (UTC).
 * This is not a place for discussing particular article. If you want to discuss about the title of the Đeravica article, go to Talk:Đeravica and leave your comment. If You think that the article should be renamed, You can try with WP:REQMOVE. Thank You. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:53, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

invite to discuss Kosovo geographic names
I am working on a list of issue and a stragtegy for the names of places in kosovo , User_talk:Mdupont I would like to invite you to take part and comment, have seen your activity of kosovo articles in the past. Thanks, mike James Michael DuPont (talk) 12:11, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * With respect to this invitation, it is edits like this which are at issue. It may be true that Albanian is not of official language of Central Serbia, but my understanding is that the mountain in question is on the border between Kosovo and Sarbia. Both names would seem to be appropriate. Fred Talk 09:33, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Please Vanjagenije, I would like to reach some agreement here. There are very many Albanian speaking people in Serbia and even if it not an official language, adding names into the head of the article wont hurt it. Please do not revert my edits, talk to me first. thanks James Michael DuPont (talk) 15:12, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Pančić's_Peak#Maja_Pan.C3.A7iq
Please respond at Talk:Pančić's_Peak Fred Talk 15:31, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

CPGI
Please, see.


 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_November_8

-- WhiteWriter speaks 14:44, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Re: Vasa Stajić elementary school, Novi Sad
You notified me about the proposed deletion, but I don't really care... :) I think the problem there is that Education in Novi Sad has a bunch of red links for all schools. If you don't think all of them should have articles, delink them to discourage creation. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 14:08, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Nicole Vaidišová
There is a message for you on Talk:Nicole Vaidišová.--Toddy1 (talk) 12:23, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Naming conventions
Hi. I want to inform you that there is current voting about name of this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Momcsilló_Tapavicza#Requested_move Perhaps you can say your opinion there if you wish. PANONIAN 10:13, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Catherine_of_St_Sava
Please read the relevant talk page. You previously made an utter failure to do so. I'll treat it a freak accident this time, but try not to repeat it. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 23:57, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 22:58, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Stop move-warring. My patience has run out. If you repeat this useless disruptive behavior, I will apply Blocking policy and Requests_for_arbitration/Macedonia. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 20:20, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning. If you do more unconstructive edits, you will be blocked. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 20:29, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

File:All You Zombies Single.jpeg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:All You Zombies Single.jpeg, 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. Peripitus (Talk) 11:04, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

File:MCMXC a.D. - The Limited Edition Album.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:MCMXC a.D. - The Limited Edition Album.jpg, 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. Peripitus (Talk) 22:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Srpska ortografija
Koliko puta treba da se vode ovakve diskusije? Koliko puta treba reći da imena bendova predstavljaju poseban slučaj? Kada je reč o pisanju imena bendova, držimo se pravila kakva su na zapadu - sve imenice, pridevi, glagoli, prilozi i brojevi u imenima bendova pišu se velikim slovom - i imena bendova predstavljaju neki vid vlastitog imena. Ovog (recimo) pravila drže se gotovo svi današnji naši časopisi, knjige, vebzini o rok muzici, a to nipošto ne znači da oni ne poštuju pravopis. Pa i gotovo svi današnji bendovi pišu tako svoja imena, i ko smo mi da im kažemo kako se zovu? Takav je, uostalom, slučaj i sa ogromnim brojem ondašnjih bendova, treba samo pogledati omote njihovih albuma - meni na pamet u ovom trenutku padaju Korni Grupa, Igra Staklenih Perli, Rok Mašina, Poslednja Igra Leptira, pa i Električni Orgazam (pogledaj samo omot albuma Breskve u teškom sirupu; na svim ostalim omotima sva slova su velika ili su sva mala). Ako nisam mogao da ih se setim više, to je uglavnom zato što su na omotima albuma pisali uglavnom sva slova u imenu velika ili mala.

Pored toga što se pomalo bavim rok novinarstvom, student sam književnosti i srpskog jezika i pravopis poznajem jako dobro, i ništa me ne nervira više od "jezičkih čistunaca". Kao što si primetio, ja se bavim najviše (da ne kažem gotovo isključivo) člancima o srpskoj rok muzici. Ja nemam, niti mogu da imam monopol na članke, ali mi je užasno krivo (kao i milosppf-u, jer se i on bavi najviše ovim - i on će ti reći isto što i ja, jemčim) kada vidim da neko čanak u koji sam ja uložio puno truda tek tako nominuje za preimenovanje. Hoćeš li, molim te, da mi kažeš: zašto neprestano insistriraš na takvom pisanju imena? Jer u pojedinim trenucima ne mogu da se otmem utisku da nešto ovako nekonstruktivno radiš iz inata. Ostalocutanje (talk) 18:09, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Gde to tačno piše da imena bendova predstavljaju poseban slučaj? Je li to neko zvanično pravilo ili ste to vi izmislili? Vanjagenije (talk) 19:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Ne, mi to nismo izmisli. Držimo se, da ne kažem pravila, ali recimo običaja koji su "uvezeni" sa zapada. Tako se piše u (njihovim i našim) rock krugovima u zadnjih 50 godina. Jesi li ti u našem pravopisu negde našao pasus koji se odnosi na imena rok bendova? Ostalocutanje (talk) 21:51, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Naravno da sam našao. "Pravopis srpskog jezika" u izdanju Matice srpske (izdanje 2010.), pravilo 63v (str. 66): "Velikim početnom slovom prve reči pišu se imena organizacija i udruženja, umetničkih sastava, naučnih škola, sportskih organizacija i klubova." I onda malo dalje su dati primeri (str. 67) i među njima lepo piše "Leb i sol". Takođe bih naglasio da pravilo WP:MOSCAPS koje se odnosi na veliko slovo kaže: "If possible, use rules appropriate to the cultural and linguistic context". To znači da se za srpske (odnosno srpsko-hrvatske) nazive koriste pravila srpskog jezika. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:17, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Dobro, skidam kapu, eto, i ja kao stručnjak sam nešto naučio od tebe. Mada, znaš, pravopis se kod nas menja na svake dve godine, a valja proveriti i šta kaže pravopis engleskog jezika, kada su u pitanju imena umetničkih organizacija... Nebitno, ja i dalje ostajem pri tome da se treba držati ovog nepisanog pravila a da kao primarni kriterijum treba da bude to kako sam bend ispisuje svoje ime... Kao što milosppf reče na stranicama za diskusiju za ova tr benda: imena bendova su deo popularne kulture, i ne moraju da se drže strogih pravopisnih pravila. To će, verovatno, značiti da ćemo da cepidlačimo za svaki mogući bend, ali ako tako mora, neka bude. Jedino što mogu jeste da te zamolim da se maneš nečega tako nekostruktivnog... Ostalocutanje (talk) 12:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * DISCUSSIONS SHOULD BE IN ENGLISH!!!!!! --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 16:01, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Moja pitanja na CQ
Ja sam blokiran pre pola godine na Konkviztadoru. Pre nego što su me blokirali poslao sam količinu pitanja. Da li bi mogao da mi proslediš imejlom, koja moja pitanja su trenutno u igri? (Nickname: aleblok70, lozinka: 12345) Hvala i prijatno! Alex discussion ★ 21:01, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Request for Move
Hi! I would like to join these discussions about Request for Move: Talk:Natasa Janics, Talk:Christina Vukicevic, Talk:Milos Raonic, Talk:Kristina Mladenovic, Talk:Alex Bogdanovic, Talk:Irena Pavlovic, Talk:Andrea Petkovic. Greetings and thanks! :) --Aca Srbin (talk) 21:24, 1 September 2011 (CEST)

October 2011
Your addition to UNESCO has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. This edit used the exact wording from the page you cited. Nev1 (talk) 21:53, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

adsvOTE
Cao pisacu ti na ovoj wikipediji na srpskom zato sto nemam vremena, kako da sa ADSVote-a izvucem sliku jedne skupstine treba li jos neki program?--Serb1914 (talk) 20:08, 11 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Resio sam problem eheh izvini.--Serb1914 (talk) 20:11, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Lists
Hello. You moved List of Penthouse Pets of the Month to List of Penthouse Pets. Why? You also redirected List of Penthouse Pets of the Year to List of Penthouse Pets. Why? There was no consensus or discussion for any of this. I'm unhappy with the move and the merge and the redirect. I left a post on the talk page. Merging the two lists was a major mistake. Playboy still has 2 separate lists and no merge, redirect or move was done there. Please undo your edits. Thanks.  Caden  cool  23:53, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Falkland Islands referendum result
Just to let you know, the result is 99.8% in favour as there were only 1,516 valid votes (the 1,517 includes one invalid vote, which is not included in the percentages for yes or no). Cheers, Number   5  7  13:28, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of B92 Top 100 Domestic Songs for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article B92 Top 100 Domestic Songs is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/B92 Top 100 Domestic Songs until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RockyMM (talk • contribs) 11:54, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

File File:Map of Eparchies of Serbian Orthodox Church in Europe-en.svg
Hi! Thank you so much for making File:Map of Eparchies of Serbian Orthodox Church in Europe-en.svg. I appreciate having an English version of this file. One little note: "Stockholm" is misspelled as "Stocholm." Do you have the original files you worked with? WhisperToMe (talk) 15:30, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I fixed it. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:46, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you :) WhisperToMe (talk) 16:49, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that 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.


 * Trappists (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Toledo, Dahlem, Charmes and Avila

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

tags in Prime_meridian
In the section Prime_meridian, you have added tags to some meridians which do have citations, and ignored other meridians which do not have citations. Can you explain your logic? Maproom (talk) 13:51, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There is no logic, I made some errors. I fixed it now. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:36, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Magnum Crimen 1948.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Magnum Crimen 1948.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:22, 22 July 2013 (UTC)