User talk:Gligan/Archives/2008/June

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Forest Strandzha.jpg

It currently says, on Flickr, that the image is all rights reserved. Are you the author of the image? If so, why have you not changed the license on Flickr? J Milburn (talk) 14:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Do you read Bulgarian? Does the uploader there claim to be the author? It looks to me like someone just assumed every image on Flickr was free. J Milburn (talk) 11:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I have fixed the sourcing and the licensing - everything looks fine now. J Milburn (talk) 18:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Самуил

Здравей и съжалявам за закъснелия отговор, напоследък не съм много активен. Ще погледна статията по-подробно, когато имам време, иначе разбира се, че ще гласувам за нея, само кажи когато я пуснеш :) Поздрави, Todor→Bozhinov 09:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Baba vida12.jpg

Just to let you know that you uploaded the image under the wrong license. I've fixed it for you now, but just in case you upload anything else from that batch of photos, it's cc-by-2.5, not GFDL. J Milburn (talk) 15:02, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Just noticed I messaged you the other day- I'm not stalking you, I'm just doing a lot of new image patrolling! J Milburn (talk) 15:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean? Like a photo of a painting? Generally, no, as that would be a derivative work, so still under the copyright of the original artist/photographer, but if the photo is out of copyright for whatever reason (or its use would fall under [[WP:NFCC|our non-free content criteria) then yes. Could you be a little more specific? J Milburn (talk) 15:09, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Eurgh, that's a grey area. If it's in a public place, there's something called a right of panorama, whereby you can freely take pictures in a public place, but to be honest, I'm not sure how far that extends. Try asking at media copyright questions. J Milburn (talk) 15:27, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Medieval Bulgarian Army

Hello! The article is quite good, if in need of a few more copyedits. One major thing that bothers me is the way you have listed the sources and citations used. For instance, you say "Cantacuzenos, I, p. 429. 19", but this is of no help to anyone trying to verify this. Which Catacuzenos is this, which work do you mean, which edition is it, what language, etc.? Especially when you use medieval authors, page numbers are simply insufficient, since they differ in every edition. You should concentrate and present your sources clearly in the "References" section. For an example on what I mean by "clear presentation" of sources & citations, check the Roman-Persian Wars article. Another thing, I would try to find a few more English sources (perhaps through Google Books), which are easier accessible to the average reader of this article, and, generally, more neutral.

Also, you should avoid repeating information: since you have created a separate "tactics" section, limit all tactical descriptions there, removing them from the "history" section. For instance, the use of the feigned flight tactic is mentioned thoroughly in the section on the 7th-8th century. You should take this down to the Tactics section. Indeed, most of the 7th-8th century section concerns structure, armament & tactics, and not history per se. Just limit the history section to a brief summary of campaigns and major battles, their outcome and impact, political and major social or religious developments, etc. If I may suggest, take a look at the Byzantine navy page, which presents a quite clear distinction between history and organizational matters. Furthermore, there is too little information on the battles that led to the Ottoman conquest. The same actually also applies to the section on the 7th-8th century: it is taken up by organizational matters, with too little actual history. You might also want to include a short introduction to the Bulgars, as most readers won't be familiar who they were or where they came from. And a few maps are also more than necessary, so that they'll be able to actually put the cities mentioned in the article in a geographical context. I'll try to help, but as my university exams are coming up, I don't know how much time I'll have (probably too little). Also, it's always a good idea to submit it for a Peer Review. Cheers and best regards, Constantine ✍ 15:20, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the wishes! :) Constantine ✍ 17:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Приветствие

Здравей! Чрез тази уикипедия допринасяш за популяризирането на някои интересни български факти, но българската уикипедия понякога изостава спрямо това. Затова по-добре пиши и там ако видиш, че нещо го няма. Поздрави Николов (talk) 21:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Vagueness

Hello, the vagueness I was referring to is that the prior sentence doesn't specify if the list of military ranks is in ascending/descending/random order, that's all. Thanks - Mr0t1633 (talk) 22:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Economy of the European Union

Hi. Unfortunately I reverted your edits because I was reverting a Bonaparte sock. Could you please restore them yourself? I didn't want to mess them up. Khoikhoi 23:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Power plants

Good job with those Bulgarian power plants. Interesied in Bulgarian film? We need to develop Bulgarian films of the 1980s etc like Bulgarian films of the 1960s ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 10:23, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

On to it - at the moment a user stops playing with Bulgaria-related articles I'll go to BG films of the 1970s and to the 80s then. It takes too much time dealing with him and his friend. Btw I asked a user to look at the list and tell me what it needs - he said references. Where am I supposed to get references? --Laveol ^T 10:26, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh hi. The 60s list looks brilliant, I know you have been busy. I will try and start a few films myself when I have time. References? Mmm you could leave an imdb external links at the end of each film to like it to imdb. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 10:42, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Oks, I got the impression he meant some other references. I couldn't find any besides the encyclopaedia. As for the films' articles - I've found pictures for some recently and plan to create a couple of articles on films and actors. --Laveol ^T 10:48, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

I think that Laveol will do that job much better ;-) my knowledge of cinema is very limited - to my mind I can't even tell the names of ten actors - both Bulgarian and foreign :-) --Gligan (talk) 12:00, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry - I don't know that much either :) I'm just using the sources. Any help anywhere would be welcome. Mail? Cheers. --Laveol ^T 14:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Postwar

Hi. I was wondering if you have any interest in the immediate postwar history of Bulgaria. Certainly Nikola Petkov deserves a 5-6 good paragraphs at least, plus something on the 1945 and '46 elections, and perhaps the monarchy referendum. Biruitorul ^Talk 02:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Excellent - thank you! Personally, I find the 1944-48 years quite depressing too (abolition of the Romanian (and indeed Bulgarian and Yugoslav) monarchy (other than Greece, the last three Orthodox monarchies), confirmed losses of Bessarabia and, though you surely disagree, Southern Dobrogea, imposition of Stalinism), but they also make for an interesting study. For example, I suppose Romania and Bulgaria were doomed to become Communist, while Czechoslovakia (perhaps Hungary too) was not - but because the Communists were so much better organised then their opponents, and the country had Soviet troops on its soil, they eventually came out on top. Anyway, people like Petkov or Iuliu Maniu deserve our deep admiration for at least trying, but nobly failing, to stop the descent into terror. Biruitorul ^Talk 18:14, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, OK, I did not know that about the two Dimitrovs. In all fairness, I will say that of the territories Romania lost in 1940, the Romanian case was the weakest for Southern Dobrogea. I suppose we enjoyed the additional beaches ;) It's definitely an open, and interesting, question the way things could have gone after the war. The Americans could have, but didn't, take Prague in early 1945. Then again, the Soviets held Eastern Austria until 1955 but left, and they could very easily have turned Finland into a dictatorship, but chose not to. But the Communists did have broad popular support in the Czech lands, plus the Soviet troops there; and Hungary had been a Nazi satellite, so that didn't do them any good after the war either. Biruitorul ^Talk 19:28, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Map

The map is brilliant, please add it in. Thanks for your hardwork. Tourskin (talk) 17:05, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Great map :). Just a little note - could you upload the images you create to Commons directly? That way it could be used in all Wikiprojects and it won't need subsequent move to Commons. I've uploaded it there as well [1], but I haven't figured out the whole "Moving to Commons" stuff yet. I'll give it little read and see what the transferring rules are. If you don't have time to deal with Commons, I'll simply move them there. Thanks :) --Laveol ^T 17:35, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Bulgarian-Serbian Wars (medieval)

I've put an "Under construction" tag on the article. There was an user making ... unjustified edits to it and I saw you've left Samuil's campaigns with just a header so I thought you'd be still working on it. Cheers :) --Laveol ^T 00:04, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Forest Strandzha.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Forest Strandzha.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:50, 20 June 2008 (UTC) --Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:50, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. With Flickr it's a frequent misunderstanding. Those can be under quite different copyright status, depending on the choice of the photographer. You always need to check what it says for each individual image, it's near the bottom right of the screen on the flickr page (saying "all rights reserved" or "some rights reserved"). But in this instance, your misunderstanding seems to have been mainly that you thought the uploader on bg-wiki was actually the photographer and was giving it a valid license there, right? Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:04, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, then, could you do me a favour and propose it for deletion on bg-wiki too?

There's also:

• bg:Картинка:Silistar Оutfall.jpg [2]
• bg:Картинка:Belogradchik Fortress.jpg [3]

Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:18, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

By the way what happens if the author once had another tag, allowing the use of the image on Wikipedia, but has changed it subsequently?--Laveol ^T 11:33, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Oltenia map

File:Terratransalpina.png

"The Banate of Severin was founded in the 1230s as a territory of Hungary, the first ban, Luke, being mentioned in 1233. In 1247, King Béla IV of Hungary allowed the Knights Hospitaller to settle in Severin to defend the Hungarian borders against the invaders. A diploma gives them Severin and other possessions pertaining to it, including the "knyazates of John and Farkas", but excluding the voivodate of Litovoi, which was to be left to the Vlachs who were holding it. They were also allowed to use the land beyond the Olt River ("Cumania"), with the exception of the Vlach voivodate of Seneslau, which had similar rights like Litovoi.

The Knights Hospitallers probably failed in their mission, as only a few years later, they disappeared from the region. In the meantime, Litovoi increased his power, rebelling in 1272 against the Hungarian King Ladislaus IV wanting to gain the territory of the Banate of Severin, an important strategic point. The king sent George, son of Simon, to fight against Litovoi, killing him in battle and capturing his brother, Bărbat, bringing him to the royal court. Bărbat became Litovoi's successor, ruling his voivodate between 1285 and 1288."

So in 1261, in Oltenia, apart from the Banate of Severin, there were only hungarian vassals: Litovoi, and probably John and Farkas, if they survived until then. I am not aware of a Bulgarian conquest of Oltenia in this period--Alex:Dan (talk) 11:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, probably. But one common error of the various historical maps is to consider Oltenia=Banate of Severin. Here you have a map with the approximate eastern border of Banate of Severin. --Alex:Dan (talk) 13:01, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'll try it a little bit later. It's rather difficult because the map is pretty small. --Alex:Dan (talk) 17:59, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Mediation

Please see User_talk:Xavexgoem#I_am_abroad.2C_away_from_home . --07fan (talk) 20:00, 28 June 2008 (UTC)