User talk:K. Lastochka/Archive 2

Hey!

You archived your page! I was wondering when you would do it. ;) But ask all the rest of my friends and they'll tell you I can't resist a blank page. :P Maybe I'll put something else here… — $PЯINGrαgђ 17:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't resist a blank page either, that's why I put Wikipe-tan mopping up the mess. :) (I get a kick out of her--how many other encyclopedias have mascots?!) Any music-related stuff I can help out with? I'm kind of bored. Köszönöm for the cookie...K. Lásztocska 17:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now I know what Köszönöm means. ;) And I like her too. Most anime (or manga—I don't know the difference) I don't like, but Wikipe-tan is really cute. Maybe I could incorporate her into my horribly cluttered talk page… — $PЯINGrαgђ 00:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Double redirects

Hi, just a quick reminder to check any redirects when you move a page, I've fixed quite a number for Emomali Rahmonov and other articles you've moved about recently. -- Nick ^t 22:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Biruitorul, you must be some Serb or Greek really mad with Turks in particular and Turkic people in general. What is your problem? What's with the talk like you are for continuous dictatorship in Turkmenistan? I wish you elaborated on that. You really sound like nationalistic pro-Slavic christian fanatic.

Yeah, and fix the template at the bottom, will ya? Biruitorul 02:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that one is not my fault. Yesterday morning, all I did was delete a few "ov"s from his name, I then moved the page which was promptly undone (with good reason, I later found out.) I didn't touch the template, I have not edited that page since. I'm no fan of Tajikbashi, but since you asked so nicely.... K. Lásztocska 13:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Anyway, the situation is still in flux, so we need not worry about that too much. By the way, would you like to weigh in here? We do refer to the Hungarian-perpetrated Ip and Treznea massacres as massacres, even though at least one killed fewer people. So I think a massacre happened at Fântâna Albă (more importantly, so does the historiography), even if that one was committed by the Great Liberator of Peoples, Joszif V. Sztálin, and the other two by the eeeeeeevil fascist Miklós Horthy. Biruitorul 01:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, because I also used that line here a couple of days ago. Great minds think alike. Anyway, thank you for the support. I've got to be careful in what I write on-wiki, so let me just say I'm glad to have someone on the same wavelength as I. (Although I support continued dictatorship in Turkmenistan, but that's a different matter.) Biruitorul 22:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, he was kind of fun. Granted, I'm saying that from a safe distance, but you know, he wasn't really evil, maybe just semi-evil, quasi-evil, or even a one-calorie Coke of evil. He only had a handful of political prisoners (though arguably the whole country were his prisoners), and he abolished capital punishment. Biruitorul 22:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the other spelling was more common - anyway, do we move the page?
By the way, a suggestion on Turkmenistan: some 40% of the "history" section covers the last couple of months, which is a little unhealthy. Granted, Turkmenbashi's death is important, but not every detail is. What I suggest doing is making a smaller article to cover these developments. After all, if we have a 25-page article on George W. Bush's second term as President of the United States, then surely one on "Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedow's term as President of Turkmenistan" would not be amiss.
Indeed. But again, there are worse: just look at Nazarbayev and and Karimov. By the way, what do you think of Turkey? I think they should join the EU, so as to wreck it, and while I'm not a huge fan of Islamic theocracy, I so despise the secularist Kemalist state that I await an Iranian-style revolution there (and also half of Turkey going to Kurdistan, Armenia and Greece). Biruitorul 23:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Wiki-time, yes, it's April 1st.

Actually, I like Turkey too. But here's how I look at the religion question. 99% of Turks are Muslims (since earlier generations of Turks killed off/drove out the Armenians and Greeks), so I think it wouldn't hurt for them to have more Islamic law, at least to a reasonable degree. Morocco, for instance, has a secular government, and the few non-Muslims live in relative tranquility, but one can wear a headscarf in schools too (and almost all women do). I just think that when almost everyone belongs to a particular religion, it doesn't make that much sense to separate it so completely from the state as Turkey does. Maybe an Iran-style solution would be bad, but the middle ground between Turkey and Iran is quite large. Plus, they persecute Alevis, etc.

Any thoughts on the latest Curse of Turan edits? It seems a bit implausible that Hungary was Muslim and Jewish at the time, or at least I'm not convinced. Biruitorul 00:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, yeah. Did you see the current FA and DYK? I like the penguin. Biruitorul 01:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vaguely, but not really. Biruitorul 01:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, sophisticated. I think we'll see lots of vandalism in the next 24h. Biruitorul 01:16, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it was nice knowin' ya. Szia! Biruitorul 01:19, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know some people just itching to start an RfC against you... Biruitorul 01:28, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That Slovak, or Czech, or German. I forgot his name. And then a Serb, a Romanian, couple others. Biruitorul 01:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or how about this VinceB character? Biruitorul 01:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, look here, then you can revert by using the edit summary rvv and give me a stern vandal warning. Biruitorul 03:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you're doing fine

I've watched your metre fluctuate, and if you ever need anything, just tell me. — $PЯINGrαgђ 04:31, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know, KL you need a meter that goes to 11 ;-) István 04:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Insane mood swings...hey, I really am an authentic Hungarian! :) You guys are really sweet. :) My personal life is in shambles in real life, and I'm in a blind panic about receiving my most important acceptance/rejection letter from conservatory....maybe I should make a meter that goes to 12. Again, it's very nice to know I'm among friends here, thanks. :) I'll try to not be such a basket case though...K. Lásztocska 14:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Benny Goodman

Why have you changed Benny Goodman's page? I am reading Ross Firestone's book "Swing Swing Swing" and it says Goodman's parents were from Warsaw and Lithuania. It mentions his birthname as Benjamin David Goodman. Please provide a better reference or revert your edits. --SeanO 20:09, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the links you provided are based on older versions of Wikipedia that contained the error. I'm going to reference Firestone's book and put a note on the talk page. --SeanO 07:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Biru

I can prove each of my statements with quotes from Biruitorul's comments. no personal attacks.Anonimu 19:13, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's right to discuss with a groupie about biru's attitude.. i don't like to talk people behind their back.. unlike some of our common acquaintance.... Anonimu 19:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Groupie"? LOL. :) K. Lásztocska 21:17, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can mail you a t-shirt to that effect. Biruitorul 21:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'm not too good with graphic design, so it hasn't actually been printed. I was thinking maybe an Arrow Cross and Iron Guard symbols joined by a chain, but I know you wouldn't wear that (though you probably could go outside like that since I doubt people would know what it meant). Other than that, I guess just a Wikipedia symbol with some inscription about me. I'm open to suggestions, though, since I know I have a large fan-base eager to get these. Biruitorul 21:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support, though I don't mind personal attacks at all. Jesus (it is Holy Week, after all) was attacked far more severely for His teachings. There is, by the way, a small Unitarian church centred in the Székelyföld. ♠♣♥♦ sounds like a plan to me! Biruitorul 21:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; same to you! Illegitimi... Biruitorul 21:57, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, just a groupie - though you denied it! Biruitorul 22:42, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ApOlOgy aCCepteD (--˚˚:--˚˚––:) Biruitorul 01:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That could be tricky. sdpr6560 at yahoo dot com can help, if you're still stuck by tomorrow Biruitorul 03:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I do too, but there's an added dimension in my case; plus, you could use an e-mail pseudonym. Anyway, the code was random and meant nothing. Biruitorul 03:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dangerous? To say the least! The protests you've been seeing in Hungary are just a picnic compared to what's coming for Romania :) Biruitorul 03:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply given. Biruitorul 19:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One more reply - that should about cover it, though see Anonimu's latest allegations on the FA talk page! Biruitorul 19:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the article's talk page. Now i have to answer to you for everything i do?Anonimu 14:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the word STOP (exact capitals)

What do you mean STOP. And what have I done now. I have commented only about the discusion, and on the harsh wording said by PANONIAN. I don't know what have I done wrong since the last warning. -- Imbris 23:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean to say that calling someone a radical in Serbia is an insult, you should check what is going on in all of Serbia. Radical party is the bigest party in People's Assembly of The Republic of Serbia. Some of those elements can be seen especially in the part of Fruška Gora in Syrmia. Nowdays no one is safe from propadanda, belive me I am not a propagandist. No one in the country I live is interested in historical debates, you can count on the fingers of one hand a few radical thinkers in this country. The problem with PANONIAN is that he has an easy temper. Where did I say the things he is talking about. Where? Please do not go beyond the warning (!) you sent, but since the warning. I admit that in the past of this discusion we have both said some harsh wording, but this i bound to happen when we have such different sources. You said that notting could be done in such cases, but I hope to achieve the full truth. I will not satisfy myself with some books, I will go to the bottom of this, go thruoghout the whole process in Wikipedia and prove my case. I could do this much faster only if I stop answering to his provocations. I will do that. Just STOP, as if his mal doing does not exist. Hopefuly you will not delete this communication from me to you. I will use this communication as a reference tool when someone says "Why did you not answer to him". I will say User:K. Lastochka said so. But I will not back down. This must be cleared. As for the terrorists see this. Breafly. In Novi Sad there is a funny coalition between radicals and democrats and Miloshevitch socialists. and the towns-mens and wommans have decided to call two streets by the names of those who burnt a country in the neighborough. Imbris 00:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You did not said those things? You even now saying those things with insulting statements about inhabitants of Fruška Gora and Syrmia. And this is proof who is right and who is wrong in our discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN/Sources And I do have bad temper, but what you expect from me when you provoke with such statements about Vojvodina? PANONIAN (talk) 11:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And about xenophoby I say this. Panonian doesn't allow other users to say anything because everything hurts the feeling of the majority in Vojvodina. This is not the truth. No one is insulting he or his family of his nation. He is just telling those thing's to attract attention and to draw them into discusion about that topic. See how he is luring the victim here. Imbris 00:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And you insult me right now too. PANONIAN (talk) 11:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not harrasing anybody. Quite the opposite. Am I bothering someone who is not interested in communicating with me. NO. I have just written about a topic I care a great deal about. Must a person be dispersed in many topics to be seriously understood. I don't know, but judging by your remark about my short history in this encyclopaedia, I say that I am not beeing seriously understood. Why I say so. Because someones merits ought to be judged by the amount of the objectivity and I think that no matter ones greatness (in the nummbers or quantity) every encyclopaedia is worth only by the ammount of before mentioned objectivity. Have I said that Panonian is not a good cartographer - no. I object to the usage of not documented terms, to colouring that is false, to the borders that are falsely painted broader than it should. I do not push a pollitical point of view, but only respond (better yet responded) to false accusations and false informations posted by this author. I am very much offended by the question raised that it is a pollitical conflict. On my part it is not. I forgive and forget it this instant, but please do not question my integrity, unless the same is questioned in the same length and width with the other side. I do not see why Panonian thinks he is obligated to respond. I have ordered information to be delivered to me and arbitration is unavoidable. I hope that you will volunteer at least as a character wittnes and hopefully as an unbiased bystander of this story who can tell the auditors on the credibility of sources that will be supplied. -- Imbris 03:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But how can I "communicating with you" when you constantly trying to deny works of numerous respectable historians claiming that all they are stupid and that exactly YOU is the one who is called to offer interpretation of archive documents? I am sorry, but those historians are much more competent than you to offer such interpretation and they did so in their books: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN/Sources And, yes, this is political conflict, because you said that your goal is to separate Vojvodina from Serbia and therefore you want to remove word "Serbia" from the historical name of Vojvodina. It is bright as a day. PANONIAN (talk) 11:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To User:K. Lastochka: Have I speaked to the very ofencable character of our counterpart in this. No. And I will not, but you better instruct that side to quit and STOP as have you instructed me. This is not fair. And I think that our beloved counterpart is not able to let anybody but our beloved counterpart to have a last line in any debate. Our beloved counterpart is very much mistaken if think that this is going to pass here and by me. I will defeat only the sources and false interpretation but not our beloved counterpart who is an instrument in the hands of historians who took ideology into their's minds and forgot all about documents. Documents must prevail over some recent editions of books that in majority do not have topics concerned about that period in time. -- Imbris 17:46, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no way that you can "defeat" all those sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN/Sources Trying to "defeat" them, the only thing that you will actually "defeat" is you. And I will repeat, the historians who wrote those sources are more relevant to present interpretation of any documents than you are. PANONIAN (talk) 20:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Documents stored in archival collections (named fonds) need not any interpretation. Archivists obey the norms set by International Council on Archives (specialised agency of UNESCO thus UN). The norms state that the name under which an institution did its business longest is the name of the fonds. Fonds must be citted. Eg. Document No. xxx from the fonds No. xxx - name of the fonds. This must be an official name, not an alias or some other referenced name. This few sentences are enough to confer to all of your Sources. All of your Sources surely do not state that Voivodship of Serbia is official name, and your D. Popovic used it once, and in the correct way of stating that it were not official. -- Imbris 23:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Forget D, Popović, you have almost 60 sources there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN/Sources In another words, if all those historians used name Voivodship of Serbia, then archive obviously have documents with that name and since two names exist in archive documents then those historians are people who should decide which of the two names should be used. If you think that you are competent to "defeat" their work, then prove that you are competent for that: tell us your name, surname, level of education, your scientific awards if you have any, recognitions of scientific community that you are competent to judge about this, etc. If you cannot provide this, then you have no right to try to "defeat" work of numerous respectable historians who gained scientific awards for that work. Also, I have to remind you that purpose of Wikipedia is to PRESENT information from sources not to "DEFEAT" such information based on personal opinion. In fact, such personal attempts for "defeating the sources" are officially called "original research" and ARE FORBIDEN BY THE POLICY OF WIKIPEDIA. PANONIAN (talk) 14:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will not forget D. Popovich because this is a clear example of how this person (who I am not talking to) does his business. Wikipedia is about objectivity as well an staying neutral. And a person that is infected with only one angle is not neutral. You speak about DEFEATING. I will try and hopefully succedde to defeat the dis-information which happened in this case by the use of only one angle, and by the use of not official sources. This is nothing orriginal but a very normal thing called the objective, neutral and open minded information providing. If the policy of Wikipedia is to give the greater meaning to some books written by a handful of "historians", and not to give the greater meaning and look objectively to the source of documents and archives then this policy has to be modified. By the use of a few sentences from the Archives of Vojvodina who decided on the bassis of the documents and the official character of them, and by the sheere nummber of documents and if they gave priority to the official name - Wikipedia will too. And not forgeting the character of folk songs and etnology and antropology that can be mentioned in the article about Serb Voivodship and Tamiše Banate. --- Imbris 18:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not continue this argument on my talk page. Take it to your own. K. Lásztocska 21:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hehehe, of course, you are absolutely right, K. Lásztocska - I apologize for my behaviour (I certainly would not like that somebody use my talk page like this). It will not happen again. :)) PANONIAN (talk) 21:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, no problem, don't worry about it. :) K. Lásztocska 21:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answer

K. Lastocha, I will archive my talk page as soon as I find time. Regarding user:Imbris, what arbitration you speak about? It is clear thar his goals on Wikipedia are trolling and provocations and this prove it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN/Sources

As well as this (just read the last sentence):

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image_talk%3ASerbia1918.png&diff=116452172&oldid=114846547

I really do not understand his attempts to deny work of numerous respectable historians (including Serbian, Hungarian and German ones). PANONIAN (talk) 11:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, even the web site of LSV political party that support creation of Republic of Vojvodina use name Vojvodstvo Srbija (Voivodship of Serbia) as a historical name of Vojvodina: http://www.lsv.org.yu/?menu=11&smenu=1 PANONIAN (talk) 12:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I do not know what can be done here. It is better not to tell you my previous experiences with admins in similar cases: last time when admin was involved in similar problem, he just protected disputed article from editing and several months ago when I had a big dispute with one other Serbian user who asked admin to help in solving dispute, the admin just said that since this is English Wikipedia the two of us should speak one with another in English, not in Serbian, so that he can read it. Therefore, I do not see what can be done here escpecially because user Imbris mainly edit talk pages and not articles and I do not think that Wiki policy against editing of talk pages exist. PANONIAN (talk) 20:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, perhaps something can be done anyway? I planned to finish my work about municipalities of former Yugoslavia but I did not managed to do even a half of this job because I had to argue with user Imbris and to answering over and over to the same questions. However, the real reason why I do not think that arbitration is good solution is because in this case I would have to explain all this again to admin and that would take even more time from me, which is not good. Anyway, let just see how would he try to "defeat" (as he said) all those sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN/Sources PANONIAN (talk) 20:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is that a perfectly good category

Hey, Slavs is the name - orriginated from Hey, Slovak's. It is a Slavic anthem, not Serbian. It was Yugoslavian anthem, and falsely proclaimed Serbian by Miloshevich. Even the people of Serbia didn't accept this. Should every nation of Yugoslavia have a category in the article about that now pas anthem. -- Imbris 17:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you so much for your support. I did not want to push it that far, but VinceB did not give me any other option. I appreciate even more all your previous offers of good offices and mediation. It did not work at the end, but I believe this was just an exceptional case. People like you make Wikipedia a sustainable community. Tankred 22:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Massacre

Hey! Of course, I can help. I haven't been able to read the whole talk page, so please give me one objective reference referring to the word massacre and I immediately rename the article. It's not a matter of consensus, but a matter of facts. NCurse _work 05:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. NCurse _work 18:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KKP

LOL :D I wasn't here, since now I'm quite busy in huwiki (and real life) (take a look at hu:User:Alensha/Egyiptom, a list of my new Ancient Egypt-related articles :) KKP is my favorite political party. Check out their website, it's probably the funniest thing on the internet now. – Alensha ^talk 14:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commons

Its a lost cause. If you can get to the AHF and get them to give a clearer disclaimer on the photos, or at *least* to amend their copyright statement to explicitly refer to the webpage and not every individual item, then that would help, otherwise its no use - they (commons) wont accept a phone conversation as bona fide evidence of anything. The picture *should* be allowed as fair use, either on the wikipedia itself, (and posted as a thumb on the article page) or you can get some help choosing the proper copyright disclaimer and info (we did not get much help, which probably says more about the commons than about anything else). Its a rough neighbourhood, the commnons. Dealing with them is like dealing with the Dept of Motor vehicles.István 23:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Összeesküvés :)

Valaki titokzatos személy arra kér, nézd meg a vitalapodat a magyar wikipédián. ;-) – Alensha ^talk 15:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tudom, hogy ki az. Nekem rögtön gyanús volt. :) – Alensha ^talk 19:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Digits and dots

Anonymous sophomore getting you down again? :( I'm sorry to hear that (I wish I could do something about it). Here's a little Hungary-related bit of humour to take your mind off of it for about eight minutes or so. ;) — $PЯINGrαgђ 15:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notice in the comments section the very mixed comments! I think he is the Chinese Liszt though…all the weirdos that don't like it obviously don't know that Liszt used to play that way. (And could we ever have gotten a camera into a concert given by Niccolò Paganini?) I love the video though. :D — $PЯINGrαgђ 19:21, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Locsolás !

(I couldnt find an appropriate image on the wiki) If you really want to improve your language, then go to Hungary for a while w/ a Hungarian b/f - being in the culture and close to people, i.e. sharing family life etc is the best way to learn the living language - You start off feeling like a pet dog in the room, only understanding inflection (and when its time to eat) (sometimes get scratched behind the ears...) and soon you can follow the discussion (hint: in H its usually complaints about whatever topic) then jump in here and there, then be quite functional, etc. You could do music there - you will find Hungarians respect foreigners, musicians, poets, olympic athletes (as demigods) any two of those and you will be welcomed heartily anywhere outside of Bp for sure, and probably in Bp too but its a big city and can be impersonal at times. In any case you don't really hear "stupid foreigner" nearly as often as elsewhere in Europe, and there are millions in the Magyar diaspora anyway so your quick self-deprecation comes off as a bit odd - disarming, but odd (give yourself some credit). And unlike some other cultures there is no loss of esteem for being Hungarian born outside Hungary (since about 1/3 of all Hungarians are anyway). And, poorly-paid musicians in Hungary are about as well-off as poorly-paid musicians in the USA, I am told... István 16:54, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wishing you all the best

...in yet another difficult and stressful time at wikipedia :( M A Mason 19:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same here. If you need us, you know where to find us. Most of our e-mail buttons work. — $PЯINGrαgђ 23:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, I've got a support group! :) I generally prefer not to actually e-mail my fellow Wikipedians--I like to keep real life and wikilife separate, and e-mail is a disturbingly fluid bridge between the two--but thanks for the offer. I guess I'm technically still on wikibreak (stormed off in a huff after a fight with a Romanian communist), but I have a little work to do on that Hunnenschlacht; I just got back from rehearsing it and noticed a few things I need to add. :) K. Lásztocska 03:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a conductor by any chance? — $PЯINGrαgђ 04:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nooooooo...I wish. :) I'm a section player in the first violins. :) I'll be studying conducting eventually, but not yet. K. Lásztocska 13:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wish too. For now I'm just on a dinky little upright piano (which my sister actually plays quite well) and a guitar—which I actually play quite well. :) I'll rise in the musical hierarchy sometime. :P Wagner and I have something in common. ;) — $PЯINGrαgђ 16:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit to Oberlin College

This edit removed a cited reference and offered no replacement. Admittedly the source is biased, yet the statements being cited were completely objective and were not influenced by the source's bias. If the source were Mother Jones would you have done the same? It too is controversial and biased. If you feel that the citing a national publication in support of the claim that the topic of an article has received national coverage is unreasonable solely because of the bias of the publication, please make some effort to cite another source for this objective fact that will be less offensive to you. A quick browse of Google yielded these results, although I feel the original source is better than them as a reference for national exposure, which was the statement being referenced not the substance of the events. Safer Sex Night: [1][2][3][4] Drag Ball: [5][6][7][8][9][10]—WAvegetarian (talk) 18:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean to jump all over you. I've had a very stressful day academically and probably shouldn't have been editing. I believe that when the reference was first put in it did read something more to that effect, but since has been changed to its current form.—WAvegetarian (talk) 22:18, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Continued attacks

Hello. I said personal attacks didn't bother me, and I meant it. However, I'm also not above using certain processes to, shall we say, sideline certain users. Let me speak concretely. Anonimu, despite repeated warnings for his vulgar and crude attacks on you, and more warnings after that, is still misbehaving. Here is some after you left, here is more, here is a mean-spirited, flippant dismissal of my work in uncovering sources, here is more senseless revert-warring (note too the hint of wikistalking that is emerging); an anguished cri de coeur from me (I was very angry at that moment): [11]. Lots of disruptiveness, very little productivity, impervious to warnings. (I have other examples from further back. For instance, this edit still rankles me, as the Romanian-language author, who has a 17-page article about him on ro.wiki, is, in comparison, an intellectual giant.)
I won't initiate anything against him. If you do, I'll support you to the hilt. If not, let's agree to watch developments closely, shall we? Biruitorul 01:00, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, good point. There are many ways to skin a cat; we just need to find one. In that case, let's let him stew in his own juices for a while, maybe tripping up a couple more times, but definitely remain seized of the matter. At some point one of us can spring a trap or, if we're both too fatally damaged by our own attacks, then some proxy can do it for us. (Of course, I just made the conspiracy quite public, but maybe we can cover our tracks once proceedings are underway.) Biruitorul 04:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

♠♣♥♦ is right. I just remembered he also launched numerous attacks against me on my talk page, so that's another arrow in our quiver, if and when we decide to start shooting. Of course I'd rather do productive work, but watchfulness is our byword for now. Biruitorul 04:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please, also follow this and this. I see no point in trying to revert him, since he will then definitevely feel justified to be more agresive, and it would be uncivilized from me to provoke him. The only solution left is to somehow bring this behavior to public attention. Do you have any ideas? I suggest (maybe stupid suggestion) to create a page or subpage somewhere (so everyone who wishes can see it), and list such instances. Under each of them, outside users should add one word: disruptive or non-disruptive, and sign (futher comments in talk page). Then there can be evidence (or maybe not, if more users think not) for a case. Not for the sake of voting (I don't like deciding by vote), but for the sake of being clear that people who think he is distruptive are not a negligible minority. :Dc76 12:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I endorse Dc76's idea of making a page where we track this sort of thing. He's at it again today. Here, he suggests that Romanians are incapable of writing about Romanian history. I don't even need to say how absurd and even outrageous such a statement is. Here, he refers to people who agree with me as my "servants", having previously labelled them as "groupies" and "lackeys". Biruitorul 22:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fântâna Albă massacre

Hi, I saw your request for Romanian speakers about this article. If you need translation (from Romanian or Russian to English), just cut-and-paste the text on my talk page. Since I have little time nowadays to allot to WP, I can not do research of sourses (at least not now), since that usually takes hours. But translation of sourses for non-involved good-faith editors - any time and with pleasure, that only takes several minutes. In fact, if you want, copy bigger passages, or just http links, I will italicize those that refer to the event, and will translate those. I mean, if this helps you. Very kind of you to do the job of editing this article. :Dc76 12:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am pritty sure (99.99%) that Biruitorul and Turgidson are Romanians, and they don't need translations. If you don't know much about the historical context of 1930s-1940s, it could be difficult for you to do extensive content edits to the article. But B and T will do that. You can do, however, something that neither B, T, not me can do: read the article/edits and the sourses, and with your logic veryfy that what is written is not distorsioned. If something is not clear to you, chances are it won't be clear for many readers. Also, I, K. Lastochka, believe this is POV and I, Anonimu, believe this is POV would have completely different weight. I don't think people would edit en masse this article in the next week, so if in time you find texts in Romanian and Russian - I can translate them for you. Even not related to this article.:Dc76 14:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

auditions and attacks

Good luck on your auditions. Are/were you considering Oberlin? Did you get in?

Looking up a section or two, I see that you are dealing with a long term onwiki dipute. I assume you have already checked out the dispute resolution page, however, you may not be aware of {{npa}} through {{npa4}}. If personal attacks are being an issue, this would be one way to get the editor's attention. I'm not suggesting that you use it maliciously, but it might help to calm their behavior. Personal attacks and ad hominems are not part of a constructive discussion. —WAvegetarian (talk) 16:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hunnenschlacht (Liszt)

On 15 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hunnenschlacht (Liszt), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 06:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:1848

Not a problem - you could say I was intentionally baiting you (I wasn't, but it could be read that way). My feelings about Hungary today weren't too positive, because I was reading a book about all the terrible atrocities committed by Horthy's men in Northern Transylvania in 1940-44. However, it's eminently possible, indeed likely, that a) the 1848 revolutionaries were not that focused on Transylvania and on oppressing Romanians, and b) that they were nicer people in general. As the article develops, I look forward to a more fruitful collaboration. Biruitorul 04:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course we are cool. The Deák book is checked out in my library till May 2008, but I will look out for it. Of course, given my belief that the Habsburgs were ruling by divine right, I have no problem with repressive rule, as royalist ideology says that the king can do no wrong, so his repression must have been either right or the result of bad advice given by his ministers.

I think we need to distinguish between Horthy and Szálasi - certainly between early Horthy (conservative, aristocratic, moderately authoritarian) and late Horthy (caught up in the maelstrom of the glorious* rising tide of fascism in the late 1930s and the war) and Szálasi (a brief, orgiastic spell of full-blown fascism). One may say that the Arrow Cross rule (much as I may relate to its deranged nationalism) was indeed "one of the darkest times in Hungarian history", but early-to-mid Horthy was really more of a continuation of the Imperial era, albeit within much stripped-down borders.

*From a safe distance in time, that is, and from the vantage point of a political order that has become all too predictable (although that may be a good thing), some riots in Budapest notwithstanding.

Of course the Admiral's tragic mistake was in disobeying his King. Ah, well - his 94-year-old son still lives, and should, I believe, rule a united Austria-Hungary from Vienna, wearing of course both the Imperial Crown of Austria and the Crown of St. Stephen. 1918-1944 is a very interesting part of Hungarian history for me, so when '48 gets done, maybe we could work on something from that period.

Also, when you say "Horthy and Szalasi do not speak for Hungary, never have and never will" - while I am somewhat of a corporatist, viewing the nation as an organic whole with a higher, pre-ordained purpose to it (ie, not simply a random collection of individuals), so I sympathize with that way of thinking, nevertheless, surely there may be several Hungaries to speak of? We know that even today, Szálasi speaks for a handful of Hungarians. And of course, as heads of state, the embodiment of their nation, they did speak for Hungary while they were in power.

By the way, not to make light of it, but note this vote: we're experts on that theme. Biruitorul 05:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. Biruitorul 04:09, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've wrapped it up there - thanks for being a good sport. Biruitorul 04:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed: read the fifth paragraph here - I promise you'll like it. Biruitorul 17:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not even I knew the word Honfoglalás, but I note it has a long article on hu.wiki, so whenever you'd like another translation contest, that might make a good choice. And I quite disagree on the films: some of the best horror films are not only Dracula, but also Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein, Son of Frankenstein, The Invisible Man, The Mummy, The Raven, The Black Cat, etc. Anyway, do read the book; it certainly impressed me when I did so years ago. Biruitorul 19:20, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to WikiProject Czech Republic!

Hi, and welcome to the Czech Republic WikiProject!

We are the project collecting, improving and maintaining articles related to the Czech Republic, Czechoslovakia, medieval Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia and Samo's Empire
Please feel free to add membership userbox on your page {{User WikiProject Czech Republic}}
If you spot any article within the scope of our project please add our tag {{WikiProject Czech Republic}} on its talk page
In case of any questions use talk page of our project
We wish you happy editing !
≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 06:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your note

I changed the tag to a less visible one, because it's an article about a person who has just died, the page may need to be sprotected for some time, and the other tag was somewhat disfiguring. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:48, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A remark concerning Liszt

Remembering certain passages of our legendary debate concerning the question of Liszt's nationality, the following part of a letter by Liszt to Lambert Massart from 1838 might be interesting for you, dear colleague.

Since about fifteen years ago my father left his peaceful home to go together with me into the struggles of the world, since he, exchanging the obscure freedom of country life with the brillant slavery of an artist's living, settled in France as the most appropriate centre for developing the musical instinct which his naif pride was calling my genius, I was always used to regard France as my fatherland.

Liszt afterwards described that the influences during the times from the age of 15 years until 25 years are most important for building and developing a personality. He gave examples for it with respect to himself. In the end, after reminding of the fact that his father had after his death been buried in French earth too, Liszt wrote that during all the times of those fifteen years he had always thought that he himself was French and was even born in France. There had not been the least idea telling him that it could have been different. (I took it from: Legány, Deszö: Unbekannte Presse und Briefe aus Wien, Wien 1984, p.22. The book had unfortunately been checked out in my library, so that I had to wait until now to get it.)(A.S.)80.144.190.204 16:19, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. Forget it. Whatever Liszt himself said, he couldn't change the fact that he was born Hungarian in Hungary surrounded by Hungarians and their music. Sorry, I will not let up on this one; you've caused Lastochka too much trouble on this already. — $PЯINGrαgђ 16:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still not convinced. Sounds like a quote out of context--it also appears to have been translated clumsily, so I can't tell if he said "I used to regard France as my fatherland" (e.g. past tense, meaning he did not anymore) or "I was used to regarding France as my fatherland" (e.g. he had become accustomed to considering France his fatherland.) Nationalist awakenings were hardly rare in those heady days--could it be that Liszt was describing the time before his own awakening, when he blithely thought that he was French? He was practically a child then after all, probably hadn't given much thought to the matter of nationality at age 15. Once again you are cherry-picking "evidence", making leaps of faith and inferences based on your own prejudices--don't deny it, I know your style "reasoning" pretty well by now. Oh, and don't you dare call me "dear colleague"--I'm not your "dear" anything and I am hardly your "colleague" either. K. Lásztocska 23:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't want to get into an argument on K. Lásztocska's page, I really don't. But I have to say agree with all the criticism above. I suspect that you've translated this yourself. Going off the fact you've put "naif", the masculine form, where in English we invariably use "Naive", the feminine. This is a slight error that you made in a post in the Liszt talk page. I don't consider your translation reliable. Not because I question your abilities, but I question how objective it is. M A Mason 00:27, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ehh, go ahead and fight on my page--if blood must be spilled here to defend Liszt's honor, so be it! :) I had to laugh when I read that about "naif/naive"--maybe AS is one of the innumerable people on here who STILL thinks I'm a bloke. ;) K. Lásztocska 00:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I feel rather uncomfortable with this. Liszt's honour will probably be the better for a few slight hacks at it by a pretender who is afraid to show his real name. And Your Royal Highness, Scholar, if you mention Liszt to Lastochka, me, or M A Mason one more time, I will revert it on sight. Questions can be asked afterwards. — $PЯINGrαgђ 00:44, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Woo! Gloves are comin' off! :) (I hope you're not too offended by people not using their real names though...after all, yours truly also uses a pseudonym...) Scholar, I would be more inclined to take you seriously had I ever heard your views espoused by any serious modern academic or musician. Oh, Lord knows I've dealt with people who say that "even though Liszt thought he was Hungarian, he was totally wrong!!!"....what I've never seen before is someone asserting, with incredible vehemence, and against all the piles of evidence to the contrary, that good Mr. Liszt didn't even THINK he was Hungarian. It would be hysterically funny, almost worthy of Monty Python, if it didn't make me so sick and angry. K. Lásztocska 01:10, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frank List. Yay. — $PЯINGrαgђ 01:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why stop there--František Lišt, Francesco Listti, Francescu Listu (now I'm just making stuff up...) ;) I've always had the urge to call Chopin "Fryderyk Frantiszek Szopin", btw. ;) K. Lásztocska 01:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't know if I'm the only one, but I actually do refer to his as "Fryderyk Franciszek" before ≈1831, and "Frédéric François" after. For some strange reason I never use "Szopen" though…the Polish will kill me. :P — $PЯINGrαgђ 01:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lengyel, magyar két jóbarát, együtt harcol s issza borát. :) K. Lásztocska 01:50, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So far as you don't want to rely on my translation, there is no objection coming from my side. You may take the German original instead which can be found at the end of chapter 1.1 of the German Wikipedia Liszt. (The omission in the middle of the quotation does not change the sense in the least. In a strong case no tricks are needed.) The German original is for itself standing in the middle of several possible meanings. The sentence "hatte ich mich gewöhnt, Frankreich als mein Vaterland anzusehen" can be "hatte ich mich daran gewöhnt, Frankreich als mein Vaterland anzusehen". It can also be "war ich daran gewöhnt, Frankreich als mein Vaterland anzusehen" or „war ich gewohnt, Frankreich als mein Vaterland anzusehen“. In all those versions with slightly different meanings it should be clear that France was regarded by Liszt as his fatherland. He was not a child at age of 25 years, by the way. (The last revision of that chapter 1.1 was made according to the book: Óváry, József: Ferenc Liszt, Budapest 2003.)(A.S.)84.61.33.159 16:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. And I, being an American, could very well pack my bags and go to Japan at the age of 19 and consider that my fatherland for the rest of my life. It doesn't change the fact I'm American. Same with Liszt. (I'll be nice and not revert this time.) — $PЯINGrαgђ 16:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous Scholar: please see the quotes (from Liszt's own letters) which I recently came across and posted on Talk:Franz Liszt. K. Lásztocska 17:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why the blarney...?

??? — $PЯINGrαgђ 17:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. Sorry, just a bit of frustrated mischief. :) K. Lásztocska 18:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. The only thing I might have against it is it seems quite (pardon) POV to be in the article, and if it were directed at a person instead, it might be considered a personal attack. — $PЯINGrαgђ 18:35, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Naming convention

Can you have a look at my last edit in Wikipedia:Hungarian_Wikipedians'_notice_board#Effect_of_the_Naming_Convention_on_Hungarian_settelements_in_neighbouring_countries --KIDB 07:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hello Lastochka. Thanks a lot for your consideration. I think you are a good diplomat indeed. Regarding PANONIAN: we have differents POVs, but I consider this to be normal and I am ready to discuss and argue with him, though he is not always open to my arguments, and he is at least so nationalist and biased as I am. With all that I appreciate PANONIAN's big contribution to Wiki and try to find a modus vivendi with him. Have a nice day. --Koppany 14:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS. I have stolen your Székely autonomy flag. :-) Thanks. --Koppany 14:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

K. Lásztocska: first, I do not "vandalize Koppany's user page" because there is no Wiki rule that say that I cannot edit pages of other users and the only thing that I do there is removing an provocative userbox (and there is a Wiki rule against such provocations and trolling). Second, you cannot compare that with Székely autonomy userbox because in Szekelyland the majority of inhabitants are ethnic Hungarians who want autonomy/independence (what ever...), but in Vojvodina, the majority are Serbs who do not want independence. So, who is user Koppany to tell to Serbs of Vojvodina that they should be independent from their own country? If he created template that he support autonomy/independence of Hungarian Regional Autonomy, i.e. of northern part of Vojvodina with Hungarian majority then I would not delete such userbox from his page, but userbox that support independence of Serbs who do not want such independence is not acceptable. Regarding "my Trianon userbox" what exactly is offending in it? Regarding my post on his talk page, it is not "threat", but rather a warning - it is acceptable by the policy of Wikipedia to watch edits of users that edit with POV or disruption - just see what user Koppany said here on your talk page about himself: he described himself as "so nationalist and biased" (what else can I say? - he even do not denying it). Also, I am not so convinced that user Koppany is a newbie - he could be a reincarnation of VinceB, Bendeguz or some other problematic user (not to mention that VinceB also liked very much to accuse me on admin talk pages and Koppany done exactly same thing). PANONIAN If you want peace and prosperity for your country then you are a patriot, but if your patriotism is bigger than the borders of your country then you are a serious threat to World peace. 17:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Dragi moj PANONIANE, let me please answer some of your statements and assumptions:

First of all I am not against Serbs, I have a lot of Serbian friends, even relatives. I think due to its ethnic complexity, the idependence or a very broad autonomy of Vojvodina would be the best solution for ethnic tensions in that region. The Serbs of course would be the most important component of this supposed state, I dont want to exclude them at all. This is my personal opinion and you need not to share it, you have the right to protest against it even on my talk page or post a box on ur userpage insisting that Vojvodina remain part of the Serbian state.

Regarding your comparision with Székely autonomy I dont think that ethnic Romanian inhabitants of Székelyland support it.

Please, just you do not try to tell what rights I have - people like you have started all wars in this World. PANONIAN If you want peace and prosperity for your country then you are a patriot, but if your patriotism is bigger than the borders of your country then you are a serious threat to World peace. 21:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

For many Hungarians Trianon is the symbol of national grief. Hungary lost 75% of its territory by Trianon. You should understand this, as I understand exactly what Serbs feel when they are going to lose Kosovo, the cradle of Serbian nation. I know the story of Tsar Lazar and Milos Obilic and I've seen in Nis the tower made of the skulls of Serbs killed by Turks. Otherwise you are wrong when advocate Trianon, because present borders of Hungary were defined by the peace treaty of Paris (Luxembourg garden 1947) and not by Trianon.

Well, it is complete lie that "Hungary lost 75% of its territory by Trianon". First, Hungary (Mađarska) did not even existed before Trianon, and former Kingdom of Hungary (Ugarska) was a multiethnic country that was disolved and every of its nations gained its part of the country. Regarding Kosovo, I support independence of Kosovo, so I feel nothing about it. Why would I feel anything for it? PANONIAN If you want peace and prosperity for your country then you are a patriot, but if your patriotism is bigger than the borders of your country then you are a serious threat to World peace. 21:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Once a man named Joe loaned his car to his neighbour. When Joe went to ask his neighbour to give back his car, the neihbour answered him: "This car was loaned for me by Joe, but you are not Joe anymore from now on I will name you John, so I dont give you back the car of Joe." --Koppany 09:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not like cars and I do not care for stupid stories for little children - if you have anything smart to say about concrete things, please do it... PANONIAN If you want peace and prosperity for your country then you are a patriot, but if your patriotism is bigger than the borders of your country then you are a serious threat to World peace. 16:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

I meant you are not less nationalist or biased then me, after you accused me to be nationalist and compared me with Hitler. We should accept that in history there are different POVs, and sometimes it's very difficult to find a NPOV. For a Serb whose father was killed in Novi Sad atrocities the Hungarian authorities are fascist killers, for a Hungarian whose family was killed by titoist partizans, the "liberators" remain communist killers. We have different background and I know how difficult is to syntetaize different opinions, but we should try it and not be doctrinal and sweeping the others' arguments.

It depends what you mean under newbie. I have been here for about 2 years. You can see my redactions if you want. Also I dont know who are Bendeguz and VinceB. And above all I didnt accuse you on admin talk pages. I have no idea how Lastochka came to know about our conflict. I dont know even where admin pages are , but probably you can check it that I did not so. I prefer to arrange conflicts personally. Pozdrav i laku noc! --Koppany 18:12, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Panonian: this is my first, last and only reply to you on this issue. (What's with the new signature, btw?)

Firstly: Koppany is NOT Vince, trust me on that one. I know Vince's writing style, patterns of behavior, and general mode of thought, and Koppany doesn't match at all.
I think what he was trying to say by "he is at least so nationalist and biased as I am" was that you and he have similar levels of "bias", POV or whatever you want to call it, for your own respective countries and perspectives--a completely normal thing.
Yes, a userbox that "supports independence of Serbs of Vojvodina" IS acceptable, even if you or I or anyone else disagree violently with it. FREE SPEECH! Is that such a hard concept to grasp? The only userboxes that should not be allowed, IMHO, are direct personal attacks and/or open incitements to outright violence. So what, he supports Vojvodinan independence. We all have to learn to deal with it when people freely express opinions which we disagree with.
I will explain the example I used of your Trianon box: Imagine that some Hungarian irredentist comes along and deletes that box from your page, calling it "provocative." When you, quite rightly, call out that user for vandalism, he replies: "who are you to tell the Hungarians of Slovakia, Romania and Serbia that they should be separated from your mother country? That is unacceptable on Wikipedia!" And then you, again quite rightly, would reply: "Supporting the borders defined by Trianon is my personal opinion, this userbox harms no one, and I have every right to express this view on my user page." Can you see where I'm going with this? One person's opinion is another's provocation, we have to be civilized and put up with even what we consider crazy opinions among our colleagues, otherwise we might degrade into outright, full-on censorship and some sort of Orwellian cyber-police wikistate.

Anyway, you can reply or not as you choose, but be advised this is my last post on this issue. I have stated my case, I will not spell it out again, and I am returning to my wikibreak now because I have a lot to do in real life. K. Lásztocska 18:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, do you like my new signature? - it just serve to remind some people who they are and where they belong. Regarding free speech, it too have some limits - your right to free speech is limited by right of others not to be insulted by your speech. Respecting this right of others not to be insulted, I very much tried that my own userboxes do not insult NORMAL PEOPLE (whether any irredentist, fascist or what ever he is would be insulted is not my problem because such persons should be in mental hospital, not here). PANONIAN If you want peace and prosperity for your country then you are a patriot, but if your patriotism is bigger than the borders of your country then you are a serious threat to World peace. 21:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I apoligize, Lastochka, to write this on your talk page, but PANONIAN keeps deleting all my benevolent messages written on his talkpage.

Look PANONIAN, this is my last answer to you. Unfortunately it seems that there is no reason to follow a conversation with you. BUT: I ask you, please dont vandalize anymore on my userpage, and if you change my edits, please always explain your reasons and if possible show your sources as well. I really want peace with you, but if you continue this vandalism, I really will alert the admins as I haven't done before. Pozor, Panoniane! --Koppany 09:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By all means, mister Koppany... PANONIAN If you want peace and prosperity for your country then you are a patriot, but if your patriotism is bigger than the borders of your country then you are a serious threat to World peace. 16:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

This is getting too much, especially for a user who is absent. I have done it before and I will do it again: if this continues to be too much, I will make use of a very handy button added recently to the Wiki software for this reason. Thank you. — $PЯINGrαgђ 16:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear K. Lásztocska,

Thank you very much again for your kindness. I am sure you are a very nice person. Though I really dont want to contribute more to Englsih Wiki, but I can not leave for ever without responding your gentleness. Well, I have been here for 2 years, and during this period I never had conflicts or problems with anyone. That's true I was not very active, mostly did small corrections, but it was me , who made a research and added the nobility titles and names (nemesi címek és előnevek) of Hungarian and some Austrian and Croatian persons. I consider this work useful for Wiki and public knowledge. 3 or 3 days ago by chance I found the article about Zvonko Bogdan, Bunyevac singer from Vojvodina. At this page started our debate with PANONIAN. I became curious who PANONIAN is, and checked his edits, doing some corrections in terms of Hungarian place names, historical events etc. Doing so I also met some Slovak users and with them also had a debate. I experieneced that they didnt consider me a partner in the debate but they was seeing me as an enemy. I was accused to be sockpuppet of banned users, I was named fascist, member of the 69 counties organization, and even compared to Hitler. I realized that these guys are not ready to argue, or listen to my reasonable arguments or proofs, their national identity is based on dogmas and myths and cannot tolerate different POVs, and the signs and remembrance of Hungarian history. I never mind if someone tells me Petőfi was of Slavic descent, or write Miklós Zrínyi's name also as Nikola Zrinski, these are facts and alternative spellings, that add a plus information. But if I mention a Hungarian place or personal name they react violently because they see it as a threat for their identity. Please see our disputes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josip_%C5%A0tolcer-Slavenski and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bratislava_Castle .

I am ready to argue but dont want to waste my time for debates with persons who behave as members of a fanatical sect. I was going to lose my calmness, so I decided it is better to leave.

I see the edits of Pannonia and also of Odbhss, but I can tell you, they are not me. They are poor Hungarians who still believe in the power of reason.

Dear K. Lásztocska, thanks for your invitation but I am afraid at the moment I can not participate in those projects. The revolution of 1848-49 is also batting on a sticky wicket.

Nevertheless, I am still present in Hungarian wiki.

Have a nice day! --Koppany 10:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to move Odorheiu Secuiesc to Székelyudvarhely

In case you are interested, there is a proposal to move the Odorheiu Secuiesc page to its native name Székelyudvarhely, similarly to Swedish settlements in Finnland, or German settlements in South Tyrol. For more, see the talk page of the article. Please remember that this is not simply a vote; your comments must include reasons to carry weight. Many Romanian users have already expressed their opinion there --KIDB 06:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]