User talk:Kennechten

Crusaders (Ustaše)

Hello! Just dropping by to let you know that the article you created already existed in some form before, see this. However, it was merged to Ustaše, which was perhaps not the ideal solution - I think there is certainly a case for the standalone article. Maybe you could use stuff from the "old" article (above link) to expand the new one. GregorB (talk) 14:25, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello, Kennechten, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Petrb (talk) 09:39, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rjecina for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 00:04, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:View on Čvrsnica 3973.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:View on Čvrsnica 3973.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 15:50, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a suspected sock puppet of Rjecina (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log). Banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; if you are banned, all edits under this account may be reverted.

If you are not a sock puppet, and would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 16:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kennechten (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This makes no sense. Editing common articles proves nothing! See here:Wikipedia:Don't_be_quick_to_assume_that_someone_is_a_sockpuppet#Editing_common_articles . Regarding to the commons interest... there can be found lot of different people here :[1][2]

and many other places.

Decline reason:

I agree with HelloAnyong. Your editing style is remarkably similar to that of Rjecina. You also have an unhealthy obsession with one particular editor and it seems this isn't the first time you've got into a content dispute and then tried to detract attention from yourself by accusing him of sock-puppetry. I strongly suspect you are Rjecina, but even if you're not, your harassment of DIREKTOR is ample grounds for an indefinite block. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

File:Einstein protest.Milan Šufflay murder.NYT.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Einstein protest.Milan Šufflay murder.NYT.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 18:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Ante Starčević-1000Kuna-1993.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ante Starčević-1000Kuna-1993.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 01:35, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Počitelj (disambiguation)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Počitelj (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
is a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:54, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]