Jump to content

User talk:LAz17/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Prior Blocks

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).

LAz17 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I had already been punished for this by Kuru. I was not allowed to even write on my own talk page because of that.

Decline reason:

Not only have you provided me with no reason to unblock you, I couldn't unblock you even if I wanted to, because this block is enforcing an arbitration remedy. If you want to appeal, email ArbCom at arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org, but I would suggest that an appeal made to ArbCom should be a little more substantial than this one. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:55, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

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.

{{unblock|:1)When I was topic banned in the past it was because I did not understand how things worked. In the dispute the admin and someone else suggested that the solution was to make an ethnic map that all sides agree on. The opposing person had heavy POV, so it was pointless to try to do anything with that guy, Ceha. No, the real way to go forward is that the better map is used rather than the worse map. But I did not know that, and instead of taking that simple solution, I thought that I had to go about disproving ceha's map. Hence the situation blew up back then. It boggles my mind why the admin said that we should agree on the map. Hence it was not my mistake, it was the admins' mistake, for his wrong actions led me to take the wrong actions in the dispute. :2)Ever since I have been on wiki I have had tried to help improve this place. I continually go on the talkpages and contribute in a constructive manner. :3)The initial ban was based on ethnic maps. I understand what went wrong there. I was a fool to go about the problem that way. However, the ban itself is ridiculously broad. We have an ethnic map problem – and from there I get topic banned for anything related to demographics?! What kind of nonsense is that? – I have spent much time adding population data from the census, something that NOBODY finds controversial. The topic ban is far too broad, unnecessarily too broad. :4)I did nothing wrong in this recent episode. I went to the talk page, asked for mediation, discussed problems – not having much effect, due to an editors POV – but I was involved in constructive matters. And from the start I went to the mediation board and continued going there to ask them to help. But nobody did – granted the dispute is only a few days old. There is no reason why I should be banned for contributing positively to wikipedia. I feel that this is admin POV... I got banned for trying to improve this place, because the topic ban is ridiculously broad.}}

This account is not currently blocked. Instructions on how to protest your topic ban were included in the original block notice. Kuru (talk) 18:16, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
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).

LAz17 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I disagree, if one can block one can unblock, no?

Decline reason:

I’m sorry you disagree. This is clearly an AE block, and is unlikely to be removed by any single admin. You have been given instructions on how to contact arbcom below. Since you are now simply using unblock templates to chat, and since you also seem to be using your talk page to threaten and insult other editors, I’ve removed your ability to edit here for the remaining duration of your block. Kuru (talk) 17:15, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

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.

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).

LAz17 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Sorry, forgot to include reason, while I was writing you replied. :1)When I was topic banned in the past it was because I did not understand how things worked. In the dispute the admin and someone else suggested that the solution was to make an ethnic map that all sides agree on. The opposing person had heavy POV, so it was pointless to try to do anything with that guy, Ceha. No, the real way to go forward is that the better map is used rather than the worse map. But I did not know that, and instead of taking that simple solution, I thought that I had to go about disproving ceha's map. Hence the situation blew up back then. It boggles my mind why the admin said that we should agree on the map. Hence it was not my mistake, it was the admins' mistake, for his wrong actions led me to take the wrong actions in the dispute. :2)Ever since I have been on wiki I have had tried to help improve this place. I continually go on the talkpages. This recent episode is one in which I called for help from other places, asked for mediation, did all I could to get more people involved, but nobody would come. The article is bad. That is a fact. So because I was trying to help improve the article, the result has been that I get punished. It does not make sense. :3)The initial ban was based on ethnic maps. I understand what went wrong there. I was a fool to go about the problem that way. However, the ban itself is ridiculously broad. We have an ethnic map problem – and from there I get topic banned for anything related to demographics?! What kind of nonsense is that? – I have spent much time adding population data from the census, something that NOBODY finds controversial. The topic ban is far too broad, unnecessarily too broad. :4)I did nothing wrong in this recent episode. I went to the talk page, asked for mediation, discussed problems – not having much effect, due to an editors POV – but I was involved in constructive matters. And from the start I went to the mediation board and continued going there to ask them to help. But nobody did – granted the dispute is only a few days old. There is no reason why I should be banned for contributing positively to wikipedia. I feel that this is admin POV... I got banned for trying to improve this place, because the topic ban is ridiculously broad.

Decline reason:

As this is related to Arbitration Enforcement, it probably can't be lifted by any one admin responding to your unblock request. You will need to email ArbCom at arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:48, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

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.

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).

LAz17 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

original unblock reason

Decline reason:

Not only is this (1) an AE block, and (2) have you not specified a reason for unblocking, but (3) I was going to block you myself for disruptive editing. If you're going to make another unblock request, I suggest you first think it fully through and reflect on your actions, and then clearly indicate why the block is unnecessary and should be removed. Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 16:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

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.

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).

LAz17 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I merely replied to the wrong accusation of a statement which said that Ceha and I have been fighting for a year. It simply is not true. These problems developed in the last two months at most. On top of that I simply stated what has happened, and given some more evidence which clearly shows that ceha is at fault for fraud. I do not understand what I did wrong this time. I did absolutely nothing wrong. If I call a murderer a murderer there is nothing wrong. It's the simple truth, and that's what I did, I stated the simple truth as to what had happened. Feel free to check it, he is the one who started the fraud with his 1991 fraud map which I successfully managed to eradicate, despite his LONG PROTEST against this. Not only did he protest, he hates me for this fact that I do not allow him to include unsourced 1991 ethnic maps of bosnia which show croatians as overly represented... he himself is croatian and so his POV is such that he wants to show that there are more croatians in bosnia. He has been in the past convicted of being a sock puppet - and to this day he continues to post in sock manners- only on certain issues, which suggests that he has a puppet master behind him that edits in other issues too.

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

  • the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
  • the block is no longer necessary because you
    • understand what you have been blocked for,
    • will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
    • will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Syrthiss (talk) 12:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

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.

In particular, you were warned you were topic banned in this area. Unblocking admins don't really care about the intricate details. If you approach us with contrition and an understanding of why you were blocked, most likely we will accept your request. If not, blocks usually stand. Syrthiss (talk) 12:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Project Croatia

My goal is to put up an image, in the form of a map, of every Croatian municipality by the end of 2007. (LAz17 23:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)).

Goal failed. Too lazy to upload 'em all. Oh well. I got a several dozen anyways. :P (LAz17 (talk) 03:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)).

License tagging for Image:Donji Kukuruzari Municipality.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Donji Kukuruzari Municipality.PNG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:06, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Glina Municipality.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Glina Municipality.PNG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:06, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Kosovo: country debate

Hello. There's a discussion going on Talk:List of countries as to whether or not Kosovo should be included in that list. You have an interest in Serbia-related articles and I thought you might be interested. The articles List of countries and Annex to the list of countries (where the inclusion criteria reside) are both relevant. Cheers. DSuser 13:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

- Eh, I am not too interested in arguing about Kosovo's status. -LAz17 - July 28, 2007.

You will be reported

if you keep vandalizing Croatian city pages with the absolutely absurd category of RSK cities. I cannot believe you are capable of such a thing. --Jesuislafete 20:00, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

- It is a totally legitimate category. It is towns that were in the RSK. What is wrong with that? The RSK does not exist and the category is towns that were in it. -LAz17 - July 28, 2007

it is NOT a legitmate category at all. It is so absurd, I guarantee you that any administrator will agree with me. RSK was a so called "state" that was NOT RECOGNIZED by any other country besides Yugoslavia, and was founded on the ethnic cleansing of Croats, and I will ask you to read Wikipedia:Categorization before you make such a gross error again. How anyone can put up a category based on the unrecognized state carved out of the internationally recognized borders of Croatia?!--Jesuislafete 20:12, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
The category is perfectly fine. RSK was a region, and an important one. The fact that it was a region and that these towns were in it is of great historical importance for history. This is not supporting RSK, it is just giving information about it. - LAz17 - July 28, 2007
I contacted a number of users to stop Jesuislafete's vandalism. Keep up the good work LAz17.
Thanks. :) (LAz17 23:49, 30 July 2007 (UTC)).

Hi

I just want to let you know, user:No.13 is accussing you of being a sockpuppet. [1]

PS: I have my suspicions on the user 217.68.80.50 Just check Knin history.

Hmm, yes, I found this out recently. He was complain to some guy... PANOMIAN or something like that is his username. Anyways, he may say whatever he wants, for the fact remains - I am not a sockpuppet and i do not have sockpuppets. (LAz17 20:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)).

Sockpuppet

The user No.13 now thinks i'm a sockpuppet. As I stated in the other discusion, this is getting out of hand. No.13 said i was your sockpuppet on a users discussion. Do you know anyone that can help with this situation? Benkovac 06:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know, but I wish I did. (LAz17 14:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)).

Debate on the correct adjective for Kosovo

Hi! Based on your interest in the Balkans, you may be interested in the currently ongoing debate on whether we should be using Kosovo or Kosovar/Kosovan as the adjective for Kosovo. —Nightstallion 15:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

RSK towns

Good idea LAz17 :)

Pozdrav Benkovac 03:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

idea

How about we put the following in artcles.

--See also--


Benkovac 05:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Former towns of RSK

Thanks for a notification however when I returned back home the vote had already been closed (( Alæxis¿question? 08:30, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

bih census 1953 maps

[[2]] Is the source for the most of those maps Ceha 18:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: need your advice...

User:No.13 has been banned, as per being a sock-puppet of a community-banned user. --PaxEquilibrium 10:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the problem is....does the fellow wants to remove the category because he believes it's irrelevant today? I don't see too much discussion on the talk pages, so I can't tell. From what I can see, he doesn't believe the "current situation" section should be there because the C.R. of Herceg-Bosna ceased to exist over ten years ago and therefore that chapter is closed. But if there is proof and good sources that the idea or situation is still being dealt with (which obviously, there is), I don't see what the problem of putting a small section explaining the situation in the page...It's not like it's a huge paragraph under the politics section of the Bosnia and Hercegovina page. Pozdrav. --Jesuislafete 16:59, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of More than Hagnesta Hill

A tag has been placed on More than Hagnesta Hill, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD A1.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Phgao 00:03, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles that you have created yourself, as you did with More than Hagnesta Hill. If you do not believe the article should be deleted, then please place {{hangon}} on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. Cheers, Jonathan t - c 00:11, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Tagging

Please AGF, what you need to realise is that tagging New Pages occurs right after they are created, so of course I tagged it a few mins after you made the article. You can add a tag, saying the article is in the process of being written and that usually prevents any tagging. Furthermore, if you wish to avoid this happening again, you can do draft versions in your sandbox and submit a more complete version. Phgao 00:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
For example you can create pages like [3] which you can add whatever you like (up to a point), and create "draft" articles there. Phgao 00:31, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Also as you were told, please don't just remove tags as they are there for a reason, instead hang on is a good way to go about things. Phgao 00:31, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

RE:Huh?

Calm down, calm down. The reason you shouldn't delete a speedy tag is because if you want the article to stay, add {{hangon}} to the page. The reason the article was put up for a speedy was because it had very little context. There's your answer, and I ask you to please remail civil. Thanks! Cheers, Jonathan t - c 00:24, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Kent

I didn't even realize the singles were intended to be grouped, I assumed the line breaks were coincidental. The grouping isn't very clear, and doesn't work well with smaller window sizes. IMO grouping the singles is not necessary, as few other artist navboxes do so. Still, I have restored the sectioning for now, as you apparently feel they were important enough to warrant your reversal of all of my changes. --PEJL 16:23, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Safe Area Gorazde

Giving readers direction like " Therefore the book should be read carefully, as it portrays only part of the story" is something you don't see in an encyclopedia. It shouldn't be up on the Safe Area Gorazde article.

Whether or not the story is biased (for all I can see, it isn't) is not something that wikipedia should be the judge of. It does show "one side", but that is not the same as bias - bias is when one side is misrepresented. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.192.211.24 (talk) 10:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Povljane Municipality.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Povljane Municipality.PNG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Tillbakatillsamtiden.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tillbakatillsamtiden.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BlocPartyLittleThoughtsTulips.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:BlocPartyLittleThoughtsTulips.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 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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BJBot (talk) 20:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Re:Drnis

Where? --Bolonium (talk) 22:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

You're talking to the wrong guy ;) --Bolonium (talk) 22:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh, that must have been an accident, I didn't mean to remove credible information... The mistake was reverting to an earlier version of the article without the same data. Regards, --Bolonium (talk) 01:58, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Require your help

I am asking for your help since from observation, I see that you have added population data to to a number of articles including Jajce. Can you check the jajce population data for 2003 and 2004. I added the source. I want to know is this a good source? Is this source acceptable on wikipedia?

Spread tha word (talk) 11:33, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


Fair use rationale for Image:Kent-GenerationEx.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Kent-GenerationEx.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 03:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Urađeno

Uradio sam ono što si tražio! Samo ako kojim slučajem mi Hrvati u BiH dobijemo svoj entitet i ove tri općine idu u taj entitet. To je sam Dodik rekao jer kako on kaže Republika Srpska ne želi raditi ništa suprotno Daytonskom sporazumu! --77.221.10.200 (talk) 11:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC) hr:Suradnik:Mostarac

Mislim da su u Novom Travniku Hrvati i sad većina. A što se tiče BiH, meni ne bi smetalo da to ostane jedna država, nego da svatko ima svoje. Srbi svoj, Bošnjaci svoj i Hrvati svoj entitet. Tako bi bilo najpoštenije. Po meni su Srbi narod koji je najviše profitirao nakon rata. Ljudi imaju svoj entitet, a za ostalo ih boli neka stvar. Pa Federacija BiH je '98., '99. imala trostruko jaču ekonomiju i sve. A danas RS je stigao FBiH, mislim da će je u dogledno vrijeme i prestići. Zašto? Vrlo jednostavno. Zato jer su u RS-u samo općine i ljudi imaju 16 ministara (znači samo vlada RS-a), dok u Federaciji osim općina tu je 10 županija, pa tako FBiH ima 108 ministara (vlada FBiH + 10 županijske vlada). Zapravo te županije su rak Federacije jer mi Hrvati nedamo da se ukinu jer tu jedino imamo vlast (u Hercegbosanskoj, Zapadnohercegovačkoj, Hercegovačko-neretvanskoj, Posavskoj županiji Hrvati imaju vlast), a balije (Bošnjaci) žele ukidanje županija. Eto toliko, a ako bude rata u budućnosti, mislim da će Srbi i Hrvati u tom ratu biti saveznici (ne baš veliki, ali ja mislim da se neće napadati) jer se Bošnjaci razmnožavaju više i od Hrvata i Srba zajedno. Povezat će nas to što smo kršćani, a zatim ćemo pobijediti balije i stjerati ih sve u Sarajevo i onaj dio Bosne. Ja tako mislim. Pozdrav! hr:Suradnik:Mostarac —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.221.10.200 (talk) 10:49, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of 2007 Eurobasket Division B Results

A tag has been placed on 2007 Eurobasket Division B Results, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Pip (talk) 20:51, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

RE: Deleted something that should have been kept!!! - Towns in RSK

Please read the Proposed Deletion policy. I have restored the article, as the policy permits. It could still be deleted via another method such as Articles for Deletion, if an editor feels it does not meet our inclusion guidelines. - Rjd0060 (talk) 02:26, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Centre Sheraton

Centre Sheraton look at that guy's talk page under the same heading. (quote) We don't keep pages because they have links to them. I deleted it after its Proposed deletion was uncontested. What exactly is the problem? - Rjd0060 (talk) 00:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

If they were proposed for deletion, I would have. - Rjd0060 (talk) 00:53, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
You are so right, this guy, Rjd, is disruptive and opinionated to boot (as well). Peter Horn 01:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I think he's a pretty nice guy. I guess when people come to his talk page and leave inappropriate remarks and accusations of disruption and "mess creating", he has less patience than normal. Cheers! - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:22, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:RUSSIA roll call and your input required

Privet. You are receiving this message as you were listed on the membership list of WP:RUSSIA at Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Members. Recent times has seen minimal activity within WikiProject Russia, and there is an attempt to re-invigorate the project and have it become more organised into a fully-fledge functioning project, with the aim of increasing the quality of Russia-related articles across English wikipedia.

As we don't know which listed members are active within the project and Russia-related article, all listed members are receiving this message, and are requested to re-affirm their active status on Russia-related article by re-adding their username to Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Members by adding:

# {{User|YOURUSERNAME}}

to the membership list. You may also like to place {{User Russian Project}} on your userpage, as this will also place you in Category:WikiProject Russia members.

There is also an active proposal on the creation of a single WP:RUSSIA project. The proposal can be viewed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Russia#Proposal_for_overhaul_and_creation_of_a_single_WP:RUSSIA_project, and your comments and suggestions are welcomed and encouraged at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia/Proposal.

We all look forward to your continued support of WP:RUSSIA and any comments you may have on the proposal. --Russavia Dialogue Stalk me 04:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Towns

What's next? Towns in former Third Reich?
LAz17, respect the decisions of voting. Kubura (talk) 12:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

LAz, you're opening Pandora's box.
That list can be the part of the article about so-called RSK (article exists).
We shouldn't play with unrecognised states. These kind of listings are too provocative and problematic. Kubura (talk) 09:52, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Man, you don't get where is this leading. Do you want to create article about towns from Serbia that were part of NDH? Or the towns from Serbia that were part of Bulgarian Empire (in First, and in Second World War), listified with their names in Bulgarian? Or the towns from Serbia that were added to Greater Albania in WW2? Or the towns from Bačka (northern Vojvodina, Serbia) that came under Hungary in WW2?
Finally, I'll repeat. Voting was on category. But, before any conclusions made, you've decided for yourself, without asking anyone. You've seen the outcome of voting. Kubura (talk) 13:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

1) How can you say such thing? Kosovo towns and municipalities are part of internationally recognised country. Previously, Kosovo was recognised federative unit of Yugoslavia. Kosovo is not like so-called RSK. Don't compare internationally recognised country with the terrorist-controlled area. In fact, so-called RSK was the mask for Serbian territorial conquest of Croatia (an attempt of violent changing of international borders) hidden behind local puppet-government.
2) Towns in Serbia that were part of NDH, don't have single article like "list of cities and towns in NDH". So, the cities and towns under rebel Serb control can stay in the article about so-called RSK. We don't give importance to terrorist ruled-areas, that someone (self-)proclaimed to be the "state".
3) About the cities that Mussolini took from Kingdom of Yugoslavia and added to its possession Albania - check the old maps.
4) "'...because of a recent shift in voters to say for it to be listified.". And whome have you left previous votes, that explicitly said: delete? Kubura (talk) 06:11, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

1) Again the same thing.
Kosovo is not "more controversial and provocative". Kosovo was recognised federative unit in SFRY, with equal voting rights, same ones as republics had.
So-called RSK is Serbian conquest of Croatian territory, only hidden behind "independent unrecognised state". Strings were openly coming from Belgrade.
2) "Most of that land had a Serbian majority, so it was not really a conquest.". Oh, really? Here's obvious your imperialist and expansionist attitude. So-called RSK was occupied territory of another country,.
3) "The entity is merely a creation to avoid the genocide as the neonazi croat president and government outright reduced serbian people to second class citizenship". No child, he wasn't a neonazi. Where are your proves for that? Don't use defamation methods.
4) What "second class citizenship"? Maybe you expected that Serbs could have that undeserved privileged status infinitely? With military factories solely in Serb-inhabited areas? With official military language as Serbian? With most of military personnel, secret service and police being Serbs? With unproportionally higher share of Serbs in state services and key functions and sinecures? And all that funded from Croatia? And we couldn't built a single highway from Split to Zagreb, because it was "nationalistic"?
5) "... and glorified the genocide done on the serbs in world war two". Woo, wait? Who glorified? We want facts here, not Ottoman-type argumentation ("kadija te tuži, kadija te sudi"). Regarding genocide, look who's talking. AFAIK, only the number of Croats was reduced after WW2. Probably the number of Albanians also, but Serb hegemonist government always showed the number of Albanians in smaller numbers in statistics, than they really were.
6) So-called RSK is based on violent changing of ethnic structure at the expense of Croats. It begun since 1918, with colonizing of famillies of Serb volunteers in Croatia (especially in fertile valleys in NE Croatia), Serbian police and army terrorizing of Croat population (e.g., Sibinj victims, Senj victims in Gospić), that forced many Croats to leave for abroad. When that terror draw interests from abroad, Serb diplomacy told that these (Croats) were "Communists" or "restaurators of Habsburg monarchy". Same story always. At that time, best way for defamation was to call someone as "Communist", today is best way to use terms "Nazi, neonazi, fascist...".
In WW2, before proclamation of NDH, "Yugoslav army" forces, made of Serbs, killed Croat population (e.g., Bjelovar area, Donji Mosti near Bjelovar [4]).
"Serb uprising" was in fact ordinary shooting of pilgrimers in areas, since then completely ethnically cleansed from Croats (Boričevac, Udbina and neighbourhood, Srb, Cetingrad, Zrin, Španovica, Rudopolje, Prijeboj, Gvozdansko, Potkonje and Vrpolje near Knin, Palanka on Zrmanja, Joševica...), in the areas that were later part of so-called RSK. No Croat was ever allowed to return. Of course, Serbs upriser simply changed iconography and battlesigns, as need occured, so they simply switched chetnik and "partisan" signs. These chetniks were nazi collaborators, and Serbia (to make things worse) recently rehabilitated that movement.
Then in socialist Yugoslavia, Croat population was decimated, expelled or eliminated especially in areas that later became "pure Serb", and population that remained with pure Croat inhabitants significantly suffered a population loss (Slunj area), or lost majority (Banovina, Lika, Krbava). Strongest strike was in 1945-1950, but later police pressure took its toll.
Finally, with Serbian aggression on Croatian, whole Croat population was expelled or exterminated on areas the greaterserbianists managed to occupy. And Croatian minorities (especially Hungarians, Slovaks, Czechs, Rusyns and Ukrainians) suffered. E.g., in Petrovci near Vukovar, chetniks have thrown out Rusyns from their homes and settled the Serbs there. There you had your "that's not really a conquest". Shame on you. Kubura (talk) 07:56, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Spam in Vy från ett luftslott

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Vy från ett luftslott, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Vy från ett luftslott is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Vy från ett luftslott, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 11:50, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

1991 BiH map

Greetings. Answers to your questions you can find at [5] and [6]. As for possible inaccuraties in the map those are mentioned on map's page in the section between Licesing... --Čeha (razgovor) 00:36, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
As you can read in the discusion I founded it somwhere on the net. It has been long time ago, and now source can not even be googled out. If you have some credible source how can those map be enhaced(rastko.net is not one of that) please show the correct version so the errors can be removed.--Čeha (razgovor) 04:15, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Copywrite rights on that map should be da same as 1981 map, and this 1991 map. If they are from the same source that should be that.
Map of which is talked is not a propaganda map, surely not a Croat one (most of the the 1981-1991 changes are in Bosniak benefit), although it may be possible to constain some inaccuracies.
As for update, I haven't see the map, nor you did not source it (name of the book etc). The point was, if existent 1991 map has inaccuracies, and the new map is accurate to simply change it, rather than manualy puting the new source on every page which has a link to existent map.
--Čeha (razgovor) 18:11, 8 November 2008 (UTC) Ok. I'm interested to see it. --Čeha (razgovor) 00:13, 9 November 2008 (UTC)


War map

South of Doboj is Ozren mountain which was under serbian control most of the war (they lost most of it in final stages). I think that maps are very good sourced so you can chech it out.
--Čeha (razgovor) 21:00, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately no. Map is correct.
You can see the same map in "Bosnia" , by Erich Rathfalder "Balkan Odyssey" by lord Owen and many others.[7] BS army wanted to "brake" another coridor at Olovo and isolate Tuzla.
--Čeha (razgovor) 21:33, 9 November 2008 (UTC) What other guy? Try to see the sources(borrow one of thouse two books in library), or google it out. Also map of mines in BiH is very usefull when discussing front lines (more things to google:)
--Čeha (razgovor) 23:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

1991ethnic.jpg =

Laz17, this image has very low quality. Can't you upload it in higher resolution?
--Čeha (razgovor) 01:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Look, If you have a copy of that map in your possesion there shouldn't be any problem to upload it in higher resolution. Intermunicipal borders are murky and not clearly visible. Also contrast on it is a little bit too high. Try to upload it in higher resolution which would be more up to wikipedia standards. As for contrast, look at 1981 map how it should look like.
As for your photoshop inclanation part, as a wikipedian user and editor I'm ablied to work in [8] and [9] and I'm not going into [10]. Which I would recommend to you also if you are planing to avoid administrator's warnings.
Also, I have an impression that you are trying to found some "belosvetske zavere" when you are speaking about that older maps. They were reported as having inaccuracies long before you've even came to wiki.
--Čeha (razgovor) 08:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Laz, it would be normal that you respond to discussion on the map you puted on the wiki [11] 

Also I would call you to improve your english, and to try to read article before you give a false accusation.


--Čeha (razgovor) 15:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I've been asked to comment on this map issue. Please see a few questions and comments of mine at Image talk:Bih 1991.jpg. Can I also first ask you to keep it all friendly and relaxed, there's no need for accusations. Thanks, --Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Possible block

On ANI I am asking short block of both users [12]. User LAz17 is guilty of incivility (word fuck and others), but in trying to calm situation maybe it is best that both are blocked for short time period.

LAz you are 100 % guilty of incivility, but I want to calm you both. On monday I will look census data in question.--Rjecina (talk) 05:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

ANI

Why did you remove and add a load of sections as you did here? D.M.N. (talk) 13:58, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

On the same subject as D.M.N.'s post, I've put your comment in the existing section at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Bosnian maps dispute - I guess you inadvertently edited an older version of the page? PhilKnight (talk) 14:08, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Huh? I don't get it... I just posted one short paragraph... I don't know where that other stuff is from? Some error? (LAz17 (talk) 15:38, 22 November 2008 (UTC)).

Maybe I am making mistake but this is now dispute aboute census data. Because of that I have created page User:Rjecina/Bosnian census in my user space. Can we please continue discussion in my user space. After consensus page will be deleted.--Rjecina (talk) 23:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Čeha is on wiki vaccation around 7 days and very soon I will be out 3 days.--Rjecina (talk) 04:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
I might go away a bit during the thanksgiving break too. (LAz17 (talk) 04:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)).

WP:ANI notice again

You were mentioned at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#BiH_ethnic_maps_and_data. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:BiHSimplifiedEthnic1991.gif

LAz17, if you have a problem with Image:BiHSimplifiedEthnic1991.gif, go list commons:Image:BiHSimplifiedEthnic1991.gif or deletion. Simple as that. Now, read the Wikipedia:ARBMAC rules. One more complaint about that image, one more whine about it's all a lie, one more calling someone a fascist or any other name-calling and you are blocked (if I find out that you are calling people names in foreign languages like this supposedly is, it's going to be a LOONG block. I've had enough of this complaining and bickering. And before you start, do not complain about other people. Two wrongs do not make a right and I will block you double for it. I will work with everyone I can and warn everyone who deserves it. Now, do you want to respond to the simple question at User:Rjecina/Bosnian_census#Clean_slate? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Posavina Fraud

Laz, those two maps are about lines of fronts and do not show anything about ethnic situation in Posavina. If you have any information about any possible inacuracies, please show your sources.
Also, it is trablesome to speak with someone who calls your work a fraud in every second word. Try to act acording to wikipedia policies ot else, I'm afraid there is not going to be much of cooperation on this issue. --Čeha (razgovor) 21:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Images with source issues

If the image clearly has no source, try nsd (which gives it seven days). If the source is "bad" in your mind, or even somewhat controversial, I would suggest listing it at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Also, if I'm guessing right, the images themselves may be contentious so be minimal and specific as to the issues. If the discussion goes into personal attacks, the images are likely to stay (and the users warned). -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:12, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Note that's only for English wikipedia. At Commons, since the whole thing is a image depository and nothing more, just the delete template works there. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:14, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello

First of all I would like to thank you for the article Geography of the Former Republic of Serbian Krajina. I thank you because I enjoyed reading it and for its well-developed content. Secondly, a link on your user page to a book called Liar's Poker: The Great Powers, Yugoslavia and the Wars of the Future was also appreciated. The book describes The Great Game which was is an interesting idea in itself.Mike Babic (talk) 23:12, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Personal attack report

You've been reported on WP:AN/I [13]. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 09:35, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Please read WP:CIVIL. This sort of language goes nowhere fast on Wikipedia.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 09:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

January 2009

Regarding your comments on Yugoslav Partisans: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 09:43, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Democracy idealism

You need sources like this. I am sure that you will agree that this is very good source for nationality of partisans during battle ?--Rjecina (talk) 20:47, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry but we do not need more western style democracy where people are voting and only american side can win. I do not know your thinking about democracy but my thinking is that democracy is like communism ideal and nothing else. If I am wrong please explain me how is possible to abolish democracy when election results are "not OK" Algerian legislative election, 1991, Palestinian Legislative Council, start street coup when results are not OK Ukrainian presidential election, 2004, Rose Revolution. No need to speak about killings made by new democratic government of Ukraine and Georgia. Small mistake right word is not killing, but carbon monoxide poisoning of prime minister (Zurab Zhvania) and suicide with 2 bullets in the head of Viktor Yushchenko minister of police (Yuriy Kravchenko). All in all democratic president can kill, or arrange accidents, but for non democratic (which is not liked in USA) this is not OK ?--Rjecina (talk) 05:13, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I do not believe in democracy.
In my thinking democracy is giving me possibility to vote for person or party which will protect my interest. This sort of democracy has died in Europe with Cold War. Examples:
In Croatia greatest questions last 2 years are entry to EU and NATO. All political parties are support entry. Who represent thinking of user:Kubura ? Nobody !
Let us leave Balkan.. Maybe I am making mistake but all states (and all important parties) are having policy of lowering taxes of richman and then screaming about need to lower social rights. Maybe I am making mistake but this policy is bad for majority of voters ?
Then we are "honest" elections. Do you know if winner of last Germany elections are left or right parties ? Answer is left with 51.8 % of votes and 327 parliament members out of 614 ! What has happened ? Greatest left party (worker and poor) has declared that she is closer with right wing party (capitalist) of other left parties ????
Last election in Czech Republic have ended with stalemate. Capitalist 100 Socialist 100. Prime minister is capitalist.
There is no need to say anything about United Kingdom. There is no difference between Capitalist and Socialist party economic or foreign policy.
For the end we are having democratic Japan where 1 party is ruling from WWII.
My thinking about democracy is that this is dictatorship + very good propaganda--Rjecina (talk) 20:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

kos

You seem to be contributing a lot of good work in the Kosovo article. I hope you keep it up. After reading your comment and some text, i found your comment to be true. Kosovo was part of the Kingdom of Montenegro. I have read that a lot of monasteries were build by the king of Montenegro in the region. This added more proof.Serbian Defense Forces (talk) 21:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Gracanica.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Gracanica.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

ANI

You are mentioned at WP:ANI#User:LAz17. As a side note, commentary such as this is never acceptable per personal attack policies and civility guidelines. I ask that you refactor the comments, given your history; any such outbursts in the future will result in a block. seicer | talk | contribs 16:14, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Kosovo

I agree, but the name of that box must be renamed!! I will ask that!! Tadija (talk) 21:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Kosovo BarnStar

Hey mate!

I used to snoop around and find members who deserve the award. Not any more sadly, because I have been off Wikipedia for a while. Other members of the project can award the barnstar, and my best advice to you is to continue your hard work and contributions, to participate actively in discussions about Kosovo, and to get involved in every way possible!

For your work on the municipalities of Kosovo articles, you are eligible for a Barnstar. It would be, however, immoral on my part to award it in such circumstances and I don't think you will accept it either.

Cheers mate!

Λuα (Operibus anteire) 23:26, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

rs

You make it sound like I care, I already made a Prud Agreement article regarding that, liking the prejudice.PRODUCER (TALK) 16:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Third entity

Well it seems so, but unfortunately there is a lot of contradictory dato on that issue...
Potpisivanje još jednog u nizu sporazuma dijela šestorke na vlasti pokazuje da se SDA, SNSD i HDZBiH još uvijek nisu u stanju dogovoriti ni o tome o čemu su se dogovorili, smatra SDPBiH. Zato nas ne bi začudilo da, u skladu sa njihovom dosadašnjom praksom, svaki od potpisnika sporazuma isti različito tumači: Dodik da tvrdi kako je RS opstala, Čović da je dobio treći entitet, a Tihić kako će BiH imati četiri regije koje će prelaziti entitetske linije sa sjedištima u Sarajevu, Banjoj Luci, Mostaru i Tuzli, navodi se u priopćenju. [14], basicly everyone of the signature parties claims that it signed something else... Third entity would be good because it would basicly gave every nation it constitutial rights. Hower it is a question how it would be done and on what territories... --Čeha (razgovor) 08:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is totaly unclear :/ As for Mostar it seems that in any variant it is going to be unified and in the croatian entity... (Even in Tihić's story Mostar is a center of an entity, that's one of the reasons why Silajdžić is so mad on him:) As for middle bosnia, I'm not certain what will happen. Croats had majority in Jajce, Dobretići, N.Travnik, Vitez, Busovača, Kiseljak and Kreševo in 2005, as a local major in Uskoplje. In last elections Bosniaks became majors in Jajce, N.Travnik, Busovača and Uskoplje and that does not looks good when talking about the borders of future cro entity. You had one offer from SDA in previous year that talked about unifing the županije with croatian majority in one... That proposition included cro territories from Drvar to Ravno with Konjic and Jablanica, but without Central bosnia... So I think that theirs prepositions will go in that dirrection... Which is something to which I doubt any of Croatian leaders will agree to that... We'll see. I think that Croatian territories now goes onto 21 % and that no Croatian leader will go bellow that. --Čeha (razgovor) 22:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Bosna je nazalost skrpljena na vrat na nos. Rat se hvala Bogu zaustavio ali previse je patnji i krvi proliveno na sve strane. Jebiga treci entitet ima smisla, a kad se setite bilo je fino svezivati zastave protiv srba, a sada se nemoze zajedno u federaciji. RS isto stoji u limbu i samo gleda sta Silajdzic provaljuje okolo. Hoce srpsku u bosni, a svaka druga rec u federaciji je cetnik. Kakav je to paradox? Jebiga, ako hrvati naprave entitet u federaciji, pa da se sve jednom za svagda raskrsti mozda bi i bilo bolje. Bosnu kao drzavu izgleda ceka sudbina Jugoslavije, ako se sve to bude guralo zajedno, svi pod istu kapu. Pozdrav! Onyxig (talk) 17:45, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Bosna je kakva je. Ne vidim kako bi se Srbi iz Bosanskog Novog mogli odvojiti od Sarajeva uz koridor od 2km bez rata. A slično vrijedi i za ostale. BiH se treba srediti kao normalna država po švicarskom modelu (entiteti, kantoni ili što već) gdje će svatko znati svoje i biti će mir. Inače BiH zbilja čeka sudbina bivše Jugoslavije. A zastave se ne bi vezale da nas niste zajedno klali.--Čeha (razgovor) 00:06, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Pa, vidite, srbi i hrvati su bili vrlo bliski bas neko dugo vreme u ratu. Herceg Bosna i Republika Srpska su imali vrlo dobre odnose. Mate Boban, vodja hrvata u bosni izgleda da je imao dobru saradnju. Dakle ja nevidim sto nebi bilo moguce opet neka saradnja. Stvar je da su stranci smaknuli bobana, tako da su stranci problem. Uklonimo strance i opet ce srbi i hrvati biti saradjivati u vezi svi stvari u vezi bih.
Nebi se slozio da je svajcarska dobar model. Ako pogledamo svajcarsku vidimo da su tamo nemci najveca grupa... oko 70% mislim, nisam proverio u zadnje vreme. To toliko govori da je ta grupa dominanta... a u bosni je malo razlicito, tako da je drukcije. Plus, u svajcarskoj ima mnogo para... ubaci mnogo para u bilosta i moci ce neko vreme ostati na neki nacin. Vidimo da imaju problemi u belgiji trenutno... ova nova vremena ce zaista biti interesantna.(LAz17 (talk) 00:54, 31 January 2009 (UTC)).
Dobro, švicarska je loš primjer. Ali ne radi ovoga što si rekao nego zato što su previše lokalizirani. Njemački Švicaraci ti čak i podrugljivo gledaju na Njemce iz Njemačke. Njemački švicarac je prvo stanovnik tog grada (kantona) u kojem živi, pa tek onda ostalo. Što nema veze s BiH. Ono što sam htio naglasiti je da ljudima iz Zuericha ili Berna (koji su njemački govornici) ne bi palo napamet nametati pravila ljudima u Genevi i Juri (koji su francuski govornici). Svako ima svoje. Bez obzira koliko nekog ima. To je poanta švicarske kao uzora. Npr. ako su Šekovići u srpskom dijelu tamo vrijede srpska pravila (moraju se poštivati pravila manjina i osnovna ljudska, ali zna se čije je što).
Trenutno najbliža usporedba s BiH ti je Libanon (tri strane, Šiiti, Suniti i Kršćani, s time da postoji dosta podfrakcija i Druzi kao 4ta, susjedne države koje imaju utjecaja na područje Libanona (Šiiti su saveznici Sirije, itd)). A i tamo je bio višegodišnji rat. Nije isto ali ima masa sličnosti. Samo iz tog primjera ne možeš zaključiti apsolutno ništa.
U Belgiji ti je problem u novcu. Imaš 2 strane; valonce na jugu i flamance na sjeveru. Nekoć su vladali Valonci kojih je bilo više, sada su se Flamanci namnožili pa oni vladaju. Valonija je novčano u komi, a Flamanci ih ne žele više financirati. Da su im granice čiste (postoji Bruxelles koji je u središtu Flandrije, a ima valonsku većinu) davno bi se to riješilo kao čehoslovačka.
Većina višenacionalnih država do sad se raspala. Vidjet ćemo što će biti s bih--Čeha (razgovor) 02:40, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Svajcarska je sigurno malo neuporediv model, jeli nikad svajcarski nemac italijan francuz nisu udarili jedno na drugo niti krv sebi prolivali. Ali Lebanon ima smisla. Bas sam pricao sa jednim Libancem koji kaze da su oni kao Bosna samo puno gore hehe (umesto 3 imaju mnogo vise strana). Svi zajedno a niko ni sa kim. Nazalost sto se tice Bosne, fino je da su entiteti razdvojeni i da Bosna radi kao drzava, ali nemoze se od Bosne ocekivati utopija. Emotivan smo narod sa mnogo istorije i patnji. Srbi se ne osecaju pozeljni od drugih strana sa opravdanim ili naopravdanim razlozima... svejedno. Slicno i na drugoj strani. Ali ko zna kako ce se sve to odigrati, samo vratiti se na istu stvar koda nista nije bilo ce biti nemoguce. Onyxig (talk) 05:01, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Sta mislite o podeli na dva entita? (LAz17 (talk) 17:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)). Da bude srpsko-muslimanski entitet i hrvatski entitet u kome ce biti travnik i uskoplje? (LAz17 (talk) 17:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)).

Misliš nešto kao podjela iz doba Banovine? Što se mene tiče, ideja bi bila ok, ali nije realistična. Srbima nije u interesu odreći se entiteta da bi ga podjelili sa muslimanima (koji bi ih za par godina dosta prestigli natalitetom), muslimanima bi to bio preveliki zalogaj, dok bi za Hrvate postojala mogućnost od preglasavanja (hrv. entitet bi imao oko 20%, a drugi 80% pučanstva). Kada su zamišljeni Washingtonski i Daytonski sporazumi, cijela federacija je trebala ući u konf. s Hrvatskom (isto kao i rs sa Srbijom), a Hrvati su tamo imali pola vlasti po fed. zakonima. Onda je došlo par upravitelja, zakoni su promijenjeni, i sada se o većini stvari odlučuje bez Hrvata. A i natalitet (uz iseljavanje) nije na našoj strani. Potrebno je dole urediti BiH, tako da svatko ima svoje, zna što je njegovo i kako se može razvijati. Iznimno je moguće dogovoriti i neke zajedničke stvari, ako postoji obostrani interes. Ne znam, koliko sam shvatio dole je (osim rata i svih zvjerstava koja su se događala tijekom njega) trenutno glavni problem loši i korumpirani političari (na nekim stranama više, na nekima manje). Imaš par knjiga od Vesne Starešine koje vrijedi pročitati (Laboratorij Balkan i Haška formula). Dosta dobra karakterizacija nekih sudionika za vrijeme rata. Najcrnji čas i hrvatsko-bošnjački rat u srednjoj bosni (ne znam autore, ali lagano se zgoogla) su dobri pokazatelji nekih međunarodnih politika tu. Jer tu ne postoje samo 3 interesa. Ima ih prilično više. Pa BiH, koja je trenutno međunarodni protektorat, zbrinjava ne znam koliko europske diplomacije :D. Mislim da više od 2/3 "pomoći za razvitak" koje dolaze tu ode na njihove plaće... Tako da...
A i glavno ti je pitanje koliko se oko nekih stvari možeš dogovoriti.--Čeha (razgovor) 10:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Dodik-Tadic file

Hey LAz17. Just FYI, PRODUCER is now trying to queue a random Reuters Photo of Tadic/Dodik for deletion. Ridiculous. I am getting sick and tired of him following me around reversing my contributions and just plainly messing around. Do you know a section where one can report biased actions of one user on another? Its not about the articles anymore, now he's just plainly doing stuff out of spite. At least with Ceha you can talk/argue/come to conclusions but this guy is getting on my nerves. BTW if you ever want to queue a file for removal, here's the place: [[15]] Pozdrav! Onyxig (talk) 17:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Hm, well, it's not difficult to set something for deletion if it is just on the english wikipedia. What makes it hard is if it is on commons, 'cause then you gotta work through commons, and well, that's more complicated and I am lazy to learn how. :P
As for dodik and tadic... I quite frankly am not fond of either of them. I really dislike tadic... I mean dude, he had less than 50% of the vote of the serbs... probably 40% of the serbian vote, and then he won thanks to the 15% minority population in serbia. Therefore he is not supported by serbs. I find the EU to be a bad thing, and find all people who want to lead serbia to the EU as traitors. The west bombed us, did it not? The only reason why the pro-west candidates ever came to power was because the ones who bombed us gave them tens of millions of dollars come elections time. Pretty rotten, don't you think? Not democratic. As for dodik... he's a very very fishy person. First of all, he was in biljana plavisic, a person who purged republika srpska of many serbs who were socialist and communist. This is anti-democratic. On je covek sa tri lica... pazi se njega. Ja licno volim partije SDS i HDZ u bosni. (LAz17 (talk) 00:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)).
Pozdrav Laz17 razumem te potpuno :). Stavio sam sliku da ima malo visual representation njihovih sastanaka. Ja licno mislim da DS u Srbiji su jedna obicna izdajnicka bagra. Gospodin Tadic nikome normalnom nije seo :) Gori od njega su Cedo i Canak. Vise sam bio opredeljen za SRS (malo razocaran primitivizmom i huskanjem)/SNS(malo zbunjen pravljenjem ove stranke i iskrenosti koju obecavaju)/DSS (malo nepoverljiv njihovim stavovima jer su bili prvo za zapad a sada???)... iako mi je sve to nesto prozirno. U Bosni sam i ja za SDS, samo sam za njih i znao. Ove socijaldemokrate neznam odakle dodjose. Dodik mi isto ne lezi, jel kolko sam razumeo uz njega i njegovu partiju izgubismo sve od vojske do obiljezja, himni zastava, pasosa, sve se rasprodade. Onyxig (talk) 05:12, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Hej, dal si video interview sa dodikom na hrvatskom tvu? (LAz17 (talk) 17:20, 2 February 2009 (UTC)).

Nisam jel to sad nesto novo ili onaj stari? Znam da je jednom bio na HRT-u. Onyxig (talk) 19:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Serija se zove nedeljom u dva... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThLXte0vo3I (LAz17 (talk) 20:21, 2 February 2009 (UTC)).
Hvala puno bas cu pogledati.Onyxig (talk) 20:23, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LAz17/Archive_1&oldid=1143125346"