User talk:The Dvornjaga

Hello

I saw that you made edits to an article [1]. Many of the inclusions you made were based on original research and unreliable sources. While your alterations where of sourced content. Please familarise yourself with WP:RS and WP:OR. Any removal of sourced material will be reverted. Thank you.Resnjari (talk) 10:08, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted only repeated repetitions of the same statements. The source of information about the publication is the OTV channel and a documentary telecast with the Četnovizija creators, the source of information about the appearance of the meme - KnowYourMeme. The Dvornjaga (talk) 11:02, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Know your meme is not a reliable source [2]].Resnjari (talk) 11:05, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a reason to delete everything? The Dvornjaga (talk) 11:08, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your making changes based on ? You claim repetition but the article is laid out to explain to readers what the topic is about, not to confuse or conflate the subject. An example is the song has many names, why remove them? WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not sufficient. The article is based on sound sources not on what feels right. On Wikipedia we do not edit on a WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS basis. Thank you.

Radio Free Europe links to the video on Slobodan Vrga channel, it says the correct name is "Serbia strong" and also says names of all performers. "Karadžić, Lead Your Serbs" is a quote from a song, it never was official name of the song. "Preformed by three males" is also a lie, there are four of them. The Dvornjaga (talk) 11:18, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There are multiple names for the song. The other news articles cite them. Did you read them? On the people involved if a news article or credible sources state there are four find one and add it. The footage has been complied of other people as well, so its a little confusing as the song progresses, especially its grainy visual quality.Resnjari (talk) 11:24, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The primary source, which is referred to by reputable media, indicates the exact names of all four participants, is this not enough? The Dvornjaga (talk) 11:30, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at it now. The main singer is also the trumpet guy. So the way the footage was cut puts him in two different roles. Its 3 people. The person shown 34 seconds into the video is footage from another similar music video of the time and not part of the actual performers of the song.Resnjari (talk) 11:33, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I know, there is footage from Miro Semberac`s Jadna Bosno Suverena. And identifying two people among themselves despite the official source on the basis of low-quality video (even though it shows that the noses are different) - this is exactly the original research. The Dvornjaga (talk) 11:40, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Its three people, not four. The trumpeter is the singer. Reliable sources note 3 not 4.Resnjari (talk) 11:49, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The same publication on Radio Free Europe refers to a video with four names and indicates the number three, most likely this is a mistake. No other sources talk about the three authors. "The trumpeter is the singer" is your alternative version. The Dvornjaga (talk) 12:01, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I read the Radio Free Europe article again. Says three not four and only gives the name of one of the singers.Resnjari (talk) 12:08, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Click "the song's video" link. The Dvornjaga (talk) 12:14, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I did and i gave my answer.Resnjari (talk) 12:16, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What is the reason for deleting ALL the edits? If you know a source saying there is 3 men in video and not linking to Vrga — add it, you are not the owner of this page. I added information about song titles to my version (even more detailed), and you just cancel all edits without reading The Dvornjaga (talk) 13:20, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Remove Kebab; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.Resnjari (talk) 12:36, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:The_Dvornjaga reported by User:Wumbolo (Result: ). Thank you. wumbolo ^^^ 18:41, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]