Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Serbia/Archive 9
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Serbia. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
FAR for Belgrade
I have nominated Belgrade for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 04:35, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Balkan Latinity WikiProject
Hello, I've been thinking for a while of an idea for a new and certainly needed WikiProject. The Aromanians/Vlachs, Megleno-Romanians/Meglenites and Istro-Romanians/Ćiribirci are poorly known peoples in the Balkans, the only ones that are Romance-speaking apart of the Romanians. Tagging pages related to these with WikiProject templates can turn problematic, see this talk page for example [1], saturated with 7 different templates. I was thus thinking that giving them their own WikiProject could increase organization on Wikipedia about info on these peoples and increase their representation in the project, perhaps even attracting members of these groups into working at Wikipedia. The project could be split into three task forces for each of the three.
If you're interested, please ping me here or message me on my talk page. Expressing your interest in the existence of such a project is enough, you will not be compromised or pressured into working in a topic area you might lose interest to soon. After (if) I recruit enough support, I will start a formal proposal and ping you there. Regards, Super Ψ Dro 20:56, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Todor Vojinović - references need checking
The article Todor Vojinović, about a 18th/19th-century voivode, is currently waiting for a review. It contains references to scholarly sources (such as ISBN 978-86-87479-05-0 - scribd link) which appear on-topic. However, I cannot read Serbian, and therefore the article could be a total hoax and I would not be able to detect it.
Can someone check that source for the basic details (i.e. that Todor Vojinović existed, took part in the First Serbian Uprising, and was hanged in 1813)? If all that matches I’m going to assume it’s OK and mark it as reviewed. (Also, if possible, provide page numbers / exact quotes and make nice inline refs, but I understand that’s quite a bit harder.) TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 14:34, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
AfC review
Draft:Jakov Gerčić has been waiting to be reviewed at AfC for four months. None of the sources are in English and only one is available online. I'm wondering if anyone here at this WikiProject would be able to assist in reviewing the sources. TipsyElephant (talk) 19:30, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- @TipsyElephant: Sorry for the late reply but looks like @Vanjagenije: has already approved this draft. Cheers Боки Talk page ↔️ Contributions 05:35, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Help on Eastern European languages
Hello!
Our of boredom, I am trying to identify the languages of inscriptions on a fountain located in central Budapest. I could easily identify some languages such as Hebrew, Armenian, Russian, English, French, Spanish etc. but I have trouble with some, mostly Slavic, languages which I do not speak myself. I guess that they must include Czech (or Slovak), Slovene, Croatian/Serbian/Bosniak, Macedonian, Bulgarian and/or maybe others.
Translations of 'The place is ours
':
- Trg je naš / Площадьт е наш (pretty sure that's Bulgarian) / Naš trg / Nas trg / [unreadable] naše je námestie
Translations of 'Non potable water
':
- Водата не е за пиене / Voda ni pitna / Непитна вода / Nepitná voda / Nepitka voda / Voda nije za piće
Translations of 'Open lawn
':
- Ходенето по тревата е разрешено / Dozvoljeno je gaziti (ǧaziti?) po travi / Dozvoljeno gaženje trave
I also do not manage to identify the language in 3 other inscriptions for which glossaries easily available online did not help. Could it be Romani?
- Náj lasó ráji / Ámáro szi o placo / Pécsár saj ustarén
Is anyone here able to tell which is which? Note that many inscriptions (such as in French and Greek) have spelling mistakes and inconsistent respect of diacritics.
Pictures of the fountain:
Place Clichy (talk) 15:54, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
FAR for Vampire
I have nominated Vampire for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 16:46, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Another old draft
Hello again, Draft:Nikola Đurković (musician) has been waiting to be reviewed for over four months now and I was wondering if anyone at this WikiProject would be interested in assisting with the reviewing of the page. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:41, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- Greetings @TipsyElephant:,
I see that article was actually approved so I was wondering if this is all you needed.
Please, advise
Боки Talk page ↔️ Contributions 23:02, 23 September 2022 (UTC)- @Боки: yup! I see it was accepted shortly after I commented here. I was just hoping to bring attention to one of the older drafts waiting to be reviewed. TipsyElephant (talk) 00:29, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, WikiProject,
I just postponed deleting this stale draft and thought maybe editors here could make use of it, either by improving the draft and submitting it for review or using the content in some other way. Thanks! Liz Read! Talk! 04:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
@Liz: - I can certainly edit it after the weekend. My question is, since this article is related to this list of Serbian historians, I am unsure as to what needs to be edited considering this is just a list of Serbian historians. Please, advise. Боки Talk page ↔️ Contributions 09:39, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Draft:Slobodan Šarenac
Hey guys,
Can someone, please, help me with this draft ? I have asked @Greenman: few days ago of what I need to do but I did not receive a clear answer. Can one of you look into this and help me get this resubmitted and approved by English Wikipedia ?
Thanks !
Боки Talk page ↔️ Contributions 09:42, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Питање
Moved from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Serbia/MembersПоздрав. Управо сам се уписао у групу едитора. Имам питање везано за чланак Talk:Great Migrations of the Serbs , који је референциран као власништво групе. Од овог чланка који се бави миграцијама Срба 50 посто укупног текста је у последњем поглављу (Modern analysis) и бави се рационализацијом зашто су Албанци аутохтоно становништво Косова. Без икакве жеље да продубљујем ову тему, од свих регија из којих су се Срби исељавали и још већих регија у које су се селили, овакав садржај у сумирању чланка је више него негативно утицајан на Србију. Све ревизије које направим одмах су ревертоване од стране корисника Saintstephen000 , који није овде на листи, не одговара на коректна питања у Talk секцији, само аутоматски ривертује све промене. При том је човек Американац који пише на свакаве теме потпуно невезане са Србијом и њеном историјом. О чему се овде ради и како ово може да се реши? BbBgSr (talk) 21:05, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Bbbgsr: Hi! This is English Wikipedia, so we use English language here (see WP:ENGLISHPLEASE). Also, there is no such thing as article ownership ("власништво") here. Every article belongs to the entire Wikipedia community (see WP:OWNERSHIP). What you did is to remove a whole section of text that is referenced to WP:reliable sources just because you don't agree with it. That is not how Wikipedia collaboration works, and of course your edits were reverted. Instead, you should use the talk page to start a discussion and try to reach WP:consensus to improve the page. In the talk page, you should explain why you think the text is problematic. If you think the text is not neutral and one side is favored more, maybe you can provide some reliable sources that represent the different point of views. I see that you started a discussion on the talk page, but you are doing it the wrong way. You are demanding from other editors to explain why the content should be there'. Instead, you should try to explain why it shouldn't be there. Remember, if the longstanding content is properly sourced, the burden is on you to explain why it should be removed. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:27, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
FAR for Macedonia (terminology)
User:Buidhe has nominated Macedonia (terminology) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:18, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
FAR for Macedonia (terminology)
User:Buidhe has nominated Macedonia (terminology) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:37, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
FAR for Macedonia (terminology)
User:Buidhe has nominated Macedonia (terminology) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:08, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:58, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Suva Reka#Requested move 28 June 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Suva Reka#Requested move 28 June 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. EggRoll97 (talk) 00:47, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Battle of Tahtalu
Hi, Talk:Battle of Tahtalu 1458
There is a debate on the talk page. Do you have Serbian history sources about the events of that period? Turkish user claim 50,000 Hungarian army led by the 14 years old king Matthias of Hungary attacked Tahtalu (I do not know where) deep in Serbia and lost against Mehmed. Hungarian sources does not know at all about this. The Turkish user provided 5 Turkish sources, only 1 out of 5 claim Matthias was there, also all 5 Turkish sources write only 1 sentence about this battle (I do not think this deserve a separate article), which seems is a raiding border conflict story when I read all sources. Hungarian sources say Matthias went to south gathering a big army, stayed at Belgrade but later went home and he did not want provokate any Ottoman attack that is why he did not recapture Golubac. Details and sources on the talk page OrionNimrod (talk) 08:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Women in Green's 5th Edit-a-thon
Hello WikiProject Serbia:
WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2023!
Running from October 1 to 31, 2023, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.
We hope to see you there!
Grnrchst (talk) 13:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Milan Obrenović II, Prince of Serbia#Requested move 6 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. HouseBlastertalk 22:11, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Siege of Belgrade (1806)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Siege of Belgrade (1806) that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Annwfwn (talk) 16:50, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
Byzantine Empire Featured article review
I have nominated Byzantine Empire for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Request for input on post-Yugoslav-breakup election article naming
We had a discussion relisted at Talk:May 1992 Yugoslavian parliamentary election#Requested move 3 November 2023 that could benefit from the input of people who have knowledge of this topic area, please check it out. --Joy (talk) 09:12, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
help reaching out to SrpskiAnonimac
As described at User talk:SrpskiAnonimac, I've had to resort to blocking this person for failure to communicate. Apparently, they don't actually speak English, and seem to have stopped following their user page years ago (!). This probably means they don't know how to go through the block appeal procedure, either. Since this editor does seem to have contributed a significant amount of edits, I'm wondering if anyone could try to reach out to them, possibly through some sort of a more local forum, where they might not be ignoring messages, and try to figure things out. Thanks in advance. --Joy (talk) 14:08, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Dragan Stanojević (Draft:Dragan Stanojević and sr:Драган Станојевић) is a member of the Serbian parliament, but the English draft isn't very long or well-referenced, and the Serbian article might have been written by one of his supporters. Since a members of a national parliament is considered automatically notable, I would like to see the English draft improved so that it can be moved to article space, but just translating the full text of the Serbian article won't be enough because it doesn't have enough references and seems not to be neutral. Please consider improving both the English draft and Serbian article so that they are neutral and adequately referenced. The Serbian article has been tagged as a beginner's article that might be deleted or moved to draft. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Golubac Fortress
Golubac Fortress has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm Talk 17:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC)