PaxEquilibrium (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
→Hey...: new section |
||
Line 132: | Line 132: | ||
Krusko Mortale, I have just counted how many times I've explained this to You and Your repeated ''same'' questions referring to a block list that '''''is not mine'''''. The number is, believe it or not: '''9'''. I'm startin' to doubt this is unintentional and am starting to think that it's ''bad faith''. That is not a threat, but a professional Wikipedia ''warning'', bent on alerting You to certain things and making sure You note them, so as not to repeat them again. I'm only doing my duty. Cheers & happy holidays! --[[User:PaxEquilibrium|PaxEquilibrium]] 20:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC) |
Krusko Mortale, I have just counted how many times I've explained this to You and Your repeated ''same'' questions referring to a block list that '''''is not mine'''''. The number is, believe it or not: '''9'''. I'm startin' to doubt this is unintentional and am starting to think that it's ''bad faith''. That is not a threat, but a professional Wikipedia ''warning'', bent on alerting You to certain things and making sure You note them, so as not to repeat them again. I'm only doing my duty. Cheers & happy holidays! --[[User:PaxEquilibrium|PaxEquilibrium]] 20:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC) |
||
== Hey... == |
|||
Hello Kruško. What's up with you? When will you be back? Can you review articles related to Bosnian War, because I think that some users are dedicated to sneaky vandalism. They remove sources, put false sentences etc... --[[User:HarisM|HarisM]] ([[User talk:HarisM|talk]]) 14:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 14:49, 14 April 2008
Kruško. Mortale.
Welcome
Welcome!
Hello, Kruško Mortale, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --PaxEquilibrium 00:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Cyrillic
Please don't start the "Cyrillic in Bosnian" issue again, or at least check out the long history of Talk:Cyrillic alphabet and Talk:Bosnian language before unilaterally changing the article. If you have objections, please state them on the respective talk pages. Thanks. Duja► 17:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Your edit
Regarding this edit of Yours:
1. That is not official historiography, but second-line theoretical thesis, same as Serbian historian Jovan I. Deretic and his histories of Serbia, or the Albanians' Illyrian origins (though the latter is far from being an invented theory AFAIC) or the Croatian second-class "Red Croatian" historiography. That is one of the reasons I removed the intro sentence (which violates WP:POV), although I was in truth simply reverting and deleting it in the process (it was added by a banned user Hahahihihoho, known for repeated disruption/trolling). So please do not return the sentence in that form.
2. Please do not remove the tags:
- The first tag is asking for sources; it was added by User:Consumed Crustacean in 19:41, 12 June 2006 and it should be kept until sources are provided. It is thus that I am also returning the WP:OR tag as well.
- The other tag was added by me a long time ago; I posted at the article's talk page a question in 21:05, 14 June 2006, so do not say that there is no discussion going on simply because no one beside me wants to discuss ;).
3. In the edit summary you wrote during your revert in 19:22, 6 December 2006: "so this reverte was a priori attitude by Pax who has many disputes with Bosniak users". I wouldn't normally consider this slightly against WP:Civil, but fact is that I have no disputes with Bosniac users, and maintain regular relations only with Kseferovic - who has become really fond to me. Thus, it is this that I could also interpret as a some-sort-of-a bad faith personal attack, especially as unfounded.
- Truly yours, --PaxEquilibrium 22:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- Dear Mr. Pax, I have checked your disputes, and I concluded that you're very contoversial user regarding your contribution and discussions with others. I will remove tags per above argument and I am not going to add the sentence that you mentioned, because you are the only one (and very contoversial) who repeat the same pattern in other Bosniak/n related articles. Yours, Kruško. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kruško Mortale (talk • contribs) 14:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC).
- Please cite which disputes are you referring to. When was I controversial discussing with others? Which is the above argument by which you justify the removal of the tags? I did not add the tags myself in the first place, but neutral 3rd party administrators. You also shouldn't have removed them - one is asking sources, which aren't provided, and the other states that it is disputed - and the dispute isn't over. --PaxEquilibrium 16:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Dear Mr. Pax or HolyRomanEmperor, according to this: [1] you are very controversial figure here. Maybe you changed your user name, but you didn't change your habits. Don't you agree, that your block log is too obvious:
- Of course I do not agree - there are perfect explanations. AFAIC, the plain fact that I was a victim of so many errors and abuse, and that I had requested myself to be blocked tells much more the other way around - you misinterpreted it. :) --PaxEquilibrium 16:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- 07:20, 5 October 2006 Dijxtra (Talk | contribs) blocked "HolyRomanEmperor (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (reblocking to prevent confusion)
- See below. Dijxtra re-indef-blocked him after he took a name not similar to mine: User:Emperor of Europe. --PaxEquilibrium 16:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- 20:37, 2 October 2006 Dijxtra (Talk | contribs) blocked "HolyRomanEmperor (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (to prevent confusion)
- Yes, I changed my name to PaxEquilibrium, and, as you can read yourself, User:CrnaGora registered under my name ("User:HolyRomanEmperor"). It is against Wikipedia's policy - despite I no longer use it, it's still my former name and it's not appropriate to adopt it, so just like he said - Dijxtra blocked the user to prevent confusion with me. --PaxEquilibrium 16:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
* 10:22, 30 September 2006 Dijxtra (Talk | contribs) moved User:HolyRomanEmperor to User:PaxEquilibrium (per user request) (revert)
- Subsequent to my name change, Dijxtra moved my user page to save its historical integrity. I have no idea what're you aiming over here. --PaxEquilibrium 16:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- 13:42, 5 July 2006 JoanneB (Talk | contribs) blocked "HolyRomanEmperor (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (strong suspicions of compromised account - please contact me before unblocking)
- I operated as User:HRE, while my old account was hijacked by a very violent user, allegedly from Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium 16:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- 23:17, 3 July 2006 W.marsh (Talk | contribs) blocked "HolyRomanEmperor (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (User has passed away. Contact me if this is not the case. Per http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HolyRomanEmperor&diff=prev&oldid=61903475)
- See above. An action of the culprit to send me off Wikipedia. --PaxEquilibrium 16:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- 21:48, 6 March 2006 DragonflySixtyseven (Talk | contribs) blocked "HolyRomanEmperor (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (need to defuse)
- I was having a long dispute with a very violent user and it has gotten out of control. He reacted like a Nuclear Reactor (just like DragonflySixtyseven said, nuclear reactors are useful, but when they overheat - they tend to explode, and nuclear radiation functions as a very damaging collateral damage-manufacturer). He earning himself some blocks for cool-off (just like he said - needs to defuse). But, since I am the one who asked the 3rd party in question (User:DragonflySixtyseven) to intervene (and he did by blocking the dude) and since I was in a dispute with the user over an article (or more precise, a wide array of articles), I considered it somewhat dishonorable and demanded that while he is blocked, I as well be blocked from editing the Wikipedia - I did that out of pure heart and good will, and I cannot see how could anyone (e. g. You) see anything bad from it. --PaxEquilibrium 16:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- 13:07, 27 November 2005 Chris 73 (Talk | contribs) blocked "HolyRomanEmperor (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (3RR on Oj, svijetla majska zoro)
- Indeed, that's the only "real" block that I got - and that was over a year ago. You should also observe that it is I who reported myself, as it was Wikipedia's policy and I was to rec my penalty for disobeying it. I think my good intentions were noticing there as well - whenever I do something bend, I do not make hesitations to admit the wrong deed (sometimes, like with Your accusations, I require evidence, because I do not recall my bad moves, or more often, I am actually wrongly "bad-tagged", to express myself).
- So you see, I think that my block history, and my reactions in those hard times (especially the latter of those You mentioned) show more good things of mine; rather than bad. I received also, under this name, an indef-ban several days ago, under the accusation that I revealed personal data about a user (which is strictly banned). However, a day-or-two later, I got unbanned, since they discovered the whole messy scripting error to which I became a victim. --PaxEquilibrium 16:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I would just advise you as a friend, that nationalism is very dangerous and negative thing and your all-going disputes about origins of some historical figures is really something I consider shameful. Yours, Kruško. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kruško Mortale (talk • contribs) 17:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- Nationalism could indeed be very dangerous and negative, I suggest you come and visit my user page and see how it was like (before I retired): here. I think you'll notice that we share opinions. Tell me please, where are those all-going disputes about origins of some historical figures? Please tell me, what are You referring to? I would like to know, so that I can inspect the case. Yours truly, --PaxEquilibrium 16:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
File:Stop hand.scg You just reverted it. You are not obeying Wikipedia's policy of discussion. Please stop doing that - You also assaulted me at the Edit summary. If you do not see the point of Your edits - then just don't make them. serious removal like those is not even a content dispute, that is vandalism. Please read Wikipedia's policy, if this is not solved I will ask 3rd party administrator intervention. Thank You, and please don't turn this into something bad; that's really unnecessary. --PaxEquilibrium 19:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Dear Mr. Pax. According to your block log you are at least disputed, so as such not relevant for putting tags. I think that your a priori attitude regarding articles related to Bosnia is enough evidence of your modus vivendi in this Wikipedia. To much disputings, too many blocks. Yours, Kruško.
- I don't understand. I already explained You that it was not me, but another person that "assimilated" my user name and the only two blocks that I myself really earned were after I asked to be blocked. I sincerely think that my block log (or better, former block log) tells more good about me than bad (showing how a discussing person I am and good-willing). You on the other hand, have ignored numerous pleas on Talk:History of the Bosniak people, which says that You do not want to discuss anything, but enforce Your own version; what You have been doing is not a content dispute, but obvious vandalism, so I'm afraid I am going to report You to the administrative body of Wikipedia for disruption. Also, please keep Your comments Civil and do not throw accusations at people (especially when they're unfounded) and as Wikipedia says, comment the content, not the user; by now You have only been writing bad mouth about me, and not the real thing required - which is Your vandalism of an article. Sincerely and I'm truly sorry that I had to come to this (I really hoped we could resolve this peacefully), --PaxEquilibrium 21:41, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
- Dear Mr. Pax. I think that nationalism is very dangerous, especially the Serb one. So I ask you as a friend to stop doing it. It is not good, for this wonderful project to have all your origin disputes. You contribution shows it, you block log shows it. Take a walk sometimes, you don't have to be the defender of Serb nation like this. Yours. Kruško Mortale 12:30, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
- Where Serb nationalism? How? When? Why? I already explained to You his block log. :) I repeat, it's highly uncivil to accuse Wikipedians like that, with absolutely no evidence (please read WP:Civil). Please understand.... comment the content, not the user (as wiki says). --PaxEquilibrium 12:36, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
- Dear Mr. Pax. I made a comment about POV tag in Bosniak History article that you put there. I also made a comment about the fact that you denied Bosniak history. I said it was your a priori attitude, because you were editor of many articles with similar subject, and you showed the same pattern of behaviour. Just like @King Ivan who doesn't even hide that. He explained that in his user page. According to all this facts I concluded that you are not someone who can put POV tags because you have many prejudices and a priori attitudes. Also, when I saw your block log...God...it was really something...I am aware also that you hide behind Wiki policies, you know the rules better then me, but I said just my opinion. I like you very much, but I cannot deny the above facts. That's all. Truly yours, Kruško Mortale 10:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC).
- You're again uncivil, insulting me (once again: comment the content, not the user). Similar subject? I'm the editor of hundreds of articles, and I've never been involved in any similar subject. What are You referring to? Where did I deny Bosniac history? I think I know where're You aiming - tell me, if I consider the Serbian version as the "right one" (clarifying Bosnia as a historically purely Serbian land), and if I said that calling Bosniacs a separate people from Serbs, with their own history etc. - would I be denying Serbian history? It's twofold, and sincerely, it's nonsense - it all depends from which edge You observe it (and looking it from no side, like me, will finally give You a NPOV image). Where did I show a same "pattern" of behavior? You are not the one who is superior to me, so You don't have any special privileges, sorry. :D I explained my block log for 7 times to You. Why do You repeat that? Why are You propagating against me? I shall repeat once again - please read my explanations (I can only understand You're trying to frustrate me), and I repeat once more - that is not my block log (the larger & bad part of it). I do not hide under Wikipedia's policy; I obey it as my Bible - what is so sinful in that? --PaxEquilibrium 20:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Dear Mr. Pax, you are now uncivil. You said that you were superior than me? What kind of statement is that? I am very dissapointed. You have double standards in your edits. I will show it to you. Truly yours. Kruško Mortale 19:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- No, please read again: I said that You are not superior to me, because You act like that. My comments have stayed in the ranges of civility, though thanks for the critics - I always make good use of those. You acted like Your word is more powerful than mine, explaining Your removal (vandalism as per WP:VAND) of tags on the History of the Bosniak people article because You are "better than me", giving power to Your word over mine. That's like I am inferior to You. And not just that, but You're only one and three of us (one from Croatia, one from Serbia and one from Bosnia - all colors) think that the tags deserve to be there, so You're imposing superiority over all of us. As for the "double standards" - please show me what You mean; I'm beginning to think You are threatening me. --PaxEquilibrium 21:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Three of you? I didn't see the third person? Kruško Mortale 13:00, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
- User:Rts_freak is the third person (the one from Bosnia). Besides, the tags were not even in the first place introduced by us - but by a several other contributors (a neutral administrator for instance, User:Consumed Crustacean]]). --PaxEquilibrium 14:15, 21 December 2006 (UTC)--PaxEquilibrium 14:15, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Mehmed-paša Sokolović
What do Your edits on Mehmed-paša Sokolović mean? I mean, what is precisely disputed? I guess You consider his Serb origin as disputed, but You both remove all Serb references and put a "disputed" tag, so there must be also something else to it. I do not know why You mentioned Live, but if You have something against the article or Mehmed, please go to Talk:Mehmed-paša_Sokolović, like I said and do not undemocratically blatantly revert. --PaxEquilibrium 18:14, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
- Quoting You from Mehmed-paša Sokolović: Dear Mr. Pax, tha tag is your idea, not mine...there is dispute... The tag was not my idea. If there is dispute, then please present it. And please stop confusing the Wikipedia community like that, it is considered disruption and those edits are all but constructive. --PaxEquilibrium 18:36, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
How's it goin'?
Kruško, as a fellow Bosniak, I am actually quite concerned about your behaviour on Wikipedia. It is considered highly inappropriate to remove tags from articles that have an obvious ongoing dispute. But, do realize, that I share your point of view about teh article "History of the Bosniak people" - that is, I think the article is good and needs to be here to explain the history of our people. However, since there are other users (e.g Ivan, PaxEquilibrium) who dispute the neutrality and factual accuracy of the article, those tags are indeed warranted. The best way I can think of for those tags to be rightfully removed, is if we improve the article by adding source, and by discussing with the other users what exactly they see as "biased" in the article. I do believe we can become a good team of editors, but we must follow proper Wikipedia procedures and be willing to engage in discussion with users who have a different opinion to our own. Anyway, happy editing! (And Merry Christams) - [rts_freak] | 5p34k 2 /\/\3 13:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- After I politely explained the facts to you, you still are going on with that ridiculous sockpuppet tag. What is wrong with you? I'm trying to be your friend here and collaborate with you, and then you go and slap me in the face. However, I am still willing to collaborate if you are as well. - [rts_freak] | 5p34k 2 /\/\3 14:12, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- I am going to have to talk more with you tomorrow because I'm about to go to sleep now (it's almost 1:00am here in Australia). Goodnite. - [rts_freak] | 5p34k 2 /\/\3 14:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Re:Sockpuppet
Uh-oh, that's a difficult question. Short answer: there's Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets. Long answer: generally, there's little one can do unless there's a severe abuse by one or both accounts; I mean, like meatpuppeting in AfD, avoiding 3RR and similar stuff. Now, putting either the sockpuppet template, or some of test templates or {{npa}} to an established user's page usually aggravates the situation and creates bad feelings all around; thus I removed it, as it can only escalate the problem rather than to add to a solution. Except for the apparent location in Australia, I can't see any hard evidence of rts freak (talk · contribs) being a sock of Ivan Kricancic (talk · contribs), although I do think that there's something fishy about that account... I can't really say what; he's well within the range of civility though, so an administrative action seems to be uncalled for at the moment. Heck, there are many sockpuppets I suspect hanging around, but for the most part I just hold my teeth stronger.
The "Serbo-Bosniak" conflict situation on Wikipedia again escalated recently, and something will need to be done soon to prevent its enlargement to a full-scale war. I'm thinking of something akin to Wikipedia:Greek and Turkish wikipedians cooperation board. The problem is that all wikiprojects and cooperation attempts created for former Yu were short-termed, or simply acted as "ethnic feuds". Too many editors from our area act like "shoot first, ask questions later (if ever)". Regards, Duja► 15:20, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Update: you might be on to something: apart from ex-yu articles, our friends seem to share interests in Smallville, notably Allison Mack (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Sam Jones III (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Kristin Kreuk (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Coincidental? Ehm... I advise that you go to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets as the first step. Duja► 15:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- I really don't understand so many rules in Wikipedia, but this is obvious abuse in Bosniak History article:[2] and [3]. Two "different" reverts by suspected sock puppet in "controversial" article. Second thing is that he pretends to be a Bosniak which is rude and unfair, in order to humiliate a nation. Yours. Kruško. Kruško Mortale 15:50, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
RTS Freak
I have received your message. If you really suspect that he is a sockpuppet then the next thing you can do is report it to an administrator. I have had several issues like that (with Boris M. etc.), but it takes some evidence to prove. Simply put, ask any administrator, that is not so much connected to Yugo (BiH, Hr, Rs [Republic of Serbia, not Republika Srpska], Cg, etc.). This way we will leave out any major bias and disputes. (P.S. for Boris, I found him on the French Wikipedia asking for help from being indefinetly blocked on the Serbian wiki, even though he was an admin there) Thank you, Vseferović 16:19, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
- Dear Mr. Vseferovic, thank you very much for the information. Yours. Kuško. Kruško Mortale 12:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Will You please stop
Krusko, You're going with Edit-warring & disruption far enough - please don't make me search a neutral 3rd party to report You. You have been adding the tag & making nonsensical and wrong edit summaries. Please do not make edits like these. This is Your last warning (please don't take this as a threat). Cheers, --PaxEquilibrium 17:25, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
- Dear Mr. Pax. Is the hand a threat? I think that your block log doesn't give you right to make threats. Yours. Kruško. Kruško Mortale 12:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Krusko Mortale, I have just counted how many times I've explained this to You and Your repeated same questions referring to a block list that is not mine. The number is, believe it or not: 9. I'm startin' to doubt this is unintentional and am starting to think that it's bad faith. That is not a threat, but a professional Wikipedia warning, bent on alerting You to certain things and making sure You note them, so as not to repeat them again. I'm only doing my duty. Cheers & happy holidays! --PaxEquilibrium 20:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey...
Hello Kruško. What's up with you? When will you be back? Can you review articles related to Bosnian War, because I think that some users are dedicated to sneaky vandalism. They remove sources, put false sentences etc... --HarisM (talk) 14:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)