| Revision as of 21:17, 25 February 2009 editVanished user ewfisn2348tui2f8n2fio2utjfeoi210r39jf (talk | contribs)45,314 editsm the← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 03:06, 26 November 2017 edit undoMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,138,312 edits →Women in Red World Contest: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery | ||
| (73 intermediate revisions by 28 users not shown) | |||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| <br clear="all"> | <br clear="all"> | ||
| == Welcome back == | |||
| Just welcoming you back to wikipedia. Regards, ] (]) 17:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==Nato== | |||
| :Thanks --] (]) 18:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
| Your opinion is that people in countries don't want NATO membership. NATO is satisfactory at protecting democracy in its member states. In theory, it is supposed to be a democratic organization. In my thinking NATO and the Croatian government can not deny people the right to choose against joining NATO. The government is, however, making it harder for people to fight against the alliance membership by convert people who are unaware of the issue into NATO advocates. This is a method that can be used in Balkan situations. It is extremely similar, in my opinion, to the methods that were effectively used in the 1990's.] (]) 23:54, 3 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== yo yo == | ||
| Pozdravljajus. :) (] (]) 16:14, 12 May 2010 (UTC)). | |||
| ==] nomination of ]== | |||
| == Re sources on Jasenovac == | |||
| ] A tag has been placed on ] requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under ], because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the ], such articles may be deleted at any time. Please ], as well as our subject-specific ]. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the ]. | |||
| If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding <code>{{tl|hangon}}</code> to '''the top of ]''' (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on ''']''' explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for ''speedy'' deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact ] to request that they ] the page or have a copy emailed to you. <!-- Template:Db-bio-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> ] (]) 23:55, 7 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| I've responded on my talkpage. Regards, ]<sup>]</sup> 17:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Re-blocked == | ||
| There has been much work on democratization around the world. Sure, those examples that you mention there are bad. Heck, you could add serbia's election in 2000 there too, as the west pumped in tens of millions of dollars. The point is that there is much real democratization going on in the world. Such democracy promoting institutions have resulted in Latin America pretty much transforming itself in the last 10 years, into a neo-socialist block. I feel that democratization is very good, but that the problem is that it is not done in many places. Furthermore, you are speaking of US government actions, and such organizations as the one in that source do not promote the same thing that the US government does. As for a new election, keep your eyes peeled on el-salvador... FMLN has a good chance of winning there. The work there is the result of many long years of work in democratization. We need more of that. Other great examples of democratization are the situation in apartheid south africa. I am always a supporter of democratization, but not of US meddling in other country's affairs. I hope that we could reach some concensus on this and agree to add that source back, and perhaps use some other sources that I have mentioned over there. Let me know what you think. Perhaps talk page is better than the article discussion, as things get messy and ugly there. (] (]) 05:21, 12 January 2009 (UTC)). | |||
| Rjecina, when you were banned last year (]), the community consensus was actually for an indefinite ban. I went out on a limb in your favour when I chose to implement the ban decision merely through a one-year block , giving you a chance to come back. However, that was of course linked with the expectation that you would change your editing if you chose to come back. You would of course also still be under all the editing restrictions that were imposed on you prior to your ban. | |||
| In 1975, seven out of ten nations in the world had political systems that were undeniably authoritarian. Two decades later, fewer than three out of ten clearly fit that in that category. What happened, and why? Good change happened, that's what happened. The US has a far way to go to reach real democracy that encourages participation. I have studied much about the a thing that Huntington called the ]. Dictatorial bastard regimes like the murderous one of Pinochet were replaced by civilian governments. This is the main point to democratization that I like. It is good and I will always support it. (] (]) 05:32, 12 January 2009 (UTC)). | |||
| Unfortunately, seeing the (few) edits you have made since returning, there is no improvement at all. You are right back with the same disruptive pattern. Making an unexplained POV edit on ''exactly'' the same issue you were blocked over last year , as the first thing on expiry of your block. Again no meaningful edit summary. Again in broken English, and no visible effort to get your grammar right at last. And then this incomprehensible rant on a talk page. | |||
| == Republika Srpska == | |||
| Yea thanks for the advice, I found it suspicious that this ip ] showed up and started reverting the article right after oxynig was banned. <font face="bold xx serif">] <sup>(])</sup></font> 15:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Unfortunately, this leaves me no hope you will become a constructive contributor yet. On the basis of the ban decision from last year, which is still valid, I am therefore re-blocking you. This time it's indef. If you want to return, you will first have some explaining to do about how you plan to improve your editing. ] ] 15:48, 2 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==Q== | |||
| :It is possible that we are having small mistake with this ban4life ? | |||
| :My thinking is that edit summary (bye) has been OK, because that is my last edit on english wikipedia. | |||
| :About my broken english it is possible only to say that interwiki spammer has accepted my incomprehensible rant and ended his spamming on sh wikipedia. You can read his statement:"Rijecina2: Don´t worry this will notbe a wiki problem. This discussion will help solve existing problems" . Example of July spamiming on sh wikipedia you can look in this . | |||
| :When this Juli it has become clear that I will become administrator on sh wikipedia I have started to write warnings on others wikipedia about interwiki spam or vandal problems (interwiki warning example on bosnian wiki from and I will continue to do this in the future. For me it is hard to imagine that this is disruptive conduct or that administrators (which I am on sh wiki) on other wiki must know good english to write interwiki warning on english wikipedia ? | |||
| :My proposition is to change definition of this ban4life in: | |||
| :"Requested by the user on sh.wikipedia as an unwanted SUL local account" | |||
| :and remove ban4life from user:Rjecina2 on english wikipedia so that I can contact administrators or vandals on english wiki about "small" interwiki problems on sh wiki which have started on english wiki--] (]) 09:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| {{unblock reviewed|1=Reasons are writen on 23 August 2010, but Future Perfect is not responding (even on emails...). I can now add new reasons (meta, interwiki problems with sh wiki), but I do not see reasons. This account will be active (or user:Rjecina2) only for interwiki problems between english and sh wikipedia|decline=sh.WP will just have to find someone else to deal with interwiki issues, this reasoning does not adequately address the reasons for your block ''here''. Being an admin on another project is in no way a free pass to do anything in particular here, and there is no good reason to unblock your alternate account as it is still you, and there was in fact strong support for a ban at ANI. I suggest that if you want to pursue this further you contact ] by email. ] (]) 17:35, 9 September 2010 (UTC)}} | |||
| Hi, I was rather hoping to get an authorative opinion on Srebrenica. Im reading a particulary outspoken source (Barrat Brown, Yugoslavia the lost country) who notes 2300 bodies, only 199 having clearly been executed of the supposed 7500-8000 who were killed during the massacre. Is he right? Were the numbers inflated to make NATO bombardment a possibility? Thanking you ] (]) 09:37, 16 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| {{unblock reviewed|1=I am blocked because of "disruptive conduct has resumed". Is the writing warnings to wikipedia users to end the interwiki vandalism on sh Misplaced Pages Disruptive conduct? If answer is yes then I am guilty, because this is reason behind ban (my only edit between april and september)|decline=And that shows you really don't get why you were blocked and why your behaviour is a problem here. ] <sup>'']''</sup> 19:09, 12 September 2010 (UTC)}} | |||
| == Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
| <div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
| The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. | |||
| ==Croatia article== | |||
| I thought i have put the fact tag after someone claimed that moderate Croats were killed by Croatian forces as well.Because i have refference about moderate Serbs killd by their own forces.The biggest problem is that Serbian editors are vandilizing Croatian,Bosniak and Albanian articles in order to confuse people who are not familiar with the subject.--] (]) 15:31, 18 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| I have also put the tag behing the 350.000,because there is no such informtion that claims that,except maybe in the world of Seselj's syphatizers.--] (]) 15:36, 18 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> ] ] 16:10, 27 October 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::Sorry to jump into the discussion. Serbs don't edit or care about Croatian articles. We want to give you guys some space to edit as you see fit. We have an unwritten rule on Misplaced Pages, Serbs don't edit Croatian and Croats don't edit Serbian articles. This is because of edit warring that usually occurs. This brings me to my most important point. We as Serb editors have one nuclear weapon in our arsenal. That is to describe the hellish crimes we have been though in Croatia on articles such as Croatia, and Croats. These crimes are facts and are relevant to those two articles. Its just that we are humble and merciful. We don't want you as Croats to suffer because of shame that this would bring to your country. We do ask for you to stay fair. For example, stay off of Serbs of Croatia article since it's those Serbs who have suffered the greatest under your tyranny. Stay off, means do not tell me that Serbs speak Croatian, that Vlahs were a group of people, and many more.] (]) 21:49, 29 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Europe 10,000 Challenge invite == | |||
| :::You are violating Misplaced Pages rules by demanding what and what not user Rjecina and other Misplaced Pages members can edit. As for this pseudo-editing rule you are talking about, it false and contrary to Misplaced Pages's foundations that anyone can edit an article to improve it. It is often the very best thing to have editing disputes and differing opinions on articles because they help create dialogue and push a more neutral, NPOV sections. As for your claim that Serbs and Croats don't edit "each others" articles, that is also a complete falsehood that I will not waste time discussing. Also, it would be in best interests if you do not speak for all Serbian editors on Misplaced Pages. There is nothing on Misplaced Pages which would support "we as Serb editors have one nuclear weapon in our arsenal." There is no way you can back up such a fallacious claim. | |||
| Hi. The ] has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland ]. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like ]. For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like ], sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --] (]) 21:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
| :::Your following remarks are purposely inflammatory and are obviously written in a way which you attempt to project your personal frustrations while attempting to display a righteous attitude and play the victim. This is a common tactic found in debaters who engage in personal attacks to propel their own proclaimed greatness, so you must not pay any attention to it, Rjecina. They often begin by testing the waters with back-handed compliments and kindness until they have nothing more relevant to say and move on to vicious attacks and outright insults, while, of course, still professing their righteous displacement. Then they attempt to stand on moral high-ground, which is really nothing than them self-complimenting themselves.--] (]) 00:25, 30 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Ser_Amantio_di_Nicolao/sandbox&oldid=748363836 --> | |||
| == ] == | |||
| :Self control is a key virtue. Supposed that my "fallacious" claim is as follows. Looking at the current history section on ]. The article that receives at least 5 thousand views daily. My point is that it doesn't have anything about the crimes in that section. ] that are true and part of the Croatians history. If I were to add these crimes to the article, it would look extremely bad on Croats in the eyes of the world. I dont write about them because I'm merciful and fair. On the other hand, my requirement is that you edit Serbian article carefully or dont edit them at all if you are there to be nationalistic. Cite, discuss, and be civil when editing. Especially the articles pertaining to the Serbs of Croatia because its those Serbs who have suffered the most under the Croats.] (]) 06:45, 30 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Hi. We're into the last five days of the ]. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale! | |||
| == Absence == | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=WiR_list_2&oldid=812113507 --> | |||
| I just wanted to say I really appreciate your efforts to keep articles unbiased in my absence :) Thanks and keep up the good work. --<font face="Eras Bold ITC">] <sup>(])</sup></font> 16:19, 18 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Intel Atom vs VIA Nano == | |||
| About your edit: I added "slightly" to reflect a fact, read the article for details. | |||
| Actually I didn't want to completely rewrite the "competition" section, that's why I just added only "slightly". If you want I can suggest something <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:54, 20 January 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == BBC == | |||
| There’s something really wrong with English knowledge of modern history. | |||
| I sow this link you used as an argument in discussion with other users. After reading it I learned one important peace of recent history of my country and my hometown. According to BBC ''Partisan forces liberated Belgrade, capital of Yugoslavia, just a few hours before the Red Army arrived''. --] (]) 11:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I personally don’t have a problem with Balkan sources, but our colleagues here obviously prefer BBC. --] (]) 08:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==3rr false warning== | |||
| Hi. You gave me a false warning on 3RR. My edits were substantially different. In particular, my last edit corrected most of the numbers Croats in other countries which were obvious result of vandalism - they disagree with the quoted references, often rising numbers in obvious ways (say, for serbia, the reference gives 70,000, and this number was falsified to 170,000 with the last three digits intact. Many other such cases were corrected. This is a truly new edit. As for the data, if one adds partial information from different countries, the data agrees - but even by wildest stretch of imagination and using previous falsified data on countries, you cannot get even close to 9 million, which is claimed by unreliable croatian nationalist source. Only reliable sources are accepted, and croatian nationalist data is certainly not that. ] (]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment was added at 00:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :You are sure?! In fact, I was not part of that discussion, I merely restored the valid info. You jump into conclusions far too easily. The figure of 9 milion is a wild overestimate, and I think you know it, otherwise discrepancy between numbers would be enoug to rise your doubt. But you seem to be just a POV pusher. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 00:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == Re: Grammar == | |||
| Ok :) --<font face="Eras Bold ITC">] <sup>(])</sup></font> 06:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Croatia - Hapsburgs == | |||
| I really like the information you put on the article here ], but I noticed a lot of grammatical errors. I noticed the names of the contributors are Slavic, and the errors are consistent with Slavic versus English use of articles (a, an, the, so on). I'm not sure if I have to ask or not, but I'd like to go in and edit some typos and grammar errors to make the article more properly consistent with English. | |||
| I came on the information since I'm doing an article on Croatia from 1989 and onward for my Eastern Central European Politics class, and I would love to hear more that you know! <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 11:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == {{user|Bizso}} == | |||
| Could please take a look of this dude's writings? He is inserting some severe Magyar gibberish into the history section of the ] article you wrote. Many thanks --] (]) 22:16, 15 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I don't think it's Toroko because he edits other topics as well and his account was created even before Toroko's account, should be the other way around if it's him, I'll take a look at his contribs anyway. ] (]) 20:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::What the heck? I feel like being in the USSR. If a say a word that is not the accepted by SOME PEOPLE then I am accused of being a vandal? Do you know what the concept of FREE SPEECH means? Are you accusing me because of the Croatia Hungary relationships?! THAT's CALLED A DISPUTE! And it's not only me! Historians argue on ACADEMIC LEVEL! WIKIPEDIA is NOT YOURS!. It's meant to present the sheer facts! Misplaced Pages lists all significant viewpoints! That the policy of NPOV:Balance. What you do is you oppress one of the viewpoints, so that you artifically justify yours! ALL viewpoints should exists beside one another if there is a dispute! Are you going to ban me for citing the opinions of other academics that do not conform to you ideas? Who the hell do you think you are? And who the hell are those names that you put on my user page? Are you paranoid? Am I Torokko? Rly? I didn't know that. What you do is you exploit your admin rights to censor Misplaced Pages. But it is not just you. In the ] talk everything was deleted that cited sourced Academic Level References of the other viewpoint. And because I readded them I am called a Vandal? That's the Joke of the century! --] (]) 22:20, 16 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| '''WE MUST ALWAYS FIGHT FOR THE TRUTH?''' Is that your motto?? LOL | |||
| DISRUPTIVE ACCOUNT? Omfg I shit my pants! Man try to restrain your dictatoristic attitude ]!--] (]) 22:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC)<br> | |||
| Please explain it to me why you removed the information on the dispute about the ] in the article ]? I am looking forward to you answer!--] (]) 22:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Reporting == | |||
| Dear Rjecina,<br> | |||
| Just to let you know, I am reporting you. Have a good night--] (]) 23:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Rjecina,<br> | |||
| I am staggered at how you can let yourself behave like this. You are censoring Misplaced Pages! Intentionally! And you are an Admin! You know the right facts! But you still change them! Where ther is a dispute, you supress the other viewpoint! Does it make you feel good? Or why are you doing it?--] (]) 04:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Talkback == | |||
| {{talkback|TenPoundHammer}} | |||
| ] and his otters • <sup>(] • ] • ])</sup> 02:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Hi, Rjecina, what is the problem? And why didn't you tell him you're not an admin? ] (]) 04:59, 17 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Bit surprising as earlier this user edited some articles constructively. ] (]) 05:24, 17 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I don't understand why these discussions were removed in the first place. There are a number of reliable sources there. I mean if Britannica claims something else than WP it is usually embarrassing for the latter. ] (]) 05:44, 17 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I was only talking about , some of these sources do seem to be reliable. No need to be urgent on that, we can discuss when you have time. ] (]) 05:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I haven't checked the citations, only the quality of references. If the citations are presented in a misleading way, these obviously should be corrected. ] (]) 06:24, 17 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==ANI thread about you== | |||
| It probably will come as no surprise, but ] has opened up an ANI thread regarding you ]. ] (]) 18:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Removing talk page comments == | |||
| Hello, just so you know, modifying and removing talk page comments by others, asyou did and is not allowed. Try not to do this in future. Thanks ;-)--]<sup>]/]</sup> 21:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Bizso isn't a banned user. Please don't remove his comments in future.--]<sup>]/]</sup> 16:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::No. Just because someone is from the same city as a banned user doesn't mean they are.-]<sup>]/]</sup> 19:26, 19 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| I reverted to your version, the part should be rewritten. ] (]) 06:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: Constitution == | |||
| No problem, I can do it tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. Where can I find the text? BTW, some ] tried to reveal your identity, but I reported him and his edits were ]. ] <sup>(])</sup> 22:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == ''Roman ruler of Dalmatia'' == | |||
| I have reverted per your input. Things like the box below implied to me that his "rule" was more that a typical Roman general. --<span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>(])</sup></span> 05:55, 23 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| {{s-start}} | |||
| {{s-bef | before=Nobody}} | |||
| {{s-ttl | title=''Roman ruler of Dalmatia'' | year=454 - August468}} | |||
| {{s-aft | after=]}} | |||
| {{end}} | |||
| :Yes, ''I'' have reverted the page, per your input.--<span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>(])</sup></span> 20:58, 25 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 03:06, 26 November 2017
|
Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page. I will respond at your talk page unless you request otherwise. Thank you. |
|
Welcome back
Just welcoming you back to wikipedia. Regards, Kebeta (talk) 17:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks --Rjecina (talk) 18:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
yo yo
Pozdravljajus. :) (LAz17 (talk) 16:14, 12 May 2010 (UTC)).
Speedy deletion nomination of Glenn Henry
A tag has been placed on Glenn Henry requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
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 - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. — Zhernovoi (talk) 23:55, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Re-blocked
Rjecina, when you were banned last year (here), the community consensus was actually for an indefinite ban. I went out on a limb in your favour when I chose to implement the ban decision merely through a one-year block , giving you a chance to come back. However, that was of course linked with the expectation that you would change your editing if you chose to come back. You would of course also still be under all the editing restrictions that were imposed on you prior to your ban.
Unfortunately, seeing the (few) edits you have made since returning, there is no improvement at all. You are right back with the same disruptive pattern. Making an unexplained POV edit on exactly the same issue you were blocked over last year , as the first thing on expiry of your block. Again no meaningful edit summary. Again in broken English, and no visible effort to get your grammar right at last. And then this incomprehensible rant on a talk page.
Unfortunately, this leaves me no hope you will become a constructive contributor yet. On the basis of the ban decision from last year, which is still valid, I am therefore re-blocking you. This time it's indef. If you want to return, you will first have some explaining to do about how you plan to improve your editing. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:48, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
- It is possible that we are having small mistake with this ban4life ?
- My thinking is that this edit summary (bye) has been OK, because that is my last edit on english wikipedia.
- About my broken english it is possible only to say that interwiki spammer has accepted my incomprehensible rant and ended his spamming on sh wikipedia. You can read his statement:"Rijecina2: Don´t worry this will notbe a wiki problem. This discussion will help solve existing problems" . Example of July spamiming on sh wikipedia you can look in this link.
- When this Juli it has become clear that I will become administrator on sh wikipedia I have started to write warnings on others wikipedia about interwiki spam or vandal problems (interwiki warning example on bosnian wiki from 9 August and I will continue to do this in the future. For me it is hard to imagine that this is disruptive conduct or that administrators (which I am on sh wiki) on other wiki must know good english to write interwiki warning on english wikipedia ?
- My proposition is to change definition of this ban4life in:
- "Requested by the user on sh.wikipedia as an unwanted SUL local account"
- and remove ban4life from user:Rjecina2 on english wikipedia so that I can contact administrators or vandals on english wiki about "small" interwiki problems on sh wiki which have started on english wiki--Rjecina (talk) 09:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Rjecina (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Reasons are writen on 23 August 2010, but Future Perfect is not responding (even on emails...). I can now add new reasons (meta, interwiki problems with sh wiki), but I do not see reasons. This account will be active (or user:Rjecina2) only for interwiki problems between english and sh wikipedia
Decline reason:
sh.WP will just have to find someone else to deal with interwiki issues, this reasoning does not adequately address the reasons for your block here. Being an admin on another project is in no way a free pass to do anything in particular here, and there is no good reason to unblock your alternate account as it is still you, and there was in fact strong support for a ban at ANI. I suggest that if you want to pursue this further you contact WP:BASC by email. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:35, 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.
Rjecina (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am blocked because of "disruptive conduct has resumed". Is the writing warnings to wikipedia users to end the interwiki vandalism on sh Misplaced Pages Disruptive conduct? If answer is yes then I am guilty, because this is reason behind ban (my only edit between april and september)
Decline reason:
And that shows you really don't get why you were blocked and why your behaviour is a problem here. Spartaz 19:09, 12 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.
Nomination of Michael Kantakouzenos (died 1316) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael Kantakouzenos (died 1316) is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Michael Kantakouzenos (died 1316) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Constantine ✍ 16:10, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Europe 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Misplaced Pages:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Misplaced Pages:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!