Misplaced Pages

User talk:Nmate: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:32, 30 September 2011 editTParis (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators30,360 editsm Talkback (User talk:TParis) (TW)← Previous edit Latest revision as of 10:24, 15 February 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
(130 intermediate revisions by 40 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==]==
{{Archive box|]<br />]}}.
Hi. I've opened a GAR on the ] article for which you are one of the top ten contributors. I have concerns that it does not quite meet current GA criteria regarding several MoS issues, see ] for more details. ''']''' ''']''' 10:56, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 70K
|counter = 4
|minthreadsleft = 3
|algo = old(1h)
|archive = Talk:Nmate/Archive %(counter)d
}}
== AN thread ==


== ] ==
There's an ] thread about you at ]. <font color="green">]</font>] 16:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


Hi,<br>
Please don't just claim that I and ] are some MarkBA. Don't revert all our contributions without any proof of your claim. You should use ]. If you say something, prove it. How would you feel if I deleted your contributions and said you are MarkBA? ] (]) 18:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current ]. The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages ]. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to ] and submit your choices on ]. For the Election committee, ] (]) 13:36, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692071653 -->
== 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.
== July 2009 ==
] Welcome to Misplaced Pages. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from {{#if:Banská Bystrica|]|Misplaced Pages}}. When removing text, please specify a reason in the ] and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's ]. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the {{#if:Banská Bystrica|<span class="plainlinks"></span>|]}}. Take a look at the ] to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-delete1 --> <span style="font-family:Papyrus">]</span> <sup>(])</sup><sub>(Jenuk1985)</sub> 18:38, 3 July 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 --> -- <b>] <sup>]</sup> </b> 03:13, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
== Sockpuppet Accussations ==

Hello. Can you please stop with deleting the contributions of all editors who happen to come from a particular IP range. You have no evidence that they are the same person other than the IP range (which covered a large geographic area, not fixed to just one person.) In future if you suspect a sockpuppet please report them to ], as your mass deletions are of a disruptive nature. You must ] until sockpuppetry is proven, as not everyone who edits on those articles is a sockpuppet. Looking through your own edits it could be argued you could be one as pretty much all your edits are doing is undoing other people's edits, though I shall also assume good faith. ] ] 10:48, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

== Aplication to undelete my post in the discussion about bratislava. ==

Hello.

I have no Idea, why you delete my post in discussion about bratislava. But probably it was done because you considered my Ip address as proxy.
If you validate my IP as proxy IP, that is wrong. It is not even dynamic Ip Address.
If administrator of such site can not find out which IP address is dynamic, which is static, or what is Proxy, that is for crying.

I am working as abuse crew leader of one international site and I work with IP addresses a lot. I never saw such example of amateur and not competent work as in this case.

If there is some other argument for deleting my message, please be so kind and let me know.
You will not have hard work to find a post, about which I am talking about according to fact, that it was just my second post on wikipedia.

Good luck and thanks in advance.

Juraj Oniščenko alias jurajda. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:21, 29 July 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Hello!

First of all, thank you for your reply and saying the reason of deletation my post.
The reason was: "I deleted your comment out of the talk page of Pozsony/Bratislava for you intend to getting involved with provoking the Hungarians instead of you would have made some costructive or at least good faith edits there, helping to improve the article."

I found your reason as not sufficient.
1. That "talk page" is not about Pozsony/Bratislava, it is about Bratislava, if you want to make a talk page about Pozsony, please feel free and make a new article.
2. Sorry, if you understood my post, and If you deleted it, you should know what you deleted, that whole was just about one thing: That whole problem should be judged by native english speaker, not by hungarian or slovak citizens. Certainly, be sure, that I was not writing that for one hungarian, who will delete that...
3. Ad constructivity: As I mentioned on second point, that article will be much more improoved, if there will be usage of official english name of the town. Not Celtic, Slavonic, Hungarian, German, Turkish, French, Slovak. I think, that is enough understable for Slovakian and Hungarian either. I am sure, that this was clear in my article.

Look, my dear rude administrator/moderator, my father spoke hungarian language as native speaker, I am teaching hungarian students on slovakian university whose slovakian language is far worse than my english, I was working 3 years under hungarian bosses who were far better than slovak one, and you are starting to say me, that I am provoking hungarians. If I am against something, that is not hungarians, but nationalistic sentiments. I will laugh on this and it should be showed, if it is on slovakian side, or hungarian side.

Those discussions, articles about jobbik, representatives of jobbik, černova tragedy, Bratislava, Komarno/Komarom, Hedviga Malinova, showed to me what kind of people are doing wikipedia and what level of reliability this whole project has. Censorship, power, intolerance, prejudice, interests of some groups are far more present than values as truth and knowledge.

My post certainly was not for deletation and you made wrong step, for which wikipedia should be ashamed of.

Good Luck.

jurajda <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 11:53, 30 July 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Slovak dialect ==
It is really not a very important matter, but I do't think it is needed to write necessarily Upper Hungary or Feldvídek ]. There was/is no Upper Hungary or Feldvídek language, but Slovak language existed even before the codification of Bernolák and before constituting Czechoslovakia.--] (]) 12:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

==]==
] Please remember to mark your edits{{#if:|, such as your recent edits to ],}} as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see ]). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}} <!-- Template:uw-minor -->

] Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Misplaced Pages, as you did to ], without giving a valid reason for the removal in the ]. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been ]. Please make use of the ] if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-delete2 --> <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 12:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Could you please cease the disruptive reverting? The name is properly referenced, it should not be removed. Also, could you quit reversions of ] as they are in violation of ]. <span style="font-size:120%;font-style:italic; color:#fff;font-weight:bold; height:20px; background-color:#c00; margin-right:1px"> &nbsp;w</span>] 13:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

== August 2009 ==
] Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages, at least one of your recent edits{{#if:Micronation|, such as the one you made to ],}} did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use ] for any test edits you would like to make, and read the ] to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-vandalism1 --> ] (]) 20:29, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

] Thank you for your contributions to ]. Please don't forget to provide an ]{{#if:Bratislava|, as you forgot on your recent edit to ]|&#32;for your edits}}. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}} <!-- Template:uw-editsummary --> ] (]) 19:53, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

== ] ==
Could you please engage in a proper discussion instead of mindless reversions? I have made a comment on the ] you are very welcome to reply. <span style="font-size:120%;font-style:italic; color:#fff;font-weight:bold; height:20px; background-color:#c00; margin-right:1px"> &nbsp;w</span>] 10:58, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

==Cluj==

With pleasure, Nmate. Regarding the fact that Romanians in Transylvania had a higher standard of living than in the Old Kingdom - perhaps, but we need to ] a ] saying that. The way you did it, it seems as if Lazarovici wrote that, but I don't think that's true (correct me if I'm wrong). Regarding the 1910 census data: first, the same requirement for citation holds; second, the information already seems to be covered in the ] section. I hope this explains matters, and I look forward to editing the article with you in the future. - ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 14:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

== 56 Article FAR ==

Hello Nmate, if you have a moment, please direct your attention ]. Thanks! ] (]) 07:08, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

== Serbs in Vojvodina which you contributed to, is currently up for ] ==

You are welcome to comment in this deletion discussion. ] (]) 19:14, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

== Hungary and Great Moravia ==

"When two editors cannot agree, either editor may list a dispute here to seek a third opinion. " so please, do not try that 'you may not this or that' on me. You have not provided a single word of opinion on the matter, you are relentlessly reverting nevertheless. If it wouldn't bother you too much, would you mind explaining your problem with the inclusion of ]? Best if you do so on the article's talk page. ] (]) 22:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

== Question ==

In response to your message on my talk page: I don't understand your Enlgish. Could you, please, be more clear and write me in simple and short sentences, what do you want me to do? ]\<sup>]</sup> 20:54, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

First of all, allow me to observe that is what we should be talking about, because this shows precisely what I added to the anon's edit. (I see no point in discussing things I do not dispute.) In more detail:
#The anon wrote "In 1918 and 1919, most of the Banat was given without any plebiscite to..". I put instead "In the wake of the Declaration of ] on December 1, 1918, in 1919, most of the Banat became part of..." and "No plebiscite was held." My version does convey exactly the same information, plus additional information. Also, it is more precise: says what exactly happened in 1918 and what in 1919. Also, please note that "was given to" does not say "by whom", and is disputed by historians, while "became part of" is neutral and is not disputed by anybody.
#Anon wrote "A small area near ] remained in ]." I changed it to "A small area near ] became part of newly independent ]." Do you agree or disagree with this formulation?
#In addition, I added: "At the dissolution of ], the delegates of the Romanian and German communities voted for union with Romania, the delegates of the Serbian community voted for union with Serbia, while the Hungarian minority remained loyal to the government in Budapest." which helps understand the background. Do you dispute this?

In short, let me remark that I have no problem with anon's edits per se. I simply improved them. As the things look from my view so far, it is rather you who has a problem with my improvements. But I hope it is just a misunderstanding. Do you dispute any of the 3 things above? ]\<sup>]</sup> 09:58, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

The name of the Assembly on December 15, 1918 was ''National Assembly of Germans of Transylvania and Banat''. Perhaps we need to search more sources in libraries. ]\<sup>]</sup> 13:22, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I am very glad. I would like to express my apologies if I have seemed to you somewhat rigid or impolite. I assure you I gave and will give complete consideration to your edits and remarks. Simply, something was going on in parallel which annoyed and irritated me very much. I hope I did not show irritation in dialog with you, but if I did, I would like to apologize: believe me, I did not mean to be rigid or impolite. (I hope I wasn't, but I prefer to apologize one time too many than one time too few.) Best regards, ]\<sup>]</sup> 21:07, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

== Sourse for the Croatian population in Subotica in 1900 ==

Well, I can not find one source for this claim. I read it somewhere and now just I checked it. According to Habsburg Empire census in 1900, the biggest population in Croatian Kingdom had Zagreb (60 000) but, at that time it was populated more with Germans, Austrians, Hungarians and other nations than with Croats. The second largest city according to the census was Rijeka (40 000), also big population of Italians, Slovens and Austrians. All other cities had less than 30 000.
Nonconservative assumption that Zagreb (as city with biggest population of Croats in the Kingdom) had somewhat less than 30 000 Croats brings us to the conclusion that there were slightly more Croats in Subotica.] (]) 22:22, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

== ] ==

I've wikified this and left a message at ]. ] (]) 18:15, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

== ] of ] ==
]] has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> ] ] 17:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

== ] ==
Hello Nmate. Which part of the ] are you referring to exactly? Could you elaborate, please? I can't find any evidence confirming historical significance of Hungarian name ''Fehér-Kárpátok'' for this particular region. If you can provide reliable sources for it, please do so and I'll gladly change my opinion. Please, respond at ], not at my talk page, to keep the conversation in one place. Thank you. --] (]) 11:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

{{wb|Swarm}}

{{wb|Emika22}}

== Iancu de Hunedoara. ==

Please read the explanation, don`t revert it blindly. There is no rule violation. ] (]) 20:56, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

==Lets forget it==
<Small></Small>

Hem, for the record, i have no intention of ever becoming a mediator. The only reason i am involved in the ] altogether is due to an escalated edit war and a subsequent ]. I think i have clearly stated that i was giving my opinion as a regular user, and i think i have also clearly pointed out that ] would be a better way to mediate this - instead of asking me.

As for the edit you quoted - you might have actually gone trough the process of checking ] edit history as well. You would have seen that this user asked the same question on at least four different talk pages, and that each of these editors had never even been involved with the article in question. Would you have preferred me stating that i am not involved such as ] did? Of course that would be a valid and friendly response but i preferred attempting to help the user in question - unlike who removed the question without so much as an edit summary. Im sorry, but i deem this the words ] quite applicable to this situation. ]</font><sup> (],])</sup> 11:57, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

:Apologise, I haven't been assumed good faith towards you and I was under the impresson that you were trying to make yourself important, so I must apologize for it. But, just to let you know, my reason for removing a certain "friendly" inquiring from my talkpage without any explanation was quite obvious for ], who was leaving the message on my talk page. Since he is a sockpuppet of the banned ]. Just like ], Iaaasi is also eagerly interested in the article ]. So then it could hardly be deemed coincidence when he was trying to interact with ] and you, with whom Iadrian yu has also recently been encountered. And so was this case with administrator ], too, who was rejecting to unblock his another sockpuppet account last time.

:Under the username Umumu, he was also trying to interact with FisherQueen. The likehood of the coincident occurance of these cases is so little that it was not the question that this message has to be removed from my talk page. But as for ],unfortunately, I am not very familiar with English / American sayings as I am ] and I have never been to any English speaking countries. However, in my opinion ] doesn't mean to be stupied and I would be stupied if I deemed Umumu a real account. So that I removed Iaaasi/Umumu's message from my talk page without any explanation because a banned user has no right to edit wikipedia any more.--] (]) 21:18, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

:: No harm done, no apology needed. As for the Umumo matter: If you believe this is a sock puppet, i would advice starting a ] case regarding the matter. As you put it, it is indeed quite coincidental that this editor registers an account and interacts as if he or she has been around here for ages. The broken english both users seem to talk only reinforces my suspicion. ]</font><sup> (],])</sup> 21:45, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

== ] nomination of ] ==
]An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for ]. The nominated article is ]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also ] and "]").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to ]. Please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the ] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

'''Please note:''' This is an automatic notification by a ]. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --] (]) 01:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

== John Hynadi - neutrality disputed ==

Please do not remove this form until the dispute is solved. Especially not like that with no reason like you did. If you have some accusations, please make a socketpuppet investigation. ] (]) 23:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

== 3RR ==

] You currently appear to be engaged in an ''']'''. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the ]. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to ] to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek ], and in some cases it may be appropriate to request ]. If the edit warring continues, '''you may be ] from editing''' without further notice. <!-- Template:uw-3rr --> Please read 3RR. Thanks ] (]) 11:06, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

== Kosice ==

How is it possible that the Slovak name of Kosice appeared first time in history in 1257, although the Slovak language did not even existed at the time and the Slovaks used the Czech variant of bibličtina?--'''<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml"><font color="#151B8D" face="comic sans ms">]</font>'''<sup><font color="red">]</font></sup></span> 09:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
:{{tb|baxter9}}--'''<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml"><font color="#151B8D" face="comic sans ms">]</font>'''<sup><font color="red">]</font></sup></span> 14:00, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

==Iaaasi/Bonaparte's mountebanking==

Hi there,

Knowing that a checkuser process may take a longer while (+ 2 or 3 weeks) than creating a next one, Iaaasi returned under the username {{user|Conttest}}.His latest blocked sockpuppet , {{user|Umumu}}, was so insolent that commenced lingering disccussions on WP ANI
and Fringe_theories boards in which he vigorously participated of course. Then he falsely denounced ]
for vandalism
and eventually he tried to get ] blocked on Edit warring board
Also, it is important to note that the reason why Umumu was blocked was
he was a sockpuppet of veteran sockmaster of
{{user|Bonaparte}}.
And now this new user, Conttest, suspiciously emerged at the same article ], which was the main hunting field of Iaaasi/]/Umumu.

It looks to me that if his recurring sock-accounts are not blocked with quicker velocity than the time a checkuser process usually takes he will stop at nothing. May I ask what do you think of it? Good luck and best wishes--] (]) 09:21, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

: Umumu contacted me on IRC in the past, and after this message Conttest contacted me there as well. A WHOIS on Conttest responded with this line: "Conttest <qeqqeeqqqe@(REDACTED)> “Umumu”", which confirmed that he is indeed Umumu (I redacted the IP address from the line). I didn't comment on it and instead just asked if the accusation was true which Conttest admitted: "<Conttest> the fact is that his accusation is true, I am iaaasi/umumu, but I made this account only to make constructive edits to show that I am not a disruptive user"

: I am not sure if he is directly related to Bonaparte, or if this is a separate group. Regardless i blocked Conttest for sockpuppeting and advised him to take it to the mailing list if he wishes to have his block reviewed. I also advised him that a two month or so timeout without further sockpuppets may demonstrate that he intends to be a constructive editor. Also a note for future reference: The user indicated that he won't be editing the disputed topic anymore when unblocked. ]</font><sup> (],])</sup> 12:32, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

== Battle of Pressburg ==

What seems to be the problem with mentioning Brezalauspurc? It did not bother you before ] (]) 15:08, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

==Hungarian names for Romanian places==
Re your message on my talk page, is there a particular editor who is going against established policy re place names in alternate languages and repeatedly editing against consensus? As I recall, there is general consensus re these cases that alternative language names are appropriate to appear in the lede of an article where these are different from the article title. ] (]) 20:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

== Reviewer granted ==

]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "<tt>reviewer<tt>" userright, allowing you to ] on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a ] at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not ] to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious ] or ], and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see ]). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found ].

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. <!-- Template:Reviewer-notice --> –]] 12:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

== Edit warring at ] ==

Could we please have some discussion of the tags, rather than just reverting? ] (]) 14:23, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

== 48 ==

Üdv! Bocsi, hogy ismeretlenül írok, de a 48-as szabadságharc angol cikknél ki kéne szedni a szlovák, ruszin, német stb népet. Csak a zsidók álltak ki teljes mértékben a magyarok mellett.

Ne felejtsük el, Ludovit Stúr és a többi pánszlávista mozgalamat. A németek meg hűek maradtak az osztrákokhoz, lásd Erdélyben, de az már tény, hogy sok német is harcolt magyar oldalon.

Szóval magyar oldalon teljes mértékben csak zsidók és lengyel önkéntesek voltak.

A többi nép autonómia és az anyanyelvük tiltása miatt ELLENEZTÉK a magyarokat.

Üdv <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 03:19, 7 July 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Szia,.mivel hogy Ip- ről írsz, inkább a saját vitalapomon válaszolok neked; mert az Ip címek folyamatosan változnak. Igazad van abban amit Ludovit Stúrral, meg a szlovákokkal kapcsolatban mondasz, azonban azonban az ő pánszláv mozgalmának nem volt sok követője.A szepességi németek és a ruszinok döntő többsége szintén minket támogatott.
:Szóval az infó kiszedése helyett inkább az átírása, illetve pontosítása lenne a jobb megoldás.--] (]) 12:52, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello Nmate! Én tudok forrásokat is adni amellett, hogy sok szlovén harcolt a szabadságharc honvédseregében. Ők nekik is voltak nemzetiségi mozgalmaik, s támogatta egy részük a Habsburgokat, de nem kezdeményeztek fegyveres harcot a magyarok ellen. Az interneten van sorozási lista Vas megyéből, ahol a szlovén falvakból ki lehet keresni a neveket, de ezek nem adnak pontos adatot, mert később is voltak katonaállítások. Illetve ez csak Vas adatai, Zaláról, Somogyról még nincs egészen, viszont talán 1000-2000 közötti számban szolgáltak szlovénok. A magyar wikin már írva az egyik cikkben erről. ]<sup>]</sup> 09:22, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Itt a már írtam fel forrásokat. Ott a Kik voltak a honvédek? címűre ha rámész ott találod a vasi sorozás listát, ahol például keresheted Permisét, Kőhidát, Kerkafőt, Muraszombatot (csak az a baj, hogy nem egészen jó az ábécé sorrend, ezért lehet, hogy pl. Permisét kicsit lejjebb találod meg, mondjuk az R-nél). A másik kétnyelvű kiadványt is valahol el lehet érni az interneten, de én inkább mégis a könyvet írtam oda, ISBN számmal. Vannak még más kutatások is, csak éppen nem fértem még hozzájuk.<br>
Ebben a Kik voltak a honvédekben még lehet más érdekességet találni, például a mostani Szlovéniából, a stájer és krajnai részről is jöttek önkéntesek harcolni a honvédseregbe, s Vasban jelentkeztek. Az egyik burgenlandi településen pedig egy dán férfi jelentkezett önkéntesnek. ]<sup>]</sup> 15:21, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Persze, persze, nyugodtan. Látom Hunyadinál van probléma. Mert én is sokat vitatkoztam ott, talán még lehet látni a vitában. ]<sup>]</sup> 13:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

== Miercurea-Ciuc talk page - reverted vandalism comments ==

Your revert was inflammatory and inappropriate because you removed my comment but left the Vandal`s comment who practically screams for ]- that is inappropriate behavior. Thank you for some information that I already knew and that was unnecessary for you to tell me in this case. Don`t take this the wrong way but I can`t know who I am talking with because your account is shared by 2 or more persons, so one day you can speak perfect English another not even a reasonable sentence. Your account has provoked many ethnic based edit wars between Slovakians, Romanians and Hungarians so please, read your advice you wrote at my talk page also about ]. Your explanations about my "behavior" is beyond any point biased and has no contact with reality. I would like to ask you in the future to review your edits before starting new edit wars without any valid reason for Misplaced Pages. At Panonian Basin I explained my edits at the talk page where the information you mentioned was inserted there with exactly that point (to promote irredentism) and if you don`t understand something please contact me and I will do my best to explain it. Thank you.] (]) 11:04, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

== Your filing at ] ==

Hello Nmate. Your about ] is waiting for any evidence that he was notified of the ] sanctions. Unless you can provide a link showing notice, the complaint will most likely be closed without action. The Digwuren case provides:<blockquote>Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision by an uninvolved administrator; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.</blockquote>Thanks, ] (]) 22:04, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


== Üdv, fontos ==

Üdv. Bocs, hogy ismeretlenül írok, de már midnennek a teteje hogy a szlovákok mindent ellopnak a magyaroktól. Kitalálták h Hadik András is szlovák volt. Bazz, a szlovákok parasztok voltak és a nemesek nem is keveredtek vele meg minden áhhh

kérlek nézd meg a hadik andrás cikket és szedd össze a magyarokat és csináljatok végre rendet! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:39, 5 September 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== September 2010 ==
] I noticed that you have posted comments in a language other than English. When on the English-language Misplaced Pages, please always use English, no matter to whom you address your comments. This is so that comments may be comprehensible to the community at large. If the use of another language is unavoidable, please provide a translation of the comments. For more details, see ]. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-english --> ] (]) 11:57, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

:Point taken.--] (]) 14:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

== Notes about rollback, userboxes, and being literal, ==

Hopefully the ANI thread is still fresh in your mind, because I am concerned with other matters to go link digging right now. In your ANI thread about another users' use of rollback, you state:

{{xt|1='''And in addition, there is a template on his user page that "This user reverts vandalism in the blink of an eye with Twinkle!". In other words, while reverting, one of his eyes blinks''' and of course his ability of apprehension of English written texts is very limited due to his poor command of the language.}}

I have bolded the relevant lines. This template does not mean that, it means the user fights vandalism with twinkle, not that they do not think while using it. Please ], and don't take everything so literally.— ''']]<sup> ]</sup>''' 03:51, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
:I am not going to involve myself in your content dispute, as I do not have the time, or the energy. My own concern was your assumption of the twinkle ], and how you were taking it literally. As I have said, please do not take things like that. That is not what the box means, and really, the user is not the one that originally created it. It means the user fights vandalism with twinkle. Whether or not that is what they actually do is not at issue; that is what the box means, and that is why I am here. Please learn to assume good faith, and not bad faith of everything you see.— ''']]<sup> ]</sup>''' 23:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

==Naming conventions==
Hi. I want to inform you that there is current voting about name of this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Momcsilló_Tapavicza#Requested_move Perhaps you can say your opinion there if you wish. ] 13:23, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

== Talkback ==

{{Talkback|Iaaasi}}

== Please note ==

Informational note: this is to let you know that there currently is a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Regards, This is in reference to the ] you submitted earlier. --] (]) 16:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

==Naming Guide==

Sir, I am aware of the Slovak-Hungarian naming conventions. Could you reference an instance where I have violated them? If you are referring to the article ] then yes I know some naming conventions are probably a little off, which will of course be rectified as soon as possible when I have more time to devote to making that article even better. Thanks for the reminder, though! ] (]) 14:31, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

== March 2011 ==
] Thank you for ] to ]. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an ], which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to ] and ]. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for ]). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-editsummary --> ''When performing an edit which is an undo or reverting material, please give an edit summary. This is not the first time you have been asked to provide edit summaries.'' ] (]) 21:28, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


Hi Nmate, please respond to the ANI thread currently at ]. It would help if you could describe rationally what the dispute is about. Your editing practices really are rather bad, as Adrian describes, and it's unlikely that Arbcom will listen to any complaint about this without prior dispute resolution. ] (]) 10:09, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

:Hi, Nmate. This is a reminder that you need to focus on the content, not on the contributors. Two users have recently complained about your behavior, so please tone it down and avoid any remarks that other users could consider insulting. Thank you. --] <sup>(])</sup> 18:42, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

{{tb|Stifle|Arbitration_enforcment_warning_request}}
==Talkback==
{{talkback|HJ Mitchell|A request|ts=16:35, 30 April 2011 (UTC)}}
&mdash; ] &#124; ] 16:35, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

== Re: IP 95.180.18.56 ==

He's been attacking the same set of dozen pages, altering or removing sourced contents. He's been blocked 2-3 times, up to 2 weeks, for those same edits. In the past month, I've reported him twice at ], with no effect, and without a feedback. So yes, I'm frustrated by now, and the rollback is now the last resort. That IP has been static for past 6 months, and needs a 1-2-month block to deter. ] (]) 10:38, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

== Új szócikk ==

Szia! Csináltam a "HU-SK relations" szócikk kapcsán egy új szócikket, és gondoltam, szólok, biztos, ami biztos: ] -- ] (]) 22:38, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

== Sandor Petofi ==
Could you please explain your recent actions on the article's talk, removal of references is not standard or proper editing practice. Thank you. ] (]) 09:24, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

== Revert warring an SPA ==

Seems like it'd be a good idea for you to report the SPA at a noticeboard, rather than endlessly revert warring with him. Just a thought. ]] (]) 11:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

== June 2011 ==
] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]. Users are expected to ] with others, to avoid editing ], and to ] rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.<br>
In particular, ] states:
# '''Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made'''; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
# '''Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.'''
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's ] to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents ] among editors. You can post a request for help at an ] or seek ]. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary ]. If you continue edit warring, you '''may be ] from editing.'''<!-- Template:uw-ew --> ''This includes several articles. Talk it out before reverting.'' -- ]] <font color="blue">]</font></font></font> 12:27, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

== Omen1229 ==

Omen's user page expresses an opinion, he is allowed to do that. I have advised him that he will have an easier life if he is clearer about he difference between opinion and immutable fact, and I give you the same advice:

It is generally fine to express a belief or opinion on a user page, and to give others a good idea of your perspective on important matters. It is best to do this in a way that shows sensitivity to the Misplaced Pages ideals of understanding, compromise, and following the sources. In other words, it is best to sound more like a scholar and less like a demagogue.

I have closed the discussion at this point and I suggest you disengage from Omen1229 or at least restrict your discussions to specific changes to content supported from good sources. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 17:01, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

:Okay, thanks for your advice.--] (]) 11:16, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

==Socpuppet investigation==
I want to inform you that I mentioned your user name here: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nmate If I am wrong about this, I apologize to you for that. ] 12:21, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

== Checkuser case ==

{{tb|Baxter9}}

== Máté Csák (grammar) ==

THX! , Mindig is azon gondolkodtam, h mikor fogok én is olyan üzenetet kapni tőled amiben konstatálod, hogy az angol nyelvi "tudásom" lehetetlenné tesz mindennemű érdemi közreműködést! :D--'''<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml"><font color="#151B8D" face="comic sans ms">]</font>'''<sup><font color="red">]</font></sup></span> 09:58, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

==Socks, etc...==
So, what is problem now? Do you deny that user:Buhuhu was indeed a sock? And do you deny that you reverted article to sock's version? Do you deny that it is suspicious if somebody revert article to version of newly created sock? As for ArbCom report, you are free to open one if you think that my behavior was wrong in any way, just be sure to emphasize that you opened it because of - I am sure that this is very valid reason for ArbCom report. ] 10:28, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

==Arbitration request==

Could you please be more clear as to ? '''<font color="navy">]</font>''' ''(<font color="green">]</font>)'' 15:25, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

:I took a look, and it appears you somehow placed a request for enforcement template onto the case request page. ] is only for requesting a new, full arbitration case, but the template you used and apparent remedy you were seeking belongs on ]. I've moved the request there and reformatted things; if this was incorrect, please let me or NW know and I can try to help out. ] <sup>(]/]/])</sup> 15:59, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

== Invitation ==

Hi. I have sent a ] on the user ]. If you have positive or negative experiences with this user and wish to share them, or if you merely can agree with the essence of the mentioned complaint, you are hereby invited to do this.

--- ] (]) 12:08, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

== You have been reported ==

You have been reported --] (]) 12:16, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
:Nmate - I have gone through a few of your contributions and I see some serious ] ( ). I understand you feel these are ] edits, however, they were made in ]. You need to discuss with the user your concern rather than undoing their revisions. Also, on ]'s talk page was inappropriate. Talk page messages do not have to be in English. Please do not remove comments from folks talk pages, especially from other people. You were that you are under restrictions at ]. This message is a reminder of that restriction, and at this time I've chosen not to block you for a week in the hope that you'll correct your behavior with this reminder.--v/r - ]] 15:14, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
::What you consider vandalism is actually good faith attempts to edit. I'll admit, as I said above, there is point of view pushing. However, you need to stop calling it vandalism and discuss on the talk page. Edit warring over NPOV will get you blocked. Suggesting someone has a mental disorder because they are stalking you is marginally a personal attack and marginally uncivil. This is your last warning, as you've ignored my previous one, stop the edit warring or you'll be blocked. You need to start dialogue with those you disagree with.--v/r - ]] 11:46, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
==Talkback==
{{talkback|TParis|ts=13:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)}}
v/r - ]] 13:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 10:24, 15 February 2023

Talk:Banská Bystrica/GA1

Hi. I've opened a GAR on the Banská Bystrica article for which you are one of the top ten contributors. I have concerns that it does not quite meet current GA criteria regarding several MoS issues, see Talk:Banská Bystrica/GA1 for more details. SilkTork 10:56, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:36, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Vök for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vök 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/Vök 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. -- Dane 03:13, 3 April 2017 (UTC)