Category:Civic youth organizations, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 11:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BosniaSarajevo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Green Giant (talk) 23:13, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Apologies, but I may have been wrong about this. Could you look into the history of the deleted source file and see when the CC license was added by the author? If it was after your upload then you haven’t broken the license terms. Green Giant (talk) 00:29, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for looking at the file. I believe the GFDL terms only require a link, so your upload should be fine. Again, I’m sorry for the error but I hope this is now resolved. Green Giant (talk) 09:57, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

On the contrary, I’ve moved it to Commons, where free-licensed files can be kept as long as there is a potential educational use, which it has. Could you delete the local copy? Green Giant (talk) 11:16, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi,

I noticed this comment of yours aimed against me diff people with a history of abusing the English Wikipedia on related topics. I understand that you hate me because you were blocked after I pointed to the issues with your editing. I do not understand you misusing Jimbo Wales talkpage to continue your little feud against me. Please stop with your WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:16, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

If you continue with your WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior against me and repeated accusations against me in inappropriate pages (article talkpages or other editors talkpages) I will report you. Please understand this as a warning.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:58, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Here it is: [1]. The entire process turned into a comedy of errors. Nevertheless, I still don't think I'd agree with the steward's decision and its rationale. (That's if it was of any consequence one way or the other, which I'd say it isn't.) GregorB (talk) 08:37, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, AAR still applies. Nevertheless, since they don't have their own process, wouldn't it be fair to assume the community has full discretion about giving or removing admin tools? Normally, an admin may be demoted through a community vote for pretty much any reason; that has nothing to do with AAR. So, I was a bit stumped here. Still, as I said, no real difference. GregorB (talk) 19:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

From my perspective, whoever did the nominations was very selective in who got nominated: [2] and also the AAR removal done here Anything from hrwiki is already looked at with extra scrutiny by stewards anyway. --Rschen7754 19:53, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Rschen7754, indeed: targeting certain admins, all the while resisting the implementation of local AAR policy despite multiple calls to do so - all part of the above-mentioned "comedy of errors". Kubura fumbled the voting deadline and changed it later without providing an edit summary (his habit), which made it appear as if he was unilaterally, surreptitiously cutting the voting short. Denny appealed, and more nonsense followed.[3] Apart from that, I was surprised (or maybe not, given that's hr wiki) to see that amount of disdain and resentment towards inactive admins, as if walking away from wiki is a crime.

As for "extra scrutiny", Rschen, you'll forgive me if I say in this particular case it looks more like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. GregorB (talk) 20:52, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm not a steward anymore, so it's not any of my doing The problem is that this is an area that nobody is tasked with and nobody really has a mandate to do anything. Stewards won't do anything (apart from a few acting on their own) and arguably can't anyway since they can't without local or global consensus. WMF has refused to do anything, repeatedly. So I'm not sure where that leaves hrwiki. The closest thing possible might be to get some global discussion (but this time, keep it simple, not tl;dr), or to enforce the global inactivity policies strictly and hope there is some sort of change eventually. --Rschen7754 20:59, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Um, the whole inactivity desysop issue is completely tangential to the egregious abuses going on at hrwiki. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:22, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing—DMZ_(computing)—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Stephen Charles Thompson (talk) 19:39, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Joy. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Prozor, Bosnia and Herzegovina is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prozor, Bosnia and Herzegovina until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. --Audi1merc2 (talk) 20:55, 25 December 2018 (UTC)