Welcome!

Hello, CoolKoon, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• 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! --Tone 13:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I ever see you say such things again, you will be blocked for violating Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Khoikhoi 06:26, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 11:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Helló! A hangok nem magyar hangok, az ő helyett is valami nagyon durva volt. A magyar hangok IPA-jelölése viszont ismert, nem most kell megpróbálni rekonstruálni valami afrikai nyelvleckének hangzó hangfelvétel alapján. :) KovacsUr 19:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, CoolKoon.
On the talk page of the article Zadar, you've said: "I'll finally know the Croatian names for the cities in Hungary."
You've mentioned Debrecen, Kecskemét, Székesfehérvár, Miskolc, Eger, Esztergom, Komárom, Győr, Pécs, I'll tell you names for the few cities from that list.
Székesfehérvár was called "Stolni Biograd" in Croatian. Still, in modern Croatian, you'll see form in Hungarian in use (mostly without diacritics, like "Szekesfehervar").
Pécs is called "Pečuh". Name is in use in standard Croatian.
Nagykanizsa (not mentioned above) is called "Velika Kaniža". Name is in use in standard Croatian, sometimes is used Hungarian form.
And, of course, Budapest is "Budimpešta". Name is in use in standard Croatian.
For the other cities, I'll provide names, as soon as I find the names. Still, it's important to note, that in modern Croatian standard language, mostly Hungarian nameforms are used for the cities in Hungary. Greetings, Kubura 17:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, CoolKoon-bacsi.
As I promised....
Croat minority in Hungary has also its names for the cities in Hungary. Those names are in use in the Hungarian Croat press (but not in Croatia!), that uses Croat standard language (with the exception of Gradišće/Burgenland Croats, they use their version of Croat standard). Also, some cities are there named without some adjectives in name. E.g., Magyarovar is in Croatian historiography/older sources in Croatian called "Ugarski Stari Grad", while local Croat minority from there calls that city "Stari Grad, Starograd, Starigrad" (at the same time, they call Mosony as "Možun"). Similar is with Szekesfehervar; while old Croatian sources calls it as "Stolni Biograd", local Croat minority calls it "Biograd", and appears under that name in Hungarian Croat press. Nagykanizsa is called simply "Kaniža".
Croat minority in Hungary has also its names for some other cities (names are used in their press in Hungary): Debrecen is "Debrcin, Debrecin", Kecskemét is "Kečkemerac, Kečkemit", Eger is sometimes called "Jegar", Komárom is "Komoran", Győr is "Jura, Đura, Vjura", Esztergom is "Ostrogon", Zalaegerszeg is called "Jegersak", Szeged is called "Segedin" (also in use in Croatian press), etc..
Recently, there was a scientific work from Hungarian scientist, titled "Croat names for toponyms in Hungary". Kubura 07:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, does "Koon" in your username has somethings with Kuns (like in Kiskunsag), Cumans? Greetings, Kubura 07:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, CoolKoon-bacsi.
When I've said, that Albanians were more important for the history of Zadar than Hungarians, I wasn't fooling.
Maybe it sound sarcastic, but that's truth.
Beside the Albanians that came from Kosovo, W Macedonia and E Montenegro to Zadar (during times of Yugoslavia), there's an original Albanian immigrant colony, today in the city of Zadar (before 50 years it was an outer village, than a suburb of Zadar, nowadays it's a cityquarter of Zadar). That Albanian are descendants of Albanians that escaped from Ottoman terror in Albania.
That part of the city of Zadar is called Arbanasi.
Arbanasi have their special dialect, with a lot of Albanian in it.
The streets in that part are named after Albanians and Albanians-related persons like: Juraj Kastriotić, Milan Šufflay (Croatian albanologist, beaten to death by royal Yugoslav police), fra Gjergj Mishta, Illyrian queen Teuta, Ivan Petani.
In the Age of national awakenings, in 19th century, that Albanian community turned to - Croathood!
Big point about this is that Albanians are traditionally "closed" community, very hard to assimilate. But, unlike with the other world, they turned to Croats, to poorer people, not toward much richer Italian-speaking community. And at that time, Croatia wasn't independent.
Today, Arbanasi are very influential for the Zadar.
Basketball player and Josip Đerđa comes from that community.
Croatian minister of transport Božidar Kalmeta is also Arbanas.
Croatian singer Mladen Grdović also has Arbanas roots.
More famous Arbanasi are on the page hr:Arbanasi.
On the other hand, what Hungarian was important for Zadar? Kubura 17:48, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not editing that article (I did it only twice recently [1] and [2]), I've just added some messages to the talkpage.
If someone accuses me in "not want to reach a compromise", just because I don't want to allow giving others what doesn't belong to them at all, than that accusation says something about accuser.
About Zadar: during Austria-Hungary, it was in Austrian part of the monarchy. Before that, under the rule of Napoleon, before that, under the rule of Venice (crusaders captured it for the Venice), before that, in Kingdom of Croatia-Hungary (or Hungary-Croatia, put it as you wish). But in that Kingdom, Zadar was in the part of kingdom that was ruled by Croatian ban (viceroy). So, where is direct connection with Hungary?
On the other hand, Buda and Pest were under Ottoman rule, but I don't see names in Turkish (on Wikipedia) for that, now one city. Although Buda and Pest were directly under Ottoman rule.
I mention this, to show how the rule of "rulers cityname" wasn't implied everywhere. Kubura 12:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, CoolKoon.
I have something for you, I think you'll be interested.
There's a voting on wikipedia Commons, regarding the map Serbia1918.
You'll be VERY interested for that voting.
Link is here [3]. Your vote'll be appretiated. Kubura 11:36, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you cannot edit, please follow the instructions at {{autoblock}} exactly. Sandstein 09:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

CoolKoon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

72.20.5.2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

---

Block message:

{{openproxy}}

• Blocking administrator: Anetode (talk • blocks)

---

Decline reason: Open proxies are generally not allowed, see WP:NOP. — Sandstein 12:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed that you'd been involved in some edit wars involving Hungarian articles. I have created a centralized subpage to discuss some of these disputes, and invite you to participate: User talk:Elonka/Hungarian-Slovakian experiment. --Elonka 08:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have just inserted Gábor Demszky into List of Slovaks (see diff diff) in spite of

• discussion over the list inclusion criteria just now running at User talk:Elonka/Hungarian-Slovakian experiment,
• no evidence on page on Gábor Demszky that he has any tie to Slovakia.

Also despite following current politics I have no idea how he is tied to Slovakia. The provided reference [4] should probably document his tie to Slovakia, but is in Hungarian language therefore please could you give the brief summary at appropriate section of User talk:Elonka/Hungarian-Slovakian experiment? --Ruziklan (talk) 19:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. CoolKoon (talk) 19:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notice: Under the terms of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Digwuren, any editor working on topics related to Eastern Europe, broadly defined, may be made subject to an editing restriction at the discretion of any uninvolved administrator. Should the editor make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, he or she may be blocked for up to a week for each violation, and up to a month for each violation after the fifth. This restriction is effective on any editor following notice placed on his or her talk page. This notice is now given to you, and future violations of the provisions of this warning are subject to blocking.

Note: This notice is not effective unless given by an administrator and logged here.

Elonka 13:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like that's the fate of anybody who's trying to be at least a BIT objective. Thanks. really.......... CoolKoon (talk) 14:10, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(response) You're exactly right about my name. :) I was named after my maternal grandmother Ilona Pazman, though with an Americanized spelling. She was born in Croatia, though I understand that she had Hungarian heritage. I also have many other slavs in my family tree, the whole stretch of eastern Europe. My father was born in Warszawa, but was orphaned by the events of September 1939. I have never been to Hungary or Slovakia, and neither do I speak either language, but I can definitely recognize a few words here and there.  :) More info about my background is at my userpage and website, if you are interested. I am especially looking for assistance in identifying some Polish paintings.[5] --Elonka 05:18, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you too should join this discussion. Squash Racket (talk) 04:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thx. I'll check it out right now CoolKoon (talk) 17:48, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I read somewhere that you live in Bratislava. Can you take a picture sometime about the memorial of the victims of racism and Daniel Tupy? If my sources are right, its on the Tyršovo embankment. It looks like this, (but in technicolor I guess): [6]. Thanks. --Rembaoud (talk) 14:50, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. As soon as I get better I might take some photos there. CoolKoon (talk) 18:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, they are great! :) --Rembaoud (talk) 16:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your repeated personal attack has been reported at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts#User:CoolKoon. --AtonX (talk) 10:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated personal attack against you? Please try not to alter the facts. CoolKoon (talk) 10:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CoolKoon, can you please respond here? User talk:Elonka/Hungarian-Slovakian experiment#CoolKoon. Thanks, Elonka 16:07, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. But I don't want talk about this whole issue anymore in public. I can tell you the whole story from my POV, but only in private. CoolKoon (talk) 17:51, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please send me an email: elonka@aol.com . And please try to keep all your comments here in English from now on, thanks. --Elonka 17:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can only promise that I'll try to. CoolKoon (talk) 10:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Fritz bot has been approved at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FritzpollBot for filling in a possible 1.8 million articles on settlements across the world. Now dabbing needs to be done for links which aren't sorted as the bot will bypass any blue links. and I need as many people as possible to help me with Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Places to prepare for the bot. If you could tackle a page or two everything counts as it will be hard to do it alone. Thankyou ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 12:13, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

![7] thanks, Jur..ahem...I mean CK. ;-)

Wow! Unfortunately I'm not sure whether I can accept this award, since I'm not a "genuine" Hungarian (just a "Cseszkó" or what do they call us in Hungary). I've lived for a few years in Budapest though (even attended an elementary school there):D CoolKoon (talk) 14:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. --Music26/11 20:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Transport management system requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Mission Fleg (talk) 07:12, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me how to remove the image instead since I've reuploaded it to the Commons with some description as well so this one is not needed anymore CoolKoon (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What was this ?. --Olahus (talk) 00:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it is used

as a countable noun, a group of humans, either with unspecified traits, or specific characteristics (e.g. the people of Spain or the people of the Plains).

 wlad 17:21, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please, look up what countable noun stands for. Peoples is used to describe several whole nations. For example Hungarian and Slovak peoples. And it's definitely not found in literature exclusively.  wlad 18:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yes, I see you're not a native-speaker http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/PEOPLES  wlad 20:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ja som to myslel v dobrom, si presvedceny o blbosti a vydavas ju za absolutnu pravdu. Jednak to nemam rad, ale hlavne, ak viem, rad sa podelim, raz sa ti moze zist. Tu mas aj oxforda, aby si mi nevycital irelevantne zdroje http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/meltingpot?view=uk  wlad 20:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Boze, este raz: peoples je nespravne, pokial to myslis ako niekolko ludi. Na druhej strane niekolko narodov, to sa uz oznacuje peoples uplne bezne. Ak si vsimnes, aj sam velky oxford to pouziva (je jedno, pri akom hesle). A ano, si presvedceny o blbosti, a tou blbostou je, ze peoples sa nikdy, za ziadnych okolnosti, nepouziva. To nie je pravda. Tu to mas aj lopatisticky.

". When people means “the entire body of persons who constitute a community or other group by virtue of a common culture, history, etc.,” it is used as a singular, with the plural peoples: This people shares characteristics with certain inhabitants of central Asia. The aboriginal peoples of the Western Hemisphere speak many different languages" http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/peoples - usage notes uuuplne dole.

A este footnote - ucitelia anglictiny su argument dobry tak na basic English a od native-speakrov sa neoplati tahat gramaticke rozumy, kedze presne gramaticke pravidla vacsinou nepoznaju, len su na nieco zvyknuti.  wlad 22:18, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at Wladthemlat's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at Wladthemlat's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at Wladthemlat's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at Wladthemlat's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at Wladthemlat's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You may be interested in this. István (talk) 21:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thx. I'll check it out in a while. CoolKoon (talk) 22:07, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pond Loop Being Sunk.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Pond Loop Being Sunk.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Pond Loop Being Sunk.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pond Loop Close Up.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Pond Loop Close Up.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work there at this article. the missus is Hungarian and we are slowly but properly editing some geo and bio and history Hungarian articles, but it is slow to do it properly, so I very much appreciate your efforts. There is so much the danger of POV also, and this must be kept NPOV. I know how hard a task this can be (I am just the back room boy who does the templates and scaffolding etc) so I very much appreciate it. Si Trew (talk) 01:15, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your appreciation, it's quite nice to see people appreciating my work (besides the Hungarians of course). Yet I'm pretty sure that most (if not all) Slovak editors will reprimand me for inserting more "anti-Slovak" material, giving the article an even more "anti-Slovak impression" and POV. I've read parts of the discussion regarding the article (I haven't had the time and patience for the whole of it) and even though the Slovak editors had a point, the majority of the discussion is centered around the fact that they view the article as "a private action of several Hungarian editors". But once again thanks for the appreciation, compliments to the missus and just drop me a line if you need some help with Hungarian-related articles ;) CoolKoon (talk) 23:21, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't need any help as such right now, though thanks for the offer (and I hope it stays open). But I'd appreciate your advice about what we are tackling at the moment, which is the battles of the Hungarian Revolution of 1848.

Neither of us are military historians, though I worked for (not in) the military for about ten years so have a reasonable knowledge of specialist terms etc. Anyway, our strategy for tackling it is "bottom up": take the battles first and translate from Hungarian WP, adding bits and pieces such as infoboxes etc etc, and sometimes translating bio articles along the way (e.g. Mór Perczel, Ferenc Ottinger), and gleaning as much as we can from e.g. German or Polish WP (neither of us speaks these languages but we can grab stuff from infoboxes etc). Once we have the battles done, we will group into e.g. Winter Campaign which has its own article on HU:WP. Then, finally, we will go to the main article Hungarian Revolution of 1848 and retrofit information into there, and do {{main}} etc. This bottom-up approach seems sensible here since the main article is well established and any changes into it will no doubt create a fight, whereas if we start with the subsidiary articles we have more of a chance of adding useful content, we think. We should appreciate your views, though.

I agree it is nice to get a thanks. In real life, too. People are quick to complain but slow to compliment. Best wishes Si Trew (talk) 00:09, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CoolKoon! Please read my comment here. Thank you!--B@xter⁹ 13:02, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at Baxter9's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--B@xter⁹ 17:41, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at Baxter9's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at Baxter9's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Hungary–Slovakia relations. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hungary–Slovakia relations. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

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

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:13, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The sourcing is suspect, and most of the content utterly irrelevant to an article on international relations. The article is deeply biased, as almost everyone was quick to note at the AfD. It is written in poor English, and uses weasel terms and peacock terms like there's no tomorrow. The edit war that ensued unprompted seems to show there is support for the new version. You should have taken your opposition to talk, rather than flooding the page with edits in an abortive attempt to obsolete the new version. I simply don't believe you fail to see the bias inherent in the previous article - you chose to push it since it coincides with yours. Your diatribe on my talk is about as related to the dispute as your article is to the international relations between Hungary and Slovakia, and for future reference I am not Slovak and have no biases towards the region. —what a crazy random happenstance 07:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have absolutely zero Slovak ancestry. And even if I did, I doubt it would make me any more or less nationalist - we do things differently in the New World. Whilst our ancestors are killing one another in the Old World, we share a beer over here. An encyclopaedia wouldn't have two pages that are unrelated to the subject matter. I did in fact reword much of what I left behind, and what I removed was - wait for it - utterly unrelated. Most of those incidents belong on a different page, they have nothing to do with the international relations between Hungary and Slovakia. In the most common paradigm of international relations - realism - most of those incidents simply don't exist. The majority of international political scientists would consider that article to have no value whatsoever, since interpersonal conflicts are widely thought by Realists to have no bearing on international relations. I do not mean this as an offence - but you seem to have no knowledge of the scientific field of international relations, a science with very clear rules and boundaries, and your version of the article reflects your lack of knowledge very clearly. —what a crazy random happenstance 10:42, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To je jednoduche. Nebolo to zrazu, to, ze ten clanok potrebuje serious reworking som tvrdil od zaciatku. Takisto som bol velmi dlho a razantne proti mnozstvu slotovych citatov a sposobom akym su uvedene. Happenstance spravil to, co som chcel aj ja, ale nemal som na to cas ani chut. Nehladaj v tom ziadne nacionalisticke pozadie, ja si fakt myslim, ze ten clanok nebol wikipedie hodny. Citovat media v takom mnozstve je kontraproduktivne, navyse k temam, ktore maju vlastne clanky.

Co vam vadi najviac je, ze sa stratili referencie, ale tie su vo vacsine pripadov v tych hlavnych clankoch, tu ide len o to, ze sa skratil obsah, aby bol prehladny. Naco su litanie o historii, ked je hore wikilink? To iste o Solyomovi. Preco robite zo Slotovych vyrokov centralnu cast vztahov? Zalozte mu vlastny clanok a tam ho vystavte na hanbu, ale nervite to do clanku, kde sa to nehodi.

All in all, happenstance dal tomu clanku konecne serioznu formu. Nezabudaj, ze wikipedia je hlavne encyklopedia, a ta popisuje veci heslovite. Dobre sa to cita, vsetko info zostalo zachovane, ja skor nechapem, preco z toho robite taky problem. Posobi to na mna tak, ze potrebujete v clankoch presviedcat o svojej pravde a na ich kvalite vam vobec nezalezi. Wladthemlat (talk) 19:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A prosim, este mi vysvetli, co robia litanie o Malinovej v clanku o medzistatnych vztahoch. Nemal by som nic proti, keby sa aspon v jednej verzii spominala nejaka oficialna reakcia madarskej strany, ale kde nic tu nic.

Ten DAC je ... well... ok, mozno by tam mohol byt, ale podstatne kratsie, nie je to stezejni cast vztahov, je to len v podstate len anekdota. To tam mozme capat aj veci ako to, ze slovensku paralmentnu delegaciu nechali cakat na chodbe hodinu a ich to poburilo a clanok bude mat kilometer. Popri tom medzistatne zmluvy, visegrad, unia, spolupraca po oficialnej linke atd. tam vobec nie su. Su aj dolezitejsie veci ako to, co sa denne pise v mediach. Wladthemlat (talk) 19:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slovakization (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

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

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial currently scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed 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. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. –xeno^talk 14:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks CoolKoon (talk) 15:08, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Family section begins with the words:"The Hunyadi family are a HUNGARIAN[7] noble family ", why do you think it is necessary to repeat that other 2 times: "Lonnie Johnson thinks he was a member of the lesser Hungarian nobility of Transylvania[16] while David W. Haines refers to him as a Hungarian nobleman" ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daccono (talk • contribs) 07:11, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to read the text again. The first sentence's discussing the Hunyadi family IN GENERAL, while the passages you've removed deal with the nationality of John Hunyadi itself. This is why I don't think that removing the text you've quoted is a good idea. CoolKoon (talk) 17:24, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As you suggested I read the text again and I think that the changes operated by represent a very good idea for the clarity and the quality of the article. The only thing that I've done is that I eliminated the tautology from the text based on the very simple logic that if is already documented that Hunyadi family is a Hungarian noble family by consequence John Hunyadi is a Hungarian noble. --Daccono (talk) 15:21, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did here: Talk:Civilization V. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Fin©™ 21:14, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at Talk:John Hunyadi#Unreliable source.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

(Iaaasi (talk) 14:51, 15 February 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Please can you point me to the bibliography? Thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 17:39, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! It's here! CoolKoon (talk) 17:41, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You could always try a Google book search for materials - [8] and [9] (p. 133) are of note. Chaosdruid (talk) 18:05, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, forgot to say that the p.133 bit mentions the Sultans cannons and his Christian gunners, so obviously there is a discrepancy here somewhere Chaosdruid (talk) 18:08, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in the books you've given also mention the use of "war wagons" and "other war-machines", which were loaded with guns. So even though I'm not sure about the exact nature of the gunpowder units, it DOES seem to be likely that Hunyadi has heavily relied on gunpowder units nonetheless. This is not to say that the Turks didn't use them as well, but that isn't the point either I guess. CoolKoon (talk) 18:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The link refers to place of origin (the link is to Wallachia), not to ethnicity. As FAkirbakir put it: You are not right, He was probably from Wallachia this is a place and it does not explain his origin, and we do not know whether he was Vlach, Cuman, Serb etc. Origin and the place where from he was originated are different things. Fakirbakir (talk) 09:53, 11 March 2011 (UTC) (Iaaasi (talk) 19:26, 11 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

What are you talking about?! The citation you've removed doesn't say anything about places! It's entirely about names, e.g. "the name of Janos Hunyadi's father, Vayk was of Tatar-Cuman origin." You've probably mistaken this quote for something else, but still, this one's there to stay. CoolKoon (talk) 10:39, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are more theories about the ethnic origin (Vlach, Cuman, Tatar, Slavic), but these aspects are presented in an entire section in the article about John Hunyadi. We must not overload also the article about Matthias Corvinus with this. According to Britannica: "János was of Walachian (a region now in Romania) ancestry.". We know for sure that his region of origin is WAllachia and he was probably Vlach, but he could also have Cuman. Tatar, Slavic ancestry (Iaaasi (talk) 10:59, 12 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

So what if those aspects are presented in the John Hunyadi article? It's no more than a brief mention in the Matthias Corvinus article. Yet you seem to disregard academic sources and intend to leave out any other source that doesn't conform with your "official" view of Hunyadi (even academic ones), that is anything that doesn't fit your agenda. I don't think the Wikipedia is the right place for that. CoolKoon (talk) 20:10, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Your input on this would be appreciated. Greetings. Adrian (talk) 22:43, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The text refers to Czechoslovakia. You are free to create the article Hungary–Czechoslovakia relations‎; (Iaaasi (talk) 16:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

First of all, I shall warn you that you should stop removing referenced material. Second the nature of the topic doesn't constitute a separate article of its own. Third, Czechoslovakia has ceased to exist in 1993. Fourth, the section you've removed is part of the history of the relations of Slovaks and Hungarians. Fifth, IIRC the article was called "Hungarian-Slovak relations", but later it was renamed. Sixth, it's just as illogical to remove the Czechoslovak part as it is to remove the "Benes decrees" part, which's also related to Czechoslovakia, isn't it? Still, I have a feeling that you can't be persuaded by logic arguments, so I doubt that there's any point in arguing with you any further. CoolKoon (talk) 16:45, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please understand that the content you've added does not fit here. Please create,the article Hungary–Czechoslovakia relations‎ on the model of Czechoslovakia–Poland relations (Iaaasi (talk) 16:47, 24 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Obviously you still don't get it. My section is about the relation between the Hungarians who found themselves in Czechoslovakia, not the Hungarians in Hungary. I think I'll consider creating a proposal for renaming the article. CoolKoon (talk) 16:54, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The move proposal would have low chances of success, because this is the standard format for this kind of articles (check the category Bilateral relations) (Iaaasi (talk) 16:57, 24 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

I've been promised by HelloAnnoying to be unblocked after she realized that I wasn't a sockpuppet from Hungary. I started two articles Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_army_of_hungary and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Magyars. The first article came out to perfection, the 'Golden Team' article was 90% completed until Coopuk and Iaaasi managed to put out an SPI investigation on me and have me blocked. They seemed to have completely taken control of the article and reduced its contents by 70%, three charts were deleted. They even went as far as renaming the article to the UK-known "Magical Magyars".

This is what the Magical Magyars article looked like before Coopuk completed truncated it with Iaaasi's help: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Magical_Magyars&diff=414741404&oldid=414741005

I don't wish to see my article that I spend 5 1/2 years of research and writing be substantially reduced like this to satisfy two unscrupulous users. What can I do to have my account re-activated and reinstated as OliverTwist? Put in a good word for me with HelloAnnoying will you, to have her see it from my perspective. Share you thoughts at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:OliverTwist88. Thanks again for your support. 24.25.218.254 (talk) 17:22, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at WP:REFUND.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JohnCD (talk) 12:55, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I've restored them all: over to you to tag them. JohnCD (talk) 21:11, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ;) CoolKoon (talk) 21:53, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:US-IL-Chicago-CA50.GIF. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 23:01, 8 April 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:01, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dakujem za mily odkaz, ale budem Ta musiet poopravit. Mojim cielom ani v najmensom nie je presadzovat slovenske myty, ktorymi si tak posadnuty a pripisujes ich vyznavanie kazdemu, kto s Tebou nesuhlasi. Tvoja obsesia najst co najviac zdrojov o tom, ako slovaci madarov utlacali je ovela symptomatickejsia.

Vravim to uplne uprimne - nie je mojim cielom nic zakryvat, ide mi len a len o logicku strukturu toho clanku. Par soch si nezasluhuje tak vela priestoru, preco sa radsej nezameriame na vymenu obyvatelstva, na dekrety, na moderne medzistatne zmluvy a vyvoj vztahov od 1993? (Ale aj trosku vedecky, nie len nazhrnat medialne utrzky o kazdej hluposti, ktoru Slota vypusti napr.). Slovaci nie su len nacionalisti, skus to konecne pochopit, a ani vztahy medzi MR a SR nie su determinovane len a len slovenskym nacionalizmom, ako sa to snazis vykreslovat. Jednak je ten nacionalizmus aj na madarskej strane, ale hlavne je hrba inych veci(V4 aktivity, battlegroups atd.) ktore tam spomenute nie su, su dolezitejsie ako nejaky ozran alebo sochy a hlavne prebiehaju na standardnej urovni a standardnym sposobom.

SKus sa pozriet na svoje editovanie, si posadnuty tym dokazat, ze od rozpadu Uhorska madarov slovaci utlacali, v com je to ine ako vyplakavanie o 1000-rocnom utlaku? Preco rozoberat detailne minulost v clanku, v ktorom ma byt len informativne zhrnuta a hlavna pozornost venovana uplne inym veciam? Chces mi fakt tvrdit, ze udalosti z jedneho tyzdna po rozpoade Uhorska je nutne rozoberat na styri odstavce?!

A este k tym zdrojom - je mi luto, ale Angyal nie je historik a ten "institut" nie je established vedecka ani vzdelavacia institucia, jednoducho nesplna kriteria reliable source. Ak si si nevsimol, nasiel som nahradnu source, takze mi nejde o mazanie informacii, len o spolahlivost zdroja. Wladthemlat (talk) 08:49, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Forum institut nie je spolahlivy zdroj, tam sa nemame o com bavit. Ze cituje, ze ich podporuje ministerstvo kultury atd., to je irelevantne. Kedze nie su renomovana institucia a este aj davaju priestor vydavat knihy amaterskym historikom, nie su doveryhodni. A spravne, knihy z MS by tiez neboli spolahlive, pretoze je predpoklad, ze budu zaujate. ALe to iste plati opat aj o Forum institute, takze preto som to nahradil anglickymi zdrojmi.

Mam v plane pridat tam vela veci, ale tiez nemam cas. Ale to neznamena, ze necham ten clanok rast zbytocnym materialom do astronomickej velkosti, tiez trosku zvazuj kolko a coho pridas. Styri odstavce o jednom tyzdni ci mesiaci v dejinach RCS je proste moc. Wladthemlat (talk) 11:23, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ja viem, ze mazat je jednoduchsie, ani na to nie som hrdy, ale kopec casu stracame zabomysimi vojnami a potom sa straca focus na obsah. Druha vec je, ze sa mi uz niekolkokrat stalo, ze som sa snazil pridavat a bol som mazany, aj ked nie v pripade tohto konkretneho clanku. Ale ani pridavanie pre pridavanie nema zmysel.

Ak by to bol dolozeny odbornik tak by sa to asi dalo prehltnut, ale Angyal je historik-amater, takze ten zdroj je nedoveryhodny. Ale tym padom aj institucia ako taka, kedze dava priestor na taketo knihy v podstate len kvoli tomu, ze sa zaoberaju danou temou, ergo da sa cakat ze bude zaujata. Tam ide hlavne o to, ze keby bolo meno nezname, ale vydane v renomovanej institucii, dalo by sa brat s prizmuerenim oka ako reliable source. Ale ked je institucia obskurna a este aj autor nie je odbornik, uz nie je o com diskutovat.

Clanok som ti navrhol na talku v clanku, ked to chces brat takto detailne tak zaloz Hungarians in inter-war czechoslovakia alebo nieco podobne, aj ked tento specificky obsah by som asi dal do niecoho ako Minorities in Czechoslovakia in 1918-1920 alebo na ten styl, proste specifickejsie.

Skusme sa dopracovat k nejakej kratsej verzii tvojho obsahu a dohodnime sa na temach, ktore treba zahrnut a na tych pracovat, takto sa budeme revertovat do smrti. AKo som uz vravel, dekrety, vymena obyvatelstva, nieco o slovakoch v Uhorsku (z rychlika) a potom hlavne moderne zmluvy a kooperacia je moj navrh. Pojde to pomaly, ale mozeme to dat dokopy. Wladthemlat (talk) 13:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tak dobre. Spravil som ti OBROVSKE gesto, takze mas sancu sa predviest. Uvidime, co s tym pocnes. Vacsinu skorych dejin CS presuniem do novovytvoreneho clanku "Ethnic tensions in Czechoslovakia", co je dufam, ze dost specificke.

Suvisle s tym mozme skratit obsah casti "history" na "HU-SK relations", pridat nieco z cias Monarchie a sustredit sa na obdobie po 1993. Uvidime, co sa stane potom....

Mimochodom neviem,, ci to usilie v clanku Győr v spolupraci s psychopatom menom User:Bizovne nie trosku marne. Totiz napriek tomu, ze tam chodi nakupovat polka Bratislavy (ci dokonca uz cela) a v takom Arkade cez vykend nepocut nic ine, len slovencinu, este ziadneho Slovaka som nepocul povedat "Ráb", vzdy len "Dér" resp. "Ďőr" (aj ked to druhe zvykli hovorit najma Madari). Ale to len tak na okraj.... CoolKoon (talk) 21:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mespravil si mi ziadne gesto, jednoducho sa prisposobujes konsenzu, ak si si vsimol, nie som to len ja, komu ten obsah prekaza. S dalsim postupom suhlasim, dufam, ze sa budeme vediet dohodnut a nie len si len prepytujem prieky robit. Wladthemlat (talk) 09:22, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vysvetluj si to ako chces, poznamky nezainteresovanych editorov (napr. Adrian yu a pod.) ma az tak netrapia. Ale este raz, uvidime, ci ten obsah tebe (a ostatnym) tam naozaj prekazalo len z "technickych" dovodov. Ja z mojej strany som uz viackrat zdoraznil, ze mi nejde o "prieky", ale o kvalitu clankov s tym, aby z toho bolo tych objektivnych a pravdivych informacii co najviac. Poviem ti priklad: nedavno boli dni Bratislavy a teda vstup do vsetkych muzei bol zadarmo. Mali sme tu aj navstevnikov z Madarska, ktorym sme poukazovali muzea a historicke budovy (teda len tie, ktore tu po vycinani komunistov zostali). Lenze boli tam aj ini. Napriklad v Primacialnom palaci stal pred obrazom Marie Terezie taky muz s dcerou. Vedla bol Jozef II. Tak ten muz to vysvetloval svojej dcere: tuto je Maria Terezia, vedla je zase jej brat (SYN!!!). Alebo dalsi: sprievodca (!) vysvetloval davu, ze tie gobeliny, ktore tam su, su jedinecne v tom, ze na Slovensku existuje posledna uplna seria. Potom povedal, ze nasli sa pocas restauracii a "nikto nevie, ako sa tam dostali" (co zase nie je pravda, lebo boli vyrobene pre kardinala Mazarina a neskor -pocas tureckych najazdov- si to kupil ostrihomsky arcibiskup, ktory vtedy sidlil v Presporku a zamurovane boli, ked Napoleon zautocil na Presporok, aby jeho vojska si to nezobrali). Pointa teda je, ze v slovenskych hlavach ohladom svojich dejin byva strasna temnota. Nepoznaju svoje dejiny, lebo nikto im to nepovie a to vzduchoprazdno sa potom velmi lahko naplni vselijakymi mytami o vymyslenych dejinach. Lenze este stale pochybujem o tom, ze ci skutocne mas zaujem o to, aby tie myty boli vyvratene a nahradene faktami. Tvoje ciny na EN WP to bohuzial vacsinou nepotrvdzuju. -- CoolKoon (talk) 10:23, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You got some serious free time on your hands :) Wladthemlat (talk) 21:15, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I was working on it for 2 days in the evening, because unfortunately he was REALLY asking for it. If you'd really like me to have the conversation with you translated as well, you can use his text as a "howto guide" and I'd "gladly" do it for you (or anyone else as well). You'd even get two gratis ANI reports too.

Ver mi, ze som to nerobil zo srandy a take nieco robim, len ked naozaj musim. -- CoolKoon (talk) 21:40, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you have posted comments in a language other than English. When on the English-language Wikipedia, 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 Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you. I understand this is your talk page, but it would be better if communication was in English. Chaosdruid (talk) 01:15, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but it wasn't me who began the conversation in non-English (well, at least with the IP user/Bizovne). CoolKoon (talk) 10:39, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am sort of ok with Babelfish translating it, though it's Czech translation is not completely accurate. It is just that, as the conversation seems a little "heated", it may be of benefit for at least one of you to use English lol :¬)

My fav part was the comment "I do not know what it is due to your induced hallucination of war Orbanom, but probably is thy place by increasing the daily dose of antipsychotic drugs." Chaosdruid (talk) 22:34, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I prefer Google Translator for most of the translation, because it's by far the best (not that it doesn't mess up text badly at times). Hopefully you didn't try translating it using the Czech translator as the text is in Slovak (not that there's a big difference between the two :P).

As for the content itself, let me translate that "favorite part" of yours correctly: "I'm not sure what causes your hallucinations about a war provoked by Orbán, but upping the dosage of your antipsychotic drugs might be necessary."

The problem with the whole discussion (among others) is the fact that Bizovne has started it in Slovak on Wladthemlat's talk page and I didn't feel like continuing in English. But to satisfy your curiosity (even though you might need some additional background info about SK and HU politicians etc.), I might as well translate the whole conversation to English. I'll have to find some spare time for that though.... CoolKoon (talk) 23:09, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, weird, using Babelfish's Slovak translator didn't work for some reason - for whole paragraphs/pages babelfish normally uses Google as it is...anyway I am not sure if you need to translate it as this is your own talk page, rather than an article talk page, as the guidelines do not mention ones own userpage specifically.

Thanks for translating that sentence though :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 12:30, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

yw ;) As for translating I think I WILL translate the whole thing ASAP, because I think that others might want to enjoy it as well, Adrian's also growing restless and others (who don't speak Slovak) are interested in it as well. -- CoolKoon (talk) 16:38, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you have posted comments in a language other than English. When on the English-language Wikipedia, 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 Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you. Greetings. Adrian (talk) 07:56, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh, just how many more of you will post me this template? I WILL translate some of the text but I'm afraid I won't be able to (nor willing to) satisfy the curiosity of all of you. You'll have to learn Slovak (Czech might do as well) and Hungarian for that I'm afraid..... CoolKoon (talk) 10:01, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did`t wrote that in bad faith and I tried not to use the default template because you have received this notice before. I did`t put the template, I did`t change much - true, but that isn`t the point here. If you write something on the English wikipedia please use English , or at least do what the talk page guildlines say -provide a suitable translation. I am sorry, but I don`t want to learn Slovakian, Czech or Hungarian, If I would, I would use that particular language wikipedia. Please use English on the English wikipedia. Greetings. Adrian (talk) 14:11, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ale klidek! You'll get to know the contents of the conversation soon enough. I can see that you're dying to learn the contents of the conversation but rest assured that your curiosity will be satisfied. Until that happens Google Translation's there just for you..... besides, this is MY talk page anyway.... CoolKoon (talk) 16:51, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That`s not the point.. I explained everything in my previous messages. We are not alone here. I think it applies to talk pages also.. ex: [10]. Anyway, did`t want to make a big deal out of this, just wanted to remind you that this is the English wikipedia and as such we should use English because this pages are accessible by almost everybody who was a Internet connection. Imagine if I start speaking Serbian with Tom, Romanian with Jerry and Croatian with Monica. And everybody else start doing so... Then the English wikipedia would be a mess. There are local projects in Slovak, Czech or Hungarian therefore there isn`t any reason why to use that languages in the English version wikipedia. I could give you many examples where whole conversations are in other languages and that is really confusing. Greetings. Adrian (talk) 22:11, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at Iadrian yu's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Adrian (talk) 04:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ahoj CoolKoon, myslim ze anglicka wikipedia nie je vhodnym priestorom na presadzovanie Tvojich fasistickych, iredentistickych, revizionistickych a velkomadarskych nazorov. Prestan propagovat spolupracu Madarska a hitlerovskeho Nemecka pocas 2 svatovej vojny. Tvoj fasizmus na wiki nema miesto —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.87.75.82 (talk) 13:07, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pre Boha ziveho, tebe naprosto sibe! Kde si videl, ze som propagoval "spolupracu Madarska a hitlerovskeho Nemecka pocas 2 svatovej vojny"? Ukaz! Jedine, co som spominal, boli FAKTY. Je to FAKT, ze Horthy ZACHRANOVAL Poliakov po viedenskej arbitrazi ako aj to, ze Madarsko STALO pocas 1. aj 2. sv. vojny na strane Nemecka a v 1989 POMOHLO vychodnym Nemcom, ktori chceli utiect do Rakuska. Co robili ceskoslovenski hraniciari? Vrazdili svojich vlastnych obcanov. A to mame v Petrzalke namestie pomenovane po nich (Namestie hraniciarov). Urcite aj ty si bol jednym z nich. Alebo si len ich potomkom? -- CoolKoon (talk) 19:54, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Rosetta Barnstar
		For outstanding dedication to voluntarily translate you own user talk-page posts. We appreciate the time it took and your willingness to help open and frank disclosure of conversations in non-English languages. Chaosdruid (talk) 00:52, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, thanks :) I've re-read the whole translation though and found quite a few typos and other minor mistakes, so I can't say I'm totally satisfied. However I'm lacking the will to make the necessary corrections :P CoolKoon (talk) 11:33, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as the official language of the Kingdom of Hungary was Latin until 1867 [11], using Hungarian names for cities etc. before this date is anachronistic. Since the Latin name that was used at the time can scarcely be found, we should list all the places with their modern names. Thank You. --Bizovne (talk) 11:36, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Villages hadn't latin names.--Faberers (talk) 18:19, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A jedlik ányosos cikk képei a magyar wikin legálisan vannak fent. A térkép pedig 120 éves Pallas lexikonból van, amit be is bizonyítottam. Se a magyar se a világ szerzői jog törvényei nem tiltják 120 éves képek szabad közzétételét. 120 éves kép szkennelése okán (mivel nem 3D objektumról van szó csupán 2D-ről azaz térképről)pedig egyetlen weboldal sem tud jogot követelni magának. Szerintem szerzői jogról nem sokat hallottál, még csak jogi diplomád sincs tini fiú. Én itt szerkesztek különböző neveken 2006 óta, (amikor te még a magyar wikit sem is olvastad nemogy az angolt- kishaver) Hungary és a history od Hungary medieval Hungary cikkek pl szinte 80-90%-ban az én munkáim voltak.--Faberers (talk) 18:21, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nézz már utána annak, hogy mikortól él ez a fiókom, okostojás! Bizony, én is itt vagyok már 2006 óta és veled ellentétben nekem a kezdetek óta UGYANAZ a nevem az oldalon, ugyanis eddig sose volt szükségem arra, hogy egy esetleges kitiltásom után új nevet regisztráljak magamnak. Ráadásul kisebb szerkesztéseim már azelőtt voltak, hogy regisztráltam volna itt magam, de akkor még kizárólag IP címmel nyomultam.

Egyébként meg te is nagyon jól tudod, hogy nem a Pallas Nagylexikonból kimásolt képről beszéltem, hiszen nem az volt belinkelve a Jedlik Ányosról szóló szócikkbe. Arról a két képről beszélek, amely a Jedlik-féle dinamót meg talán az egyenáramú villanymotor-modelljét ábrázolja. Ugyanis abszolúte SEMMI nem bizonyítja, hogy akár a magyar wikin is legálisan lennének fent. Ehhez képest mind a két képet konkrétan megtaláltam más oldalakon is, ahova biztos, hogy nem innen (vagy a magyar wikiről) került. Ha pedig bebizonyosodik, hogy bizony a szerzői jog által védett képeket töltöttél fel ide, akkor jogosan követelhet a jogtulajdonos kártérítést a Wikipédiától a te rövidlátásod miatt. Az viszont persze nem érdekelne, hiszen te nem vagy "fizetett admin", de még csak "csicskás admin" se (hálistennek), igaz? Jogi diplomám az nincs, de ahogy így elnézem, még így is nagyságrendekkel többet konyítok a szerzői joghoz, mint te. Tettem már fel ugyanis a Commons-ra képeket én is, de veled ellentétben az ÖSSZES kizárólag olyan mű volt, amit vagy magam készítettem, vagy lejárt a szerzői joga, vagy pedig egy másik, szabadon felhasználható mű feldolgozása (pl. SVG-k fordítása). A te feltöltéseid viszont legalább háromnegyed részben az internetről összeollózott (v.ö. összelopott) tartalomból állnak, és még csak annyi fáradságot se vettél, hogy esetleg a jogtulajdonos hozzájárulását kérd vagy valami. Ehelyett ipari mennyiségben gyártod itt a zoknibábjaidat és amikor Iaaasi (amúgy jogosan) egy csomó gyanús képedet törlésre jelöl, még neked áll feljebb. Iaaasi-nak persze szintén nincs ki mind a négy kereke és szívesen zárnálak össze vele, de attól még a jogsértő képek törlése miatt NEM JOGOS A PANASZ.

A "tini fiú"-stílusú megjegyzéseidhez meg csak annyit, hogy pont te vagy az, aki egy pattanásos (és nem mellesleg rendkívül frusztrált) kamasz benyomását kelted. Teszed ezt nemcsak azzal a stílussal, amivel sikerült vérig sértened a Wikipédián gyakorlatilag mindenkit, de a megszállottságoddal és azzal, hogy semmibe veszel gyakorlatilag MINDENKIT, még az(oka)t is, aki(k) esetleg jóindulatúan segíteni próbált(ak). És persze nem veszed észre, hogy mennyire kínos néha a többi magyar szerkesztő számára is az, amit csinálsz, ahogy szemmel láthatóan az se érdekel, hogy a szerkesztés itt a csapatmunkáról szól, nem arról a fajta önkényuralmi hozzáállásról, hogy "az én szavam a szent és mindenki másnak kuss a neve".

Amúgy érdekes, hogy a magyar wikipédiát emlegeted, mikor nem szerkesztettél ott gyakorlatilag semmit se. Az angol wikiről meg úgy beszélsz, mintha minden, magyarokkal kapcsolatos szócikket 80-90 százalékban te írtál volna holott a nyelvtudásod (annak ellenére, hogy állításod szerint már 2006 óta kevered itt a szart) pont ennek az ellenkezőjét bizonyítja (nyelvtudásban lassan már Iaaasi is leköröz.....). Ami pedig engem illet, gyakorlatilag az angol wikin kezdtem és csak később vettem észre, hogy "jé, van magyar is".

Mellesleg nem én vagyok az egyetlen magyar szerkesztő, aki nem nézi jó szemmel azt, amit csinálsz, ezért is írtam, hogy mellőzhetnéd az értelmetlen dolgokat és nagyon fontos a forrás. De látom, te is olyan vagy, mint Iaaasi: mész a saját fejed után (közben persze senkire se hallgatsz), néha összecsaptok, kitiltják az éppen aktuális zoknibábjaidat, regisztrálsz egy csomó másikat és kezdődik az egész elölről.

Az LMP-dolog meg erősen LOL már csak azért is, mert egyrészt nem vagyok mo-i, másrészt kommunistákra már csak elvből se szavaznék, neokommunista sötétzöldekre pedig szintúgy (a "klubodba" pedig egy b-vel írandó). -- CoolKoon (talk) 18:57, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gagyi vagy már megint, megártott a sok LMP meg az anyag az ottani bulikon. A szövegem 80%-a a térképre vonatkozott, amit te is betámadtál kedves Koon Béla! Beszélgettem mailban jópár magyar wikissel.....igen, rólad+ szerkesztéseidről. Nem igazán csípnek téged, nem is minden ok nélkül. Nem tagadod meg a fajtád, szereted te a területlopók hungarofób szerkesztőit, mindegy csak utálják a magyart. Azok a képek meg amik a Jedlik cikknél voltak lehetnek akár könyv szkennelések, soha nem jössz rá. Máskor pedig gondolkozz mielőtt írsz.--Faberers (talk) 19:11, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Úristen, neked tényleg elmentek otthonról! Szóval most már judeobolsevista drogos is vagyok, nemcsak LMP-s? Mellesleg igazán érdekelne, kik voltak azok a magyar (?!) wikisek, akikkel rólam beszélgettél és nem voltak rólam jó véleménnyel. Ugyanis attól tartok, hogy vagy Iaaasi zoknibábjai voltak, vagy valami tót szerkesztők, mert általában csak azok utálnak engem (tehát csúnyán át lettél verve :P). Az angol wikin eddig kizárólag tót meg román szerkesztők voltak, akik utáltak/megpróbáltak keresztbe tenni, de azok tényleg kegyetlenül. Elárulom neked, hogy az angol wikin (egyelőre) te vagy az első és egyetlen magyar szerkesztő, aki látványosan (és nyilvánosan) beszól nekem. Persze lehet, hogy csupán az önámítás hibájába estél, és olyanoknak hiszel, akik maguk se túl jártasak a témában (ugye a "vak vezet világtalant" tipikus esete).
Megpróbálom elmagyarázni akkor még egyszer: NEM a térkép miatt támadtalak be, kedves kaméleon! Az, hogy a térkép volt a téma, szinte mellékes is volt, a lényeg ugyanis a nyafogás volt, miszerint a csúnya Iaaasi megint bánt téged, a szerencsétlent, aki ártatlan, mint a ma született bárány (miközben tudjuk, hogy ez messze nem fedi a valóságot). A Jedlikes képekről pedig nem állítom, hogy nem számítanak közkincsnek, de a jelenlegi (gyakorlatilag nem létező) leírásukból ez nem derül ki. Ráadásul elárulom neked, hogy a jogvédett anyag akkor is jogvédett marad, ha ditigalizálod, tehát ha megveszel egy könyvet, hiába szkenneled be a benne található képeket, attól az még a kiadó/fényképész/szerző szellemi tulajdona marad. Azoknál a képeknél pedig nincsen az égvilágon semmi, amiből tudni lehetne, hogy honnan származnak. Egyértelmű leírás (és forrásmegjelölés) híján viszont bármelyik admin törli őket, elég csak szólni nekik.
A "fajtámról" meg annyit, hogy ebből is látszik, hogy össze-vissza beszélsz. Ha tényleg szeretném "a területlopók hungarofób szerkesztőit", akkor egyrészt a magyart inkább erősen törve vagy egyáltalán nem beszélném, másrészt pedig az elsők között állnék ki a mélytót szerkesztők mellett (miközben -épp ellenkezőleg- elég sokat asszisztáltam a kiebrudalásukhoz). De látom, úgyis hiába tépem itt a számat, hiszen a te párhuzamos világodból ez teljesen másképp látszik. Maradj hát nyugodtan a "tieid" között egy szebb, boldogabb, gondolkodásmentesebb világban, és még véletlenül se próbálj meg értelmesen, megfontoltan szerkeszteni.
Bárcsak azt mondhatnám, hogy meggondolatlanul írogatok/szerkesztgetek itt össze-vissza, de nem. Ugyanis veled ellentétben eddig szinte kizárólag tót nacionalistákkal kerültem összetűzésbe itt (=az angol wikin, a magyar wikin senkivel se kerültem összetűzésbe). Te viszont saját magad írtad, hogy "különböző neveken" szerkesztesz itt 2006 óta, ami magyarul annyit jelent, hogy szinte fénysebességgel tiltattad ki magad minden egyes alkalommal, amikor szerkeszteni kezdtél. Ez pedig korántse azt sugallja, hogy gondolkodtál volna, mielőtt írtál. -- CoolKoon (talk) 20:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at Larry V's talk page.
Message added 13:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Hello, CoolKoon. You have new messages at Baxter9's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is CoolKoon reported by User:95.102.200.205. Thank you. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 17:52, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ahoj. Docital som sa ze si pre vlastnu rodinu v Budapesti len Cech. Hahaha. V 1945 sa mnohi Madari na Slovensku radsej prihlasili na Slovensku len aby nemuseli ist do Madarska. To je ta velka narodna hrdost? Urcite aj tvoji predkovia sa hlasili k Slovakom len aby ich Benes nevykopol ako smradlavych psov. A zmaz si nalepku ze vies po slovensky ako keby to bola tvoja rodna rec - ziadny Slovak nenapise "po Michaloviec" ako si to napisal ty na sme. Rec brechajucih psov ti ide lepsie. Fico a Slota sa po volbach dostanu znova do vlady z coho mas fobiu uz teraz, pises o fasisme Matice Slovenskej ale o fasizme Jobiiku nenapises ani slovo ty madarsky klamar. Tak si davaj pozor aby si nedostal po hube za madarcinu v Ba - sam pises ze sa na teba ludia oborili tak im to asi vadi. A ze by si chcel madarske napisy v Ba - kde je 3% madarov to uz vrchol. Papa debilko. Si len obycajny vojnovy stvac, fasista, privrzenec Orbana a Jobiku. --Jurkojanosik (talk) 11:01, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ale, ale! Bizovne, si to ty? Vlastne je to uplne jedno, co si zac, lebo aj tak ti poviem, co si: si jeden prosty, zatrpknuty a (samozrejme) neukojeny uboziak. Totiz len taky clovek (spolu so zvysenym sebavedomim, co anonymita obnasa) je schopny napisat nieco tak nechutne, co si si napisal ty.
Takze po prve bol by som zvedavy, co by si povedal na to, keby ta napr. v Anglicku mali za Rusa (pocul som uz o tom) a zato by tam na teba zazerali?
Vies co? Aj v tom hlaseni sa k Slovakom mas pravdu. V Petrzalke (kde byval moj pradedo) totiz po 1945 bolo zivotu nebezpecne hlasit sa k Madarom (strelili ich totiz do masovych hrobov ako tych tvojich smradlavych psov) zrejme kriminalnici, ktori sa neskor stali estebakmi a tvojimi starymi rodicmi/rodicmi/prarodicmi. Totiz len zlocinci a ich rodinni prislusnici mozu obhajovat aj tie najhorsie zlociny t.j. zlociny proti ludskosti. Takze kludne sa spytaj tvojich predkov, ze kolko nevinnych ludi postrielali len preto, lebo hovorili/vedeli po madarsky. Takze ano, reslovakizoval sa, ale az potom, ako sa vratil zo sibirskeho "vyletu" (a nejaky cas po nastupe komunizmu to aj tak nechali).
To si naozaj myslis vazne, ze sa obuvas do jedneho z mojich preklepov v prispevku, ktory som zrejme pisal, ked som uz sotva videl od unavy/mozog mi este nepracoval? Som zvedavy, ze kolko "vaznych" chyb si sa dopustil svojho zivota ty. A este mi povedz: mas doma slovnik slovenskeho jazyka? Ked mi povies, ze nie a ze naco ti to bude, tak hned budem vediet, ako si na tom.....
Ja pevne verim, ze Fico sa k moci uz nikdy nevrati (Slotu ma uz "vystrielaneho", bol pre sudruha Fica ako toaletny papier - na jedno pouzitie), ale kedze Slovensko je krajinou milion retardovanych (tvojho rangu), clovek si nikdy nemoze byt isty. Ja fasizmus Jobbiku seriem, totiz nezijem v Madarsku, ale v BA (ktora -ked som si to naposledy cekol- je este stale hlavnym mestom Slovenska). Nech sa o Jobbik postaraju ti, co ho volili/chystaju volit a zvysok Madarska. Alebo potom poziadaj tvojho idola, sudruha Hranola o to, aby sme boli pricleneni k Madarsku, aby tam mohol vyzit svoje prehnane ambicie (vsak v tom skaredom parlamente vedla hradu sa nerobi nic ine, len sa prerokuvaju madarske zakony -dokonca z opozicnej iniciativy-, ako keby to bola druha komora madarskeho sne..parlamentu).
Maticu slovensku zase "osierat" musim, keby uz za nic ine, tak aspon z principu. No nie z principu "madarskeho sovinizmu" (ako sa nazdavas ty a tebe podobni), ale z principu, ze prezeru peniaze, ktore dostavaju aj z mojich dani. A pritom do slovenskeho kulturneho zivota "prispievaju" len oslavovanim slovenskeho vojnoveho zlocinca, vydavanim knih/"vedeckych" diel s vylucne protimadarskym postojom/obsahom, obcasnou organizaciou ozajstnych "kulturalnych podujati" (tanecnych predstaveni, sem-tam nejakych divadelnych hier atd.), a to vsetko s uplnou absenciou verejnej kontroly (stat moze do MS liat len peniaze, menovat niekoho na ich celo nie). MS teda nesluzi na nic ine ako glorifikaciu zlocincov, protimadarske stvanie (za co bola zatvorena aj za Monarchie) a samozrejme prepieranie penazi/tunelovanie pre SNS. Vies, co robia podobne organizacie vsade inde vo svete (aj v Madarsku)? V Ý S K U M (ja viem, tazke slovo, maloktory Slovak to pozna a hejslovak uz vobec), cize napr. digitalizaciu vzacnych kulturalnych pamiatok (co keby zdigitalizovali napriklad zilinsku knihu?), ich zberom a hlavne ich VYSKUMOM (cize napr. analyzou toho, kto mohol napisat tych -tusim- 8 basni, ktore sa nasli vo Fanchaliho kodexe a ktore hejslovaci pripisuju Balassimu). Ale na Slovensku je vsetko inak, tu sa vyskum/vyvoj robit nemusi (resp. sa nema, ved tym by to cele stratilo svoj "slovensky" charakter), ved "vsetko je na nete". A pritom nedostatok inteligencie je u vacsiny Slovakov tak napadna, ze si to vsimaju (okrem Madarov) aj ini. Len pre porovnanie: vies, preco netrestaju v Cine zneuzitie ("kradez") zapadnych diel (chranenych autorskym zakonom) a preco neznemoznuju ich stahovanie (hoci by mohli, ved maju na to specialnu sietovu infrastrukturu)? Pretoze vedia, ze v kulturnej dominancii, vedeckej cinnosti, vzdelani a (hlavne) vyskumu su za Zapadom este stale zaostali. Takze kompenzuju si to "dovozom" vedomosti zo zahranicia. A co robia Slovaci? Vselico mozne, len aby nemuseli rozmyslat a aby v tej vede nenapredovali. A potom ked automobilky sa poberu na vychod a zostane tu po nich milion nezamestnanych, tak na vine budu zase len ti (hnusni!!!!) Madari a nie ta hromada Neandertalcov, ktora sa nikdy nechcela ucit a dosiahnut nieco velkolepe uz vobec nie.
Vidim, ze BA si videl tak akurat na pohladnici resp. naposledy si tu bol ked Vladimir "otec naroda" Meciar si v 1999 (tesne po prehratych volbach) zorganizoval tu idiotsku demonstraciu, kde celodenny program pozostaval z vypocutia si madarskych operetov so slovenskym textom a kricanim fraz ako "neutralne Slovensko". Takze laskavo si (co sa tyka zalezitosti BA) drz hubu, staraj sa o problemy v tej tvojej hornej-dolnej a BA nechaj na "pastikarov" (z coho polovicu tvoria aj tak Vychodnari :P). To, ze v BA ma osocovali za madarcinu svedci len o tom, ze kolko je tu tych "cudzincov", ktori nemaju vychovu, mravy (tipujem, ze su to tie iste osoby, ktore nesplachuju po sebe ani ked sa vysrali) a ani akusi prirodzenu inteligenciu. A zrejme su to ti, ktori zacali na mna nahlas nadavat, ked som (vo svojom rodnom meste) zacal hovorit svojou rodnou recou. A tie napisy by tu neboli ani tak pre "domacich" Madarov (hoci aj ti by to privitali), ale hlavne pre madarskych turistov, ktori (by) sa tu velmi radi poobzeraju (poobzerali), pokial by ich teda nevyhnali odtial taki nemozni a uplne nevrazivi ludia, ktori sa poseru (zo namyslenosti), akonahle zapocuju co i len jedinu madarsku hlasku. Ja by som bol velmi rad, keby sa ich cas naplnil (ked su stari :P) resp. keby sa odstahovali do Severnej Korei. Bolo by "pracujuceho" ludu postatne menej, ale aspon by nevyhravali komunisti/populisti po kazdom 8. roku :P -- CoolKoon (talk) 22:56, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sheesh, how quickly people forget lol! Please, in English? :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 02:10, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ale klídek :P Do you have my talkpage on your watchlist or what? And don't worry, I've already translated the nutjob's post (and include it shortly) and I'll translate my reply as well (all the better that it contains some unflattering facts about the Slovak history :P) so you'll get to read it all :P -- CoolKoon (talk) 13:33, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've read somewhere that even for your own family in Budapest you're just a Czech. Hahaha. In 1945 a lot of Hungarians in Slovakia have rather reported themselves in Slovakia (?) just so that they won't have to move to Hungary. This is the great national pride? I'm sure that your ancestors have proclaimed themselves to be Slovaks only to avoid being kicked out (from Czechoslovakia) by Benes like some smelly dogs. And just delete the sticker which says that you speak Slovak on a near-native level - none of the Slovaks write "po Michaloviec" like you did at SME. You're better at the language of the barking dogs. Fico and Slota will regain their power once again after the elections, from which you obviously have a phobia already. You write about the fascism of Matica Slovenská, but you fail to mention the fascism of Jobbik you Hungarian (in this case rather: retarded - the word Hungarian became a synonym for a retarded/dummy person/doofus in Slovak) liar. So take care to avoid getting beaten up for (the usage of) Hungarian in BA (Bratislava) - you say yourself that people have lashed out on you, so obviously it (the usage of Hungarian in public) is annoying for them. And to top it off you want to have Hungarian signs in BA -where's about 3% of Hungarians-, that's just unacceptable. Bye, moron. You're just a regular warmonger (?!), fascist, supporter of Orbán and Jobbik. --Jurkojanosik (talk) 11:01, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Nick-D (talk) 11:44, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CoolKoon think we should create this article, because the Hungarian military organization was different then the rest of medieval europe. could talk to any Wikipedian who knows about this subject. A greting--JuniorFuster (talk) 17:46, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been reported here--Omen1229 (talk) 13:31, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Don't you think it's a bit like rubbing salt in a wound when you continue to discuss a topic on Omen1229's talk page that he has been banned from editing? Please drop the topic on his talk page and respect the topic ban.--v/r - TP 18:56, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It might seem so, but obviously Omen1229 didn't mind the band either as he inserted another reply to my post after he's been topic banned (which's been followed by my reply described by you as "rubbing salt in a wound"). Why'd I reply to him despite the fact that he's been topic banned? Simply for the fact that I've seen too many times the tactic he tries/tried to pursue: many editors just simply insert heavy nationalist POV material into articles related to Hungary (after all, Slovakia did NOT exist in any form prior to 1918-1920 so there's a 100% overlap between the Slovak and Hungarian history before 1918) and then go ahead and source them using Slovak nationalist (or even plain self-published) sources. So then someone (who isn't necessarily a Hungarian editor, but most of the time he/she is) comes along and removes it, they either reinsert it (triggering an edit war) or reports the user in question at ANI for being a heavily biased nationalist and a plain douchebag who removes "well sourced" and "objective" content from everywhere and hence should be sanctioned. And when this fails/doesn't bring about the desired outcome, they'll just complain by stating that EN WP's overwhelmed with Hungarian editors/their heavily biased POV and even admins support only the Hungarian POV and nothing else (and they do this occasionally even on off-wiki sites like Samofi did). The sad thing about this however is the fact that I've seen this happen countless times over and over again (i.e. a Slovak editor comes along, inserts hate propaganda material, gets sanctioned for that), yet they still refuse to accept the fact that it isn't their nationality/personality that's objectionable, but rather the unverifiable statements they try to pass as ultimate truth and expect to get away with it. The reason for this would need a VERY lengthy explanation (and I don't think I should be one telling this since the very fact that I'm Hungarian makes me heavily biased against Slovaks - or so they say), suffice to say that very few people in Slovakia are interested in knowing the truth instead of believing in stories that sound good enough to pass for a "history lesson". Even though the opposite might seem to be true, I REALLY tried to help Omen1229 by suggesting that he could reword his statement/edit to use less weasel words, but perhaps he viewed my attempt as a personal attack/attack against "everything that's Slovak" (read: everything he believes in), so he refused (but at least he was honest on his userpage when he added a userbox stating that he's a nationalist....).

As for your request, fine, I'll let it go (despite of the fact that how much I dislike any attempts at displacing the historical facts with a "parallel universe" where everything's different). Though this can't (and won't) prevent Omen1229 from pushing the issue/discussion further or just to continue it at another talk page. -- CoolKoon (talk) 22:23, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm ignoring most of your wall of text, see WP:TLDR. I didn't say let it go. I said he's topic banned from discussing it. You asking him to discuss it in direct violation of his topic ban is disruptive. Your baiting him to get blocked. You can argue it again in 6 months.--v/r - TP 00:37, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry, I didn't know that you have ADHD, my bad. :P I'll try to make my next post as brief as possible:

Tell me, could you just assume good faith for a second here? What if my intention was NOT to taunt him/chase him into a block/topic ban, but a GENUINE desire to discuss matters over which he gotten into an edit conflict with another editor at the Treaty of Trianon article? I thought after the topic ban was issued that he'd just cease the discussion altogether. He didn't so I felt compelled to react on his post and the accusations within (besides, I thought that the user's own talkpage is exempt from this ban or something). -- CoolKoon (talk) 19:46, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Actually this isn't my first (suicidal and somewhat masochistic) attempt at discussing matters with Slovak editors. We had an editor a while back called MarkBA who was subsequently indefed, yet kept coming back using socks (a la Iaaasi). Still, I had this feeling that MarkBA is reasonable and after we discuss some things, we might come at least to a partial agreement (which would've been good enough). So I've contacted him on SK WP at tried to reason with him in Slovak. It seemed to work and I MIGHT'VE even coerced him that perhaps he could make a comeback after he realizes that he has to back off just a little bit (at least that's what I went there for), unfortunately I was cut off by the SK WP's fascist and hateful admins (you can ask ANY admin who speaks Slovak/Czech about this). They've started reprehending me stating that I should do some REAL work instead of making some pointless small talk, which's absolutely useless anyway (even though I've made this "small talk" on MarkBA's talk page). I've even tried to argue that a user's talk page should be left on the user's own discretion, but according to them that was unacceptable (hence my labeling of them as fascists). In the end they've ended up banning me for months (if you're interested in the reasons, feel free to drop me a line) and I haven't edited much there ever since (that's been years ago IIRC). Oh, sorry, I forgot about your ADD; feel free to ignore this rant of mine altogether.... -- CoolKoon (talk) 00:05, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1) Vadi mi, ze generalizujes tvoj postoj voci slovenskym editorom, casto pouzivas slovne spojenia zaujati slovenski editori, slovenski edotori nediskutuju, rozvijaju obskurne teorie a podobne.. Bud opatrnejsi s vyjadrovanim

2) Dalej mam problem s tym, ak niekto vola mna nacionalista, ten co nenavidi Madarov, hovori, ze novodobe Slovensko je fasisticky stat, ktory chce asimilovat Madarov a tito editori si veselo edituju a ja mam topic ban

3) Ja som mal s tebou jeden priamy konflikt na clanku Slovak Lands, chcel som urobit neskodny stub o dolozenom termine Slovak lands, uzemie malo meno Slovaky, Slovenska zem a pod. pisomne dolozene uz od roku 1405. Je to podobny termin ako Kurdistan. Ja som nikdy netvrdil, ze to bol stat, bol to region so specifickou geografiou a socialnou historiou, kedze bol obyvany dominantne Slovakmi. Ottoman Hungary tiez nebol stat a ma vlastny clanok

4) Vadi mi pausalny preklad terminu Hungarian pri osobach na Hungarian people (najma pred rokom 1918) a linkovanie s nimi. Moj predok je na stranke Madarskych knazov studujucich v Jene, ja mam po nom bibliu v Slovakizovanej cestine pisanej Schwabachom, bol slovensky luteransky knaz a clen Novej skoly slovenskej. Ale neutralne zdroje tvrdia, ze bol madarsky knaz. Keby nieco vyznamne dokazal, tak by ste z neho lahko urobili Madara a velmi tazko by som potom dokazoval, ze bol Slovak. Su tu stovky osob, ktore su z byvaleho Uhorska a nedokazeme urcit ich etnicitu. Nemam absolutne problem, ked sa povie Uhor, Uhorsky - ale neznamena to to iste ako Madar, ani v anglictine. Spickovi anglicky pisuci historici zaoberajuci sa dejinami Uhorska rozlisuju Hungarian a Magyar. Aj Stur sa povazoval za clena "Hungarus" - politickeho naroda Uhorska. Bel bol tiez Hungarus - prislusnost k statu a nie k etniku. Napriklad Bugara som linkol so Slovenskom nie Slovakmi a dal som tam jeho etnicitu. Problem je ako riesit sporne osoby, pri ktorych nedokazes madarsky povod ale su oznaceni ako Hungarus, priklad Kosztka, Markusovszky... Slovensky hovoriaci, zmiesany povod.. Rovnako aj etnicky zmiesana nobilita: Thurzo, Ozstroluczki, Jeszenski, Podmanitzki, Revaiovci, Zsilinski, Kossuthovci.. Velka cast z nich sa otvorene hlasila k Slovakom

5) Vadi mi, ze meno Slavus z latinciny madarski wikipedisti vzdy prekladaju ako Slovan. Troska hermeneutiky chyba..

6) Vadi mi clanok Principality of Hungary. Fakir nemal problem spojit 30 zdrojov, urobit kompilatnu original research esej. Pritom jediny zdroj z tych cias o nejakom celku v tomto regione bola Zapadna Turkia. Ziadne spojenie, ze by to bolo Uhorske kniezatstvo..

7) Co sa tyka geografickych nazvov v Uhorsku. Pausalne sa zacali madarske nazvy pouzivat az koncom 19. storocia. Dovtedy sa pouzivali lokalne nazvy. Staci si pozriet stare mapy od Samuela Mikoviniho. Mam knizku o starych mapach Horneho Uhorska [12]. S nazvom nesuhlasim ako sa knizka vola, podla mna je prijatelny termin Upper Hungary ale fotky map su dobry zdroj. Prislo mi nepochopitelne pouzivat nazov Nagyocsa pre Mateja Bela, ked to bola 400 rokov Ocsova (Očova) a stale je to Očová. Iba 1898-1918 to bola Nagyocsa. --Samofi (talk) 09:03, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tak, pekne po rade:

1. Vadi mi, ze generalizujes tvoj postoj voci slovenskym editorom, casto pouzivas slovne spojenia zaujati slovenski editori... - Ano, asi je to pravda, ze mam iste predsudky voci slovenskym redaktorom. Lenze ked si vyhladas datum registracie mojho konta, zistis, ze som tu minimalne od januara 2006. A od tej doby, co tu posobim ako registrovany uzivatel som stretol nejedneho slovenskeho redaktora, ktory sa zaujimal o historicke clanky. A moje skusenosti boli ovela horsie, nez som predpokladal. Proste akoby kazdemu slovenskemu editorovi boli ukradnute doveryhodne zdroje (madarske, ale skutocne od renomovanych akademikov), zato za kazdu cenu by pretlacili uplne nez-/vymysly, ktore nielenze nedokazu doveryhodne zdokladovat, ale ani nemozu to dokladovat, lebo bud je to vymyslene, alebo nepreskumane. Zoberme si taky priklad: "unos slovenskych deti" neziskovkou FMKE (v slovenskych zdrojoch -neviem preco- uvadzanych aj ako FEMKE). Napriek tomu, ze som si co-to prestudoval o organizaciach typu FMKE (podobny bol aj v Sedmohradsku a vo Vojvodine), nikde som nenasiel co i len drobnu zmienku o niecom podobnom. Napriek tomu nevylucujem, ze sa to stalo, ale doteraz mi nikto nepredviedol rukolapny dokaz o tom, ze sa to skutocne stalo. A co spravil nejaky slovensky editor? Hodil do diskusie obrazok z pamatnej tabule odhalenou meciaristami (alebo MS, co je skoro to iste) v centre Bratislavy. Ako keby to bol nevyvratitelnym dokazom hocicoho. Preto som povedal, ze ked to bolo organizovana akcia (a ked to bol "unos", tak musel byt organizovany), tak musia existovat o tom nejake zaznamy. Zoznam "odvlecenych" deti, zoznam organizatorov, zapis o tom, kam tie deti vlastne uniesli atd. Predviedol tu doteraz niekto nieco hoci len podobne? Obavam sa, ze nie (a pamatna tabula sa skutocne nerata). No a teda po ustavicnom prilive podobne rozmyslajucich (a logickymi argumentmi nepresvedcitelnych) editorov si clovek povie, ze "na slovenskych redaktorov so zaujmom o dejiny si musim davat pozor".

2. Dalej mam problem s tym, ak niekto vola mna nacionalista, ten co nenavidi Madarov, hovori, ze novodobe Slovensko je fasisticky stat, ktory chce asimilovat Madarov a tito editori si veselo edituju a ja mam topic ban - V tomto mozem hovorit len a len za seba. Nepamatam si, zeby som bol niekde napisal, ze Slovensko je fasisticky stat (ved tu preboha zijem a este som nebol odvleceny do koncentraku ako ani nikto z mojich znamych) a za inych redaktorov rucit nemozem. To si budes musiet vybavit s nimi. A topic ban ti zase nedali madarski redaktori, ale admini, ktori mali na to skutocny dovod (vid nizsie), takze mozes sa vyplakavat aj na roznych blogoch kolko len chces (o tom, aki su Madari hnusni, utlacaju na anglickej wiki kazdeho statocneho Slovaka a pod.), tym si nic nezmenis. Asi jedina tvoja sanca je prediskutovat si to s dotycnym adminom, ktory ti ten topic ban dal. Ale to vyzaduje aj istu mieru sebareflexie.

3. Ja som mal s tebou jeden priamy konflikt na clanku Slovak Lands, chcel som urobit neskodny stub o dolozenom termine Slovak lands, uzemie malo meno Slovaky, Slovenska zem a pod. pisomne dolozene uz od roku 1405. - A presne na tomto clanku je najlepsie vidiet, preco ti dali ten topic ban. Sam pises, ze pisomne je to dolozene "uz" od roku 1405. A napriek tomu co si tam napisal? Toto: The term Slovak lands describes Slovak ethnic territory[7] from the 5th century when Slavs inhabited this lands[8] until the time of Czechoslovakia A pokial ma pamat neklame, ziaden z uvedenych zdrojov nehovori o Slovakoch skor ako od toho 15. storocia. Ale ty si tam v klude hodil zmienku o 5. storoci, hoci s tym by nesuhlasili ani Cesi a Poliaci, nie to este ini. A darmo ti vysvetloval kazdy (vratane mna), ze to je uplna blbost (a ze s vedou to nema nic spolocne), nikoho si nepocuval. A potom ti prisiel ten topic ban ako hrom z jasneho neba, lebo si nepripustil, ze ini by mohli mat v niecom pravdu. Samozrejme pripustam, ze aj madarski editori mozu byt obcas dost drzi (nechcem tu spominat mena, lebo to by desifroval kazdy aj bez prekladaca), ale naozaj mali pravdu v tom, ze si mazal doveryhodne zdroje a texty, ktore si potom nahradzal hlupostami. To si nemyslim len ja, ale aj admini, inac by ti ten topic ban nedali. A ked to budes nadalej brat tak, ze kazdy neslovensky editor je tvojim uhlavnym nepriatelom a klame ti vzdy a neustale do oci, tak si s adminmi ani nepochodis. A fakt si to neber v zlom. Keby som chcel byt svina, tak toto cele by som ti tu nevypisoval.

5. Vadi mi, ze meno Slavus z latinciny madarski wikipedisti vzdy prekladaju ako Slovan. Troska hermeneutiky chyba.. - asi to bude tym, ze madarcina prebrala ten latinsky vyraz (szláv) a nema ziadne ine slovo na Slovanov (resp. len predpony typu keleti, nyugati, dél- atd.). Takze s tym si asi nic nespravis (je to podobne tazke pre Madarov ako napr. pre Slovakov pouzivanie clenov typu a, an, the v anglictine). Mozno predniest nejake rozumne argumenty a hlavne DOVERYHODNE zdroje napr. cez Omen1229.

6. Vadi mi clanok Principality of Hungary. Fakir nemal problem spojit 30 zdrojov, urobit kompilatnu original research esej. Pritom jediny zdroj z tych cias o nejakom celku v tomto regione bola Zapadna Turkia. Ziadne spojenie, ze by to bolo Uhorske kniezatstvo.. - Asi ta sklamem, ale Madarsko bolo az do korunovacie I. Stefana kniezatstvo. Alebo chces mi povedat, ze z nicoho nic sa stalo jedno velke (a prekvapivo dobre organizovane) kralovstvo? Ze predtym to vobec nebolo zorganizovane? Len cisto logicky by si dokazal predstavit, ze by z uplnej anarchie/chaotickej vlady mocipanov by dokazal jeden clovek vybudovat take silne kralovstvo, ktore prezilo aj dlhsie interregna, ktore nasledovali vladu niektorych Arpadovcov? A aby som sa pohral s tvojim stihomámom (:-), existenciu madarskeho kniezatstva nespochybnuje z Madarov nikto. A vies preco? Lebo je to sucastou uciva dejepisu na madarskych skolach dokonca aj na Slovensku. Takze spochybnit nieco, v com sa viacmenej zhoduju aj akademici (co je velmi zriedkave) nie je taktne. A aj kebyze to bola nejaka pochybna tema, bolo by treba mat trosku odlisny pristup. Totiz jednou vetou si zavrhol vsetky Fakirbakirove zdroje, a to bez ohladu na to, ze je tam mnozstvo skutocne kvalitnych zdrojov: zdroje Madarskej akademie vied (MTA), roznych dalsich madarskych univerzit, ale aj renomovanych medzinarodnych institucii ako napr. MIT, Cambridgeska univerzita, Oxfordska univerzita a pod. Znamena to teda, ze jednym svihom si oznacil vsetky doveryhodne zdroje za uplne nespolahlive. A to ti nikto nezozerie, lebo nikto nepovie, ze MIT, University of Cambridge, University of Oxford atd. su nedoveryhodne. To skor ti daju topic/indef ban.

7. Co sa tyka geografickych nazvov v Uhorsku. Pausalne sa zacali madarske nazvy pouzivat az koncom 19. storocia. Dovtedy sa pouzivali lokalne nazvy. Staci si pozriet stare mapy od Samuela Mikoviniho. - Sory ale to nie je a ani nemoze byt pravda. Stare mapy od Mikovinyho praveze ukazuju roznorodost vselijakych nazvov. Mesta boli oznacovane bud nemeckymi nazvami (Leopoldstadt), alebo madarsko-nemeckymi (Po/z/sony-Pressburg). Dediny zase bud najzazitejsimi nazvami, alebo (ked boli) madarskymi nazvami. A sudiac z jednej zo spominanych map ([13]) ja by som povedal, ze to druhe bolo v prevahe uz na konci 18. storocia. Alebo chces mi povedat, ze este na konci 18. storocia bolo tolko Madarov na Zahori, ze "lokalne" nazvy boli madarske (napr. Lévárd/Leward, Malac/z/ka, Konyha, Búrszentgyörgy, Búrszentpéter, Szomolán/y/, Cseszte atd.)? To by si protirecil sam sebe. Samozrejme netvrdim, ze zmeny nazvov obci na konci 19. storocia nemal aj madarizacny zamer/element (lebo urcite mal), ale bolo by dobre uvedomit si, ze na niektore zmeny nazvov obci mali skutocne dobry dovod: Uhorsko siahalo az k juznym Karpatom a preto sa naslo strasne vela duplicit v zazivanych nazvov roznych dedin (napr. mesto s nazvom "By/i/strica" existuje v Sedmohradsku dodnes), ktore sa museli (aj z praktickych dovodov) eliminovat. A sem-tam sa stalo, ze niektore obce dostali mena, ktore nemali so zazivanym nazvom nic spolocne, ale dovody tam boli ine ako administrativne (napr. pri Novej Dubnici a Dubnici nad Vahom). Ovela castejsie sa ale stalo, ze sa naslo viac obci s totoznym menom (napr. taka Dubova, ktoru mame dnes aj pri Svidniku a aj pri Pezinku) a preto zmenili meno jednej z nich na nieco uplne ine. Pre porovnanie po Trianone sa na Slovensku premenovavali obce najma z ideologickych (nacionalistickych) dovodov (napr. Bratislava, Kvetoslavov, Sturovo, Gabcikovo, alebo byvale Calovo, Calovec a Safarikovo atd.), prakticke dovody nehrali rolu skoro nikdy (coho prikladom su prave napr. vyse spominane obce Dubova). Ale tieto finty sa v knihach "o madarskych sebaklamoch" bohuzial neprezradzaju. A samozrejme je vzdy lahsie hladiet na "nepriatela" ako na bezducheho a bezcitneho demona, lenze z toho vznikaju vojny a genocidy, nie zisk a prosperita. Pri takychto debatach o mien dedin zase staci spomenut, ze vhodnejsie by bolo pouzitie nazvu "Ocsova" ako "Nagyócsa" s pripadnymi zdrojmi.

4) Vadi mi pausalny preklad terminu Hungarian pri osobach na Hungarian people (najma pred rokom 1918) a linkovanie s nimi. - toto je na strasne dlhu debatu. Totiz v Uhorsku sa na zaciatku 19. storocia (v dobe vzniku/hladania sebaurcenia narodov) zacali debaty o sebaurceni madarskeho naroda ako takeho. Vybrat si ale mohli z dvoch modelov: z nemeckeho a francuzskeho. Nemecky model hovoril, ze kazdy, kto zije na uzemi Nemecka, je Nemcom bez ohladu na to, akym jazykom hovori. Francuzsky model zase hovoril, ze kto sa chce stat "plnohodnotnym" Francuzom, musi sa "odnarodnit", teda hovorit vylucne po francuzsky a uznavat za svoju vylucne len francuzsku kulturu. No a pre fatalny omyl menom Revolucia a boj za slobodu v rokoch 1848/49 sa tieto debaty natiahli az do 2. pol. 19. storocia. Napokon zvitazili zastancovia francuzskeho modelu, preto sa madarska elita rozhodla pre "blaho Uhorskeho statu" pomadarcit vsetky svoje mensiny (resp. sa o to pokusit). Ale co sa tyka pouzivania vyrazu Hungarian (a jeho "pausalne" pouzivanie), za to (tiez) nemozes vinit jedine Madarov. Totiz vo svetovych jazykoch fakt neexistuje vyraz, ktorym by sa oddelil Madar od "nemadarskej mensiny zijucej na uzemi Uhorska". Sem-tam clovek natrafi na vyraz "Magyar" (v kontraste s Hungarian), ale to len v anglictine a aj tam sa to pouziva strasne malokedy. To ma mrzi, ze tvojho predka mali za Madara napriek tomu, ze nebol Madarom, ale zdroje nemusia byt v tomto smere celkom presne. Narodnost niektorych osob sa da vydedukovat majma z ich osobnych korespondencii, no pri tych, u ktorych take zdroje chybaju, musime spoliehat na nieco ine. Ale to zase vobec nemusi znamenat, ze ludi, ktorych narodnost sa neda jednoznacne urcit, automaticky pomadarcili historici v neskorsich obdobiach. V opacnom pripade to totiz moze viest k nezmyslom ako napr. prisudzovanie basni Balintovi Balassimu, ktore nielenze nemusel napisat on, ale je mozne, ze maju viacerych autorov, co napokon viedlo k vyhlaseniu, ze "Balassi bol madarsko-slovensky basnik, ktory pisal basne aj v slovakizovanej cestine" (hoci neexistuje na to ziaden dovod, len jeho basne sa nasli vo Fanchaliho kodexe spolu s dalsimi madarskymi a "ceskoslovenskymi" basnami). A sireniu nezmyslov o slovenskych dejinach by sichcel predist aj ty, ci nie? -- CoolKoon (talk) 20:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Odpoved c. 2

1) ja som o tych unosoch zo strany femke nepisal a ako sa mozes presvedcit. Pouzil som aj dost velke mnozstvo zdrojov madarskych akademikov. aj voci mne mas predsudky?

2) co sa tyka mojej sebareflexie, uznavam ze moje zaciatky na wiki boli "rusne" ale ked si pozries moju histroriu, tak moj sposob komunikacie aj sebareflexie sa znacne zmenil. som rad ze citas moj blog :) ale neviem o tom, ze by som hovoril o hnusnych madaroch. co sa tyka tvojej sebareflexie, myslis, ze odvodzovat zavery zdrojov typu gesta hunnorum... a pod. je dostatocne vedecke? Uprimne mi povedz, ty si vazne myslis, ze za svoje vyroky a spravanie su rovnakou mierou postihovane obe nazorove frakcie? user co mi nadaval do nackov a povedal ze slovensko je faši stat a je stale v opozicii voci mne nebol nijako potrestany. teraz spolu s jeho asistentom zlikvidovali moje posledne aktivity na wiki. viz. pannonian steppe a carpathian highwaymen

3) v clanku Slovak Lands som mazal zdroje? Ten termin sa pouzival aj na oznacenie najstarsich dejin uzemia Slovenska. Uznavam, ze to nebol daky dokonaly clanok ale ty si to nazval uplnou sprostostou s nutnostou okamziteho zmazania. Je to nazov regionu, v pisomnych zdrojov od 1405 ale nemozeme vediet, ze ho ludia takto nevolali aj skor. Citoval som tu aj knizku o vyvoji slovenskeho jazyka a prve odlisovanie dialektu Slovanov na uzemi dnesneho Slovenska bolo v 5 storoci. Ale to je na sirsiu debatu kedy pouzit termin Slovak a kedy termin Slovan.

5) ja nemam problem ked sa preklada termin Turci a pod., ked je evidentne, ze ide o madarov na madar. Preco to neplati opacne? Napr. Zilinska kniha, privelegia pro slavis... Existuje aj slovo tot ako preklad pre slovanov.. Podla mna treba na zaklade kontextu rozlisovat, ci pouzit slovan alebo slovak ak boli pouzite terminy slavus, tot a pod..

6) zas zo mna robis nieco co niesom. Kde som spochybnil ze kniezatstvo nebolo??? Spochybnil som clanok "Principality of Hungary" a argumenty som spomenul. Neviem o tom, ze na Slovensku alebo v Madarsku sa ucilo, ze bolo kniezatsvo madarov od roku 895. Daj mi zdroj. Spochybnoval som nazov clanku a rok vzniku. Pokiel viem bolo niekolko udelnych kniezatstiev, ktore zjednotil az geza I. Prosim linkni mi kde som spochybnil cambridge university, oxford a pod. v kontexte principality of Hungary. Ja nieco poviem a ty mi tu hovoris o stihomame a odpovedas o niecom uplne inom. Mozme hovorit o seminomadskom narode bez dokazov o tom, ze sa chceli natrvalo usadit (lendvai) ako o kniezatstve? So vznikom madarskeho kniezastva v roku 895 nemozem suhlasit. Bola to faza formvoania kniezastva, niekolkych kniezatstiev, co bolo zavrsene zjednotenim od gezu. s tymto co som napisal nesuhlasis? preco neni ekvivalntny clanok o kniezastve na madarskej wikipedii ani na ziadnom inom jazyku len tu? clanok rovnako nesie typicke znamke eseje a syntezy.

7) Proste zas si si vybral len to aby si nesuhlasil. Ty mas zaujem hladat kompromisy a diskutovat? Ja teraz UPLNE SUHLASIM, co si napisal o mapach, lebo som ich videl a cital som knihu. Ano su roznorode nazvy, ale preco by mali byt pouzivane madarske z konca 19 storocia na skorsie obdobie? Pouzil si jednu mapu, aby si nesuhlasil ale na dalsich mas nemecke nazvy spomenutych obci alebo slovanske nazvy. Cize co sa tyka nazvov obci by som pristupoval opatrnejsie a citlivo z oboch stran. O tej zmene na konci 19 storocia mi hovoril moj madarsky kamos v reale a tym to argumentoval. Ale napriklad zmena nazvov na Slovenske mozes vysvetlit aj tak, ze madarske sa tazko ucili :) To bol sarkazmus

4) Pozri ja som nevinil madarov. Len som povedal o tomto probleme. Pozri ten predok tu neni a radsej ani nechcem o nom pisat clanok, len som poukazal na relativitu. Existuje korespondencia v nemcine, latincine, madarcine, slovencine a je jej minimum. A teraz co? Je na zozname madarskych knazov (hungarus). Pritom viem, ze bol Slovak. Preto som chcel urobit clanok Hungarus alebo Natio Hungarica aby som na to poukzal alebo bol clanok atakovany. Skor mi ide o to, ze by bolo podla mna ferovejsie linkovat Hungarian z cias Uhorska s KoH a nie HU people a potom na zaklade overenych zdrojov o ich povode tie osoby priradit k jednotlivym narodom. Argumentovat tym, ze nieco laicka verejnost nepouziva v svetovych jazykoch? Nejde nam o odbornost? To mi pride akoby si obhajoval zneuzitelnost tohto terminu, pretoze v hovorovej reci je to casto ako synonymum. Btw, nasiel som aj madarsky zdroj co tvrdi, ze basne vo fanchaliho kodexe napisal balassa. ale z toho clanku som sa stiahol a akceptoval som to. Jasne, ze nechcem sirit nezmysly, ty chces? Si schopny aj menit nazor ak ti niekto predlozi argumenty? --Samofi (talk) 10:58, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1) ja som o tych unosoch zo strany femke nepisal a ako sa mozes presvedcit. Pouzil som aj dost velke mnozstvo zdrojov madarskych akademikov. - Nepovedal som, ze si to bol ty, kto pisal o unosoch zo strany FMKE. To bol len priklad toho, preco zvyknem brat slovenskych editorov so zaujmom o dejiny na jedno kopyto. Nemozem za to, ze si to beries osobne. To, ze si pouzil zdroje madarskych akademikov je fajn, ale aj tak nemozem odhliadnut o faktu, ze ine madarske akademicke zdroje si bud ignoroval, povyberal, alebo proste len oznacil za nedoveryhodne. A taketo chovanie nevzbudzuje dojem objektivneho editora. A nehovor, ze si to nerobil, lebo robil, naposledy na diskusnej stranke Fut. Perf.

2) ...som rad ze citas moj blog :) ale neviem o tom, ze by som hovoril o hnusnych madaroch. co sa tyka tvojej sebareflexie, myslis, ze odvodzovat zavery zdrojov typu gesta hunnorum... a pod. je dostatocne vedecke? Uprimne mi povedz, ty si vazne myslis, ze za svoje vyroky a spravanie su rovnakou mierou postihovane obe nazorove frakcie? - noo, citat je silny vyraz, kedze odvtedy sa tam neobjavilo nic nove (a to vzlykanie si si napisal pred par rokmi), ale ano, videl som to. Nehovorim, ze doslova si tam pisal o hnusnych Madaroch (to nie), ale z tonu tych prispevkov mi bolo jasne, ze za vsetko vinis Madarov (resp. madarskych editorov), preto ti "hnusni Madari". A napriek tomu, ze VIEM, ze madarski editori mali svoje reakcie "spravne nacasovane" a reagovali vzdy v ten "spravny okamih", dal si im (az pri)vela sance, ktore vyuzili. Samozrejme niektori madarski editori SU zaujati (zase nechcem spominat mena), ale s vynimkou jedneho-dvoch sa zavesia len na tych, ktori su strasne konfliktni (konaju im naproti) a vobec to nevedia alebo si neracia vysvetlit. Cize namiesto logickych argumentov odcituju nieco z Madarskych (seba)klamov a pod. a nechapu, preco su na nich Madari zli. A pritom sa tomu da predist, ved aj Nmate dostal ban za veci, ktore napisal na stranku ArbCom. No a adminov zase vyplakavanie a cista demagogia vacsinou nenadchne, cize na nich sa to tiez neoplati skusat. Ale ocividne tiez nie si tu ziadnym novacikom, preto aspon niektore veci ti uz davno mali byt jasne.

3) v clanku Slovak Lands som mazal zdroje? Ten termin sa pouzival aj na oznacenie najstarsich dejin uzemia Slovenska. Uznavam, ze to nebol daky dokonaly clanok ale ty si to nazval uplnou sprostostou s nutnostou okamziteho zmazania. Je to nazov regionu, v pisomnych zdrojov od 1405 ale nemozeme vediet, ze ho ludia takto nevolali aj skor. Citoval som tu aj knizku o vyvoji slovenskeho jazyka a prve odlisovanie dialektu Slovanov na uzemi dnesneho Slovenska bolo v 5 storoci. - Ale no! Kde som ti napisal, ze v Slovak Lands si mazal zdroje? Najvacsi problem so Slovak Lands je, ze si tam hned nazaciatku napisal veci, ktore idu uplne naproti vsetkemu, co sa nielen skuma, ale uci. Dokonca aj na univerzitach sa uci, ze v dobe Velkomoravskej rise este ani zdalek neprebehla diferenciacia zapadoslovanskych jazykov, cize tvrdenia typu "Slovenskou zemou sa nazyvala oblast xy uz od 5. storocia" je uplnou fikciou. A nejde o to, ze ten clanok "nebol daky dokonaly", ale o to, ze vyssie spominane tvrdenie je hlavnym motivom celeho clanku, preto cely clanok je jednou velkou floskulou. A take clanky sa bud mazu, alebo sa prepisu na nepoznanie.

4)(...) Skor mi ide o to, ze by bolo podla mna ferovejsie linkovat Hungarian z cias Uhorska s KoH a nie HU people a potom na zaklade overenych zdrojov o ich povode tie osoby priradit k jednotlivym narodom. Argumentovat tym, ze nieco laicka verejnost nepouziva v svetovych jazykoch? Nejde nam o odbornost? To mi pride akoby si obhajoval zneuzitelnost tohto terminu, pretoze v hovorovej reci je to casto ako synonymum. - Bolo by to ferovejsie, ale to by sa tu najprv museli objavit viaceri slovenski editori, ktori nechcu obhajovat neobhajitelne za kazdu cenu a dalo by sa s nimi dohodnut na nejakom kompromise/konsenze. A kedze by slo o konsenzus, jeho dodrzanie by ocakavali nielen od Madarov, ale aj od seba. Kedze ale takyto konsenzus neexistuje ani medzi odbornou verejnostou (a ono sa to este aj spolitizuje), sance na nieco podobne su podla mna blizko nuly.

Btw, nasiel som aj madarsky zdroj co tvrdi, ze basne vo fanchaliho kodexe napisal balassa. ale z toho clanku som sa stiahol a akceptoval som to. - To vazne? Mohol by si mi hodit aj nejaky link alebo nieco? Lebo zdroje, ktore som doteraz videl, hovoria dokonca o tom, ze ani vsetky madarske basne z Fanchaliho kodexu nemozno pripisovat Balassimu a preto ich mu (napr. v ucive) ani nepripisuju. Pripisuju ich bud roznym anonymom/autorom s neznamou biografiou, alebo o nich nehovoria vobec.

Jasne, ze nechcem sirit nezmysly, ty chces? Si schopny aj menit nazor ak ti niekto predlozi argumenty? - Jasneze nechcem (sirit nezmysly) a trosku aj preto som si dal tu namahu, ze som sa s tebou pustil do debaty :P Co sa tyka nazoru, nielenze som schopny ho menit, ale som schopny zmenit aj svoje zvyky pokial sa presvedcim o tom, ze nieco robim zle a ze sa to da robit aj lepsie. Takych momentov je ale pramalo...

5) ja nemam problem ked sa preklada termin Turci a pod., ked je evidentne, ze ide o madarov na madar. Preco to neplati opacne? (...) - Ale ani doteraz sme sa nebavili o veciach, ktore su evidentne, ci ano? Problemom ale je, ze mnoho ludi, u ktorych madarska narodnost/povod je podla Madarov evidentne, Slovaci spochybnuju (aj ty, aj ini). A to nehovorim len o davnych predkoch, ale aj takych, ktori umreli tesne pred 1918 (alebo po). No a zase tu nechcem spominat mena, lebo to by potom tato debata sa potiahla este dlhsie.

Napr. Zilinska kniha, privelegia pro slavis... - Co jej s nimi? Kto tvrdil o zilinskej knihe, ze je madarska? A vobec, najvacsi problem s tou knihou nie je jej privlastnenie, skor nedostupnost. Totiz MS alebo kto ju ma schovanu niekde v Martine ci kde a ani by im nenapadla jej digitalizacia. Aj faximile verziu Fanchaliho kodexu som nasiel na madarskej stranke, nie na slovenskej (napriek tomu, ze to objavil vo viedenskej kniznici Slovak). To Madari fakt nemozu za to, ze Slovaci sa nestaraju o svoje kulturne dedicstvo....

Existuje aj slovo tot ako preklad pre slovanov.. Podla mna treba na zaklade kontextu rozlisovat, ci pouzit slovan alebo slovak ak boli pouzite terminy slavus, tot a pod.. - "tót" ako preklad pre Slovanov?! Pouzitie pre Slovakov a Slovinov som uz pocul, ale vseobecne pre Slovanov? Link?

6) zas zo mna robis nieco co niesom. Kde som spochybnil ze kniezatstvo nebolo??? Spochybnil som clanok "Principality of Hungary" a argumenty som spomenul. Neviem o tom, ze na Slovensku alebo v Madarsku sa ucilo, ze bolo kniezatsvo madarov od roku 895. Daj mi zdroj. Spochybnoval som nazov clanku a rok vzniku. Pokiel viem bolo niekolko udelnych kniezatstiev, ktore zjednotil az geza I. Prosim linkni mi kde som spochybnil cambridge university, oxford a pod. v kontexte principality of Hungary. - Tak napriklad Why did not you protest against these fringe theories: Principality of Hungary, [52], [53] and so on?, Ziadne spojenie, ze by to bolo Uhorske kniezatstvo, you had no problem with "Principality of Hungary" which is mentioned in few obscure sources a to som este nevyhladal dotycne diskusie na diskusnej stranke dotycnych clankov. A to tretie vyjadruje aj tvoj postoj k zdrojom z Univ. Oxford, Cambridge a MIT, ktore boli citovane pri "Principality of Hungary" (link je diskusna stranka Fut. Perf.). Tym ze si spochybnil "PoH" ako celok si spochybnil aj zdroje patriace k clanku. Ja som zdroje k clanku "Slovak lands" nespochybnil. Skor tam bol problemom, ze si im prisudzoval tvrdenia, ktore vobec neobsahovali.

7) Proste zas si si vybral len to aby si nesuhlasil. Ty mas zaujem hladat kompromisy a diskutovat? Ja teraz UPLNE SUHLASIM, co si napisal o mapach, lebo som ich videl a cital som knihu. Ano su roznorode nazvy, ale preco by mali byt pouzivane madarske z konca 19 storocia na skorsie obdobie? Pouzil si jednu mapu, aby si nesuhlasil ale na dalsich mas nemecke nazvy spomenutych obci alebo slovanske nazvy. Cize co sa tyka nazvov obci by som pristupoval opatrnejsie a citlivo z oboch stran. O tej zmene na konci 19 storocia mi hovoril moj madarsky kamos v reale a tym to argumentoval. Ale napriklad zmena nazvov na Slovenske mozes vysvetlit aj tak, ze madarske sa tazko ucili - Ja tiez som za opatrnejsi pristup, lenze ono to vobec nie je take jednoduche, ako si to myslis. "Moderne" madarske nazvy sa pouzivaju najma preto, lebo moderny madarsky pravopis existuje len od konca 18. storocia, ked sa de facto kodifikovala madarcina. Dovtedy neexistovali ziadne jednotne pravidla, cize kazdy si pisal po svojom (samozrejme s tym, ze madarcina sa vyskytovala len v sukromnej korespondencii, kedze uradnym jazykom do zaciatku 19. storocia zostala latincina). A to sa vztahovalo aj na nazvy miest. Napr. Bratislava sa v jednom zdroje spomina ako "Poson", v druhom ako "Posony" atd. to iste plati aj pre ostatne mesta a obce (dokonca napr. taka Banska Bystrica sa najprv volala "Novy Zvolen", co skomplikovalo veci este viac). Preto ta snaha o presadzovanie modernych madarskych nazvi (z konca 19. storocia, ale tie sa pouzivaju dodnes, su dokonca obsiahnute v specialnom slovniku). Samozrejme pre svojvolne premenovavanie obci sa pri pripadoch podobnych Ocovej by sa dalo diskutovat o presadzovanie starsieho (slovenskeho?) nazvu, ale na taketo veci sam nestacim (kedze nie som manuskar vsetkych madarskych editorov, ako si to pravdepodobne mysli Omen1229), cize taketo veci by si mohol prediskutovat aj s inymi (aj madarskymi) editormi. Bez toho to jednoducho nejde. -- CoolKoon (talk) 22:20, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Madarske nazvy sa prepisovali podla slovenskeho pravopisu uz po Trianone, bez tazkosti. Kym ale inde sa pomenuvaju obce podla slavnych osob len vtedy, ked dotycna osoba sa tam narodil(a) alebo posobil(a) po dlhsiu dobu, na Slovensku sa tie mena udelovali vylucne obciam, ktore s nimi nemali nic spolocne (raz som dokonca pocul, ze nejaki Slovaci sa vybrali do Gabcikova hladat Gabcikov hrob....). Take veci preto nemozem brat s humorom (ale ani v inych oblastiach, napr. ekonomike, vede, IT a pod).

Szia!

Mivel fel vagy iratkozva a WikiProject Hungary-ra, gondoltam reszt vennel annak ujjaeleszteseben. Jelenleg a WP HU elegge inaktiv allapotban van, ezen szeretnek segiteni az azonos erdeklodesu szerkesztok osszefogasaval, es egy kis eletet lehelni bele. Irtam egy rovid vazlatot, hogy mit gondolok most jelenleg, illetve felvetettem par lehetoseget hogyan lehetne kicsit aktivabba tenni a projektet. Lathatod, hogy tobbek kozott a hataron tuli magyarokkal (a Karpat-medenceben es azon kivul is) foglalkozo muhely letrehozasat is felvetettem, ami szerintem erdekelhet, es amihez orommel vennem ha csatlakoznal (masokhoz is persze, ha gondolod). Nem tudom, hogy mennyire vagy aktiv itt az angol wikin, de minden kicsi segitseg tovabb viszi a projektet. Ha barmi kerdesed lenne tedd fel batran a "Project organization" oldal vitalapjan, itt (figyelolistara tettelek) vagy az en vitalapomon.

Udv,

Thehoboclown (talk) 12:51, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Persze, végül is miért ne. Azt viszont nem tudom garantálni, hogy napi szinten (is) foglalkozni tudnék a témával, mert nem járok ide annyira gyakran. Amit garantálni tudok, az az esetleges történelmi és felvidéki vonatkozású cikkek szerkesztése. A többiről esetleg érdemes lenne emailben értekezni. -- CoolKoon (talk) 14:34, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CoolKoon ty madarsky kus hovna. Cital som, ze v Budapesti ta vlastna rodina volala Cechom. To nasere, co? Kvoli Ficovi spavas dobre? Mas z neho totiz velke komplexy. Na Slovensku sa SNS nedostala do parlamentu, ale v Madarskom Bazmekistane sa fasisticky Jobik stal druhou najsilnejsou stranou...co ty na to, chujo madarsky? O madarcine - rano, ked serem tak je to podobny zvuk ako prijebana madarska rec - este aj ten stekot psa je krajsi. My Slovaci sme Slovania, ale Madari su co? Ugrofinotatari? A ten picus Orban len zhana pozicky pre Madarsko - zebraci. Tak cau a pojeb sa. --CoolKoon jebe svoji matku (talk) 09:09, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ale Bizovne, nemali by ta v tom blazinci pustat na Internet, lebo z tej zlosti, co salaju tvoje prispevky, ta raz trafi slak. No a byt tebou by som radsej pravidelne bral vsetky psychiatrom predpisane tabletky, v opacnom pripade totiz liecba stale nezaberie. -- CoolKoon (talk) 10:13, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ty madarske hovno, aka zlost...ja sa celkom bavim. Tvojho stareho otca mali v gulagu zastrelit, madarsky fasista mal dostat gulku medzi oci a taky picusko ako ty by sa vobec nenarodil. Tvoja rodina, slavni Madari a pri slovakizacii zradili madarstvo a boli posrati aby ich nevystahovali tak sa zrazu prehlasili za Slovakov. Ale je mi ta luto, vlastna rodina v Budapesti ta nazve Cechom...necudo ze si z toho v pici... Vo vlastnom zaujme nerozpravaj tou pojebanou madarcinou v BA lebo ta rozkopu Slovaci. Pojeb sa, ty kokot. --CoolKoon jebe svoji matku (talk) 10:46, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Asi ta sklamem, ale otca mojej babky odvliekli to tvojho milovaneho Sovietskeho zvazu uz ked bola babka na svete. Moja rodina reslovakizovala prave preto, aby bastardi najvyssieho (ci najnizsieho?) rangu ich nezastrelili za to, ze sa opovazia hovorit po madarsky (v Petrzalke sa totiz naplnilo par masovych hrobov Madarmi tesne po vojne). To, ze mi tebe podobni vymetenci vynadali za madarcinu, ma este nikdy neodradilo od toho, aby som DOMA (v BA som totiz doma, nech sa ti to paci alebo nie) rozpraval mojou rodnou recou.

Ten "zvlastny" pozdrav (pojeb sa) si si doniesol z rodneho domu? Takto si musel zdravit doma kazdeho clena rodiny? Alebo mas len Tourettov syndrom? A to ta este neliecia? -- CoolKoon (talk) 11:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rusi vedeli co robia - bol to madarsky fasista, takze si to zasluzil. Teda presnejsie - mali ho postavit k muru a zastrelit. Bola to len madarska svina. Reslovakizovali zo strachu a posranosti - zradili madarstvo. Vies, Slovakov za madarizacie vrazdili, ale madarske zbabele hovna - tvoji predkovia - sa radsej nechali slovakizovat. Nejde o vynadanie, raz dostanes v BA poriadne na hubu aby si pochopil ze na Slovensku po slovensky a madari do pice. A ten pozdrav nemam z domu, to je len pre madarskych fasistov ako si ty. Stale si mi neodpovedal kam patria Madari. Slovaci, Cesi, Poliaci, Rusi, Ukrajinci, Srbi, Chorvati, Bielorusi - to vsetko su Slovania. Ale co su Madari? Nepatria nikam a vsetky okolite staty ich nenavidia od cias Malej dohody. A ta madarska odporna rec...to je na dalsie nadavky.--CoolKoon jebe svoji matku (talk) 12:48, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The text above is pure harassment in Slovak. The only reason I've decided to translate it is because it contains some peculiar anti-Hungarian hate speech which bears the typical signs characteristic of Slovak nationalism (hence it shall be left here for documentary purposes and to serve as an example). If you're a hypocrite who's offended by such explicit wording, you should stop reading right now. Thank you.

Hi. You are the only Wikipedian I could find that know Hungarian and still active in English Wikipedia :) I am trying to improve this article in Turkish Wikipedia and found this source for the article. Can you translate this article to English? Or can you show me someone who can do it? Thanks.--Rapsar (talk) 12:03, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, that's a fairly lengthy article (especially for translating the whole). Couldn't you just specify some particular sections which you'd need translating? Perhaps I could help you with than. -- CoolKoon (talk) 16:02, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Preperations of Hungarian side" would be very helpful. Thanks.--Rapsar (talk) 12:39, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:SNS 2010 campaign poster.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:01, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CoolKoon. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --95.102.187.187 (talk) 15:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Hungarian people. Please comment on the content and not the contributors. At this edit [14] you imply that nationalist trollls who assert that a church consecrated to Saint Elizabeth of Hungary can't be an example of Hungarian architecture - That`s great, you added refs(how should I or anybody else know that this Church is Hungarian Catholic?- In a place where Hungarian make only 3,8% of the population. Have a little good faith, most of us is here to help the project), but this comment is far from wiki manual. After all, some of those "nationalist trollls" use modern names as indicated per WP:PLACE, as we all should. Please keep that in mind. Greetings. Adrian (talk) 14:28, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to see that my comment ended up being taken personally by you. Truth is that it was meant for IP user 195.28.75.114, who's probably User:Bizovne (I don't know this for sure, but the IP's from Slovakia and its editing pattern DOES match that of Bizovne with a high probability). The other IP user's obviously Stubes99 (I know THIS one for sure), and I kinda have to side with him on this (actually I'm yet to see ANY occasion where I'd side with Bizovne). So no, the comment was NOT meant for you and if you have any doubts about the true nature of Bizovne (that he's a Slovak nationalist troll), just read my translations of the posts he's made on my talk page. What's worse is that he's even created an account in my "honor": User:CoolKoon jebe svoji matku (=CoolKoon's fucking his mother). -- CoolKoon (talk) 18:36, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:37, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 18:55, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Hungary shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Neither nonfree image involved can be used in the article, One purportedly illustrates a matter not even mentioned in the article (international reaction); the other illustrates a person briefly mentioned. Text alone is clearly sufficient to convey the matters involved; use of each image there clearly fails NFCC#8, which you should review carefully. Please do not restore these images again. Your threat to make a vandalism report is groundless and is likely to WP:BOOMERANG against you. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 21:53, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, in your comments you're obviously just as arrogant as you're in your edits. Guess what, the issue of the Time Magazine cover has been brought up YEARS ago and the consensus was to keep. Somebody with intentions eerily similar to yours has nominated the image for deletion, but the result was to keep it (FOUR years ago). And now you come out of the blue and assert (by some inexplicable misinterpretation of rules) that a picture detailing Hungarians in the international press has nothing to do with the article about Hungary? You really don't care about acting against an already established consensus either, do you?

Your comment about the second picture is an obvious proof of your ignorance as well. Had you have known ANYTHING about the sports history of Hungary (or history of soccer in general) you'd know that Ferenc Puskás is the iconic figure of Hungarian football. Moreover roughly half of the chapter about sports speaks about nothing else but football. To remove the picture of Puskás öcsi from the section and citing irrelevance as a reason is like adding insult to an injury.

To top the whole thing off you insert here a template that instructs me to discuss the issue on the article's talk page, where you didn't post a single letter detailing your intentions, asking for a consensus or showing ANY willingness to talk things through at all. Then you assert your own (mis)interpretation of the NFCC rules (and their applicability on the pictures you singled out) as the ultimate truth ("neither image can be used"^{[by whom?]}) only to finish your whole comment with a reference to WP:BOOMERANG. Just go ahead and proceed with the picture removal and wait for the results. -- CoolKoon (talk) 23:16, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. What is "well-known" for you keep for yourself. Please stop with this kind of attacks on my account. If you have a problem please file an SPI, otherwise keep your false accusations for yourself. Adrian (talk) 00:37, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Segíthetnél rendbeszedni a cikket. Különösen a Military events szekciót kellene röviden tömören, de átfogóan megszerkeszteni. Ha ez megvan a "Hungarian revolution of 1848" cikkben, azután kellene majd két külön bővebb új wiki cikket nyittani a Téli és a Tavaszi hadjáratról is. Több magyar wiki szerkesztő között kellene felosztani a feladatot.

Válaszodat előre is köszönöm!--Bwatzuk (talk) 16:50, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Úristen, te tényleg nem adod fel.......

Nos, mit mondhatnék....sajnálatos módon nemhogy nem a "szakterületem" úgy en bloc az 1848/49-es forradalom és szabadságharc, de a tavaszi és téli hadjáratok tipikusan olyan mozzanatai a történelemnek (t.i. csaták), amelyek valahogy sose érdekeltek igazán (arról nem is beszélve, hogy ezek a történelemórákon is mindig rengeteg magolással ill. helységnevekkel és évszámokkal voltak megspékelve). A legújabb szerkesztéseidet elnézve (2-3 ezer karakternyi "szösszenetek", meg a többi "apróbb" szerkesztés, a júzereknek írt üzeneteket leaszámítva 45, mindössze két nap alatt) pedig nem is igazán hiszem, hogy bárki is felvehetné veled a versenyt (vsz. az általad megszólított többi szerkesztő se).

Ami pedig úgy általában a többi dolgot illeti, igen, minden üzenetet megkaptam (és nem fogod elhinni, de meg is vannak valahol), csak hát van egy kis gond (ill. rögtön kettő is): egyesekkel ellentétben bizony az én "nem értelmiségi" állásomban elvárásokat támasztanak velem szemben (pl. azt, hogy dolgozzak is, sőt, lehetőleg a munkaidőmet teljes egészében munkával töltsem; ráadásul a cég jellege miatt külföldi IP címről/tartományról nyomjuk az ipart, ami csak fölöslegesen megkeverné a szart, ha bejelentkeznék, neadjisten szerkesztenék is alatta). Ez pedig egyéb (többek között a "nem értelmiségi" állásomból fakadó frusztrációmból eredő) bokros teendőim mellett a rendelkezésemre álló idő jelentős részét elviszi. Másfelől viszont még ha valódi "értelmiségi" állásom is lenne (valami olyan hely, ahol az ember a végzettségéből eredően napokig nem kell hogy dolgozzon, teszem azt valami erőmű főmérnöke, vagy valami ilyesmi), neadjisten rengeteg "üres perccel" járó "nem értelmiségi" állásom (teszem azt projekt menedzser valamelyik multinál), valószínűleg még akkor se tolnám ezt megállás nélkül. Az ok igencsak egyszerű: míg téged fűt valamiféle belső megsz...izé...vágy, addig nekem valahogy (anélkül is, hogy valaha is kitiltottak volna akár csak egy percre is) elment a kedvem attól, hogy hibbant agyhalott megszállottakkal vitatkozzak. Az ilyenek ugyanis pl. cinikus módon nyíltan magyarellenes forrásokat idéznek be rutinszerűen, meggyőzhetetlenek, és bármiféle kompromisszumra képtelenek, mert izzadságszagú, átlátszó, és ostoba dogmákat kántálnak körbe-körbe, ráadásul bármiféle vitát rögtön személyes támadásnak vesznek, ha pedig úgy adódik, bármikor beszólnak valami észveszejtően ostoba dolgot (pl. hogy "a magyar egy csúnya, rokontalan nyelv, ami kutyaugatásra hasonlít, bezzeg a tót a szláv nyelvek ékköve"). Ennek köszönhetően pedig nem elég a cikkek szerkesztésével meg forrásgyűjtéssel foglalkoznom (ami már önmagában véve hosszadalmas folyamat, rengeteg idejét leköti az embernek), de még iszapbirkózást is kell közben folytatnom különféle véglényekkel (akik esetenként a forrásokkal alaposan megtámogatott bekezdéseimet is pillanatok alatt kiszedik). Az ilyeneknek a kitiltatása (még az ideiglenes is) pedig már önmagában egy nehézkes, hosszadalmas, de legfőképpen időigényes (=időrabló) folyamat (ráadásul pont a te példád bizonyítja a leginkább, hogy esetenként ez is hatástalan). Ezzel pedig az egész egy rendkívül hálátlan, időrabló, és úgy általában véve utálatos munkává válik. Ilyet pedig az ember még fizetésért cserébe se végez sokáig, nemhogy ingyen, a saját szabadidejét rááldozva (amikor is inkább pl. a saját jövőjét kéne megalapoznia, vagy bármi értelmeset/hasznosat csinálnia). -- CoolKoon (talk) 19:30, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Egy kis adalék: egészen elképesztő, hogy egyes dolgok mennyire nem változnak. Idestova 3 év telt el azóta, hogy ideraktad nekem azt az "LMP-s" beszólást, amiben a gyanús szerzői jogú képek törlése kapcsán sérelmezted, hogy Iaaasi oldalára álltam (és az általad feltételezett zsidó felmenőimre tettél utalásokat). És mintha az a 3 év el se telt volna: ismét gyanús eredetű (=innen-onnan összelopkodott) képekkel szórod tele a Wikipédiát (még csak meg se próbálod tisztázni a képeket ill. beleírni a leírásukba, hogy mitől minősülnek közkincsnek). Mintha a jog egy kicsit se a te asztalod lenne. Ja és persze továbbra is futószalagon gyártod a wikifiókokat számolatlanul. Nem tudom, nem lenne egyszerűbb visszavenni az örökös konfrontációból, és néha elismerni, hogy a "cigánynak" (meg a fizetett/csicskás adminoknak) is igaza (igazuk) lehet? Hogy lehet, hogy nem is egy összzsidó összeesküvés részesei mind (természetesen engem is beleértve), hanem néha egyszerűen csak túlfeszíted a húrt (ráadásul még teljesen fölöslegesen vérig is sértesz mindenkit, miközben semmi szükség nem lenne rá)? Mert az adminok lehet, hogy tényleg félnek attól, hogy valami félkegyelmű bepereli őket a szerzői jog megsértése miatt (mindegy, hogy kép vagy szöveg kapcsán-e, biztosan tudod, hogy ennek most nagy divatja van). Ha pedig egy-egy ilyen vadbarom komoly összegeket perelne ki a Wikimédia Alapítványtól, akkor egy szép napon megtörténne, hogy leállítják a szervereket, és még csak hírmondó se marad a kedvenc játszóteredből. De hát téphetem én a számat/koptathatom én a billentyűzetet akár ítéletnapig is ugye... -- CoolKoon (talk) 21:32, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on CyberStampede requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 21:55, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ironically, your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nancy Mangano are inappropriate, unless unless you can explain, with diffs, how citing WP:DONTBITE is appropriate, or how I "quite obviously have a chip on your shoulder" for removing names per WP:LISTPEOPLE, something that is not new and not something I did only for this article. Explaining why the subject is not notable is not WP:BITE nor is the AfD is dig at the article's creator, despite your assertions to the contrary. However, your comments on the AfD were inappropriate because they focused on the contributor, not the content. Your comments were solely about editors, not the content. In the future, please keep your comments on the content as appropriate; if you think my behavior is problematic, bring it up at the approppriate venue (WP:ANI, WP:RFC/U), but an AfD is not an appropriate place for that, especially as unfounded as it is. - Aoidh (talk) 06:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I didn't know about the WP:LISTPEOPLE thing. It's just crazy how many policies has Wikipedia lately (i.e. adopted in the past year or two). Sorry for that then.

What I was pointing to is that you were quite harsh on the article creator (the article's edit log consists pretty much of him adding content and you deleting it).

I mentioned right at the beginning of my vote that I can't comment on the notability of the person, because I have no proper access of US media (not that I mind though). That's what I did and I also mentioned some technicalities. As far as I know I'm not obliged to comment solely on the article's content only (which is sound BTW, I don't think it reads like a pure advertisement, even though it has traces of flattery here and there).

Why on Earth would I want to go to WP:ANI regarding an AfD voting? For having suspicions/theories about grudges? You surely don't want to say that I shouldn't do discussion at an AfD discussion, do you? -- CoolKoon (talk) 22:28, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I do say that you shouldn't discuss issues you have with an editor on a discussion about an article's notability. The AfD is for discussing the notability of the article's subject, venues like WP:RFC/U are for discussing issues with the conduct of editors. - Aoidh (talk) 01:01, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Cyber Stampede, Inc has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Promotional article, with no evidence of notability. None of the references is substantial coverage in an independent reliable source.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the answer to your question of a few days ago is:

E stands for Electromotive force. E_p and E_s are the primary and secondary electromotive forces. —BillC ^talk 19:37, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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 Wikipedia 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) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing First first-class cricket match in Australia, an article I wrote. Happy new year too. Xender Lourdes (talk) 02:25, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you're welcome. Happy new year too :) -- CoolKoon (talk) 12:48, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I forgot to mention, the article is now a Good Article. Xender Lourdes (talk) 02:02, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well done ;) -- CoolKoon (talk) 02:18, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Xender Lourdes (talk) 03:32, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 02:52, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CoolKoon. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CoolKoon. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CoolKoon. 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)[reply]

Hello, CoolKoon. 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)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]