A belated welcome to Wikipedia! In case you haven't already found them, some useful links are Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers, Wikipedia:Naming conventions, Wikipedia:Manual of Style, and Wikipedia:The perfect article. Most questions are answered at Wikipedia:Help; if you have a question not answered there, then you can post it to the Village pump.

A word of warning: when comments are posted, the raw text appears without vocal inflections or body language; the lack of these nonverbal cues tends to make the raw text appear to be more terse/rude than the sender actually intended. This is stating the obvious, but people seem to forget it in the heat of the moment. So my word of warning is this: don't be surprised if someone makes comments to you that seem unnecessarily brusque; and try not to take it personally. It is a side-effect of the medium.

A useful trick for signing posts on talk pages is to use four tildes (~~~~), as I have done below. The software automatically converts it into a signature. If you use three tildes, it leaves off the time and date.

Cyan 00:40, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Wikiquette. Your reversions of Croat and Bosnian neologisms and comments at Talk:Croat and Bosnian neologisms aren't really how we try to get things done around here. You have been listed at Wikipedia:Problem users. (Good stuff with the external links at William Faulkner, though.) -- Cyan 07:03, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Mir, I hope you'll pay attention to Cyan's comments here. There are polite and inpolite ways to fix inaccurate or misleading information, and Wikipedia really values folks who can disagree and correct in a polite and constructive manner. Martin 09:52, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

These are from Talk:Croat and Bosnian neologisms. Please be civil. If you feel the points you made here are important, I suggest you remake them in a polite manner. Thank you for your co-operation. Martin 09:32, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC)

---

This page is a product of Serbian sickos. It aims to deride Croatian and Bosnian languages, and the content is almost completely false. Virtually the only exception is the word "dalekovidnica" for TV, which is a literal translation (like German Fernsehen), and not accepted word "zrakomlat" for helicopter. Other "words" are crap "invented" by Serbian psychos. One could ask: why ? Why would anyone bother with such idiotic "enterprise"? Well- when you're filled with hatred towards those who've beaten you in recent wars- no restrictions apply. On more linguistic level: Croatian language is, like some other developed languages (Czech, Hungarian, German, Icelandic, ..), a neologisms-bent language. Many Croatian neologisms form a significant part of any ordinary Serbian dictionary (Serbs have adopted them since their linguistic culture is more prone to loan-words than to calques). So, here are some.

-vodopad (waterfall)

-zubobolja (toothache)

-samoubojstvo (in Serbian translation "samoubistvo") (suicide)

-sladoled (ice cream)

-računovodstvo (bank accountancy)

........

All these words are from Croatian dictionary by Ivan Mažuranić and Jakov Užarević, 1842. Serbs "got" the above mentioned words from that dictionary. Anyway- this "Newspeak" page is a crap, a lie, and a sign of Serbian malignity which manifests itself even in such an unexpected fields as linguistics. It gotta be erased since it's a pure and unadulterated BS.

Mir Harven (mharven@softhome.net)

---

Why should be so ? I don't think that even serious spelling-reform like that initiated by G.B.Shaw are discussed on English language page (let alone Mark Twain's mockery). This "Newspeak" crap doesn't describe any real phenomenon (like, for instance, slang or gender-related speech). It's nothing but Serbian concoction and a sign of idiocy: the only equivalent I can think of would be to list some English words, indulge in ad hoc etymology (software- soft ware: heheh, what an idiotic word for ...you know.) What such a claptrap on *any* language has to do with an encyclopedia ?

M H

---

The times of presenting Bosnian Muslims as simpletons and laughing stock have run out.

---

Moron "Igor something" has reestablished his crap without any credible background info. I suggest the page to be completely erased.

M H

---

Crap.

---

You're an ignorant ( I hope, because ignorance-or stupidity- is not something bad per se). In case your rubbish is a product of pro-Greater Serbia partisanship, and not innocent misinfo- ....well, I dont give a hoot anyway. What I *did* notice is absence of any linguistic info whatsoever. Mmmm....how expected. And-yes, Igor something's crap goes to the cesspool again.

MH

---

Btw- I deleted this crappage purporting to describe "neologisms". This nonsense is a goulash of some Serbian words ("pantalone") arbitrarily connected to another words, old Croatian words ("pismohrana", dating from 15th century and recorded in Vladimir Mažuranić's monumental "Prinosi za hrvatski pravno-povjestni rječnik", 1908-1922 (reprint 1975), ca. 1800 pages ("Contributions to Croatian legal and historical dictionary"), while "Bosnian" part is an imbecile mixture of true Bosniak words (which are, as far as Ctoatian language is concerned, archaisms-ie. phoneme "h" in certain words-in Serbian words in this form never existed) and moronic "jokes". Anyway- this shitpage (now-*that*'s neologism) was put under label of "further info blah..". I dont see any credible info and dont see a reason for tolerating this exercise in Serbian moronologism.

Mir Harven

---

A liar demistified is a good day in life.

---

OK, to show what kind of ignorant rubbish it is

---

Just Serbian sickos' ignorant crap.

---

Perhaps by using some brains, huh ?

---

The only issue is that Serbian defamations and distortions will be reacted upon- but that's normal reaction.

---

c) but-let me ask a question: why Serbian dabblers here, on wiki, paranoically (ugh..I forgot about "politeness") meddle into anything with relation to Croats and Croatian ? Why did they try to change the content of Croatian language page-in a derogatory manner ? Why are they trying to ridicule Croatian and Bosnian languages- with this idiotic page ? Why are they deriding Bosnian language with adding link to this shitpage ? Why are they so nervous about *anything* connected with Croatian history, culture, people etc. ? Why is that no Croat (except me- I was annoyed by their constant pestering, so, for fun, put 2 or 3 linx on their history page. Of course, they deleted them immediately- and I didn't further intervene, since this is childish anyway)-so, why *no* Croat or Bosnian Muslim tries, incessantly, to alter the content of pages dealing with Serbian history, culture, etc. ? I detect sick minds here. Guess whose ?

---

and, last: why are you dabbling into something you simply dont know about ?

---

And, to end this exercise in futility: why do some nuts even presume they can "intervene" in Croatian language (history, culture,...)themes ? Mind your own biz & scram with your pathological patronizing attitude. I've wasted enough time already. Margaritas ante porcos.

Pearls before swine?

Look at your a-b-c-d comment, before and after. By removing the bits where you're just calling someone stupid, the remaining text you wrote is far more convincing. Rather than reading as if you're attacking someone for disagreeing with you, it reads like a scholarly rebuttal, and that will carry far more weight. Martin 10:13, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Wikipedia has mechanisms for warning readers and other editors about contentious topics in a polite manner. Please see Wikipedia:Accuracy dispute and Wikipedia:NPOV dispute. -- Cyan 17:33, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Mir, when you state that Idries Shah is an impostor, you do not specify in which sense. Please fill in the following stuff:

• What exactly did he pretend to be?
• What exactly was he not?

Otherwise it will be unintelligible. Nixdorf 00:28, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Please fill in the license details of:

• Image:Tomislav.jpg
• Image:Vukovar.jpg
• Image:Tudjman-knin.jpg

We need to know if they're fair use or not. --Shallot

I dont know how to fill the license(s) (I mean, the procedure).

Each of the pages above has an "Edit this page" link, click it and you'll see that you can edit it like any other page. It's easy :) --Shallot

Please, do it for me. Temporarily I'm disabled as a learner.

Tomislav is from www.hercegbosna.org , and therefore free since I'm one of the owners of the site,

It still seems to be a copy from elsewhere, as I mentioned on Image talk:Tomislav.jpg, it's only fair that you should name the source. --Shallot

It's from Stjepan Antoljak's book "Croatia: A history" (available via amazon). If you have copyright dubieties, then you got available maps at http://www.hic.hr/books/hr-povijest/tomislav.htm Mir Harven 13:01, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

and Vukovar and Tudjman-knin are freely downloaded pics from public sites on Cro. history with no restrictions whatsoever with regard to copyright and similar stuff. Mir Harven 22:49, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

If they're made by government agencies, they're public domain, but otherwise they're implicitely copyrighted. (I'm not sure if HINA qualifies as a government agency.) In any event, a source/author should be listed. --Shallot

Vukovar is at http://www.geocities.com/tegetthoff66/vukovar/vukovar.html (if you want, you can contact them. I doubt they will object. Tudjman is from- ?. I'll check later. Mir Harven 13:01, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Please check for Tudjman-knin.jpg. It looks like a newspaper image so all we need for fair use is an attribution. --Joy [shallot]

Also:

• Image:Mestrovic.jpg -- this is a trivial photograph of an artwork attributed to its author (Ivan Mestrovic), so it should be fair use. Right?
• Image:Branimir.jpg -- sounds like the same, with the added benefit that the object on the image is too old for copyright :)

TIA. --Joy [shallot] 16:18, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Two questions:

• I just wrote in Croatian language#Current events that there isn't a single language academy and listed the main institutions and books instead. Is this completely correct? I couldn't find an exact reference.

Although not officially instituted, the central institution is Institute for Croatian language and linguistics, http://www.ihjj.hr You can check at their pages that they work on standardization of EU terminology etc., so they are "the prescriptors" (and not HAZU nor University nor Matica nor LZMK).

Yes, here it is: http://www.ihjj.hr/institut-djelatnosti.htm..U Odjelu za normiranje hrvatskoga standardnog jezika ostvaruju se znanstveni i strucni zadatci u vezi s oblikovanjem i njegovanjem hrvatskoga standardnog jezika, proucavanjem njegova ustroja i funkcioniranjem u drustvu na hrvatskome jezicnom prostoru...

• I reverted a change in Bosnian language that said that the prescribed name in Croatian is bošnjački rather than bosanski. Later I saw on hr wp that you wrote that the former name is official but that it's not fully recognized at the same time. Perhaps you could clarify that in the English page?

OK, I'll try, but things are a bit fuzzy. Mir Harven 20:07, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

TIA. --Shallot 16:04, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Your POV additions to Greater Serbia are unacceptable. Do you really think that such passages as "must be climed that "the wish to live in a unified state" is, in practice, the goal of only and exclusively Fascist ideologies. Having in mind that Germans, Russians or French live dispersed in many countries, and that this poses no problem for these nations- the virulent nature of Greater Serbian concept becomes all too visible. " are NPOV? RickK 19:28, Jul 10, 2004 (UTC)

And- your POV that such passages are "unacceptable" is, somehow, "closer to reality" and "objective" ? The point is: ALL attempts to unify one nation into ONE nation and by necessity the means were that of war aggression-state in past 100 years have been conducted by totalitarian and fascist regimes or movements: from those of the 30s to 90s. It may be rephrased in a more nuanced language, but the basic fact of quasi-fascist nature of such afforts (including Greater Albania) is indisputable. The comparison with Russians and French stays. Mir Harven 06:59, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Mir, možda možeš da odgovoriš na neke Velikosrbske neistinite optužbe na ovim linkovima User:Orthogonal/Avala_evidence, Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Avala/Evidence, User:Snowspinner/Avala Evidence. GeneralPatton 23:21, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Nikola je več operisao po "prijateljskim" talkovima User_talk:Romanm#Avala's case at the Arbcom, User_talk:Joy#Translation GeneralPatton 23:34, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

We'll see. Mir Harven 08:09, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes, you see, you can add people to a category, but not by editing the [[Category:Writers ...]] page, but instead by editing the people's pages and adding the "[[Category:Writers ...]]" marker to the bottom. --Joy [shallot] 10:13, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You can always add them to the generic categories and rely on other editors to re-categorize if necessary (if they get too crowded). --Joy [shallot]

Yeah, I only put them there because there was nowhere else to put them. We can create a Category:Croatian SF writers as a subcategory and move them all there, of course. --Joy [shallot] 09:00, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've added individual pages for all three dialects, shtokavian, kajkavian and chakavian. I noticed that the Croatian articles already have a lot of information in them so it would be nice if you translated some of it to English. TIA. --Joy [shallot] 14:20, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Ugh...OK, a few days later since I'm currently writing some bigger stuff. Mir Harven 15:42, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't realize it was about current old-štokavian. I'll move that. I don't see how the rest is illogically formatted. --Joy [shallot]

In case you haven't heard already, there's now a meta:South Slavic NPOV page. I know you don't really agree with everything in the Wikipedia NPOV policy, but still, you may be interested in watching. --Joy [shallot] 12:44, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

OK, I'll see. Although- I even less agree with "South Slavic" anything, since it reminds me of Yu and West Balkans, brotherhood & unity and (let someone translate)..svinjske sindikalne polovice i kretenske vježbe ONO i DSZ. Mir Harven 15:42, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The page has little or no wikification, i.e. there are no internal links in the whole essay. The rest I cleaned up already, but I left the note up because of this. --Joy [shallot] 14:30, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Just found that there's a separate note for wikifying, so I replaced it. --Joy [shallot]

Your edit summary seems to indicate that the article is valid, but the name is not spelled correctly. If that is the case, you can use the "move" button at the top of the article to rename it to the correct spelling. The characters you typed don't translate well on my screen, so I can't be sure of the proper spelling. I'll un-blank the article, if you would be kind enough to name it properly. Thank you. SWAdair | Talk 11:51, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hey, I'm posting this on english wiki for a bit of privacy. Just leave the idiot on the Bosnian language page alone to himself. Im making sure that he wont be vandalizing the page anytime soon. I will be unprotecting the page as soon as he disappears so if you have any more to add to that article just wait a bit. Asim Led 21:39, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for uploading Image:Vinodol.jpg. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GFDL, or {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much, – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 17:47, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (| talk)

Ugh..thanx for info, but, currently I'm swamped by other duties galore. Anyway, thanx for info.Mir Harven

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

• Image:Dizdar.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 05:01, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

OK, I'll try. Ugh-a complex stuff, this verification. Mir Harven 18:03, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Discussion moved to Image talk:Aralica.jpg#Copyright.

Thank you for uploading Image:Jagic.JPG and for stating the source. However, its copyright status is unclear, so it may have to be deleted. If it is open content or public domain, please give proof of this on the image page. If the image is fair use, please provide a rationale. Thank you. --Aqua 20:11, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

• No problem. I've retagged it as {{Fairold}}, since he died in 1932, and even if it was published later, I think that simply taking the image from the book to illustrate his article counts as fair use. It might be helpful if you knew which book it was from(it should have copyright info on the images), but if not, don't worry about it. Have a nice day. --Aqua 21:00, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

Hi MH, you've been reported for 3RR violation at Greater Serbia. If you revert again, you may be blocked from editing for 24 hours. Please seek consensus on the talk page for your edits. Many thanks, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:06, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

Whenever you have time I think you should check this page out. It's pretty small so it shouldn't be hard to fix. Asim Led 16:24, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You will probably want to check this page out given that it links a hercegbosna.org article. --Joy [shallot] 00:03, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please consider weighing in at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/ARD and Jwalker. --Joy [shallot] 2 July 2005 13:21 (UTC)

Fixed the RFC. It was barely readable, I need to clean it up. In a second. --Joy [shallot] 7 July 2005 12:50 (UTC)

I don't get it, what's wrong with the B&H page? I didn't see any edits from Radiant! there? --Joy [shallot]

Imas li negdje kakve citate iz dokumenta Chronicum/Chronicon Venetum di Giovanni Diacono? Na hercegbosna.org pise da je to izvor informacija o knezovima Domagoju, Zdeslavu i drugima. --Joy [shallot] 18:03, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To bi na en: trebalo ici na Chronicle of Venice. --Joy [shallot]

Sure thing. Most people here have more pressing commitments than Wikipedia mdash; or they should! Most of my most recent comments are advice as to how you can actually contribute to the article, rather than just to the talk page (although in specific places I still argue against your position). I hope at some time you will contribute to this or other pages — article pages, not talk pages — but urge you to take my comments as constructive and well-intentioned. Slrubenstein | Talk 15:21, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad that one wasn't deleted; I wasn't looking forward to VfDing the other "List of X religionists" articles, which I committed to doing if this one got deleted. It was good that you moved the Actor section to a new article, other big sections should be moved too. I think the article needs to be organized better. Right now the order of the sections seems almost random. NoSeptember 13:46, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

About this change to RSK page - what does it mean "those published in official Croatian census"? I thought the census results are described just above that table, where it says:

"A census held in the spring of 1991, just before the war began, showed that 555,540 people lived in the territory of what became the RSK. Of these, 331,619 (59,7%) were Serbs, 168,026 (30,2%) were Croats and 55,895 (10,1%) were other Yugoslavs, Muslims, Hungarians, Slovaks etc."

...? --Joy [shallot] 20:52, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't check everything but if I recall correctly I first copied some numbers from the German Wikipedia, and then some from the ICTY web site. I don't recall calculating anything, but if I made any errors, they were unintentional. --Joy [shallot] 22:13, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, it wasn't me who gave the original wrong number, it was User:Spacecaptain :o) See Talk:Republic of Serbian Krajina#Figures Census 1991. --Joy [shallot]

Like I said, I didn't add those sloppy figures, another user had added it. --Joy [shallot] 15:49, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I moved list of Catholic Scientists, with the incorrectly capitalized S to list of Catholic scientists (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style in regard to article titles; we don't use a capital initial merely because a word is in an article title). I did the same with authors. Could you help move these? I probably broke some links when I edited the main list of lists; all of these will work again once the articles are moved. (Don't do copy-and-paste moves; just click on "move this page". That way the edit history is kept intact.) Michael Hardy 22:46, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me, as short as you can, your personal opinions of the fascistic states of Republic Serb and the Serb Frontier. HolyRomanEmperor 22:04, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

...that was not a rhethorical question..... HolyRomanEmperor 14:24, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ispričavam se. :( Očito da si shvatio moje pitanje pogrešno. Ja samo želim da mi izložiš svoje opće mišljenje o tim dveju državama. Pridjev "fašističko" sam samo izvadio iz tvojih citata. Nema zaista nikakve potrebe da budeš toliko... "What's your problem with life?"

Uzgred, rado bih započeo zanimljivu istorijsku polemiku s tobom, ako si raspoložen? (pitam zato što si zvučao, malo, uvrijeđeno) HolyRomanEmperor 18:57, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to start with this fact. You said that you have the DVD-version of "Oluja" sa HRT-u. And you said that they display very exact info. It was said that "there were some cases like Varivode and others, but the problems were solved; and the criminals punished" Guess which village I visit every summer. Truthfully, several Croatian nationalists were arrested; but they were released later, due to the missing of dufficient proofs. The Serb villagers here created a commemorative monument "for the brutally executed in 1995. and for their souls" 'cause it's a fact that the crime, just like many others, will not be solved, probably, ever. HolyRomanEmperor 19:16, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the text in Croatian is more than clear on these issues: http://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republika_Srpska_Krajina Mir Harven 12:18, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I already red the English part and it is already clear, albeit acceptable that you think that those countries were governed by nationalistic and even corrupted people that cared only how to utilize the "flock-system" (I think that we both agree on this, no?) But I didn't ask you to re-route my question to just another site, I want to hear directly from you, but no matter that. I am now much more interested that you answer me my second post, please (the one containing Varivode and etc.) HolyRomanEmperor 18:51, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry if I offended you in any way; but I don't see a reason to be ignored by you so mercilessly... HolyRomanEmperor 16:16, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not ignoring anyone, just, I do not visit en wiki frequently, especially last month or two. Mir Harven 20:46, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just happened to notice this on User_talk:HolyRomanEmperor...

About the Oluja show (emisija?), I don't really think that you need to waste your breath on that kind of programming. If I'm thinking of the right programme, that is. The one where the war veterans get interviewed and each of them shares whatever silly yet patriotic experience, and then the crowd is expected to "ooh" and "aah" after hearing them? I can assure you that a large portion of the viewers switch the channel at the very notion.

? O čemu pričaš ? Ako o emisiji na HRT u kojoj su gostovali Miljavac, Domazet i Štefanek-ona je odlična i puna podataka (imam ju na DVD-u). Mir Harven 17:51, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Uhvatio sam par kadrova iz te emisije gdje sam vidio admirala(?) Domazeta, govorio je nesto o vojnoj operaciji, da. Ali sam jednom vidio i nekog didu koji je hvalio Boga, Franju, Antu i sve, pa sam odmah promijenio program. Sumnjam da sam krivo protumacio, ali dobro, moguce je. Sto se tice ove prve, koliko ti je velika ta snimka, cijeli DVD? --Joy [shallot] 19:02, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To je oko 2 i pol sata. Stavio sam na VHS, pa mi je prijatelj prebacio na DVD. Imam još neki kolaž od emisije od 1 sat (dan poslije) gdje su Šarinić, Granić, Stieptić i sl., te oko 2 h na NOVOJ, kod onoga Vlahova, u nekoj konobi. Ta ima 3-4 zanimljiva podatka, iako je u cjelini slabija. No, iz tih stvari, kao i drugih izvora, napisat ću (polako) novi tekst o Oluji. Mir Harven 20:45, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A laž u vezi Varivoda? HolyRomanEmperor 15:58, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Kakve Varivode ? U Hrvatskoj je za zločine samo u Oluji procesuirano preko 1.400 hrvatskih vojnika i civila, a od toga preko 20 na više godišnje kazne.Srpskih agresora je procesuirano oko 700 za zločine tijekom 1990-1999. Trebalo je, po svim kriterijima, od 5.000 do 10.000- i lista kojiu je Jacques Klein poderao za "mirnu reintegraciju" spala je na jedva 100 ljudi od dokumentiranih preko 3.000 srpskih zločinaca. No- o tom potom. Stvar ide dalje..Mir Harven 19:19, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

????? Što hoćeš da kažeš? Imam osjećaj da izbjegavaš da mi odgovoriš...HolyRomanEmperor 21:18, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Patiently waiting for an answer.... HolyRomanEmperor 15:30, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Sorry, I got the fealing that I am being ignored because of my Orthodox Christian religeon (I heard many warnings from other users that you are very stereotypic). Could you inform me, please, of a detailed site about the History of Croatia? HolyRomanEmperor 17:00, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I found an interesting Herzeg-Bosnian site. Although, I find it a bit fictive and extremly nationalist. It refers to Sclavini as Croats generally. It speaks of the Orthodox Christian Slav/Serb King Mihailo Vojislavljević as a Croat, and about something called Red Croatia. HolyRomanEmperor 17:05, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The image you uploaded, Image:Branimir.jpg, has no source information. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, ie in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. Unless the copyright status is provided, the image will be marked for deletion on 24 October 2005.

This message notification has been automatically sent by NotificationBot managed and run by AllyUnion. Please leave comments regarding bot operations at AllyUnion's talk page. Please direct all comments regarding licensing information at Wikipedia talk:Images for deletion. --NotificationBot 13:13, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed this myself now, ignore it. --Joy [shallot] 14:18, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know any other Croatian history site? HolyRomanEmperor 20:12, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I guess this would be the most accessible site: http://www.hr/darko/etf/etfss.html Mir Harven 20:25, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The existence of that site has only one purpose - spreading Greater Serbdom. It holds against the Serbs that the Austrian crown and Serbian dinar were equal before the war, and then the Serbs moved the dinar to be four times stronger! The reason is inflation (Austria's loss of the war). HolyRomanEmperor 19:32, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It also counts Goran(c)i as Croats. And is wrong at several numbers and years. This one is worse than that Herzeg-Bosnian. It lacks actual history. Isn't there any other? HolyRomanEmperor 19:37, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I guess there are no Croatian history sites that would accomodate views promulgated by Serbian hysterians. Nor, for that matter, international ones. In a nutshell, this is as follows a:http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.cgi?path=23806913658146 Mir Harven 20:39, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That is the third time that I have been called Serbian on wikipedia, and only some 15th in my entire life :)) HolyRomanEmperor 22:13, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

May I also ad that you are among the first persons that called me Serbian and were not members of the Ustaški domobrani 11 (a 57-strong gang) HolyRomanEmperor 22:25, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You mentined an international site on Croatian history? Where? HolyRomanEmperor 22:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You probably misunderstood me. I am looking for History Maps of Croatia, and chronological events (what was most important that it's rulers did and who, when, chronologicly... etc.) and something on the Principalities of Dalmatia and Pannonia (Croatia's predececors) HolyRomanEmperor 22:29, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I find especially fascinating the dynastic (and other) struggles between the Dalmatian-Pannonian rulers (like Princes Borna and Ljudevit Posavski) The vast realm of King Tomislav Ist is also a geat interest of mine. HolyRomanEmperor 22:44, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The two Krešimir's that successfully extended their rule over Bosnia also I find interesting. HolyRomanEmperor 22:47, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Of the latter history, I am looking mostly for the enlightening Illyrian movement and the infamous Independant State of Croatia. HolyRomanEmperor 22:54, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

About the hysteric part; yes, wounds and two months in the camp of the unwanted to that to a human's mind :S HolyRomanEmperor 23:08, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that any rational Croat would consider your history remarks & worldview as utterly biased and, essentually-not debatable at all. I'll just , for the sake of politeness, put a few links in Croatian and English (reflecting the mainstream opinion), as well as links to the representative books. If you find these unsatisfying, that's your problem.

http://www.hercegbosna.org/ostalo/starija_povijest.html

http://www.hercegbosna.org/ostalo/novija_povijest.html

http://www.hic.hr/books/

http://www.hrstud.hr/Nastavni%20program/Opisi%20kolegija/Kroatologija.html

http://www.euratlas.com/time1.htm

http://www.euratlas.com/time2.htm

http://www.hercegbosna.org/engleski/history.html

http://misp.isp.hr/

http://www.sveznadar.com/knjiga.aspx?knjiga=58097

http://www.hercegbosna.org/engleski/reviews.html

http://www.ffzg.hr/pov/ddstudij/hrpov1.htm

http://www.ffzg.hr/pov/ddstudij/hrpov2.htm

http://www.sveznadar.com/knjiga.aspx?knjiga=63697

htp://www.sveznadar.com/knjiga.aspx?knjiga=58374

http://www.hercegbosna.org/ostalo/recenzije.html

Thesa are, more or less, the mainstream opinion & sources. And, that's it. Mir Harven 12:13, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I see that it recorded that I deleted your talk page. I guarrantee that I didn't, I pressed the "+" button and typed a post. There was some technical error, I guess. HolyRomanEmperor 15:22, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Much thanks, mate :))) HolyRomanEmperor 15:26, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you saw my user page, you would known how I would interpret your last post: "every rational Croat would concider my history remarks and worldview utterly biased...? HolyRomanEmperor 15:37, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Now, can you clarify this: there were two Jelena Šubićs. But which is which? HolyRomanEmperor 15:40, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just found out that a Serb count had ruled over Spalato (Split) in the Medieval Ages; and that the Šubićs were partly Serbs :)) HolyRomanEmperor 15:49, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Could you elaborate the article Ivo Andrić. We're having a slaughter over there. All agree that he concidered himself a Serb, save for Elephantus, who thinks that we should keep him as a Croatophobe Croat... HolyRomanEmperor 13:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I need your permission to use the info from that hercegbosnian site (pics and other stuff) Can you ge it for me? HolyRomanEmperor 13:12, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

We need to know the source and license for Image:Dzamonja.jpg which you uploaded way back in Feb 2004 (it's been deleted for being unsourced, and re-uploaded); it seemed that you had not been asked if you could provide a source, so now I'm asking; it's a nice image - if we can use it legally, it'd be nice to have. If you have any questions, please let me know. JesseW, the juggling janitor 06:48, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Mir, I've noticed you've been absent for a while. I saw on hr wiki that you said you'd only be back by the start of next year, but now I'm wondering if things have changed and you've already returned to your usual level of activity? Asim Led 00:24, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, just a relapse of wikiholism. Later...Mir Harven 10:10, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ivo Andric requires some of your expertiese. Bokeljani text seems to be pro-Croatian; but look at the image with the Serb Orthodox belt on that Bokeljan; it's self-contradictory. There are several other places where you could give a hand or two... HolyRomanEmperor 19:34, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus, I dont have that time. I've come only for one or two reverts & dont want to get sucked into a whirlpool of polemics, corrections & copyedits. Later, after post-New Year recovery...Mir Harven 21:30, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Over 70% of your claims are based on hard evidence (that's the part of you that amazes me; apart from the disliking nationalistic part) and scholarely research, so that's why I requested your assistence. I have took some pics from the Herzeg-Bosnian site without permission; so I must urge to (if you can) get me one. Hear from you soon! :) HolyRomanEmperor 17:52, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Take freely whatever you want. Mir Harven 18:24, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Hear from you soon! HolyRomanEmperor 14:33, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, seeya..Mir Harven 15:02, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Have you got any proof of Andrić's alleged pro-Serbian attitude (like self-declaration or something similiar) to justify the claims that you mentioned earlier? I know that he hated Stjepan Radić (actually calling his followers "fukare"( with his gut, but I meant rather his "Serbian determination". You mentioned it earlier, but sources are required... HolyRomanEmperor 22:06, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In one of Yugoslavia's "Who is who", published ca. 1955-1960 (I don't remember the exact year the book was published), Ivo Andrić 's nationality is put as "Serbian" (Broz's "Croatian" etc.). This book can still be found somewhere, I suppose. Mir Harven 22:46, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure if User:Elephantus is going to accept that. Buy now, he has presented Ivo Andrić as a proud Croat (mind the anti-Radić attitude). HolyRomanEmperor 17:12, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged Image:Kulin.jpg as having no license. It will be deleted in seven days if one is not provided. Please kindly attend to this matter. Thank you! -- Elle vécut heureusement _{toujours dorénavant} (Be eudaimonic!) 13:57, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, but what is the license? Is it public domain? Creative commons? GFDL? -- Elle vécut heureusement _{toujours dorénavant} (Be eudaimonic!) 14:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the copyright status is that vague, it might have to be deleted. If you assert yourself as the owner of the image, a license has to be provided. Cheers! -- Elle vécut heureusement _{toujours dorénavant} (Be eudaimonic!) 14:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw some heavy discussions with this subject. Could you please explain in short summary what was it? --HolyRomanEmperor 13:25, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This was/is boring. Read again & come back in, say, a month. Mir Harven 13:40, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe better in a year :) seeyah! --HolyRomanEmperor 12:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you denying that Catholic Serbs existed. But surely there was at least some? --HolyRomanEmperor 22:41, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aaronw 17:47, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ima te knjige. Ja je drzim u rukama. Ruska je, i od ruskog slaviste. Eto ja sam na Zmajevoj stranici napisao sto tamo pise. User talk:Zmaj

Znam, da neces to prihvatiti. Ali bih htio da upozorim na to.

Po mom mislenju, treba da se ta stranica premesti, dok netko vise kvalifiran nego Luka ne dode i ne podigne pitanje opet. Ako to nece ispasti, onda nek zauvijek bude kako vi hocete. --VKokielov 19:46, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In English "dr" is never used in lowercase, it's always "Dr."

As for date of death, various sources including HDZ party website and HRT website, as well as BBC, Britannica, etc. all say December 10. See Talk:Franjo Tuđman#Date_of_death for references. -- Curps 20:13, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Velikasrbija.png. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. CLW 14:41, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand.

Din't you ever hear of Stefan Nemanja or Stefan Dragutin? --HolyRomanEmperor 15:20, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

O čem ti pričaš ? Koja je fora s tim Nemanjićima ? Mir Harven 18:04, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

bejaše Katolici (još je bilo, no oni su najpoznatiji) --HolyRomanEmperor 00:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kakve to ima veze ? To je prije odvajanja Sv. Save, a i onda je ta dinastija bila u okviru bizantskoga civilizacijskoga kruga. "Katolici" koji govore neki južnoslavenski dijalekt (u formiranju) 1200. nemaju nikakvoga vidljivoga kontinuiteta s istima 1500., a kamoli 1900. Mir Harven 01:33, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poslije svetoga Sabe? Ali kako: Stefan Dragutin je bio Kralj Raške, Zete, Travunje, Zahumlja i Dalmacije od 1276 do 1282 i Kralj Srijema od 1282 do 1316. --HolyRomanEmperor 20:55, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mogao se razbacivati titulama po volji (i sadašnja engleska kraljica je, formalno, i kraljica Francuske), no to ne mijenja ništa-srpski dinasti su u doba prije Sv.Save-a i nedugo poslije formalno ostali katolici, iako su bili u okviru bizantskoga kruga. Nema srpskih katolika u doba kada je raskol već definitivan, ni u doba i prije raskola izvan bizanstkoga utjecaja. Nema Srba koji bi bili katolic, a da pritom sudjeluju u zapadnim strujanjima (romanika, gotika, renesansa, barok,..). Ova ili ona politička makinacija ne mijenja ništa na stvari. Mir Harven 22:48, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

that's Luka kako me jebe again.

I should really report him. --VKokielov 23:23, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nista, prezivit cemo, on je izgubio rat.  ;)

Bilo je vrijeme kad sam bio sklon zaliti takvih kao Luka. Pa malo sam manje ubjeden u njihovu postenost dandanas. --VKokielov 00:08, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... titule nemaju veze ni sa cim. To su sve standardne titule svih Nemanjica. poanta je da je on zivio posle raskola. Mogu li još i dodat nešto. Kralj Srba Uroš I je ratovao protiv Dubrovačke Republike. Kotor je i tada bio većinski katolički grad. Papa je pozvao Kotorane na stranu Dubrovnika, a ovi odbiše i rekoše da im je Kralj Srspki Uroš I nemanjić jedini Pap koga oni priznaju. i da, ne možeš reći odvajanje, Saba je samo stvorio autonomiju.

Ovo je smiješno. Jedna od 2-3 "teza" koje se ponavljaju ad infinitum u srpskim krugovima. na sve je to odgovoreno odavno i n puta: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina#Point_Counterpoint, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina#Coup_de_graceMir Harven 11:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uzgred, što je ono sa Moliškim hrvatskim jezikom? Moliški "slavenski"? :D Sto cu jos cuti na wikiju. :) --HolyRomanEmperor 16:24, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ja sum konvert s katolicizma na Pravoslavlje ako nijesi znao :D --HolyRomanEmperor 16:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So, basicly, the last Serbian (coastal) ruler of Roman Catholic Christian religion died in the beginning of April 1403. What do you consider is the final moment Shism of the two Churches then? --HolyRomanEmperor 15:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

? OK - you have me confused - we're talking about the coastline - NOT Bosnia - and I told you that the last Serbian ruler of Roman Catholic Christian religion died in April 1403.

What could've you possible meant? Could you explain? --HolyRomanEmperor 13:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who was the last Serbian Catholic leader/monarch who died in 1403 ? There was no such a thing. If one thinks of Uroš (who was not a Catholic) and Kotorans (whose political allegiance, in this fable, was primarily political & not a sort of "ethnic confession" as some would have it (such matters were non-existent in the age))- this is a misfire. Mir Harven 10:35, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

George II of Stracimir of Balsha (DjuraDj II Stracimirovich Balshich) - Lord of Albania, ruler of Hvar, Korcula, Skadar, Drivast, Ljes, Danj, Sveti Srd vassalaged to Stefan Lazarevic. He was of the House of Balsha - a famed Serbian family from the ages of Emperor Stefan Uroš V. --HolyRomanEmperor 13:35, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't check, but, say that this is true. So-what ? Some local feudal vassal who retained or switched denominational loyalties doesnt prove anything (especially in the context of fuzzy boundaries and ethnically mixed region like this (Albanians, Serbs, Vlachs, Croats, Dalmats,..)). What on earth is a significance of a marginal thane who didn't leave behind himself anything of significance (manuscripts, buildings, works of art,..) & is, as I see, situated on religious/ethnically mixed fringes of civilzation (I've written on Montenegrin Croats in the 17th cent. on some of the aforementioned pages). Mir Harven 14:56, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked you [1] for WP:3RR on Franjo Tuđman. William M. Connolley 23:19, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Block anyone, but protect the original article from vandalism. Mir Harven 14:48, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He held the Dukadjinis and Zachario (Albanian Lords) vassalaged as well as Radich Crnojevich of Montenegro. Both rebelled and pressed him to the Skadar Lake. He married the daughter of Prince Lazar in 1387, Jelena. His throne was Ulcinj. He vassalaged with the Ottomans and invaded Bosnia in 1386 with them as a revenge for Tvrtko's previous wars against the Balshichs. He was also involved in the 1388 battle at Bilecha. In 1389 - his forces fought on the Battle of Kossovo. In 1391 he nominated Pope Bonifacio IX his heir and broke off from Ottoman control. His relative, Konstantin Balshich declared independence from him and ruled his area independently from Djuradj. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:50, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I said: Albanian-Montenegrin-Serbian what-not. This is your best case for "Catholic Serbs" in post-St. Savva period ? Forget it. Mir Harven 16:01, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After this 1391 event, the Ottomans captured him. They returned him Skadar, Drivast and Sveti Srdj on Bojana, and Djuradj had to pay them a vassalage tax. In 1395, he retook all other cities from the Turks bu force and Danj from Konstantin Balshich. In 1396, he sold all of those cities to the Venetian Republic for 1,000 ducats and remained to rule the territories on the western flank of the river Bojana with Bar and Ulcinj and received protectorate from the Venetians in turn. The same year, Radich Crnojevich was killed - and Djuradj, as his greatest rival, Djuradj took a part of his Montenegrin lands. In december of 1396, Djuradj received the defeated Crusaders from the Battle of Nicopolis under Hungarian King Sigismund - where they regained their full strength. In turn, Hungarian King Sigismund then vassalaged him, awarding him the islands of Hvar and Korcula and making him the supreme Lord of Albania. --HolyRomanEmperor 16:02, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for keeping me informed on the whereabouts of this, OMO, historically marginal person, but, still- I can't see what's the point about him. I have to go now. Best Mir Harven 16:11, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At the end of summer in 1402, he received Serbian Despot Stefan Lazerevic who was returning from the Battle of Ancyra and fully equipped him for his internal struggles for power against Djuradj Brankovic. Djuradj's forces won near the monastery of Gracanica at Tripolje where his forces defeated both the Brankovic's forces and that of his Turkish Ottoman allies.

Near the end of his reign - he became a vassal of his father-in-law Despot Stefan Lazarevic - supporting the claim to reunite all the lands of Prince Lazar Hrebeljanovic.

He died in the beginning of April 1403 and was buried in one of his donations to the Church - the Church of Saint Catherine in Ulcinj. His son, Balsha II Balshich inherited the throne over Zeta.

Oh, and he inherited Zeta from his uncle's widow - Mistress Comnenus (daughter of Despot John Asen) some time before 1387. --HolyRomanEmperor 16:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mir, there were 10 medieval Serbian ruling families - and he was the head of one of them. How can you call that insignificant? --HolyRomanEmperor 16:14, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, what do you mean by Albanian-Montenegrin-Serbian what-not. In his time - it is surely recorded: The population were Serbs who make the bulk of the people, Vlachs who live all around the realm and who are now Serbs and Albanians who live in small numbers at our most eastern lands - these are personal Balshich explainations. --HolyRomanEmperor 16:19, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even if this were true (I won't delve into the facts): so what ? This ruler is, by all account, marginal. Hardly anyone bothered to take notice of him. Mir Harven 19:58, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So am I. :) I don't see the necessity to be famous; the subject was whether Catholic Serbs exited in the first place. Besides, the House of Balšić built numerious (tens) Catholic churches next to orthodox. And there were around 50 Medieval Catholic rulers. How can you claim such a thing then? --HolyRomanEmperor 14:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thery are not in the mainstream of Serbian history, nor Serbian culture. It's debatable whether they (or at least a part of them) are Sebs at all. I'll repeat: after St. Savva, and one or two lapses, the entire Serbian culture (monarchs, the way of life, architecture, written word,..) are unquestionably Eastern Orthodox, shaped in the Byzantine mould. Mir Harven 21:56, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Imam osjecaj da ti mislis da je sve to neka nacionalna propaganda (usmjerena k tvrdnji da su neki Hrvati porijeklom Srbi), ali nije, uvjeravam te.

Nego htio sam te pitati da napravimo Portal:Croats. --HolyRomanEmperor 22:03, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Koja propaganda, koji portal ? Koji je to bog ? Mir Harven 21:52, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Propaganda? A, pa mislio sam da mi ne vjerujes da je Djuradj II Stracimirovic Balsic bio katolicke vjeroispovjesti. No, zaboravih ti naglasiti, on je rodjen Srpske Pravoslavne vjere, no preobratio se ondak kada se priblizavao Papstvu.

Pa, eh, vidi Portal:Serbs... i onda vidi Portal:Croats. Sto ga ne bismo napravili? --HolyRomanEmperor 22:21, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, moram ti naglasiti. Ne znam sto povezujes Svetoga Savu sa "etnickom pripadnoscu"? To bi znacilo da su Srbi nastali nakon Svetoga Save.

Dakle, mislim da grijesis u dve-tri stvari. Prije (a i malo za vrijeme) Nemanjica nije postojao ni jedan, ama cak ni regionalni srpski vladar koji nije katolik. Dakle, Mihailo Vojislavljević, Konstantnin Bodin Vojislavljević, Petrislav Vojislavljević, Radoslav Vojislavljević, Dobroslav II Vojislavljević, Mihailo Vojislavljević, Dobroslav III Vojislavljević, Kočapar Vojislavljević, Vladimir Vojislavljević, Vladimir Vladimirović Vojislavljević, Đorđe Branović Vojislavljević, Grubeša Branović Vojislavljević, Gradihna Vojislavljević, Radoslav Vojislavjlević, Mihailo Vojislavljević, Desa Vojislavljević, Zavida Vojislavljević, Vukan Vojislavljević, Marko Vojislavljević, Stefan Vukanović Vojislavljević, Uroš I Vukanović Vojislavljević, ugarska kraljica Jelena Urošević-Vukanović Vojislavljević, Beloš (u Hrvatskoj poznatiji kao Bjeloš) Urošević-Vukanović Vojislavljević, Uroš II Vukanović-Urošević Vojislavljević, Marija Vukanović-Urošević Vojislavljević-Sobjeslavljević, Zavida Vukanović-Urošević Vojislavljević, Stefan Tihomir Vukanović-Urošević Vojislavljević, Stefan Nemanja (Vojislavljević),...

Beloš je vrlo zanimljiv. U hrvatskoj povijesti ćeš ga naći kao Bjeloš. On je postao moćan Ugarski dvorjanin i penjao se stepenicama vlasti u Ugarskoj sve do Palatina, kada je sa svojom sestrom, Jelenom, postao vrhovni vladar Ugarske. Penzionisao se tako što je postao Ban Hrvatske, ali se vratio da još vlada Ugarskom, jer ju je trebalo braniti od Bizanstkih i Njemačkih ugrožavanja, a novi kralj je bio mali. Pokušao je da se penzionira u srpkim zemljama, ali je napustio taj plan, pa se konačno vratio kao Ban Hrvatske, gdje je i umro.

Dakle, po rođenju, Miroslav Vukanović-Urošević Vojislavljević je bio katolik, ali je napisao Miroslavljevo Jevanđelje i pojačao prisustvo pravoslavlja u Zahumlju koje je skočilo sa relative majority na absolute majority. Po toj logici je i Stracimir Vukanović-Urošević Vojislavljević.

Dakle, nije postojala ni jedna jedina trunka ičeg istočno-pravoslavnog u srpskim zemljama. Dizano je malo zadužbina - osim u Duklji i Skadarskoj oblasti i to sve su Rimokatoličke zadužbine.

Dobro, Stefan Nemanja se prekrstio u katolika i započeo srpovođenje pravoslavne kulture. Ali je rimokatolička kultura Zete, prapostojbine Nemanjića postala osnov karakteristične srpske kulture, i to se pogotovo vidi u imenima vladara (Vukan,...). Dakle, Stefanov najstariji sin, kralj Vukan Nemanjić je stupio na mjesto u Zetu/Duklju, gdje je prihvatio katoličku vjeru (a što ima veze, i onako mu je otac rođeni katolik). Stefan Vukan je oženio rođakinju Rimskoga Pape. 1202 je uz pomoć moćne Zetske vlastele zbacio Stefana Nemanjića s vlasti uz pomoć Ugara. 1204 i 1205 su Bugari vratili Stefana, ali su prepirke nastavile sve dok se Sveti Sava nije vratio sa Nemanjinim moštima. Tada se Vukan vratio u Zetu, i priznao Stefana Prvovenčanoga. Kada su srpske zemlje postale jedinstvena Kraljevina 1217, Latinska kultura i jezik su počeli naglo da suzbijaju ćirilicu i djela Stefana Nemanje. Preko Vukanove udeone kneževine, širilo se na Rašku i ostale zemlje. Ovo je bio ključni razlog zašto je Rastko Nemanjić osnovao Srpsku Pravoslavnu Crkvu 1219 - kao neophodni pokret kojim je zauvijek zaustavljeno 200 godina Katolicizma među Srbima i 600 godina Latinske kulture.

No, grana Nemanjića koja se osamostalila u Zeti - počev od Đorđa Vukanovića Nemanjića (od 1208), je nastavila da neguje i Katoličanstvo i Pravoslavlje - kao dva osovna sustavna dijela Zećanskoga života. Treći Vukanov sin, Dimitrije je podigao Davidovicu i zamonašio se - katolik. Njegov sin je bio Vratislav, njegov Vratko, a ovaj je imao Milicu. Milica se udala za Lazara Hrebeljanovića, čime je u dinastiju Lazarevića Nemanjićka krv puštena - i pravo - skoro jako ko Kotromanićko - nad Srbima naslijeđeno.

Dakle, majka Kralja Stefana Dragutina, Helena Anžujska, je bila oduvijek vatreni katolik. Vladala je primorsko-zetskim oblastima iz Trebinja za oproštaj što je Dragutin svrgnuo svoga oca s vlasti. Podigla je Gradac, gdje je i sahranjena - karakteristični srpski pravoslavni manastir sa izričitim elementima Gotičke i Latinske kulture. Njen period je među Srbina zapamćen kao Latinsko Pravoslavlje.

Stefan Dragutin se odrekao vlasti na Saboru u Deževu 1282 godine. Zavladao je sjevernim i zapadnim srpskim oblastima iz Rudnika kao udeoni knez. Dobio je Mačvu s Beogradom, kao i Usoru i Soli iz Bosne kao miraz od kralja. Postao je vazal i srpskog i ugarskog kralja - ali neovisan, toliko da se proglasio Kralj Srema. Preobratio se u katolika, a njegov sin, katolik naravno, postao je Ban Slavonije sa Srijemom i vladao u ime svoga oca (svim tim hrvatskim zemljama osim posjeda Frankopana i Zrinskih). 1316, Vladislav je naslijedio sve zemlje svoga oca i umiješao se u borbe za srpski prijestol još dugo, do 1319.

Stefan Milutin je stvorivši više od 40 Srpskih, Grčkih, Jermenskih Pravoslavnih, Hebrejskih i Rimokatoličkih hramova širom svijeta stvorio zasebnu srpsku kulturu. Raška škola je zamijenila Bizantsku školu. Zasnivala se na bizantskoj kulturu, ali sa novim, preovladavajućim elementima zapadnjačkoga stila, kao što se može vidjeti na Gračanici.

Dakle, Kotroman je bio pritisnut od strane Šubića, pa se povukao u dio Bosne koji je bio pod kontrolom Stefana Dragutina - Usora i Soli. Tu je njegova žena, Jelena Nemanjić rodila Stjepana II Kotromanića, i krstila ga Srpske Pravoslavne vjere. Stjepan se prekrstio u Katolika nakon što je postao Ban/Herceg Bosne.

Trebalo bi i napomenuti da Kosače nikako ne mogu da se odluče između Bosanskoga Bogumilstva, Rimokatoličanstva ili Srpsko-pravoslavlja.

O Balšićima već znaš. I da, Đurađ II Stracimirović Balšić je sa svojom ženom, Jelenom Lazarević podigao na ostrvcu Gorici Crkvu Svetoga Đorđa. Inače, Balšići su poznati isključivo po brojnim katoličkim i pravoslavnim hrišćanskim zadužbinama proslavili.

Pa sad, mogao bih nastaviti još podosta o katolicizmu, ali jednostavno, mislim da je i ovo još previše. :D --HolyRomanEmperor 23:18, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jesi li ti normalan ? Nadrljao si pola stranice tipa copy-paste. To nemam vremena sada čitati, no, kasnije ću pogledati. To je problem s vama Srbićima, znam ja odavno: hiperemocionalizam kojem je logika terra incognita. Tako bi se moglo preganjati do Armageddona. Mir Harven 16:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To nije kopi-paste, vec moje licno kucanje. :D I kao sto rekoh - ja sam konvert s katolicanstva na pravoslavlje, pa te molim (po drugi put) da me ne zoves Srbinom, molicu. Hvala lijepo. --HolyRomanEmperor 20:45, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mir Harven. As one of the more knowledgeable editors of Croatian topics, I was wondering if you would join a Croatian Wikiproject if I were to create one. If I can get a couple people on board, I'd definately like to put a project together. Thanks. --Thewanderer 16:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and best wishes for the project. Unfortunately, my other obligations prevent me from delving into issues other than I'm already commited to. Best Mir Harven 23:25, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Razlika je medu jezicima uglavnom u rijecniku. Ali ja ne znam sto je to izvorni govornik bijeloruskog. Ne znam postoji li jos uvijek takva stvar. U svakom slucaju, tamo gdje postoji, utjecaj poljskog je morao biti dosta jak.

Uskoro ce se bijeloruski u microslavic jezik.  :)

---

Ukrajinci imaju svoj identitet. Belorusi ga nemaju. Uskrs mrtvog jezika je teska stvar. To je njihova steta, jer oni su uvijek medu Rusima i svojima.

Nisu svi hrabri ko vi.  :) --VKokielov 00:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ja mislim da se nacije grade izvan. Kod vas je jak (tj. izvorni) pritisak (sa svim posljedicama) religija. Medutim, Belorusi su malobrojna skupstina medu trima gigantima, Poljacima, Rusima, i Ukrajincima. Gdje god oni krenu, to ce se osjecati. Pa i sam jezik pogledaj...Gotovo svaka rijec razlicita od ruske jeste poljska. --VKokielov 00:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Da, ali Mire, beloruski *nije* maternji jezik vecine Belorusa. Ako mi ne vjerujes, pogledaj par objektivna izvora. Ili, ako ti je prijatnije, poslusaj novine...vecina ljudi kako za svoje, tako i za strane medije govori na ruskom. Vidi da se to ne dogada u Ukrajini, gdje postoji, uz zvanicnu, jos i temeljita mrznja ruske hegemonije. Toga u Belorusiji jednostavno nema. Belorusi nece osamostaliti se.

Bi li trebali, to je drugo pitanje...ali ja se klonim mislenju, da ne bi. Kako sam znas, ponekad svoje govno je bolje ot tudeg, a Rusija je za Belorusa vec dvesta godina svoja...ehh ako bi me nasi liberalni Evropljani razumjeli, odsjekli bi meni glavu...:) --VKokielov 15:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Serb vandal Bormalagurski has asked his pro-Serb admin friends to help him, spamming talk pages with trolling and personal attacks, protecting the page and contrary to all rules blocking users who revert such Serb vandalism and personal attacks on their own talk page. He posted a "warning" threatening me with being "blocked for disruption" because I voted against his admin candidacy, and he and others have engaged in revert war to keep the Malagurski trolling on the user talk page. For example he also wrote on the talk page "Allow me to make an impersonation of you: Serbs are guilty for everything. All Croats are saints. I love my pope, who let's me get away with everything. I'm so Serbophobic that I can't even allow Serbian posts on my user page. That's why I voted for the deletion of the article "Serbophobia", because it doesn't exist." [2]. They are also conspiring to enforce their POV. See "User:Croatian Historian" and "Revert war" at User_talk:Bormalagurski, as well as User_talk:Purrger (one of their sockpuppet accounts) for some evidence (lots more may be found). They use large numbers of sock puppets. I don't know what to do. Admin candidacy of Bormalagurski failed for obvious reasons, but it seems some people like him were able to get enough votes. This is a very serious problem for those who oppose the massive Serb nationalist vandalism on dozens of articles and Greater Serbian anti-Croatian propaganda articles.

We'll see what can be done. Dont worry. Mir Harven 13:34, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I see you need a source for the statement that Croatia had been visited by almost 10 million tourists in 2005. Here it is:

http://www.mmtpr.hr/default.asp?id=1571

I would have included it myself, but have pledged to avoid this and Ante Starcevic articles for 24 hours following my misinterpretation of 3RR rule. EurowikiJ 15:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but I don't recall ever asking you anything, or saying anything to you. And you leave me a message saying "We'll see about this Serbian propaganda"? explain your actions, and the sentence which, to me, doesn't make too much sense, considering that you're not in the conversation, and it's very rude to jump into one when you're clearly not wanted. --Boris Malagurski ₪ 01:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page is for everyone-one need not be invited. And, from the context, it is obvious it was intended for Serbian trolls like Purger at all. Mir Harven 08:19, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please don't revert my user talk page, I'm not like User:Croatian historian, what's written is written, and it will stay there no matter how much it doesn't fit in. Also, you clearly didn't answer any of my questions, put aside our obvious ideological differences and answer my questions. --Boris Malagurski ₪ 02:36, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm sorry, I accused you of something you didn't do. You didn't revert anything, someone else reverted it. I apologize. --Boris Malagurski ₪ 02:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know the talk page is for everyone, but if you are going to jump into a conversation, don't leave remarks like the ones you left. First of all, I don't listen to everything Purrger tells me to do, and I honestly think he is a sockpuppet, as I have stated on his talk page. So, next time, try to stick to the topic at hand. --Boris Malagurski ₪ 03:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that you are acting in an uncivil manner. Please remain civil and don't resort to making personal attacks or instigate edit wars.

? Who is this addressed to ? Mir Harven 07:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

to you - calling people vandals is certainly a personal attack. Mylan 07:45, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, a well known Serbian troll. Is this a personal attack ? Mir Harven 07:51, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Calling people trolls or vandals just because of their POV is certainly a personal attack. You know full well that there are plenty of people who do not think of Tudjman very highly, and according to wiki policies their POV has to be discussed and explained. If I have called you a known troll/vandal (I actually only said that once, and not directly to you) - it was because you seem to have a history of disruptive behaviour. In any case, whatever your position, you cannot blank other POV and insert yours, as wiki has a clear NPOV policy. Stating contraversial claims as facts, removing quotes (your favorite it seems) etc. is hardly an acceptable behavior. Mylan 21:18, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have stated your case on the talk page. It was not, by the majority of the editors of this page, considered to be much more than an unconvincing vindication of trolling. Therefore, the page was reverted, and will be reverted ad infinitum until someone comes up with new information or better elucidation of the already discussed themes. For the time being-you're just one among many Serbian trolls. Pity only 6-10 Serbian users are definitely not Greater Serbian propagandist sickos, but, as Ned Kelly had said, "sich is life". Mir Harven 21:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is simply not true - I have put my questions on the talk page today, and noone replied. On the other side, I see you are the only one who advocates current version on that page. As for the people who revert my edits, they are Croatian, and so hardly neutral. As for what you said about greater serbia propagandist, I find it very insultive indeed. Not everyone who sees Tudjman in the other light than you do can be called that - but I guess you know that and just want to insult people who disagree with you. But never mind... Mylan 03:11, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to trouble you with this. I wanted to let you know that User:WikiMB is, in all likelyhood, another account that has been opened by User:Bormalagurski. Given the number of his edits and the approach he is using he is probably aiming at eventually getting adminship at Wikipedia which User:Bormalagurski failed to secure on a couple of attempts for all the known reasons. Needless to say, this would have interesting consequences on our efforts to maintain articles related to Croatia. I had suspected this for some time, but I didn't have any proof until yesterday (April 2) when User:Bormalagurski made a mistake of deleting a Luka Jačov's comment left on User:WikiMB's discussion under Re:Template. Luka Jačov appeared 5 minutes after this deletion and left a slightly modified comment. Pretty interesting tempering with another user's page on the part of User:Bormalagurski. Of course, User:WikiMB re-appeared 5 minutes later as if nothing had happened to add another PR remark. For more info check WB's history page]EurowikiJ 12:25, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a follow-up on the note that I have left above. The administrator on the check-user page has decided not to conduct a check on the User:Bormalagurski and User:WikiMB. Though my claim was based on a chain of strange edits that took place on WikiMB's discussion page on April 2 and certainly not on any editing pattern, the administrator concluded that "Just from looking at the contributions I find it unlikely that these two are sockpuppets of one another; they appear to me to be distinct editors.". Hence, the request was denied and the accounts in question were not checked. For User:Bormalagurski and User:WikiMB's reaction(s) and arguments, please see the entry at Request for Check User page, WikiMB's and my talk pages. EurowikiJ 09:10, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Later, currently I'm off wiki for a while...Mir Harven 10:52, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mir, you're a very wise Wikipedian, and I respect you and generally agree with your wiseness, but look at Werner Herzog, or even at John Malkovich whose grandparents were of Croatian descent.

To se piše za ove zvijezde, i to možeš naći u biografijama na imdb.Mir Harven 19:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Croatian origin/nationality being pushed there so heavily to stick the eyes? Isn't Werner a German and John an American.

Jesu.Mir Harven 19:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why not put a footnote instead of such a clear arguement?

Slažem se s tobom, i ja bih tako napravio. Samo sam revertirao besmislicu. No-ja ne pišem te tekstove, iako mislim da bi s eto moglo, eventualno, staviti negdje u samome tekstu, jer to nije bitno za te ličnosti. Mir Harven 19:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regards, good friend. --HolyRomanEmperor 18:34, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Best Mir Harven 19:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

E, pa tu nemoj da to pomislis o meni. Ja ne volim te nacional-push gluposti. Clanak je Nikolin, a ne moj. Revertiraj gluposti kolko hochesh ;-)

Pozdrav, Mire! --HolyRomanEmperor 17:08, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to e-mail me at Asimwiki@hotmail.com. I prefer to keep my personal and wikipedia e-mails seperate, so my old account expired due to inactivity. Asim Led 19:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Mir Harven 19:14, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, dobrodošao na stranu Bosnians – vidim da si je vidio :-); pretpostavljam da si tek sad natrčao na nju. Ne znam da li si čitao prethodni talk, u kojem smo se Nikola i ja natezali s Dadom i Emirom, a ja sam u međuvremenu odustao od ćorava posla; nek' se igraju panbosanstva. U stvari, nemam ništa posebno pametno da ti kažem u vezi s tim člankom – vidiš sve i sam – samo mi je bila smiješna tvoja reakcija... čisto sam znao da ćeš popizditi kad/ako je vidiš.

Pozdrav, Duja 19:23, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Da....no, na stranu nacionalna iživljavanja ova ili ona, od stoljeća 7. ili -7., istina mora biti kriterij. Ondje gdje ne može biti suglasnosti "zaraćenih strana", treba iznijeti korektno različite stavove bez preglasavanja, pa neka posjetitelji sude tko je uvjerljiviji i racionalniji. Mir Harven 21:29, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:Joy#Hej. Ako ipak potvrdjuju to i Joy a onda i Millosh (a sam si ga pohvalio), mislim da mozda ipak tu ima istine.

Otac/deda Rudjera Boskovica je bio srpski velikas. Ipak, Rudjer je bio Dubrovcanin. (Informacija od profesorke dubrovacke knjizevnosti sa Univerziteta u Beogradu, koja nije nacionalista.) --millosh (talk (sr:)) 17:07, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Pozdrav! --HolyRomanEmperor 20:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Miloš je to čuo, kako kaže, iz druge ruke. Ruđer je bio Dubrovčanin, da, i ? A ovo ti je jaka informacija: "profesorka dubrovačke književnosti". Ne ću ulaziti u detalje, to je komično. Na stranici o RB-u je realno: postoje neke, nedovoljno provjerene, informacije da mu je otac bio srpskog podrijetla. Njegova je etnička afilijacija bila poglavito slovinska i ilirska, a koliko se može suditi po dostupnim podatcima (link koji sam dao na Žubrinića), taj je pojam pokrivao ponajviše hrvatski etnos, premda to u to doba i nije bilo od neke važnosti, jer je besmisleno projicirati na prošlost današnje nacionalne profilacije. Mir Harven 21:27, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naravno, naravno. Samo mi sve to malo smrdi. Trebao bi se neko pozabaviti time detaljno... Poz! --HolyRomanEmperor 21:45, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to this edit of yours:

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy: There is no excuse for personal attacks on other contributors. Do not make them. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that you may be blocked for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thanks, --serbiana - talk 23:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...is a Roman Catholic Christian by religion and a Serb by nationality. :) --HolyRomanEmperor 17:11, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.  :)

You're right, of course. And it makes perfect sense. There's no equality in this world.

I'm sorry it ended this way, though. I really am, I'm sorry. But, what can you say, the idea reeks of the same communistic inclinations as all the other ideas like it. Eh, if only it were Just the Language. But it isn't and never was. --VKokielov 22:07, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Primjetio sam da zoves federaciju ex-Yu, mada sam mislio bas na Jugoslaviju a ne na danasnje naslijednice.  :) --VKokielov 22:10, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mislim na SFRJ. Mir Harven 22:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean "usual vandalism"? Do you bother to look at what is being done at all? This is the second time when I'm edit warring with the Serbian socks, and then I'm stabbed in the back by you "rational" Croats and labeled a vandal, because I've tried to compromise and be neutral. Mentioning Tudjman's being controversial in the beginning is quite reasonable and NPOV. What I had left was a perfectly sound compromise, with no falsities, and you call it "vandalism". Not to mention that I had removed one of the fact tags due to info I'd found, but you have to undo even that, i.e. the only piece of constructive work that has been done in this article for ages. What kind of people are you, for God's sake? --85.187.44.131 15:18, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I saw that you have given some kind of a justification on the Tudjman talk page, and I have replied to it there.--85.187.44.131 17:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the contributions of User:Medule. I have managed to protect the Tourism in Croatia, but he's doing the same thing with Dalmatia, History of Croatia, Borovo Selo raid and several others. I have reported him, but caution is needed. Regards! --HolyRomanEmperor 19:42, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your intervention. But, sorry- I can't change my opinion on the admin position voting you're embroiled in.Mir Harven 09:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would be glad if you didn't interpret this as a bribe - the voting's already practicly over & I respect your vote as much as anyone else's. Regards! --HolyRomanEmperor 11:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't. You misunderstood. This was just an aside statement. Mir Harven 20:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've sent a wikipedia:request for comment for the Franjo Tudjman page and the commenters have arrived (sooner than I expected). I've tried to present the case objectively for them, but you might feel that I'm misrepresenting it in some way, so please come and make sure that your case is stated correctly. I haven't informed the other Croatian editors, because they have never discussed anything on the talk page anyway, but I hope that you will call them to comment if you think that it is appropriate. --85.187.44.131 23:11, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kakva zipdarija.  :)

Znas da su mene blokali jucer? Zbog onog deliba Moea Epsilona...

ehhh...jadne mi glave...  ;) --VKokielov 23:46, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zašto to ? Pogledat ću. Mir Harven 00:12, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...treba mi za jednu diskusiju izvor da je on izjavio da mu je Hrvatski jezik maternji... Mozes li mi pokazati neki izvor? Sto neutralniji (po mogucnosti, toliko neutralan da bi ga najveci hrvatomrzac na svijetu prihvatio). Vodim jednu diskusiju s jednim Bosnjakom koji ne da Bosnu. :) pa mi treba... Mozes li naci? Bog! --HolyRomanEmperor 18:06, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nije, nego je tražio neke redovnike od pape: "SLOVĚNSKI" I "HRVATSKI" KAO ZAMJENJIVI NAZIVI JEZIKA HRVATSKE KNJIŽEVNOSTI

Radoslav Katičić......... 31 Tako, jamačno, valja shvatiti i to kad bosanski ban Stjepan Kotromanić 1347. traži i dobiva mnoga prava za franjevce u Bosni, pa tako i to da mogu sebi uzimali pomoćnike, ali samo in fidei doctrina peritos et lingue croatice non ignaros - "iskusne u nauku vjere i ne bez znanja hrvatskoga jezika". (Prema "Glas Hercegovca" 1891, br. 22.) (fusnota), http://www.hercegbosna.org/ostalo/jezik2.html#il Taj mi izvor (Glas Hercegovca) baš i nije jak, ali je, koliko se sjećam, potvrđen u "Acta Bosnae" Euzebija Fermendžina iz 19. stoljeća (zbirka dokumenata koje je skupio hrvatski povjesničar, inače Bugar). Mir Harven 20:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hvala.

No, interesira me jos jedna stvarcica - sjecam se da si jednom prilikom kritizirao Vladimira Corovica - bas sam zbog toga nabavio nekoliko njegovih knjiga, i uopce mi ne izgleda lose - za nekog 18 i 19-stoljetnoga povijesnicara. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:28, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nije Ćorović loš, dapače, on je znamenit povjesničar. Jedino, kao i Šišić, on spada u razdoblje starije historiografije, tj. one koja inzistira na pričama o kraljevima i njihovim intrigama, a nema cjeloviti prikaz ekonomije, demografije, kulturologije, materijalne i duhovne civilizacije onoga doba. Usput, kao i Šišić, Ćorović je veći dio života bio "Jugoslaven". No, bitnije je da se radi o kvalitetnoj starijoj povjesnici, koja je vrijedna baština, no, koja nužno spada u starije razdoblje historiografije jer nije multidsiciplinarna. Primjeri novije historiografije su npr. Francuzi Ferdinand Braudel i Jacques LeGoff. Kod ex-Yu povjesničara ima nekoliko imena, no, teško je reći u kolikoj su mjeri podložni ideologozaciji i starudiji. U Institutu u Sarajevu ima nekoliko neloših tekstova o tim starim pristupima (uza sve rezerve):prikaz obilja tekstova o BH povjesnici-http://www.iis.unsa.ba/prilozi/pii_29.htm, a tu su i neki spomenuti autori. (ovdje je poveznica na više tekstova različite vrijednosti-http://www.iis.unsa.ba/institut/izdanja_katalog.htm). Mir Harven 17:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hvala na linkove, pogledat cu ih sutradan.

Meni se pogotovo svidja Vladimirov pristum tim mutnim stvarima; on nigdje ne kaze X je..., nego uvijek govori moguce je da je X, ali... - i zanimljiva je njegova genealogija Vusevica, koje prati do rijeke Visle. On istice da su Hrvati dosli nesto prije Srba na Balkan, i vjerovatno u vecem broju - no nagovijestava prelaznost onih vec poznatih "mutnim" dijelova. Npr. dok na jednom mjestu naziva Visevice srpskom dinastijom, ocito naglasava da oni dolaze iz Bijele Velike Hrvatske, i da su poslednji clanovi te dinastije Hrvati. Zanimljivo je kako on povezuje to "ko je sta" iskljucivo s politicke scene, a ne etnicke.

Bog! --HolyRomanEmperor 18:02, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am requesting page protection till things cool down a bit. Maybe the only way out would be to keep the article as for your edited version but adding a verifiable criticism section. I am not familiar with the subject, in all cases.

How could you, for Crissake ? ;^) This is a dull, actually a dated provincial issue & I wouldnt have bothered with it hadnt it been so "avidly" vandalized with a rather obvious defamation intent. Mir Harven 22:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regards, Asterion talk to me 21:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I guess others (I'll try to write a few lines, too) will have completed the text in near future, incorporating all the potentially controversial dimensions in the main body of the article. Best Mir Harven 22:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I finally listed the Request for Comments. So far, no 'outsider' seems to be interested yet. Well, we shall wait and see... Best regards, Asterion ^{talk to me} 20:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy: There is no excuse for personal attacks on other contributors. Do not make them. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that you may be blocked for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thanks. SradkaW 02:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is, I see, the usual tactics of Serbian trolls obsessed with hatred towards anything Croatian. Offend, lie & run whining to some wiki bureaucrat your "chastity" has been violated-because you've been exposed for what you truly are. Despicable, I'd say. Mir Harven 08:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user is, I'm pretty certain, a Serb politically-construed sockpuppet. Why not verify ? Mir Harven 09:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

This is very offensive. I demand apology for thowing this accusation!--Romaine 12:22, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, let's see. This is your contrib list: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=250&target=Romaine Well, it proves beyond reasonable doubt that the description of your activity on the wiki is truthful. Mir Harven 12:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You like to play with words and twist people into knots, Mir Harven! You ought to deal with the merits of a given argument than striving to disqualify, getting it both ways, etc. Why don't you work your argument into the Seselj article? That's my last serious comment to you -- I'll never take you seriously again!

Profnjm 19:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC) (a.k.a. "Croatophobic Judaeophobe")[reply]

I've blocked you for 12h for personal attacks; [3] and [4] are not acceptable William M. Connolley 10:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Trolling snitches should be protected. Where are these days when crybabies just haven't been payed attention to ? Eh, I'm waxing nostalgic....Mir Harven 11:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In view of your comments since, make that 24h, as of now William M. Connolley 12:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Znaš puno o povijesti i kvalitetno i temeljito radiš na Wikipediji, ali će te tvoji komentari pokopat. Ljudi te doživljavaju kao teškog hrvatskog nacionalistu, a vjerujem da to nisi. Šta je najgore, to je sve zbog tvojih komentara, a ne zbog onog što radiš. Zar ti stvarno to treba? Nećeš smanjit broj trolova svojim komentarima. Jakiša Tomić 00:48, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ja sebi ne bi dozvolio da me hrpa organiziranih osnovnoskolaca iznervira do te mjere da se pocnem ponasat ko oni. --Ante Perkovic 11:54, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mir, you've been reported for 3RR at Neo-Nazism and have been blocked for 24 hours. When you return, please use the talk page to resolve the dispute. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 09:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ima li izvora o Crvenoj Hrvatskoj osim Barskoga rodoslova?

Mislim da nema. Govori se o Liber Metho(i)os ili Methodos, no, po sjećanju, to je iz Hrvatske kronike koja je iz 1500ih. Ako ima ranijih izdanja, bilo bi zanimljivo, no mislim da se radi o falsifikatima. Ovo je novije izdanje-http://www.sveznadar.com/knjiga.aspx?knjiga=68736, imao sam to u rukama, no nije me baš zanimalo jer mi taj Mužić djeluje kao mitoman. Kritika je LJPD dana kod Klaićeve, http://www.hercegbosna.org/ostalo/srp_port.html Mir Harven 13:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mislim da ima ranijih izdanja - negdje u Italiji na latinskom jeziku. --HolyRomanEmperor 18:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Htio bih citati. Kazem osim, jer je Grgur spominje samo u prvom dijelu, koji navodi da je pripovedanje povijesnih legendi i mitova - a ne historiografskome drugom dijelu; sama cinjenica da Grgur zove Barskog nadbiskupa "Primatom Srbije" mi je takodjer sumnjiva - s obzirom da je prvi pomen te titule s XVI stoljeca - isto kada se i prve kopije Hronike svestenika pojavljuju. Htio bih malo procitati o njoj, ako ima... --HolyRomanEmperor 19:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meni je ta cijela knjiga sumnjiva kao povijesno vrelo, zajedno s pričom o Vladimiru i Kosari i sl. Više mi to djeluje kao književnost u kojoj ima nekih historijskih činjenica, ali ne postoji suglasnost što je povijesna istina, a što mašta. Mir Harven 13:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ne, ne, ne. Covjek lijepo naglasava dva dijela knjige - prvi, koji sam kaze da mu je skupina onoga sto narod veli i drugi, koji je potkrijepljen (skoro) svim drugim povijesnim izvorima - pretpostavljam zato sto je to pisao dok je bio ziv. Znaci, tamo gdje pise na jednom mjestu gdje je Caslavljev unuk zivio 200 godina prije njega - tacno se vidi gdje je historijski fakat, a gdje ono sto narod veli. Jedan katolicki (hrvatski?) arheolog u Beogradu - podrijetlom iz Bara - je napravio detaljnu istragu, i moci cu od njega nabavit cijelo dijelo (na hr, en, sto god). --HolyRomanEmperor 18:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

History of Balkans pominje Crvene Hrvate kao one koji su ostali u Velikoj (Bijeloj) Hrvatskoj. HolyRomanEmperor 18:28, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To je krivo. Oni su Bijeli (ako se tako može reći). http://www.croatianhistory.net/etf/et01.html#white Mir Harven 18:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, ispravit cu to cim saznam tko je to napisao. --HolyRomanEmperor 22:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Posted by Pruneau^T 01:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC) on behalf of the AID maintenance team.[reply]

OK. Mir Harven 20:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ove kontroverze oko Bosne su vrlo dosadne. Da te pitam nesto. Da li bi bilo OK stavljati kategoriju Bosnjacka historija na clancima o srednjovjekovnim bosanskim vladarima? Mislim, moja je logika da srpsko-hrvatsko-bosnjacke sukoba treba izostaviti pogotovo iz navodnih "etniciteta" monarha i drugih vladara iz Srednjega vijeka. Prirodno, ja zelim da se stave odgovarajuce kategorije na ocigledne stvari - na primjer, moje dodavanje kategorije "Hrvatska povijest" na clanku o Stjepanu I i Stjepanu II Kotromaniću (i srpska istorija na ovog pervog). However, Emir Arven smatra da su takve stvari uvredljive po Bosnjake, jer povlace insinuaciju da su Hrvati i Srbi bili povezani s bosanskom historijom (iako su tu samo zato sto je Bosna tada bila hrvatski/srpski vazal) - i zato ne samo da dodaje kategoriju Bosnjacka historija, vec i uklanja ove dvije kategorije. Pomoc, mozda? Stvarno se ne zelim petljati u primitivni Balkanizam... --HolyRomanEmperor 10:14, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Baska_tablet.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Stop it and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Stop your nationalism in Dinko Ranjina article.--PIO 14:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Diffs? --PaxEquilibrium 19:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In this article for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_nations_of_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina

Ethnic Maps (before and after the war) are inaccurate.

For accurate Ethnic Maps, one should consult maps issued by the Office of High Representative for Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Here is the link: http://www.ohr.int/ohr-info/maps/

We can include those maps into wikipedia, they are not copyrighted.

Bosniak 06:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Ujevic.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mire, najveci hrvatski sine uvijek za dom spreman, novi Ante, cito sam puno o tebi.

Mozemo li nekako glasovati da se zabrani Srbima pristup wikiju?

I haven't talked to you in a long time. Please vote on Osli73 arbitration. He is the guy who was disrupting and vandalizing Srebrenica Massacre article. I voted "oppose" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Osli73 Bosniak 02:37, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bog majstore. Izgleda da trebamo vase pomoc za clanak o Starčeviću, ako je moguce. Ne sekiraj se o revert-war, mi cemo se brinuti s time. Same trebamo neke dobre izvore ili njegovih govora (na web-u su najvise stranice o njemu pravaske, sto nije bas veliko pomoc za NPOV). Hvala unaprijed.--Thewanderer 23:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you've been asked before, but why don't you join WP Croatia? Mihovil 03:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Vukovar.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 02:50, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article List of Catholic leaders and politicians, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. JJLatWiki 19:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You will not believe that after ours reverts wars on Croatian wiki I am happy to see you on her. I and Direktor are in revert war (together) against users from Serbia which on article Serbs of Croatia write how Serbian kings has ruled Slavonia. Maybe will be interesting to you that in article Kingdom of Slavonia is writen (without sources) how Croats are minority and Serbs relative majority in Slavonia in 1790. Do not be afraid to entering party Rjecina 16:46, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Tito.jpg. 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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:48, 29 August 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Anrie 12:48, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Radic.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media 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. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 16:55, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Povelja Kulina bana.jpg. 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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:03, 17 February 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Timichal (talk) 10:03, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Image:Gundulich.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Gundulich.jpg|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. Sdrtirs (talk) 02:56, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, back in 2005 you added data from the official Croatian census on Republic of Serbian Krajina. Do you personally have access to the official 1991 census data? If so, how exactly did you determine the populations? When compared with the ICTY link, the data looks fine except for the SAO Western Slavonia region (or "UNPA sector West"), which has the largest difference. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I doubt the Croatian census would've used the term "SAO Western Slavonia", so I'm curious about what method you used to get that data. There's a bit of a discussion about it at Talk:Republic of Serbian Krajina#Population. Spellcast (talk) 12:35, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Kasic.jpg. 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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:28, 11 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:28, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The image Dizdar.jpg is being considered for speedy deletion at the Commons.[5]

What can I say ? Bureaucracy always wins. Mir Harven (talk) 07:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Relkovich.jpg. 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 10:00, 4 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:00, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vidim da se već dugo natežeš s ovim jugočetnicima oko članka o hrvatskom jeziku a posjeduješ mali milijun članaka hrvatskih jezikoslovaca o ideologiji serbokroatizma. Zašto sve te rasprave s njima ne sažmeš u novi članak koji bi se bavio baš tim vidom specijalnog rata protiv Hrvata, mislim da bi to bio relativn kratak posao. Možda bi nam to pomoglo da se više ne uništava i neprestano napada članak o hrvatskom jeziku.

Pozdrav!

Godemir (talk) 17:19, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ne vrijedi to jer bi zauzelo previše vremena, a ljudi pate od ADD. Mir Harven (talk) 20:55, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion on this article is getting out of hand. Personal attacks, such as calling people psychotic for disagreeing with you, are not appropriate on WP. Please stop. — kwami (talk) 04:08, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The user referred to is a psychiatric case, so posting a snapshot diagnosis is not contrary to the rules of polite conversation. Mir Harven (talk) 19:42, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm asking to have you blocked. I'm too close to do it myself.

I've also reverted your comments. I have no objection to you making your case, just not attacking/trolling. — kwami (talk) 20:46, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You pet Štambuk (and perhaps a few other pamphleteers) have been calling names people who disagree with for a long time- without any reaction from your part, except cheerleading. Actually, your behavior- deleting the posts showing your incompetence re matters under discussion, bias & manipulation with the matters you're clueless about, blatant one-sidedness & completely arbitrary interventions you should have been banned from long since- this we call in Croatian "whores pontificate on chastity". As for psycho Štambuk- I don't mind deleting parts on him, since no one with sane mind could care about his distortions & lies. Just- an expose of your inadequacy will stay. Mir Harven (talk) 23:14, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Calling someone crazy is rude, never polite. You're welcome to edit somewhere else, like Encyclopedia Dramatica or Uncyclopedia if you want to be rude. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:10, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ian ment something like this [6]. Probable that's not rude language? ("pay f**king attention", "Screaming and bitching and moaning with bulls**t accusations") :))). Kubura (talk) 02:41, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Kwamikagami filed a wikiquette alert about Mir Harven calling him crazy. You're welcome to do the same thing on Ivan Štambuk. I honestly don't care about the content of the Croatian language article. If you can provide diffs of current behavior problems, then go on and take them to Wikiquette alerts, instead of hassling me because I responded to a wikiquette alert filed on one of your buddies. On the subject of current behavior, the message I left on that IP's talk page was a result of frustration from a dishonest editor lying to a bunch of his occult group on facebook, resulting in this AfD and its talk page being flooded with idiots with persecution complexes. Multiple admins saw the whole situation, and although my actions were not correct, they were completely understandable. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:33, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the article Croatian language and other articles relating to the Balkans fall under the ruling of WP:ARBMAC. Note in particular Wikipedia:ARBMAC#Discretionary sanctions, which states

"Any uninvolved administrator may, on their own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if that editor fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, the expected standards of behavior, or the normal editorial process. The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; restrictions on reverts; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project. Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision."

Repeated blanket reversions, repeatedly and knowingly restoring material with large amounts of poor English and grammatical errors, and repeated introduction of material rejected by consensus all fall below the expected standards of behaviour at this project. Knepflerle (talk) 23:09, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yawn..Mir Harven (talk) 19:09, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you awake, notice that I reported you to WP:AE#Mir Harven. No such user (talk) 11:33, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Knepferle said "repeated introduction of material rejected by consensus" and falling below the expected standards of behaviour at this project.
Very interesting "consensus".
Please, Knepferle, give the diff so we can see that "there's consensus". Which users "agreed"? Which users disagreed?
Whose "poor behaviour" on article about Croatian language [7]? Who ignored the discussion? Who abused his position? Who imposed his personal opinion by using the tools and ignoring the discussion? Which involved admin has shown the bad knowledge about the topic? Who ignored the opponents arguments? Who threatened to opponents with his position? Which user locked the articles at his POV version, with the argument "it's so because I say so"? Who usurpated the articles? Who behaves possessive towards the articles? Who blatantly deletes other users' work by reverting and redirecting? Who attacked the opponents? Kubura (talk) 04:47, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure you should post in an RfC that was closed. I've told the closer at User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise#Croatian RfC note. Maybe best to move the comment below the box. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 14:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, others have also posted. And- it's unfair for someone who's involved in a discussion to be "cut off" in such a way that his arguments are not heard, and the "opponent" has the privilege of "automatic" last voice- just due to a sort of censorial cutoff. Mir Harven (talk) 16:04, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This might interest you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Croats#Infobox_picture --78.1.124.164 (talk) 06:51, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

You have been involved in the case of SPA User:Velebit and his fixation with Ante Starčević.

Could you please take a look at here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Rjecina

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Velebit/Archive

MagnumCrimen (talk · contribs) and anonymous IPs.

--Kennechten (talk) 15:27, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the problem is still there... To be honest, it's better than it was, and I wouldn't say it's that bad: haven't analyzed it in detail, but at least it is decently sourced and more or less free of editorializing and WP:SYNTH. However, there is still a promotional air about it and a certain tendency of downplaying critical viewpoints.

This would not be an easy rewrite though. One cannot just chip in with the contrary content. There is a risk of turning the article into an extended point-by-point debate on her views. I'm putting it on my todo list, but it is very long, so I can't promise a time frame. GregorB (talk) 14:47, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for the note on the MPRI training - I remember those as well and I'm very well aware that the widespread speculations are baseless. However, I felt I had to include a note on the speculations and clear denial of their validity - precisely because a lot of sources report those speculations (and the dismissal of the same). I went for the minimalist approach not to give the MPRI issue WP:UNDUE weight, but you prompted me to clarify that Croatian officials likewise deny MPRI involvement beyond their publicly admitted role - and I think that's covered now too. The passage now clearly confronts speculations with clearly stated denials of two different entities, so a neutral reader should have no problem drawing the correct conclusion. I do not wish to add an editorial on the issue as that would not survive a WP:GAN let alone a featured article review that the topic deserves. Hopefully, that will take place quite soon.

Once again, I'm sorry if my action came off as brash, I should have explained better why I made the change in the edit summary. Happy editing in 2013!--Tomobe03 (talk) 00:57, 3 January 2013 (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) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, an IP editor started a village pump discussion about your user page ... or, rather, the fact that you've never edited it. See Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)#Deletion of User:Mir Harven. Graham87 09:30, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why would I edit it in the past few years if I don't see the reason for it? Mir Harven (talk) 10:01, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. –Vipz (talk) 19:36, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any issue I've been involved with. Mir Harven (talk) 21:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I removed the long screed on Wikipedia censorship. If you do something like that again, I will revoke TPA.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:47, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I just removed the screed that was reposted and removed talk page access. Note: While you are blocked, yo do not get to continue to use your talk page to continue your disruption and POV editing. You request to be unblocked. Since you were continuing in your disruption, your talk page access has been pulled. RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:51, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]