Talk:Sombor/Archive 1

Archive 1

Fair use rationale for Image:Fijaker.jpg

Image:Fijaker.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:21, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sombor.jpg

Image:Sombor.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sombor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101123051031/http://www.rtvspektar.co.rs/ to http://www.rtvspektar.co.rs/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:45, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Dispute

There seems to be a dispute between two versions. Could you both outline why you think one version is better than the other below:

1. Sombor (Serbian Cyrilic: Сомбор, Hungarian: Zombor, Rusin: Зомбор) is a city located in Serbia and Montenegro at 45.78°N 19.12°E / 45.78; 19.12.
2. Sombor (Serbian: Сомбор or Sombor, Croatian: Sombor, Hungarian: Zombor, Slovak: Sombor, Rusin: Зомбор, Romanian: Sombor) is a city located in Serbia and Montenegro at 45.78°N 19.12°E / 45.78; 19.12.

My personal opinion is that I'm not sure that it is really necessary to include all of the languages if the name is spelt the same in that language in the lead. I would have no problem with a separate Name section describing this. I think that the list in the lead should be confined to the official languages of the area. Others can come in a separate section. This is not to say that I am right, it is just an observation. - FrancisTyers 23:14, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Can people sign below in the Consensus field with the number of the compromise version they agree with. If you disagree I would encourage you to suggest another compromise version and sign with that number. - FrancisTyers 00:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Version 1

There is no need to repeat names and other wikipedia articles work that way. I am sure there arent 6 tables when u enter Sombor! Luka Jačov 23:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Version 2

Vojvodina province in which this city is located have 6 official languages and names are written in these languages. We do not "repeat" names, but we mention them in the various official languages, no matter if the name in some of the languages is same. The "other" Wikipedia articles cannot be compared with the articles about cities in Vojvodina, since most of the other places in the World does not have 6 official languages. On the official public inscriptions in the cities of Vojvodina all these names are used, no matter if they are same in some of the languages. Furthermore, all of these ethnic groups live either in the city either in the West Bačka District, of which Sombor is administrative seat, thus for these ethnic groups is important to mention how the name of the city is spelled in their language. Also, Serbian language use both, Latin and Cyrillic script, and to mention that only Cyrillic name is Serbian is not correct. PANONIAN (talk) 23:50, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Compromise

1. Sombor (Serbian: Сомбор or Sombor, Croatian, Romanian and Slovak: Sombor, Hungarian: Zombor, Rusin: Зомбор) is a city located in Serbia and Montenegro at 45.78°N 19.12°E / 45.78; 19.12.
2. Sombor (Serbian: Сомбор or Sombor, Croatian: Sombor, Hungarian: Zombor, Rusin: Зомбор) is a city located in Serbia and Montenegro at 45.78°N 19.12°E / 45.78; 19.12.
3. Sombor (Serbian Cyrillic: Сомбор, Serbian and Croatian: Sombor, Hungarian: Zombor, Rusin: Зомбор) is a city located in Serbia and Montenegro at 45.78°N 19.12°E / 45.78; 19.12.

Consensus

Compromise 1

1. - FrancisTyers 00:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
2. - Its nonsense. Do tables on entrance of the cities of villages ever bare two same names written in same script??!! About Vojvodina having 6 languages look at this article: Chur, It doesnt mentions French, doest it?! Actually I was one who proposed this to Francis on ICQ. Luka Jačov 01:01, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
3. - Sparing space. --M. Pokrajac 01:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
4. Oppose. I do not like it. It is quite different than the official multilingual documents used in Vojvodina, where name in every language is listed separate, no matter if names in some languages are same. It is a policy of equality used in Vojvodina, and this kind of language presentation is not NPOV in the Vojvodina case. However, not all of the languages are used in all municipalities, thus, I would agree not to write Slovak and Romanian name, since the number of Slovaks and Romanians is not large. Other 4 names are important. PANONIAN (talk) 00:55, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Compromise 2

1. - FrancisTyers 01:17, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
2. support PANONIAN (talk) 04:17, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
3. support --Elephantus 20:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Compromise 3

1. - FrancisTyers 15:35, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
2. - Same analogy for other articles. Luka Jačov 18:49, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
3. Oppose. Every language should to have separate place. That is official in Vojvodina. PANONIAN (talk) 19:03, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

How many tables r there in Sombor??!! Luka Jačov 19:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia doesnt have to obey any political desicision. This is Wikipedia not Vojvodina! Luka Jačov 19:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

---

And Wikipedia doesnt have to obey your personal crusade against the official language policies in the countries of former Yugoslavia. Your opinion is a minority one, not generally accepted or recognized, and plus it is insulting for the people who speak these languages. PANONIAN (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Who else? Only u and your "grandfather". U r acting like articles u r writing r your proprety and that u r sole authority in the subject! Luka Jačov 19:42, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

---

I did not wrote this article. I only want to assure that those articles are written in neutral manner (and you disrupting the neutrality of these articles). PANONIAN (talk) 19:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

---

First photo

I've added a very recent external photo of the Zupanija building to the gallery, which is probably more recognizable, than the first photo currently shown on the page.

 Vkuncak (talk) 16:21, 1 May 2016 (UTC)