User talk:Cradel/Archive 1
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
January 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to 2008, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. This is especially important when dealing with biographies of living people, but applies to all Wikipedia articles. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are already familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Thank you. —BoL 02:24, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Kosovo town names
Stop moving Kosovo article names, or you will be banned. Last warning, as you did it quite a few times. --Bolonium (talk) 20:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- I second the warning, it is agreed that Kosovo cities will be written in Serbian Latin, if you want to change Wikipedia policy, you have to discuss it first. Thank you, --GOD OF JUSTICE 21:08, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, please note that your recent edits to the following articles: Kosovska Mitrovica, Peć, Kosovska Kamenica, Dragaš, Priština, Ðakovica, Kosovo Polje, Gnjilane, and Uroševac have all been reverted because the moves and edits were not discussed. The naming policy on Kosovo related topics follows the structure of the Serbian name as the title, and first in the introduction, respectively followed by the Albanian name. Please stop making undiscussed moves or edits or you will be blocked from Wikipedia for vandalism without further notice. Thucydides of Thrace (talk) 21:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Your Edits
You have once again been changing the names of Kosovo towns/cities without any prior discussion of the matter. These names have been agreed upon and therefore will be used until there is consesus for possible replacement and/or removal. Also, your edits to the talk page in the article Priština under the header "Survey" have been removed because that discussion was from one year ago. It explictly states, "the following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. " Please follow Wikipedia guidelines or your edits will continue to be reverted and you will ultimately be blocked. Also, removing warnings on the talk page is not allowed. Please refrain from removing them. Thucydides of Thrace (talk) 17:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Edits
You have once again reverted a previously agreed upon version of the Priština article, after being told numerous times by several users that the changes would need to first be discussed. I will now be seeking administrator intervention in the matter.Thucydides of Thrace (talk) 04:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi
I'm an administrator. Among other things, this means that I have the authority to intervene in disputes and, if necessary, enact disciplinary measures. I hope that disciplinary measures will not become necessary here.
I understand that you are Albanian, and as such it bothers you to have the names of Kosovar towns listed in such a way. Really, I do understand. But you have to understand - this is the English-language Wikipedia, not the Serbian or Albanian. We do not represent Japanese placenames in Japanese characters, we do not represent Andhra Pradesh placenames in Telugu script, we do not represent Russian placenames in Cyrillic. We transliterate.
For placenames in multi-ethnic areas like Kosovo, we - those of us who have been working on the articles for a long time - have reached a consensus as to the best way to represent them. You are not the only person involved here.
Remember, names are not real. They have no actual existence, they are the result of agreements between people. They are collective fictions, like "borders" and "nations" and "laws". If you want to make major changes to the naming structures of Wikipedia articles - especially for Wikipedia articles whose names have been the subject of controversy - then I strongly recommend that you a) discuss the subject with the other people involved, and b) be prepared to make compromises. I also recommend that you read the archives of previous discussions, so that you can see what arguments have already been made.
I do not want to have to block you for disruptive behavior. But I will if it becomes necessary. Please do not make it necessary.
Thank you. DS (talk) 15:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey Bindicapriqi,
I heard you've been very active within the Kosovo subject and would thus like to personally invite you to join the Kosovar WikiProject. Cheers. --Prevalis (talk) 21:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Handball
It doesn't matter if you can see it on television, you need to prove it here. Wikipedia doesn't allow for the following: "trust me, I saw it on TV, it must be true". Besides, your spelling and punctuation was abysmal and would have needed editing anyways. Currently, you still have spelling mistakes again in the edit. I suggest you review your edits better next time. Thucydides of Thrace (talk) 16:57, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 4 | 21 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 23:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 28th, 2008.
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 5 | 28 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 03:14, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to WikiProject European Union!
|
Hello, Cradel/Archive 1, and welcome to WikiProject European Union! Thank you for your generous offer to help contribute. I'm sure your input will be much appreciated. I hope you enjoy contributing here and being a European Union Project Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to discuss anything on the project talk page, or to leave a message on my own talk page. Please remember to sign all your comments, and be bold with your edits. Again, welcome, and happy editing! | 
|
-- J Logan t: 14:43, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Istog
Hi. Number of versions is not important, only one, but correct, is quite enough. This issue was already discussed a year ago, so please check the Istok talk page first. PajaBG (talk) 16:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Re:Links in Kosovo
The history of Ottoman Serbia incorporates present-day Kosovo. Therefore, do not remove the links. --Bolonium (talk) 19:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Well, not only did you remove that link, you removed another. And if you do not know, you might as well go read up on some history yourself. I recommend something that isn't on this Wikipedia, as others like yourself tend to remove links and data, screwing the whole thing over. --Bolonium (talk) 21:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
3RR
Please pay attention to WP:3RR. You're entitled to only three reverts per day. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Cyrillic names in Kosovo's infoboxes
Hi Bindicapriqi. I notice that you are removing the Cyrillic versions of Serbian names from all infoboxes of Kosovo's towns: diff., diff., diff., etc. Is there any agreement on removing the Cyrillic versions, or is it just your personal preference ? If the latter, please add them back: style issues like that need to be agreed upon in advance.
To keep the discussion coherent, I would appreciate if you could answer here, in your talk page, please. I will see your post :-) Best regards, Ev (talk) 20:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- I have been removing them because I see them as unnecesary there. The serbian cyrillic version is alredy there (and appears first in the introduction), plus , I am not deleting the serbian latin from the list because that could be useful but the cyrillic is very unnecesary , however if they do need to be there I'd suggest putting them last in the list not first--B.C. 21:03, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- First of all, thank you for responding here :-) I understand your reasons, and yes, it can be argued that mentioning the Cyrillic forms twice is redundant and unnecessary. However, such mentions of "native/original" names in the infoboxes is the standard practice of the English Wikipedia (even for those with non-latin scripts, cf. Damascus, Moscow, Sofia, Athens, and even the Roman Empire :-).
- For the articles on Kosovo's towns, as far as I know, the general agreement is to follow this standard practice and list the Cyrillic forms in the infoboxes too. To change this to another format (cf. Tel Aviv), it would be better to have a centralized discussion first (for example, at Talk:Kosovo), and reach a consensus to make the changes before actually editing the articles.
- In any case, I fully agree with you that in the infoboxes the Cyrillic forms should be the last ones, as is the case with all the examples listed above (except for the odd case of the Roman Empire, listing Latin first and English second :-)
- I will open a disscution on Talk:Kosovo on wether they should stay there or not , however until then I will put them back , although not right now :). --B.C. 21:56, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for your understanding & willingness to discuss. And there's no hurry :-) In any case, after reviewing the {{Infobox Settlement}} template, I think that it would be better to list only the latin-script versions of the names in the official name field, and add the Cyrillic forms in a newly-added native name field.
- I will be paying attention to the Kosovo talk page. - Best regards, Ev (talk) 22:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Until then perhaps we should leave the cyrillic names on the list--B.C. 21:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- You mean continue to placing the Cyrillic forms in the same official name field as the Latin-script ones ? That's fine: the main thing is that they be not removed from the infobox before an agreement is reached to do so :-) Regards, Ev (talk) 23:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Order of names in infoboxes
Keep in mind that this very minor issue is not a disagreement over content in one specific article, but a simple editorial choice affecting a whole category of articles. It's not about adding or removing content, but merely about deciding which presentation of that content could be more beneficial to our potential English-speaking readers.
To edit war over it in over a dozen articles is a very very bad idea. Instead, try to reach a general agreement on which format to use by starting a centralized discussion somewhere (perhaps at Talk:Kosovo or Template talk:Infobox Settlement). Only after a general consensus is reached should the changes be implemented in all related articles. As I mentioned before, style issues like this need to be agreed upon in advance.
Best regards, Ev (talk) 15:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Since Serbia is in Europe, there is no need to have both Wikiproject Serbia and Wikiproject Europe templates. Wikiproject Europe "concentrates primarily on matters of a pan-European nature". I'm not aware of any city or geography articles which have both Wikiproject Europe and Wikiproject <country> templates (Brussels does, for example, but it's because it is EU capital). Nikola (talk) 18:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Please. Kosovo is completely a part of Serbia, though not under Serbian administration. Nikola (talk) 18:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Nikola, you're right on this; WP Europe isn't appropriate. I'll get to work on setting up the framework for a WikiProject Kosovo - both of you, please see my comments at the bottom of Talk:Kosovo. -- ChrisO (talk) 21:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Seconded: Nikola & ChrisO are right on this. - Ev (talk) 15:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
You are currently involved in an edit war at the above article. Consider this a final warning: if you attempt to use reverting to force through your change, you will be blocked from editing, to prevent further damage.
It is essential you sit down and discuss the differences you have with the content of an article and other editors, rather than revert war. Open up a discussion on Talk:Istok, invite other editors involved in the dispute, and talk about what you are disagreeing over. If that doesn't work, come back to me, and I will assist you in seeking dispute resolution.
Once again, refrain from edit warring at all times: discuss with the other editors!
Anthøny 22:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 4th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 6 | 4 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
{{Kosovo-bio-stub}}
Hi - I've changed your re-creation of the deleted {{Kosovo-bio-stub}} into a redirect, as is standard practice for Kosovo-related stub types. {{Kosova-geo-stub}} has also been nominated for deletion (if you wish, there is the correctly named redirect at {{Kosovo-geo-stub}} which can be used). It is long-standing practice at WP:WSS/P to not have separate stub types for disputed territories or those currently undergoing changes to their political status. Once Kosovo gains independence and that independence is recognised internationally by several foreign governments, it may be appropriatee to have separate stub types for Kosovo. When that happeens, those stub changes should be proposed prior to them being made at WP:WSS/P. Until that time, these stub types should remain as redirects alone, as per previous discussions on the subject. Grutness...wha? 01:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Kosovo
Bindi,
Flm shumë për ftesën për t'iu bashkëngjitur Wikiprojektit Kosova. E shtova emrin tim aty menjëherë. Flm edhe për mbështetjen rreth artikullit mbi kushtetutën. Mendoj se është fort neutral, por kështu nuk mendojnë ata që nuk kanë tru. Suksese në përpjekjet tona të përbashkëta!--Getoar (talk) 00:15, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hello, could you please supplement a translation to English and continue to do so later on according to Wikipedia's guidelines and continue to do so in the future? Thanks. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- He basically just said: Thanks for the invitation on wikiproject kosovo and for your support on the constitution article , it is very neutral --B.C say what ? 12:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand why we're supposed to use English here (or at least offer translation)… Anyways, I restored a vintage version of the article on Adem Jashari. Yet, there is much to desire, but that piece of writing is much better than those “f*** up” propaganda fliers they have been embedding on Wikipedia.--Getoar (talk) 20:50, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the info. -- Wesley M. Curtus (talk)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strelok
Regarding your "delete" at this AfD, could you please provide a reason for your "delete"? Just voting with no reason is considered bad form. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 01:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Message from reader
You have made your views on Kosovo/Kosova very clear. I just want to extend to you a friendly question. Would you be consider it a fair deal if Serbia were to grant Kosovo's independence in exchange for Kosovo agreeing that all the monasteries would be on Serbian soil. It would work in a fashion similar to how embassies are on the soil of their respective countries... So there would really be no geographic continuity between these areas, but would allow Serbia to retain the Serbian part of Kosovo without hindering the free functioning of an Albanian Kosovo. How do you think Albanians would feel about this? If you don't want to talk about it, I understand. Peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.185.107.55 (talk) 07:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
- I (personally) would have no problem with serbia having monasteries in kosovo that way but I dont quite understand what you mean with the word "retain" , if you mean serbia controlling municipalities in Kosovo with Serbian character (like zvecan , zubin-potok etc) than Im not fine with it because those municipalities belong to kosovo however if they would decentralize from the government of kosovo (meaning creating a sort of government of their own within kosovo) I still woulden't have a problem with it ( although I think the albanians living there would ) , anyway if you mean serbia "controlling" just the monasteries , that would be OK (and I think most albanians would agree with this as well ) --Cradel 12:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Alright. Thanks for the reply. With the phrase "retain the Serbian part of Kosovo" I was thinking specifically about the monasteries. It was just a thought I became curious about...70.185.107.55 (talk) 18:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Not knowing too many people from Kosovo it is difficult to understand what the perceived problem is with having a division of Kosovo based on present ethnic lines. I don't understand why anyone supporting the full self-determination of Kosovo's Albanian population would insist upon dragging along the municipalities that have Serbian majorities (e.g. the municipalities of Northern Kosovo that you mentioned) into a new state. Kind of doesn't make sense to let the Albanians free of the Serbians and not let the Serbians free of the Albanians. The other thing I don't understand is how you reason that the municipalities with Serbian majorities belong to Kosovo. The independence of Kosovo is not a matter of a piece of land gaining self-governance, its a matter of the Albanians of Kosovo being free of any Serbian rule. That being said, how do municipalities of overwhelmingly Serbian character belong to Albanians or are required for Kosovo's Albanians to be free of Serbian rule?
You mentioned that the Albanians in those municipalities (~10% of the population) would oppose remaining a part of Serbia and that is reason to have those municipalities become a part of an independent Kosovo. If you extend this logic, of the minority population being allowed to hinder the self-determination of the majority population, you would then see how the same argument could be applied to the Serbian population of Kosovo (e.g. Kosovo can't be independent since the Serbians will oppose this"). I don't agree with either perspective of that train of thought.
It just seems that if a more balanced approach were to be taken, a more agreeable solution could form. Kosovo Albanians would achieve less hindrance to self-determination when they're free of the Serbian population (e.g. the Northern municipalities). Kosovo Serbians would not be forced into a state to which they don't belong. Since retaining the Northern municipalities is the only real goal for the Serbian government, and self-determination is the only real goal for the Kosovo Albanian government, why not let each side attain its respective goals when they can be simultaneously met. Why would anyone oppose division when it could lead to a mutually acceptable solution that would benefit everyone to a greater degree than the current direction of action will? It just seems that the chance for future reconciliation and friendship is being thrown away for no reason.
I am just writing some of the thoughts that came to mind when thinking about the mess over there. To give you a comparable level of background - I am a Serb (from outside of Serbia), supporting the full self-determination/independence of all of Kosovo's people. My only real question to you is, "how do you reason that the Serbian majority municipalities belong to an Albanian Kosovo?" 70.185.111.3 (talk) 20:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- I think you have misunderstood me . I never said those municipalities belong to albanian kosovo , what I said is that they belong to the multi-ethnic country of Kosovo , and not serbia , think of Presevo for example , it is like zvecan , albanian populated and yet it isnt in albanian (or kosovo in this case) , its part of serbia . Anyway , I think the best solution would be a decentralization from the government of kosovo ( well,at least for a while).But not to be given to serbia , if that happens then Presevo , Bujanovac etc. should be given to kosovo because of the same reason .personally I would support such a trade , but a new border drawing could cause destabilization and open the "pandora box".
- And Finally , I dont think the point is to be free of the serbs but to rule our own country --Cradel 21:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
The thing is that the goal of the government in Prishtina is not to create a new Bosnia (i.e. multi-ethnic state) but rather to create a state where the Albanians of Kosovo are free from Serbia and can achieve self-determination otherwise being part of a "multi-ethnic" Serbia wouldn't be as unacceptable as it actually is. The new, independent Kosovo (within the present boundaries) will be overwhelmingly Albanian and the Serbian population will not be the one desiring this independence. Whatever formal statements the Prishtina negotiating team may have made about wanting a multi-ethnic Kosovo (now stating the obvious) are the necessary load of garbage required for the endorsement from other governments. You do have a point with the exchange of Preshevo valley for Northern Kosovo, but its really a matter of lack of patience and politicians' disregard for future relations rather than a matter of opening "Pandora's Box". Destabilization would not occur given time to regurgitate the issue for a while. If we look at it from the division of Kosovo alone (without Preshevo,etc.) than the separation of Northern Kosovo (municipalities with Serbian majorities adjacent to Central Serbia) would still not be a complete separation along ethnic lines since more than half of Kosovo's Serbian population is in areas south of Northern Kosovo... Losing those southern/central Serbian enclaves would be the compromise from one perspective. Serbians would be on the Albanian side of the border, in southern/central Kosovo, as would Albanians would be on the Serbian side of the border in Preshevo valley in Serbia. Neither side would be able to achieve a completely clean boundary (as is the case in the majority of countries that come to mind). But naturally, I understand how the situation cannot be viewed with disregard to Preshevo. Hopefully, even with all the declarations of independence that will occur in the near future, some dialogue can continue to resolve the Northern Kosovo and Presevo valley questions... though its doubtful. It would seem logical that in order to gain full-fledged independence (with less limitations than found in Ahtisaari's plan) and UN membership, that the Prishtina government would barter a bit with Serbia in order to gain Serbia's recognition (i.e. the only path to complete statehood). It would also seem logical that the Serbian government try to retain what it can (i.e. Northern Kosovo). For various reasons both sides are completely in lack of creative thought. I'll stop writing now... reading about the events over there is just too stressful.
Anyway, I've enjoyed talking with you. Thanks for broadening my understanding of the Albanian perspective on Kosovo. Lamtumirë.70.185.111.3 (talk) 23:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Question from reader
Feel free to join by editing the table and placing your username, in alphabetical order. May I ask you to do this in alphabetical order on the [1] ? Lars 08:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 7 | 11 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Të falemnderit!
Thanks for the welcome, and happy Kosovo Independence Day! Νεοπτόλεμος ( talk | email | contribs ) 00:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations
Congratulations on becoming a citizen of the world's newest independent state, the 46th country in Europe! I hope that in the future Kosova can become a member of the European Union. I give you and your fellow Kosovars all the best wishes and good luck for the future. =) 81.155.125.119 (talk) 15:03, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- thank you , I can only say that this is the best day of my life :) --Cradel 15:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I was going to congratulate you also, but someone got there first. All the best, greetings from the United Kingdom! 86.144.60.87 (talk) 16:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Rollback
I have 1 granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 20:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I despeedied this as there is sufficient context to know what the creator is talking about. Also another editor had despeedied it before. Not sure subject needs an article apart from Kosovo though. Please PROD or AFD if you really think it should go. Cheers, Dlohcierekim Deleted? 14:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 05:07, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Blocked (Pristina)
Cradel (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I didnt break this rule as I only reverted twice on the Pristina article
Decline reason:
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
[2], [3], [4], [5] were four clear reverts within the last 24h, and [6] was a contentious edit if not technically a revert (I haven't checked if that version had existed previously). Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- 1 and 2 are from 18 February while 3 and 4 from the 19th , these are edits from 2 days and not a single one --Cradel 11:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- It's "within any 24-hour period", not "within a span of 00:00 UTC to 23:59 UTC", or "within a span of 00:00 to 23:59 in whatever is your timezone". Counting by calendar days would be impossible because we are all in different timezones across the world, and we don't even know which is yours. Besides, it misses the point of what the purpose of the rule is. It is to slow revert wars down. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
{{unblock|Listen,I know I broke the 3RR rule (by accident thought) , but please unblock me as I wont repeat this again , I know it will expire by tomorrow but I really feel like editing it today , please unblock me , please}}
- Can you promise you will stay away from editing the contentious Kosovo-related articles during this time? I have no problem unblocking you under that condition. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- I will edit kosovo-related articles but I will not be involved in edit wars as I will discuss these edits first--Cradel 12:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- But I have to ask you to look at kosovo related articles to specify that kosovo is a country and not a province of serbia , and punish users who revert these edits--Cradel 12:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I'm not quite happy with that. The Kosovo articles are currently so hotly disputed that almost anything you could do there would carry the risk of new contention . It's in fact become quite hard to do any edits there that are not reverts. And your last comment above shows me you are still in a rather confrontational mood about this topic. I'd prefer if you kept off it for a bit. But I'll leave the unblock request open for others to review. Fellow admins, feel free to unblock without further consultation if you feel comfortable that this editor will be editing constructively. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:58, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- What if I dont edit any kosovo-related articles until tomorrow --Cradel 14:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
{{unblock|I still cant edit pages , I think that my IP address hasn't been unblocked yet , please check}}
- I believe I've found the autoblock. Please try to edit now. - auburnpilot talk 16:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
General Balkans notice
In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If you engage in further inappropriate behaviour in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban. Thank you.
Stifle (talk) 14:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm trying to achieve consensus within this article to have it merged. Since you participated in the AfD discussion, the consensus of which is disputed, I wondered if you would like to comment on the new discussion I am holding on the article's talk page. I am contacting all editors who participated in the AfD regardless of their vote in the interest of fairness. - Fritzpoll (talk) 22:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Mother Teresa
Hello Cradel. Could you please translate some of this for me? I think it says that Mother Teresa's father was Aromanian (Vlach). Just so you know, I don't have an agenda here - I am not trying to say that he was not Albanian, I just think it is an interesting fact. Thanks BalkanFever 11:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- It says that someone named Stojan Trencevski had a document proving that her father represented the aromanians in the assembly of Skopje , and that people in macedonia have no doubt that Mother Tersea was albanian but they were also sure that her father wasn't , but that he was Aromanian .
Anyway that is all it says about her father
But it also says that the argument : "The surname Bojaxhi in albanian means "painter" , so he must be albanian" , doesn't "work" because the albanians borrowed "Bojaxhi" from turkish and so did the aromanians , so he could be aromanian aswell . But anyway , it stops with this and it doesn't really conclude if he was aromanian or not --Cradel 12:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
THANKS
... for your help with the names / colours thing. And I love your userbox that states London is the greatest city in the world! Thanks again, Katie ( Let's talk!! ) 16:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Re: Kosovo cities
I've noticed that the order of the names, and the names in general in the beginning have been changed. This, is actually considered vandalism, unlike my edits. In this issue, there was already a consensus, and I discussed it with another user just to be sure - the rule stays in place. As for Kosovo in general, just because the United States with a few other countries have recognized, does not make a difference. They aren't in the UN even, and have no say. Maybe you should go around changing the Transnistria articles as well? Actually, go. Good luck, --Bolonium (talk) 00:13, 23 February 2008 (UTC)