User talk:Antidote/Archive2

Anyway, I cleared the talk page and put it in the Archive above since it was getting pretty lengthy. I also wish to personalize my User page as many people have been doing. I am unfortunately, a bit ignorant as to how to do that. If anyone can give me a pointer or even add something on here that would make it look, for lack of a better word, "pretty", please do so!

Nice userpage

Wikipedia:Babel templates are nice and easy to use - check them out! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 13:17, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Sources for Helena Rasiowa

Hello. Good work on Helena Rasiowa, and thanks for the contribution. However, you did not provide any references or sources in the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. Can you list in the article any websites, books, or other sources that will allow people to verify the content in Helena Rasiowa? You can simply add links, preferably as inline citations, or see citation templates for different citation methods. Thanks!--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 13:17, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Tnx. If you used any of those sites as references, please include them in a 'References' section. 'See also' are for related articles on Wikipedia, while 'external links' are for related sites off-Wiki, which were NOT used as references (just like 'Further reading' is for offline sources that may be relevant but were not used by article creators). It may be confusing at first, but should become clear after you try it a few times. Tnx again, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 21:37, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd be glad to help, but I'd recommend posting any help request at a wider forum for quicker responce. For Polish-releated issues, try Wikipedia_talk:Polish_Wikipedians'_notice_board.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 17:29, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Tchaikovsky Ukrainian??

You'll notice I reverted your edit. Firstly, Ukraine was simply a part of Russia in T's day, not a separate nation as it is now. So even if he had strong Ukrainian links (which I hotly dispute), he would still have been considered Russian. But I've never read anything to suggest that T had any knowledge of the Ukrainian language, culture or people. Some of his forbears may have come from that part of Russia - although his father certainly didn't and his mother was of French extraction - but he was born in Russia, as a Russian, speaking Russian, identifying as Russian in all respects. That makes him Russian and nothing but Russian, in my book. It may be OK to state that he had some Ukrainian ancestors, and French (d'Assier), and German (Keiser), but to assert that he was, even in part, a Ukrainian composer is just wrong. I'll stand corrected if you can produce some documentary evidence for your claim. Cheers and Merry Xmas. JackofOz 05:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Oh, and please see my comments from yesterday on this same subject at T's talk page.

Yup, I responded on your talk page, and Merry Christmas to you too! I appreciate some holiday cheer. Antidote

I'm responding on Tchaikovsky's talk page, where I've copied your response. Please meet me there. JackofOz 09:19, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

List of Jewish inventors

Hello, I've noticed that you are in the process of verifying residents of this list and posting your findings on the talk page. That is laudable, but it would be even better if you could add footnotes and references for inventors that you have proven to deserve inclusion on the list. It is essential to have proven verification for every person on the list, otherwise new editors will essentially repeat the steps you are already taking. It will also act as a guide for future contributors. Thanks very much. -- JJay 00:16, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Yea, I'll try to do that too. Antidote

Lists

Hi Antidote. Thanks for the comment.

I hate lists generally. I think that they are particularly bad when on a controversial topic, and I for one think that jew is a controversial topic, not only because of their persecution over such things as the holocaust and then with such hugely controversial things as the Israel-Palestine conflict, but also because of their definition of what is a Jew, which includes religion, ethnicity and cultural issues. Its just too controversial. African American is much the same. It is not remotely clearly defined, and I think that there's too much hostility with these lists.

That being said, I don't care too much about it, so I don't really want to edit these things anymore. I am getting stalked in relation to this stuff, so that's about all that I want to do with it. My only interest in this was to right an injustice and to give advice to help newbies in trouble. That's enough for me. I am sorry, but I don't want to get involved with it anymore. Its just too distressing for me. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 08:18, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

No. I would not vote. I am sorry. I was very reluctant to get involved in this to begin with. I think that everyone involved should work towards working together, not apart. But I am not convinced that this is possible over such a controversial topic. If its clearly defined, make it a category, which would be much less controversial because then the issue is with individual articles, and we can handle it case by case. If its not clearly defined, then no list. But look I really don't want to get involved. Sorry. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 08:24, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong. I think that the whole AFD process is wrong. Go read my sub page on it: User:Zordrac/deletions if you want my views on the whole thing. But I'm certainly not Deletionist, as I explain in User:Zordrac#Which Wikipedia philosophy?. :) Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 08:30, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

The vast majority of lists I've seen in AFDs have been deleted. The prevailing attitude is that they shouldn't exist. "listcruft" is often used. Its probably up there with band vanity as the most likely to be deleted type of article. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 08:43, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: an old afd

Yes I support another afd for list of Jewish historians. It's just anti-semitic listcruft, and I think sufficient time has elapsed between the last one and now. Graham/pianoman87 talk 08:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

You can put it up, as you have tried to compromise with the editors of the article. I only found it on special:newpages patrol. Graham/pianoman87 talk 08:58, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Wo, can you tell me what has been done to resolve the dispute at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Antidote? I don't want to be dragged into the debate. I only afded articles which 80.230.125.193 had been a major contributor to, and I chose not to drag myself too far into the debate. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Jewish heads of High Schools for my reasoning. I'm honestly feeling more uncomfortable now ... but my deletionist instinct is kicking in, so you can still nominate it. Just take note of these comments. Graham/pianoman87 talk 09:34, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, there has been much controversy over Jewish lists because a group of users were having problems with WP:OWN and listmania with them. I've been attempting to reform them and found myself with accusations such as those presented there which have usually been misinterpreted (sometimes purposely so) to make it seem as vandalism etc. I have asked that no other people on Wikipedia I know vote in any of my afds to resolve possible accusation of double voting. Antidote 09:39, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

OK. Ironically, that seemed to have happened with user:RachelBrown as well. Incidents like that highlight the problems with using only the IP address as evidence in a dispute. Graham/pianoman87 talk 09:55, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I'll renomominate it, to settle this matter once and for all. Now the list is completely redundant. Graham/pianoman87 talk 10:02, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

afd

Nomination completed at wikipedia:articles for deletion/List of Jewish historians 2. I didn't know about the afdx template when composing the nomination, but it seems to have turned out OK. Graham/pianoman87 talk 10:21, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

The list actually was a list of Jewish heads of universities, which was even more scary. And only Jewish heads of prominent universities. I spotted it on newpages patrol, and marked it for deletion straight away. It didn't exist for long ... Graham/pianoman87 talk 10:33, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

What is with the obsession with lists of Jews? According to the definitions of Jews listed on wikipedia, it would make just as much sense to have a list of Australian musicians of third-generation Italian descent. Wp:beans seems to apply here though. Graham/pianoman87 talk 10:47, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

And on musicians, there's a list of Jewish musicians, and its associated lists. This is depressing ... Graham/pianoman87 talk 10:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Demographic history of Vojvodina

"I'm wondering where you found those Vojvodina historical population statistics and if you could possibly find one for Serbia and Bosnia too."

I found it in several sources, but most of it here:

• http://www.rastko.org.yu/istorija/srbi-balkan/djuric-curcic-kicosev-vojvodina.html

I do not know where can you find a historical population statistics for Serbia and Bosnia. Try here (I did not read that article, but it have some interesting statistics):

• http://www.rastko.org.yu/istorija/srbi-balkan/spasovski-kicosev-zivkovic-sfry.html

Also here (you have there several articles about Serbian history and demographics):

• http://www.rastko.org.yu/istorija/index.html

PANONIAN (talk) 10:55, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

---

This one is for Bosnia:

• http://www.rastko.org.yu/istorija/srbi-balkan/spasovski-zivkovic-stepic-bosnia.html

PANONIAN (talk) 11:25, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

---

Wikipedia:Three-revert rule

You have been blocked for 24 hours for a violation of the three revert rule on List of Ukrainians. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. Izehar 13:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

You were reported at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR#User:Antidote and your Block log reveals that you have been blocked for a 3RRvio on the same article before. Izehar 14:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

List of Ukrainians

You should take care not to blind revert articles, as this causes collateral damage. You've revered my recent edits of this article, probably not even bothering to read them. I'm sorry but this is vandalism, regardless of who is right in your edit wars with other editors. --Lysy ^(talk) 19:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

No I didn't revert your edits back because your edits were all on the disputed names. Look for yourself. Antidote 19:04, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Translation help

OK, Alas is probably the most famous Serbian mathematician, and we need his article on English Wikipedia. I will try to translate the article tomorrow. BTW, where did you dig up Alas (where did the interest for him came from), I'm just curious? -- Obradović Goran (ta^lk 21:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi! I finished my translation of the article about Alas from Serbian Wikipedia. Now you could go through it, and fix the grammar. When you read the article, you may find that it lacks data about his scientific work. While I was translating the article, I talked over IRC with the guy who wrote it (he is a collegue of mine from the Faculty of Mathematics in Belgrade). We agreed that for the foreign reader, this info (scientific work) would be more interesting, than his extensive biography, that existed in Serbian language article. Serbian article is written in this fashion because Alas is well known in Serbia, not only as a mathematician, but as prominent public figure as well, and most Serbian readers are more interested in reading about his life, than about differential equations :]. We agreed, however, that this article needs to be expanded with more info about Alas's work. When we find time, someone of us will do some research, and add this info. -- Obradović Goran (ta^lk 02:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Talk:List_of_Poles#Historical_territory_vs._current_territory

Hi, I left a comment at the List of Poles article's talk page. Could you give your opinion? Thanks.--SylwiaS | talk 09:39, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the list of artists is too long, I agree. We can have some other list, not of painters. Maybe sculptors or a more general list of artists. I can select them as soon as I stop waisting time on the fruitless discussions about people who are not Poles by any streach. As to the Germans. How about a compromise? People like Farenheit whose parents simply immigrated to Poland because for many reasons they considered living in Poland better than in Germany, will stay on the list. It was their own decision to move here. People whose parents moved to Poland when it was occupied, means they moved here thinking of the towns as of new German territory, can be listed on a list Germans born on German occupied Polish territory.--SylwiaS | talk 19:24, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

We may write that Farenheit had German parents. No problem. As well as we may write that Hevelius's parents were Czech if I remember correctly. As to the list of artists, that's exactly what I though. Maybe I wasn't clear. The list of painters is ok. The general list of Poles should include only the most famous people. In all the cathegories artists included.--SylwiaS | talk 21:03, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I'll work on the list, maybe tomorrow. In fact many really good artists don't have their articles yet, while some not really special have. It seems rather accidental that someone has their article.--SylwiaS | talk 21:39, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I know that you prefer to stay neutral, but just to be fair I want to let you know that I started a voting there. I hope it will solve the case.--SylwiaS | talk 12:21, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Henry David Thoreau

hi antidote -- can you reference your inclusion of Thoreau as a cat lover? I can't recall having read anything like that. Thanks. bikeable (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

List of Ukrainians

Hello, Antidoe, I'm sorry for having protected the page list of Ukrainians in the wrong version twice. I know that this must be very annoying for you, even if you are acting in good faith and I believe you are (despite what has been said about you). I still think that you should make the duplicate article - those who oppose it will have little reason to feel disgruntled and will just have to explain their reasons for doing so. If they can't (or won't), then I will unprotect the page ASAP. I would revert the page to your version, except I am not allowed to: WP:PPol. Let's hope that Pecher co-operates, and if he doesn't, then I'd recommend and RfC on the subject. I'm sure that Pecher is acting out of good faith, but these disputes always create bitter feelings on both sides. We're hoping something can be worked out. BTW what is your native language, your infobox doesn't have a NL userbox? Izehar 00:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Looks like Izehar is on the job for this one, so I'll let him supervise this edit war. Hope it all works out peacefully. howcheng {chat} 07:43, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Where was the consensus reached?

It makes a very big difference because if Sylwia's version of the introduction stays, then those with Polish family names get deleted. So you want to stay neutral? Sylwia has changed the introduction again, where was the vote? Who enforces this? Even if you choose to remain neutral you should still approve a vote first. Informationguy

Consensus is now reached

I ask again, am I allowed to post on the talk page, and am I allowed to post on the article because of the voting results? Informationguy

fine arts

Why are you adding now the artists I moved yesterday?--SylwiaS | talk 01:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Alas portrait

It is so nice of you that you uploaded this portrait of Mihailo Petrović Alas. However, I'm afraid that photo of this portrait by Uroš Predić is not yet under public domain. Predić died in in 1953. This photo might go under fair use, but User:Djordjes (who wrote the article about Alas in Serbian), said that he knows about some older (famous) picture of Alas, and that he will upload it tomorrow. I will remowe PD tag from the photo for now, and later we should decide what to do with this file. Cheers -- Obradović Goran (ta^lk 03:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, by the look of the Alas, I would say that it is painted after 1928. I don't know which picture is more famous. We will wait for tomorrow, and see about that other picture. -- Obradović Goran (ta^lk 03:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

• Hi, Antidote. You can see Alas photo (1905. year, public domain) on commons. Name of picture is Mihailo_Petrovic.jpg. If you wish, in future I can write somethig about other serbian mathematics (for example Bogdan Gavrilović, Đuro Kurepa, Dragoslav Mitrinović, Nikolaj Saltikov, Anton Bilimović etc.) in Serbian, and Goran can translate it in english. In this time we have nice biography of Dimitrije Nešić (sr:Димитрије Нешић) in serbian. Best regards. --Djordjes 23:30, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Just to tell you that I am translating the article on Ognjeslav, and may help you with Alas after that. Nikola 07:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Slika?

Hello. I noticed that you are dealing with those pictures on the Serbs; so I am asking you to do me a favour. Could you please make a same picture like present on the Serbs article; but with Ruđer Bošković, Svetozar Boroević, Milutin Milanković and Nikola Tesla? I need it for Serbs of Croatia. --HolyRomanEmperor 12:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry for becoming abusive. I've been bad-tempered for other reasons and the shock after you re-added him made me boxed out of my mind. I'm much against adding figures worldwidely detested as representative of Germans. For your information the article you showed had a similar-devastating edit conflict. I'm all for the combination you proposed and your behaviour.Engel der Vorstädte 01:10, 13 January 2006 (UTC) Mozart is not bad. Only Hitler and Einstein should be averted. What about Luther?Engel der Vorstädte 01:17, 13 January 2006 (UTC) Can you change the picture showing Goethe to Image:Goethe.png ?Engel der Vorstädte 01:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC) I would say Kepler but don't count on my neutrality, I've never liked Physics :)Engel der Vorstädte 01:24, 13 January 2006 (UTC) Appears to be reasonable. Thanks.Engel der Vorstädte 01:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC) Eww no idea. I'll try searching the web.Engel der Vorstädte 01:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

scottish people changes

i find it appauling that you would revert my work on statistics for the scottish people page...first of all...the figures you reverted back to have no statistical merit whatsoever....how there be 5 million people in Scotland and another 5 million in the United Kingdom when there are no sources that ever showed that...the Census didn't even show a figure close to that...granted there may be many in the rest of the UK (england, wales etc) that may have Scottish roots but this has not been shown in the census...second Australia have not declared itself to have 5 million Aussies of Scottish descent...according to the Census of 2001, the largest reported ancestries were Australia 6.4 million, English 6.4 million and Irish 1.9 million...Scottish came hovering around the 0.5 million mark (500,000)....don't believe me...check the Australian Bureau of Statistics...and look under Census Ancestry results...there have been no reports to suggest that there are 1 million people in Brazil of Scottish background....actually most of that was copied from an earlier version of the Irish people page...and I was told to have them removed if I can not give sources....give wikipedia some more credibility and for now stick to using sources and less estimation from thin air70.30.71.252 01:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

The point of returning them was so we could at least have a basis for researching these numbers. See my comment in Talk:Scottish ethnicity Antidote

Ahh, could you think of another box that could be applied just like ethnic groups to Serbs of Croatia (and you put it?) Also, I don't want to sound like a pain in the ass, but must we have a drawing of Milutin? --HolyRomanEmperor 13:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I like the picture of Milutin found on List of Serbs: File:Srbs3.jpg. Also, is there any way to create something similiat to the box (so that I can present all the states populated by Serbian Frontiersmen)? --HolyRomanEmperor 23:53, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Stevan Hristić

I think User:Obradovic Goran would be glad to help you with this. A very similar article exists on sr:Стеван Христић so you can point him there. --Elephantus 16:28, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the image very much :) . I only noticed that it previously contained Ruđer Bošković, but no longer. What happenned, was the image deleted? --HolyRomanEmperor 22:37, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, User:Elephantus has yet to prove that. Ruđer is found on the pic at the List of Serbs; and is present there, as well as on the Serbs article. The main problem is that both Croatian and Serbian factions claim him, and his detaled heritage comes only from Serbian nationalist sources. I don't see that Elephantus' personal opinions are relevant enough to remove him from the picture, as the discussion was held at his talk page; and confirmed his Serbian identity at User_talk:Joy long ago. Unfortunatly, Elephantus has re-opened an old wound, and edit wars are bound to come up again. :S --HolyRomanEmperor 22:49, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

The picture should also contain Jovan Karamata; if you really feel that you won't involve into Elephantus' long disputes, you could simply replace him with Jovan. Thanks in advance! --HolyRomanEmperor 22:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

How come u r interested in Croatian Serbs :)? Luka Jačov 01:44, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Norwegians

I think you got the list wrong in the photo grouping. You currently have it as Amundsen, Bjerknes, Ingstad, St. Olav. I think you actually have two pictures of Amundsen in there unless the first one is Ingstad. I know for sure the third one is Amundsen and obviously the last one is St. Olav. Just was wondering if you could clear it up since the current order of names is a little confusing. 69.157.109.6 12:00, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Stevan Hristic

I will do it as soon as possible, my friend! :) --HolyRomanEmperor 13:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Stevan Hristić

There; satisfied, my friend? Stevan Hristić --HolyRomanEmperor 14:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes. You may do that. Regardless that he is considered a famous Croatian, he is also a famous Serb. :) --HolyRomanEmperor 16:43, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Croats

I say we remove the Genetics and Cuisine sections, as they are inappropriate to the article in question. What do you think? Antidote 20:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Mu. IOW, Cuisine can be moved to Croatian culture (is there one?), but Genetics currently has no place to rest, and you will probably create an edit war by removing it. The real solution is to expand the article and create Origin of Croats, but I don't have time & energy to do it. In the meantime, I prefer to leave it as it is now.Duja 20:33, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

About the Image:Slavs.jpg

Hi, someone pointed this image out to me because it's somewhat "dodgy" fair use. Just to sum up the problems:

• It's tagged as {{bookcover}}, but it doesn't say from what book. The source given is not much help because it doesn't show the image used in any context and it doesn't give any info on who actualy own the copyright.
• One of the key points of the fair use doctrine (as we apply it) is to use low-resolution images. While this image is fairly big (yeah I know "low resolution" is relative, but 1846x2049 is a tad over your average "web resolution").
• Asuming it is a bookcover we are only supposed to use it to ilustrate the book in question (says so right on the tag).

So to sum up. If it is a bookcover it can't rely be used in the Slavic peoples article, not unless there is at least some commentary on the book itself in the article. If it's just a painting that happened to be included in a book somewhere it can be used a bit more freely (but still only for "critical commentary", and not merely decoration), but then it should use the {{Non-free fair use in|Slavic peoples}} tag (and a fair use rationale). However it will need some source info (as in how painted it, just pointing to a file in a directory listing isn't rely all that helpfull). And in either case the image should probably be reduced somewhat in size. I won't claim to be an expert on this, but this is my understanding on how fair use (is supposed to) work, if you have any spesific questions Wikipedia talk:Fair use might be a good place to ask. --Sherool (talk) 14:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: Ukrainians and Poles

I apologize for revising the established images for Ukrainians and Poles. I felt that John Paul II would be a nice addition to the Polish compilation since many consider him a famous Pole. I didn't mean to make a political statement or anything by swapping Sergey Korolyov with Yushchenko. I only added him because of how well he is recognized here in the West. I didn't mean to offend anyone. I restored the Ukrainian image (I meant to do it once, but I accidentally did it twice). With your permission, however, I would like to revert the Polish image back to my original because I feel that the former Pope ought to be recognized in that particular section. If you think it's fine the way it is, then we'll just leave like that.

Again, no hard feelings, I didn't mean anything by my edits. Clevelander 19:39, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Images

I have found images that you could put on Serbs of Croatia! and File:Valtazar Bogisic.jpg

Marko Car was the initiator of a movement to convert all Catholic Serbs to Orthodox Christians; while I do not know much about Balthazzar Bogišić, I do know that he was a writer. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:39, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

What can you tell me about those two? (Marko Car and Balthazzar) Or better, could you write and article about them? I will translate that from Croatian wikipedia, my friend; as soon as possible! --HolyRomanEmperor 14:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Get in touch

Get in touch [email protected] I have few questions on how you do this. I have to report some vandalism too...

I think you posted on the wrong talk page buddy. I didn't edit anything on George Reeves. Antidote

Number of Poles in Germany

I don't think it is feesable to include only proven figures from census in the template. In some cases no such figures are available. Please compare with the other such articles, like French people, German people. Quite some of them are only estimates as well there. That is espacially necessary concerning France, because the French census forbids to ask for ancestry or ethnicity. --Lucius1976 23:43, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, today I have extended the Battle of Kiev (1941) page considerably. Believe didń't turn out badly, but the grammar could need some improvement I guess. --Lucius1976 00:02, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

What about Marko Car? Who was he? --HolyRomanEmperor 13:06, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

List of Poles

I admit I didn't check the article's history before editing. I'll try to add them back. Thanks for spotting it.--SylwiaS | talk 21:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

deletions for famous people lists...

Hi Antidote. I'm sorry I didn't consult anyone. I didn't think anyone would mind. I deleted the red links for several reasons. I was working on the German Americans page for 3 days straight adding the occupations and what people were famous for next to their red link names for oganization. I didn't want to delete them for the specific purpose that you mentioned. Many people came to the agreement on that page that it would be in our best interest if we deleted the red links to shorten the page. Therefore I didn't think anyone would mind on Czech and Poles to do the same thing considering its a low traffic page. Also I feel the red links make the articles excruciatingly long. That is why I waited a week or two before I did it. I noticed people werent filling up the red links so I just went along and did it. Also the people usually with red links are not as influential as people with full pages otherwise they would have had a page. I feel that a lot of time it's just names on the page which make the article super long and end up turning people away. For sports there seem to be ten thousand red link baseball players without pages. Even with the removal of all the red links the list is still pretty big. I don't know if it's necessary to name every single Polish professional baseball player. Do you see what I mean? Also a few red links I didn't delete. For inventions I left all the red links because if they invented something I figured time would fill those guys in along with others like "Olympic gold metalist" etc.

I think it would be beneficial to keep the most influential people on the lists. Let me know what you think.

JJstroker 02:10, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Quote:However, once the red links are filled up, it is absolutely necessary to prune the lists to only include the most famous representatives. End quote

Yeah I agree with everything you said. I just think it would be beneficial to delete the less famous people first to save time for everyone. I was monitoring the czech and poles pages for a while and noticed that not many people have been filling up the red links. I like your idea of moving all the red links together at the bottom of the page. I dont think people would mind even if it is against wiki policy. That may be an incentive for people to get them filled up. Up to you though I think we should still prune it a bit to make life easier around here. Also by deleting the links I would hope for it to encourage people to make a page for the individual immediately when they decide to add them on wiki. Anyways you have my support.

JJstroker 02:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Alright great, let me know if you need anything. :) We can also propose to segregate the red links in the page discussions.

JJstroker 03:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

• I would say the deletion on List of Czechs was quite stop on. Most of the names are not much known and the list is not list of everyone. (There were few exceptions as Mikolas Ales.) Pavel Vozenilek 02:11, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

All the people on the list should be real and at least bit known - the list is watched over. The times when the list was short and every new biography was automatically added here (I did it too) are over, though. I am in favor of radical cleanup and adding links to relevant categories to the end of each sublist to replace the deleted names. Pavel Vozenilek 02:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I would do the cleanup myself but I am too short on time. I tried to engage others but apparently they are not better in this regard. Personally, I would keep JJstroker's delete. Pavel Vozenilek 02:30, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, you you will prune the list down, more power to you. There's real problem that no one volunteerd for this - adding is easy, deleting hard (when one tried to do it right). Pavel Vozenilek 02:42, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Sima Lozanić

Done! Someone should also transfer images, fix the userbox and recategorize (I just translated categories but did not actually verify whether they exist in English Wikipedia...

--Aleksandar Šušnjar 17:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Привет! Я немного понимаю по русский - плохо говорю. ... just realized how you got to read cyrillic... If you're interested in that, just few short notes that will make it a lot easier for you:

Serbian does not have "dual sound" letters such as Я, Е, Ю, and Ё - all have exactly one sound. No мяакий/твёрдий знак either. Мяакий got fused with the letters it applies to. For example, НЬ is Њ and ЛЬ is Љ. Serbian "Е" does not have the "Й" at the beginning of a russian one - just the second half of it. Simple map of differences:

Vowels and Ј:

• О - always pronouced as "О", never as "А"
• Е - does not have the "Й" at the beginning
• И - does not have the "Й" at the beginning, as "ee" in English
• Ј - Russian "Й"

Fusion of мяакий знак :

• Љ - ЛЬ
• Њ - НЬ
• Ћ - ЧЬ
• Ђ - ДЬ

Other:

• Џ - ДЖ pronounced as a single sound, like "G" in "George" but harder.
• Х - Serbian sound is slightly softer than Russian
• Serbian does not exactly have Щ, Ы, ТЬ and other softened letters although we can pronounce it. This is why russian generally seems almost as "soft, nice, gentle, baby talk spoken strongly" to Serbs.

--Aleksandar Šušnjar 18:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

List of Eastern European Jews

Hi,

I'm sorry, I haven't noticed that Dahn has already separated the pages and you reverted them. I put a long answer on Talk:List of East European Jews, so that the discussion will continue on that page, not on our talk pages; hopefully more people will voice their opinion about this.

regards,

Alensha 14:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Paja_Jovanovic.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Paja_Jovanovic.jpg. 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. --OrphanBot 08:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

?

You haven't informed me about Marko Car. :S --HolyRomanEmperor 00:06, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Milla Jovovich images

Hello, I have removed both of your images from the article as the first Image:Jovov.jpg you replaced for a free use image, and the second Image:28 mila.jpg has a falsely stated source. Regards Arniep 16:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

a site that does not indicate who the creator was or who the copyright holder is not an acceptable source. Arniep 20:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

it's nothing to do with whether I like the images or not. Any source which does not state the creator or copyright holder is not acceptable. Arniep 20:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

one of the images seems to be reasonably notable in that it was her first cover shoot for a magazine (Lei, Italian) in 1987. If you give these links as sources that should be acceptable [1] [2] Regards Arniep 20:35, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Also some information would need to be added to the article about it being her first cover shoot etc. Arniep 20:36, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello I have reworked the article, and readded the free image (which was kindly donated by a Hungarian photographer). Regards Arniep 00:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Free images should be at the top, and fair use images if really have to be used should be smaller and less prominent. Which articles have you found that don't follow this? Arniep 01:35, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Two people

You asked me about two people ... Maybe you wanted to ask HolyRomanEmperor as you started with "Holy" but doesn't matter - I answered it on my talk page. --Aleksandar Šušnjar 04:45, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Abrasevic is very known, there are a lot of schools named after him, for example. I can't find out who is Rastko Popovic, probably there are several people with the same name, some of which may be notable. Nikola 08:57, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

List of Ukrainian mathematicians

Почему ты удалил некоторых математиков из List of Ukrainian mathematicians???

Если ты удалил секции, нужно было удалить и шаблон CompactTOC2--Ahonc 18:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Mileva Marić

Did you asked me about Mileva Marić because I included her into Serbs article? As for her importance, it is thought that she is greatly "responsible" for many Albert Einsteins achievements. As for her inclusion into Serbs article, I do not insist to include her. If you want to leave her there, leave her, if you want to erase her, erase her, you decide this, ok? PANONIAN (talk) 01:03, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Will do. If you didn't notice, I'm a litte busy these past few days. In the mean-time, I've got something to ask you myself: could you put the picture of Patriarch Pavle as the last on the picture of the Serbs of Croatia? Thanks in advance! --HolyRomanEmperor 22:35, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Request for edit summary

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labelled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you.

– Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 21:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

What article is this in reference to? I often leave very explanative edit summaries? Antidote 00:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

---

I am very sorry, but my translations will be late. And yet another picture do I have to ask you to put on the Serbs of Croatia :S (sorry! don't do it if you haveb't got any time): Rade Šerdedžija. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:00, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the help on List of Czechs. Pavel Vozenilek 13:55, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey, you could also help with Bosnian Serbs. --HolyRomanEmperor 00:15, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Belgradenight.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Belgradenight.jpg. 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 indicate why 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, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then 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 want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 14:22, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Jovanovic_Ranjeni_Crnogorac.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jovanovic_Ranjeni_Crnogorac.jpg. 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 18:13, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Decanska_street.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Decanska_street.jpg. 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 indicate why 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, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then 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 want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 09:50, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Request for edit summary

Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 11% for major edits and 34% for minor edits. (Based on the last 150 major and 88 minor edits in the article namespace.)

This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear impolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 06:01, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Sources for GFDL

How do you source an image you or someone you know made? Your bot says I need a source. Thanks. ~~Antidote

The GFDL requires that the author's copyright statement be included with the image. For images you created yourself, the template {{GFDL-self}} should be used. For images that other people created and have released under the GFDL, use the template {{GFDL}}, and put the author's copyright statement (something like "Copyright (c) 2006 Joe Smith") underneath. --Carnildo 08:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Lists of Czechs

Thanks, this was just start. I think in the future a split will be necessary - currently I can count number of Czech editors on fingers of both hands. When it gets more popular unevitable explosion will happen. Pavel Vozenilek 12:20, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Predic_2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Predic_2.jpg. 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 03:54, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Fejes_Basel.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Fejes_Basel.jpg. 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 indicate why 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, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then 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 want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 05:04, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Stevan_Hristic.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Stevan_Hristic.jpg. 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 20:37, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

January Koželuh

Could you please ask to speedy delete this redirect? It has no meaning, it is never used and certainly it has nothing to do with the composer. Pavel Vozenilek 23:53, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Neither German not Polish. I known no language where January is used as a name.

About Austrians/Jews/Germans: I do not agree. The list should contain people who had made significant cultural contribution to the Czech lands, regardless of ethnicity associated to them today. The term "Czech" had different meanings over time. The current meaning - a person speaking Slavic language - had crystallized some 150 years ago, before it was term used for all inhabitants of Czech Kingdom. The term Czech Germans (or Bohemian Germans) was commonly used until 1920s-30s.

I my pruning I remove only people who didn't spend time in Czech lands or didn't have much of influence there (some post-WWII emigrants are exception). Defining by ethicity is somehow reliable only during 20th century, before it was usually unknown issue. Classifying someone as Jew is also questionable - before WWII they often defined themselves in terms of German culture, those surviving accomodated Czech culture.

Question of ethnicity is quite complex in the area of Czech lands. Geographical criterium is clear and beyond disputes and IMHO most useful. Pavel Vozenilek 23:52, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Mendel: born/lived in Moravia, where half of people spoke German (Boehmisch Deutsch). The current characterisation as Austrian is rather misleading.

The current classification of Czechs still need to be fine tuned, there are no people interested in it. Pavel Vozenilek 23:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Austrians/Germans born in Czechia are no more Czech than American-born Czechs..'

The were not Austrians/Germans in current sense. They (like Mendel) were born in Czech Kingdom which had two nations (Czech Germans/Cesti Nemci/Boemische Deutsche + Czechs/Cesi/Tschechische) and two official languages (after half of 18th century). Mendel spend his life in Moravia, Freud did not and until 1920s is was not much known here. Birthplace was much less significant at past times than now, in age of passports. Pavel Vozenilek 00:36, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

American-born Czech is rather strange creature - the relation to Czech lands/language dissapears in first or second generation of emigrants into US. Currently, there are only few small and dying organisations of people in the US who regard themselves as Czechs (or American-Czechs). I do not consider nostalgic searching for ancestor's roots as reason for "czechness" (and I do consider neither Czech sounding name). Pavel Vozenilek 00:36, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

The 1.2 million of US Czechs is taken out of blue sky. Unlike, say Poles, the pre-war and post-war emigrants had little or no connection with Czechoslovakia (also because of disinterest or outright hostility from Czechoslovakian side) and felt no need to care about the "old fatherland". From time to time, journals here in the Czech Republic write about a gathering of Czechs in the US and it is something so exotic, almost unbelievable to exist. My guesstimate is that the number is much, much smaller and if it is 100,000 I would open my mouth wide.

What regards Antonín Slavíček (a definitely well known name), I will try, depending on time and stamina. I waste way too much of time in the hopeless struggle with vandals and this eats all my energy. Pavel Vozenilek 01:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Emerik Feješ revert query

Hi Antidote. I am curious why you reverted my edit to Emerik Feješ from postcard back to the disambiguation page postcards. Is there another meaning of postcards that should be mentioned on that disambig page that this reference should then point to? I changed a number of wikilinks last night from postcards to postcard where they used a lower-case 'p'. As several were from artist pages, it is quite possible I do not understand an art-world meaning of "postcards" that is not appropriate to change to "postcard". Cheers. --Scott Davis ^Talk 23:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

No worries. Thankyou. I was concerned I had missed another meaning. Cheers. --Scott Davis ^Talk 00:11, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

American-Czechs

Just getting curious I looked up page [3] (in Czech) about Czechs in the USA, from Ministry of Foreigh Affairs of the Czech Republic. It says:

• In US statistics from 1990 1,3 mil claim to be of Czech ancestry, 300,000 of Czechoslovakian ancestry.
• Most of them don't know Czech language.
• There are 166 organisations of "Czechs" in the US, most of them small and not connected with each other. In New York state with 80,000 people of Czech ancestry around 2,500 are somehow active.
• Czech Republic occasionally gives a grants to some of these organisations, typically in $10,000 - $30,000 range, so their activities look rather limited.

The text mentions few names, of people who feels as Czechs (second and next generations), none has article in Wiki.

Miloš Forman, Karel Husa, Ivana Trump, Paulina Porizkova are first generation emigrants listed in Wikipedia. There is Category:Czech-Americans that cries to be pruned. Pavel Vozenilek 02:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Communities in Brazil and Argentina had dissapeared (I read about these people meeting regularly during 1950s, nothing about them later). There are smaller groups in South Africa and Western Europe but Czechs generally quickly assimilate (in language and culture), as did happen in say Austria - Vienna once hosted hundreths of thousands of Czech workers and was de-facto the largest "Czech" city (gone but few). Groups in former Soviet Union, former Yugoslavia and Romania are either very small or moved back to the Czech Republic. Pavel Vozenilek 02:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

More on Categories

Hello, Yid. You've made some constructive contributions in category making, but as stated above categories like Category:Jewish composers and songwriters are slightly redundant (not to mention bulking up the subject article pages). My suggestion would be to move all composers into Category:Jewish classical musicians and all songwriters/mainstream musicians into Category:Jewish musicians, then have Category:Jewish composers and songwriters either be speedily deleted or renamed into something else. I'll help with the moving if you agree. Antidote

That's fine with me. I'm sorry for all the mess. However, most of the names are either on Category:Jewish classical musicians or Category:Jewish musicians. So I'll just look through each name, if it's not in the other category and remove it from Jewish composers and songwriters, and if it is just remove it from Jewish composers and songwriters. Yid613 20:20, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Come to think of it, since the Jewish composers and songwriters will be deleted anyway, I'll just go through the list and add Category:Jewish classical musicians and Category:Jewish musicians to those who don't have it already, and tell you when I'm done. Will save a lot of work. Thanks. Yid613 20:22, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Nooo don't do that. The problem is that people who were really mainly songwriters or composers are also listed in the Classical musicians category. The solution is just to remove the songwriters and composers from the musicians category unless they really were also well known as a classical musician. Arniep 20:33, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I haven't done anything, only looking through the category entries right now. But I think the three of us should work out what consensus solution we want before we do anything. Yid613 20:50, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Idea A) Make a Category:Jewish composers and simply put all the composers in there. Then change the Category:Jewish classical musicians into only including classical musicians (violinists etc). As for songwriters...isn't a songwriter a musician? That would just go into Category:Jewish musicians. Category:Jewish composers and songwriters is a weird combination. Technically both Neil Diamond and Arnold Schoenberg belong in that category. How about just renaming Category:Jewish composers and songwriters to Category:Jewish composers??? This way almost every person only ends up having one category to fill in (even if they profess greatness at more than one). Antidote 04:45, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey, sorry for the delay. I more or less agree with the proposal above. On one hand, the reason why I created the composers and songwriters category was because I saw that composers and performers were grouped together in Category:Jewish classical musicians and that there was a need to be more specific. On the other hand, it makes sense to say that people should not be in more than one of these categories but only the one to which they are most noted for or worked the most as. Since this is in encyclopedia, every subject that is worthy of an article has to have a certain level of significance, and for people such as musicians it means they have a certain level of accomplishment (feel free to correct this sentence if it is wrong). Therefore, a composer may have played an instrument, but if he is not known for that but rather for his work as a composer, there is no real reason to include him in both a composer category and a classical musicians category. I admit that the composer/songwriter combination is wierd. Granted, there are some people, such as George Gershwin, Kurt Weill, and Jerome Kern, who could be called both. But I have no problem with the above proposal to change the category to "Jewish composers" and have "Jewish classical musicians" have only performers. Thank you both for your patience on this. Yid613 03:54, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Removal of the new picture of Bulgarians

Hi, I started a new topic on the discussion of Bulgarians, but you seem not to have noticed, so I'll post here. What exactly are your criteria which are violated for the picture of 8 bulgarians? You mention something about tags and sources? What do you mean? All 8 persons are Bulgarian, they were all born in Bulgaria and have a reasonable degree of international recognition. I would be glad if you are more specific. Smartech 01:48, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Re:Bosnian Serbs

Well - I want the article done in the same way as Serbs of Croatia. Also, skim through the history - someone removed famous figures, please. Regards! --HolyRomanEmperor 11:54, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Oeser

Hi, I wander what was your reason to remove Adam Friedrich Oeser from the List of Slovaks(?)
Adding edit comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Jurohi 11:48, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

You will find reply on my talk page. Jurohi 06:04, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

List of Czech writers

Hi Antidote! Is there any reason why you removed Norbert Frýd from the List of Czech writers? Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 08:45, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Your recent edit to Miloslav Kabelac was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept our apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 04:24, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Miloslav Kabeláč

Please use the move button to change the name of pages. Cut and page as you did destroy the page history, and requires administrator intervention to be fixed. Thank you, Kusma (討論) 04:31, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Please check that I reverted to the correct version in the end. I think I did, but this is only the second time I am using the "history merge to repair cut and paste move" function, and it still feels a bit weird. Kusma (討論) 04:38, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Prokop Šedivý

Hi Antidote! I've just edited the article about Prokop Šedivý that you recently created. Could you please give a source saying that he wrote The Czech Amazons (1792)? I have consulted several Czech sources but haven't found this work in any of them. Anyway, he wasn't that famous. I've never heard about him at school and many lexicons of Czech literature don't mention him either. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 10:19, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for the source. I wouldn't say he was unimportant. I guess Czechs were particularly proud of his plays during the National Revival era, when there were very few plays and books in Czech. But from today's point of view, his position is the Czech literature is much lower. That's why I changed your sentence in the article into "a significant playwright (...) of the National Revival era," which is undoubtedly true. Anyway, thanks for the new article! If you don't mind, I'll try to keep up with you and occassionally add and/or correct some information in articles about Czech people, esp. writers. Have a nice evening. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 19:55, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:SimaLozanic1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:SimaLozanic1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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. 18:56, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Translations

Greetings, old friend. Please write down on my talk any translation required from the Croatian, Bosnian, Serbian or Serbo-Croatian wikipedia. Now, I've got enough time. Gather a full list, please.

All the best! --HolyRomanEmperor 10:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:EKusturica.jpg

An image that you uploaded, Image:EKusturica.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Teofilo talk 12:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

What happened to all Greeks of Byzantium

They are the modern Greeks. Miskin 23:46, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Poland/New_article_announcements

If you write a Poland-related article, please annouce it at that section. Tnx!--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 18:55, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Jewish cats

Hi, I don't really understand your suggestion to merge these two as many many classical musicians are not composers or songwriters (although many songwriters and composers are known as musicians in their own right). Arniep 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Czech composers

I see you compiled the template Czech composers. I don't know if you are the person who sent a rude message to my disucssion page under an IP address about this template - I hope you are not. But in any case, can you please provide a citation for naming these composers 'The Great Four'?--Smerus 21:44, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not the one who created the template, but I've just searched for some reference in Czech sources. This is an example of what I've found:

"u nás celá velká čtyřka - Smetana, Dvořák, Janáček, Martinů" [4] (translation: in our country the big, or great, four – Smetana, Dvořák, Janáček, Martinů)

Another example can be found here

However, I had never heard the term "velká čtyřka" before myself. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 21:53, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Dear Antidote; There is no encylopaedic justification for calling these composers 'The Great Four'. The citation you give seems to be a 'one-off'(in English, certainly, but this is English Wikipedia). No musical dictionaries or journal seem to use this term. (It is not thus like the 'Kuchka', or 'Mighty Handful' used to describe the group of Russian composers including Modest Mussorgsky). Moreover the use of this box without any explanation or justification in various articles gives the term a specious validation to which it is not entitled. Beacuse it serves no purpose, and because I am not the only one who feels so (see discussion page at Antonin Dvorak), I have deleted it from the articles where it was posted. There is already a Category:Czech composers.--Smerus 08:04, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:KnezMihailova_ped.jpg

Can you please provide a source or a proof that Image:KnezMihailova_ped.jpg "is copyrighted. The copyright holder allows anyone to use it for any purpose." The sourced website claims that " Copyright © 2004-2005 - Totally Belgrade. All rights reserved" --dcabrilo 05:25, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:KnezMihailova_ped.jpg

An image that you uploaded, Image:KnezMihailova_ped.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Fair use rationale for Image:Slavicky.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Slavicky.jpg. The image description 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:05, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Vostrak.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Vostrak.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. 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 qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then 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 media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images 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. howcheng {chat} 18:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SafetPalako.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:SafetPalako.jpg. The image description 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:06, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Maceds.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Maceds.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. 04:06, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Hristofor Zhefarovich

This is ridiculous... so you'd leave him out of any painters and writers categorizing just because you don't want him in three different nationality categories? Initially he was only categorized as a Bulgarian (a clear one) and Serb (he also referred to 'our Serbian motherland'), but Bomac added him to the Macedonian categories due to his place of birth. What's wrong with him being in all three if he considered them a single one and worked for a united South Slavic culture, and he is also thought of as 'theirs' by all three peoples? He's shared by those nationalities as I see it, just like Goce Delchev is categorized as both a Bulgarian and a Macedonian revolutionary (although he never considered himself Macedonian in an ethnic sense, but is regarded as one in the Republic of Macedonia). Todor→Bozhinov 21:06, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not about making the decision, but presenting only the facts — deciding on his nationality when it's somewhat vague may be biased. Of course, it is unlikely he was an ethnic Serb; he was most likely Bulgarian in an ethnic sense and Macedonian in a regional sense. Not sure about putting him in the Macedonian categories, though — seems a bit anachronistic to call him a nationality that didn't exist, and almost certainly wrong when he's never ever referred to himself as a Macedonian. That means only the Bulgarian categories should stay, but I'd like to hear some other opinions since I may be biased (or accused of being biased).

Regarding the List of Bulgarians — it really needs some major work and I'd be happy to help in certain spheres where I have some knowledge and/or interest. Todor→Bozhinov 21:25, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:FamousBG 8.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:FamousBG 8.jpg. The image description 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:05, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Germans

You appear to be edit-warring on Germans. I have asked repeatedly for a reference that Swiss/Austrians may be considered "ethnic Germans" in contemporary ethnography. WP:CITE is policy. This means that you will have to either supply the requested reference, or stand down from reverting. dab (ᛏ) 18:01, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Categories

Hi. When creating articles, please take care of adding categories based on birth (and death) year. See for instance Category:1970 births, Category:1970 deaths. Thanks, Punkmorten 17:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Srbs3.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Srbs3.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. howcheng {chat} 21:13, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Germans

first of all, I asked for a reference, not a web url. Secondly, I grant you that many Austrians may have considered themselves "German" prior to WWII (not the Swiss though, for them, you'd have to go back to before 1500). That's irrelevant, because these infoboxes refer to the present, and not to some point in history. If you read the discussion, you will find that I (and others) question the utility of these ethno-infoboxes. I thus do not feel compelled to answer in which infobox the Swiss 'should be' included. I suppose in a Swiss people article? Of course Swiss German and French speakers form subgroups of those. Who says we need an infobox on every subgroup? Do we have an article on West Midlanders as an ethnic group? As that may be, I am still waiting for a reference categorizing Austrians (let alone Swiss or Dutch) as "Germans". "Germanic", or "West Germanic", yes. "German"? I don't think so. dab (ᛏ) 09:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Would you please stop adding unreferenced nationalism to the Germans article. You are welcome to edit, but in case of the edits you're making references are required. Rex 17:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

you are welcome to propose a straw poll on talk. That would certainly be better than stubborn edit-warring. However, I am afraid we cannot vote on inserting unsourced information. Until you provide the source we've been asking you for, you do not have a case. Present a source, and we'll talk about how to present it. Re "revisionism", revisionism of what? Revisionism of 1930s German foreign policy? You'll be interested to learn that this has indeed been revised over the past 60 years. dab (ᛏ) 17:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Germans

Yes, we can't let ourselves be thrown off historical accuracy. I will find refs which support the truthful, non-revisionist version of the article- then a vote wont be needed. Cheers. Ulritz 15:23, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

great. I wish it wouldn't usually take weeks to impress the utility of citing references on your kind of editor, but I am glad we have reached the stage where you consider consulting a work of reference. Let us know how your research is going. dab (ᛏ) 15:45, 2 August 2006 (UTC)