Userpage	Talk page	E-mail (opened once per year)	Articles	Sources	Gallery	Sandbox	Awards

My Talk Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16

		The Serbia Barnstar of National Merit
		Many thanks for your numerous articles about our WWII history. I appreciate your work and find it quite inspirational. Congratulations! Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 01:55, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sadko, thank you very much.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:49, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, no mistake here. Unfortunately this is just another example of WWII denialism hr wiki is known for. This sort of stuff has not only been built upon for years and years, but also very likely rests on top of systemic bias created by the sources. (I.e. this is very likely source-level whitewash, not cherry-picking by the editors involved.) This is why fixing hr wiki will be very difficult, but one has to start with something. GregorB (talk) 18:55, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your articles are welcome! Hope you're well!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 37, November – December 2019

• #1Lib1Ref
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:09, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have written 17k of text and bibliography to improve a very bad and small article that was all over the place - Hoti and you just deleted it with no excuse other than I "removed cited content". What "cited content did I remove"? The only cited content that is being removed here is 17k of text and bibliography I've written. If you think that I've removed something, please explain to me what it is or add back it yourself and let's discuss this but please don't remove the very careful work I've done. Before I worked on this article it had maybe 5-6 sources of bibliography, now it has over 25. --Maleschreiber (talk) 19:52, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, I've answered your concerns. In short: what you think that might have been removed, hasn't been removed. I have expanded that article. If you think that something on how I presented Durham's account can be written in a better way, you could do that. There's no reason, however, to do that massive deletion you did before of content that is really not about the story Durham recorded. I have also raised some concerns on Talk:Shllaku.--Maleschreiber (talk) 22:55, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to Tribes of Albania.

If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref> and one or more <ref name="foo"/> referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref> but left the <ref name="foo"/>, which results in a big red error in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/> with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any big red error.

If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 20:48, 3 February 2020 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}} to your talk page.[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D looks at a failed German counterattack in the Battle of Normandy

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team[reply]

And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 57 contestants qualifying. We have abolished the groups this year, so to qualify for Round 3 you will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Epicgenius, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with a featured article, five good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 895 points.
• Gog the Mild came next with 464 points, from a featured article, two good articles and a number of reviews, the main theme being naval warfare.
• Raymie was in third place with 419 points, garnered from one good article and an impressive 34 DYKs on radio and TV stations in the United States.
• Harrias came next at 414, with a featured article and three good articles, an English civil war battle specialist.
• CaptainEek was in fifth place with 405 points, mostly garnered from bringing Cactus wren to featured article status.
• The top ten contestants at the end of Round 1 all scored over 200 points; they also included L293D, Kingsif, Enwebb, Lee Vilenski and CAPTAIN MEDUSA. Seven of the top ten contestants in Round 1 are new to the WikiCup.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. In Round 1 there were four featured articles, one featured list and two featured pictures, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. Between them, contestants completed 127 good article reviews, nearly a hundred more than the 43 good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Contestants also claimed for 40 featured article / featured list reviews, and most even remembered to mention their WikiCup participation in their reviews (a requirement).

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There was an error in the WikiCup 2020 March newsletter; L293D should not have been included in the list of top ten scorers in Round 1 (they led the list last year), instead, Dunkleosteus77 should have been included, having garnered 334 points from five good articles on animals, living or extinct, and various reviews. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Recent external reviews

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at the logistics behind the Crusades and the USAF's early Cold War nuclear deterrant

Hello, Antidiskriminator. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 02:26, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sadko. I have not received any mail. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Check it again. Thank you, Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 23:06, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:10, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And? Was something I wrote was untrue/incorect? --13:23, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020

• New partnership
• Global roundup

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Serbian epic

Thank you for quality articles about the history and culture of Serbia, such as Autonomous Albanian Republic of Korçë, Marburg's Bloody Sunday and Jelena Lazarević, and Danilo Stanisavljević as #512 right now, for templates such as Serbian epic poetry, for service in over ten years, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2388 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Gerda Arendt.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:42, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The second round of the 2020 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 75 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top ten contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 186 good articles achieved in total by contestants, and the 355 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

• Epicgenius, with 2333 points from one featured article, forty-five good articles, fourteen DYKs and plenty of bonus points
• Gog the Mild, with 1784 points from three featured articles, eight good articles, a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews and lots of bonus points
• The Rambling Man, with 1262 points from two featured articles, eight good articles and a hundred good article reviews
• Harrias, with 1141 points from two featured articles, three featured lists, ten good articles, nine DYKs and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews
• Lee Vilenski with 869 points, Hog Farm with 801, Kingsif with 719, SounderBruce with 710, Dunkleosteus77 with 608 and MX with 515.

The rules for featured article reviews have been adjusted; reviews may cover three aspects of the article, content, images and sources, and contestants may receive points for each of these three types of review. Please also remember the requirement to mention the WikiCup when undertaking an FAR for which you intend to claim points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth. - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You added a reference to

• Vujnović 1986

in that article, but without a full citation it's impossible to know what the reference is. Could you add it please?

Also if you use User:Svick/HarvErrors.js, you'll be notified of these errors in the future. If you don't know how to install it let me know, I'll walk you through it. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:43, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Headbomb resolved. Thanks for pointing me to this error.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Demonization of the Serbs for deletion.--Maleschreiber (talk) 15:33, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D and Hawkeye7 look at fortifications, the German Army, and post-Cold War conflict

I don't hate you personally, I don't have any reason to do. But I dislike(d) some of your contributions. I corrected obvious error in article Operation Bullseye. That led me to article on Đilas. There I read that period of leftist errors begun in summer. No, it didn't. It is illogical knowing chronology of events - it begun in winter. There weren't reason to purge potential enemies while Axis were still advancing (in Soviet Union, in North Africa), there weren't what to purge - there were notchetniks units in Montenegro, colonel Mihailović is virtually unknown person among masses in Montenegro in summer of 1941. Then Drvar Uprising - it is like copied from Pogledi, from that jester Samardžić. -- Bojan  Talk  08:21, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You simply don't know history and keep inserting lies. OZNA didn't killed 60,000 men. Perhaps half of these men - volksdeuchers weren't murdered, they died in labour camps from hunger, diseases. Among these 60,000 men are those killed by Balkan Air Force (bombing of retreating German and Chetnik Collumns), some were murdered by Ustashe, like Milorad Mojić [1], Dimitrije Ljotić's secretary and translator to Serbian of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion , when Serbian Volunteer Corps retreated towards Slovenia via Zagreb. His entry is incorrect. Nesko Nedić, Milan Aćimović and many other weren't killed by OZNA, they died in combat against partisans. Dragoljub Mihailović, Milan Nedić, Nikola Kalabić, Velibor Jonić, Dragi Jovanović, Dragutin Keserević, Božidar Bećarević, Svetozar Vujković, Svetislav Stefanović, Krsta Cicvarić were everything, but innocent victims civilians. And again, some of them weren't murdered by OZNA --- Bojan  Talk  17:12, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately it's almost a run-of-the-mill example of right-wing bias Croatian Wikipedia is notorious for. Note that, compared to its original version (vetted by Kubura, no surprises there), the article was significantly expanded (and thus somewhat balanced) by Inoslav Bešker. Its only major problem now is indeed the outrageous description of Bzik as a "victim of Yugo-Communist crimes". A minor problem is an unnecessary use of hu-benedikt, a super-fishy right-wing source, when scholarly sources can be found to support the same statement.

I keep all these problematic articles on my watchlist (200+ at moment!). I believe we're not too far away from getting a chance to fix them at last. GregorB (talk) 22:12, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Meta-Wiki RfC, of course. I believe the three responsible admins will be removed in the end. GregorB (talk) 22:40, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! GregorB (talk) 23:29, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020

• Library Card Platform
• New partnerships
  • ProQuest
  • Springer Nature
  • BioOne
  • CEEOL
  • IWA Publishing
  • ICE Publishing
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:12, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anti. I hope you're doing well these days. I rewrote parts of the article on the genocide of Serbs in the NDH а couple weeks ago. I would like you to take a look. Of course, everyone is welcome to make changes. Do you think that a nomination for a good article could be considered in the near future? I would really like us to achieve that.--WEBDuB (talk) 21:04, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WEBDuB. Thank you, I am very well, I hope you are well too? "These days" are somewhat over, so I do not have much time for wikipedia anymore. The article in question is very complex and delicate and deserves and requires more attention than I can dedicate to it now. If anything changes I will be more than happy to help if I can. All the best.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:46, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D looks at the naval siege of Japan in 1945

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:24, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Western world on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Concentration camps in Independent State of Croatia has been nominated for merging with Template:Genocide of Serbs. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. buidhe 08:37, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi greetings,

I have been looking for update and expansion support for 2 following articles in draft namespace

• Draft:Aurat (word) (article to cover grammar and linguistic part)

and

• Draft:Aurat (article to cover cultural women)

Please do have a look at the article, do update, expand, correct inaccuracies, suggest and discuss better article titles

Looking forward to your kind support.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku (talk) 09:41, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The third round of the 2020 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it into the fourth round each had at least 353 points (compared to 68 in 2019). It was a highly competitive round, and a number of contestants were eliminated who would have moved on in earlier years. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• Epicgenius, with one featured article, 28 good articles and 17 DYKs, amassing 1836 points
• The Rambling Man , with 1672 points gained from four featured articles and seventeen good articles, plus reviews of a large number of FACs and GAs
• Gog the Mild, a first time contestant, with 1540 points, a tally built largely on 4 featured articles and related bonus points.

Between them, contestants managed 14 featured articles, 9 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 152 good articles, 136 DYK entries, 55 ITN entries, 65 featured article candidate reviews and 221 good article reviews. Additionally, MPJ-DK added 3 items to featured topics and 44 to good topics. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 710 good article reviews, in comparison to 387 good articles submitted for review and promoted. These large numbers are probably linked to a GAN backlog drive in April and May, and the changed patterns of editing during the COVID-19 pandemic. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on Hadrian's Wall and Hawkeye7 on the British military Op-ed: Nick-D on diversity and military history

Welcome, and thank you for contributing the page Pajica Omčikus to Wikipedia. While you have added the page to the English version of Wikipedia, the article is not in English. We invite you to translate it into English. It has been listed at Pages Needing Translation, but if it is not translated within two weeks, the article will be listed for deletion. Thank you. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:15, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Arameans on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Recent external reviews Op-ed: Nick-D on 1945

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Myth of Tito is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myth of Tito until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Soman (talk) 22:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zdravo, I have worked a bit on the Serbian literature page. Please join in if you have the time. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 23:45, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitation Sadko. If I will have some time and see some space, I might jump in, though I don't think me joining you in editing any Serbia related article would be a good idea. People say that everybody has one. In my case, and I think you are well aware of it, I have much more than one. All the best. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:10, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Eastern Europe or the Balkans. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33 Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:24, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]