Jump to content

User talk:Kosmar6314: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Kosmar6314 (talk | contribs)
m (1. Don't template the regulars; 2. Looking at that page's history, you appear to be edit warring yourself -- just discuss it on the article talk page)
Reliable sources and tendentious editing
Line 91: Line 91:
::No, it is fine the way it is, and for a reason; [[SAO Krajina]] and/or [[SAO Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia]] participated in the battle, and were extraneous entities outside of Yugoslavia.--[[User:3E1I5S8B9RF7|3E1I5S8B9RF7]] ([[User talk:3E1I5S8B9RF7|talk]]) 13:07, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
::No, it is fine the way it is, and for a reason; [[SAO Krajina]] and/or [[SAO Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia]] participated in the battle, and were extraneous entities outside of Yugoslavia.--[[User:3E1I5S8B9RF7|3E1I5S8B9RF7]] ([[User talk:3E1I5S8B9RF7|talk]]) 13:07, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
:::[[User:3E1I5S8B9RF7|3E1I5S8B9RF7]], Not true. SAO means "Serbian Autonomous Oblast", a Autonomous Region within SFRY. It was not it's own entity, did not have it's own armed forces. It was a Yugoslav victory. By your logic we can say that it was also a Vojvodian and Kosovar victory because people from those parts also participated [[User:Kosmar6314|Kosmar6314]] {[[User talk:Kosmar6314|talk]]) 17:27, 30 June 2021
:::[[User:3E1I5S8B9RF7|3E1I5S8B9RF7]], Not true. SAO means "Serbian Autonomous Oblast", a Autonomous Region within SFRY. It was not it's own entity, did not have it's own armed forces. It was a Yugoslav victory. By your logic we can say that it was also a Vojvodian and Kosovar victory because people from those parts also participated [[User:Kosmar6314|Kosmar6314]] {[[User talk:Kosmar6314|talk]]) 17:27, 30 June 2021

==Reliable sources and tendentious editing==
I notice you were edit warring at [[Serbian Volunteer Corps (World War II)]]. And instead of discussing on talk, as you were urged to in [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Serbian_Volunteer_Corps_(World_War_II)&diff=1045527416&oldid=1045413890 this edit summary], you [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Serbian_Volunteer_Corps_(World_War_II)&diff=next&oldid=1045527416 reverted again], referring to "westerners" (meaning a whole host of academic sources) being unreliable, as opposed to the organization's self-description, which you think ought to rule. This shows ignorance of (or refusal to abide by) basic sourcing principles on Wikipedia. Please read [[WP:Reliable sources]], especially [[WP:SCHOLARSHIP]]. [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] | [[User talk:Bishonen|tålk]] 09:00, 22 September 2021 (UTC).

Revision as of 09:00, 22 September 2021

Welcome!

Hello, Kosmar6314! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Jmertel23 (talk) 20:08, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

No.

Notice

The article Nedić's serbia has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Proposing deletion as it is a new article that largely duplicates an existing article (appears to duplicate Territory_of_the_Military_Commander_in_Serbia#Administration) but I'm willing to put it up as PROD rather than CSD in case I'm wrong. I don't see a reason to split the other page, but if there are plans to add a lot more data here then maybe it could be justified.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:02, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nedić's serbia for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nedić's serbia 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/Nedić's serbia 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. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 17:01, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Vukovar

Please, stop with the disruptive editing on the Battle of Vukovar article. The sources in the article clearly say "Pyrrhic victory", and it stood like that for ten years, it passed a highly detailed Featured article review, so please do not change it now on a whim. Furthermore, It wasn't just the Yugoslav Army that fought in the battle, but also other Serb entities which were clearly outside of Yugoslav stature (Republic of Serbian Krajina was never part of Yugoslavia), so a Yugoslav-Serb adjective is justified. If you have any further complaints, please take it to the talk page of the said article.--3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 16:59, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

3E1I5S8B9RF7, I Left a message on your talk page. Kosmar6314 {talk) 21:16, 28 June 2021
No, it is fine the way it is, and for a reason; SAO Krajina and/or SAO Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia participated in the battle, and were extraneous entities outside of Yugoslavia.--3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 13:07, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
3E1I5S8B9RF7, Not true. SAO means "Serbian Autonomous Oblast", a Autonomous Region within SFRY. It was not it's own entity, did not have it's own armed forces. It was a Yugoslav victory. By your logic we can say that it was also a Vojvodian and Kosovar victory because people from those parts also participated Kosmar6314 {talk) 17:27, 30 June 2021

Reliable sources and tendentious editing

I notice you were edit warring at Serbian Volunteer Corps (World War II). And instead of discussing on talk, as you were urged to in this edit summary, you reverted again, referring to "westerners" (meaning a whole host of academic sources) being unreliable, as opposed to the organization's self-description, which you think ought to rule. This shows ignorance of (or refusal to abide by) basic sourcing principles on Wikipedia. Please read WP:Reliable sources, especially WP:SCHOLARSHIP. Bishonen | tålk 09:00, 22 September 2021 (UTC).[reply]