User talk:Argo Navis

Archive
1 2 3

Hi, I noticed you tagged Kingdom of Dalmatia for speedy deletion because you think there should be an article there. This is fine, if you think there should be an independent article at that point, please feel free to write one. If you think that this should redirect somewhere else, please feel free to redirect it there. But there's no reason to delete a redirect just because there should be an article there; if there should, then put it there...:). --- Deville (Talk) 17:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep up the good work on editing the Boscovich page, taking out Serb POV. Jagoda 1 06:43, 19 October 2006 (UTC) Boscovich was Croatian Italian end of story Jagoda 1 06:43, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nm, I thought it was Afrika paprika. My bad. HolyRomanEmperor 10:16, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Wanna be an admin? --HolyRomanEmperor 08:40, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NO. --Ante Perkovic 13:26, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was reading the "Hrvatski" Marco Polo page on Wiki. Very interesting compared to that of the "English" version. Have a read as i think the "Hrvatski" version shows some good sources/theory on him being Croatian. The idea of him signing his name Pol and not in Latin Polo should be made mention of in the main article.

Can you add it to the English article without getting into trouble? When ever i try adding anything Croatian to Marco Polo i get called a Vandel. Maybe you know a good way to do it without it sounding like Croatian POV. Henry Yule is a good non bias source, one of many.

With respect many people think Columbus was Spanish yet the article on Wiki also makes mention of him perhaps being Italian or Potuguese. Same should be done for Marco Polo, he was Venetian of possible Croat or Italian blood. The Polo article as it stands now is very Italian Pov..

I think a change would be fair as enough unbias evidence out there points to him having some link to Croatia by birth and or blood.

Jagoda 1 23:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS I have left Wiki but will check on Polo article in the future.

God Speed

Why such a strong refusal? --HolyRomanEmperor 16:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Too much trouble. I would like to keep the things simple. --Ante Perkovic 19:16, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please, stop bothering people with translations. --Ante Perkovic 19:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who, me? --PaxEquilibrium 10:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir Ante Perkovic,

Ever since you had kindly left this statement last year, I have stopped using machine translation to create new articles. Thankyou for your extremely helpful advice. Now the Croatian article has nearly been written properly (It is now 70% complete).

In fact, it is now my aim to obtain an excellent quality Croatian translation through the help of expert Native Speakers such as you. I now highly respect the Croatian language and culture.

Regards --Jose77 22:26, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ante Perkovic:

Recimi, dragi Ante, recimi tvoj MSN? Thunderman 15:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ante, what is your problem?

In Croatian wikipedia you blocked me jyst because I wrote that bosnian language exist and not bosniak language.

But if you think bosniak language exist, ask then USA, UN, EU, NATO or the entire world. Everyone will say that Bosnian language does exist accept Croatia and Serbia.

Understand? Alkalada 11:57, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, Ante, is this true??? --PaxEquilibrium 19:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a notification to inform you that a stub template and category that you created ({{Croatia-hist-stub}} and Category:Croatian history stubs) is up for deletion at WP:SFD. Please join the discussion. ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 17:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Afrika paprika wasn't blocked until now. For almost a year he created hoards of sockpuppets and never (even still now he keeps using it) did he stop using anonymous IPs. And "rooting out" his Army of meat-puppets you can thank to my little private investigations. So you shouldn't be grateful that he's blocked (when nothing seems to be able to stop him).

Anyway, its irredentist to count ethnicities of Wikipedians, and to "show off" if one ethnic group has the least amount of trolls/vandals (when apparently your recent showing off was incorrect :); its the biggest cause of stereotype and actual drawings of borders amongst Users of this non-national Wikipedia. For example, all (ethnic Albanian) users from Kosovo (and there is a number of them) are trolls, vandals or extreme POV-pushing nationalists and other disruptive editors (bad faith sock-puppet... etc) that have been blocked/banned by now. Does it show how "primitive" is the Albanian nation? What conclusion do you draw from that? --PaxEquilibrium 17:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if I seem to have offended you - that was not my intention. --PaxEquilibrium 23:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correction - I was wrong. Afrika edited all the time and is still editing, I just didn't manage to track down his newest sockpuppets.

Nemoj se nervirati zbog ovog. :) --PaxEquilibrium 22:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nema me već dugo, nemam vremena. Ne znam ni kad ću ga opet imat :-/ --Ante Perkovic 18:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The image Washingtonia robusta.jpg is already under {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} Geographer 12:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article need to be looked because supporters of Greater Serbia like to write how Serbian kings and despots has ruled Slavonia between XIII and XVI century. I know that you are rarely her but you know more croatian users of me on wiki. I am becoming tired of revert wars--Rjecina 23:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...dear user A.P...as I could read from your 'brother in arms' user Rjecina 'mail', you two are fighting some wars here, maybe?...wars of reverting, maybe?...very interesting, contractive, deliberate indeed:)...just as it says in the code of conduct of Wikipedia ?:)...I will feel free to keep this exchange for the record :)

--Votec 11:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many others states are having local notice boards so that interested users can know everything about article problems (edit wars and similar). This way we like Serbian, Hungarian users will know when there is problem in article and we will not fight alone revert wars. It will be nice if you will send this message to other users which write about Croatia or Croats. Rjecina 21:23, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A.P. do you fight 'revert wars' ? :)...maybe, you are ideological leader here? :)...as I can see, dear Rjecina is addressing you all the time :)

...kept for record too :)

--Votec 11:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for agreeing to ammend the "Croats and non-Serbs" section on the list. I appreciate that. I've left it as you edited it (my final edit was a reversion to yours as some joker played with the Bosnian part). Now on principle, it doesn't stand quite how I would have chosen: obviously yours in an improvement to the original by a long way. The situation is, I am not an expert on the RSK, nor on Milosevic, nor on his FR Yugoslavia, and certainly not on 1990's Serbian aspirations. You know how politics is full of "ulterior motives", and trying to put your finger on this one is surely one of the most difficult tasks. The RSK administration was certianly totalitarian in value; it elliminated its disloyal citizens by expelling them, or killing them. Unlike FR Yugoslavia, it was a Serbia-only entity. We know that. But does that mean that a successful RSK which was recognised, thriving and at peace would have been one with a population declaring 100% Serb? I don't know the answer to that. If so, would Serbian nationalists not have made that its hub, then from there - aim to interfere in the opposite direction; change FR Yugoslavia into just "Serbia"; revoke Montenegro's status; and cleanse the identities of people identifying by Serbia's other nationalities? Personally I think that it is unlikely; at most, the RSK would have survived rather like Transdniester in what is internationally recognised as Moldova. It is supported by if not recognised by the Russian Federation; it is a land for its local Russian/Slavic inhabitants to call a nation state; it has engaged in hostile activity which has removed ethnic Moldovans and others - or if you like, non-Russians; yet still these Slavic people still do not compose 100% of the population, 16 years since being created and with no talk of a "Moldovan Operation Storm" or interference from Washington or Brussels. In a sense, that land is more Russian than Russia as that itself is only the Russian Federation, which is indeed federal, with non-Russian units adding to it. According to Wikiedia, ther 1991 census of Knin did record a little over 10% as non-Serb. The next one you get is 2001, long after Storm. 1991 may be a little early; for one, it does not say when in 1991 it was conducted, for another, August 1995 when the RSK was overturned was some years away and much would happen between 1991 and 1995. But I say again, critics of the RSK do lack evidence that there was a campaign which was purely anti-Serb; the ICTY have used it in their indictments, however, it would make little difference for the accused to give examples of non-Serbs who were not affected, and Serbs who were - because the two key elements of the indictment here would be "...expulsion of the non-Serb population" (ie. people expelled). The "non-Serb" is purely added for stylsitic ornamentation, and so that it doesn't sound like the domestic trial of a nutcase. So, how would you feel about the following?
Supposing we replace the original "Croats & non-Serbs" but add that this was the ICTY indictment, or bring ICTY closer to the main text? As an editor, I believe that it is down to the reader whether or not he accepts or disputes organisations such as the ICTY - so to say that "this is what they concluded" is irrefutable! We're not saying that it happened, we're saying they are saying it happened! And their credibility is...as I said, down to the individual. How would you feel about that? Evlekis 12:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evlekis, you are complicating thinks too much. Serbs were the only ethnic minority having problems with Croatia gaining independence. None of the other nations (Hungarians, Check, Slovak, Italians, Ruthenians, Bosniaks, Aliens from Zeta Reticuli...) object to that. Note that there was practicaly no other nations other than Croats and Serbs in Knin area, so it makes no sense to say that not many non-Croats were expelled from Knin. I have an impression that you are not too familiar with Croatian war of independence? --Ante Perkovic

Well, well, well if it isnt little Ante Pederkovic who is back! Visca el barca 08:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are realy disapointing. I have belived in you. Sometimes yu even try. But no, why, why did you have to be such a Croatian nationalist? Ive been watching you here and on CroWiki, and you realy disapoint with your nationalist atitudes, I realy wasnt aware of them before.

Im not joking. I may have just came to tell you this, but this is corect. After observing your edits in english and cro wiki, the only question I can ask is...why? Why? Are you a victim of the war and in deep emotional pain because of it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TjaZarAP (talk • contribs) 12:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opening an account just to patronise me is pathetic, nothing else. --Ante Perkovic (talk) 19:29, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please, stop deleting valid contributions in Operation Medak Pocket. The part related with U.N. Officer's Denial of alledged battle is well documented. Ia gave the reference from "24 sata" newspapers (http://www.24sata.hr/news/clanak/ademi-norac-nije-bilo-sukoba-hrvata-i-kanadana/50605/). If you don't like that reference, I can find you the same information in every possible newspapers in Croatia. Is this good enough to make you understand that this is not a bogus? --Ante Perkovic (talk)

Responded at the Operation Medak Pocket Talk Page -- Esemono (talk) 13:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Operation Medak Pocket‎. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.

Please comment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.250.12.231 (talk) 20:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Propaganda" is not a valid reason for speedy deletion. The image is also sourced. You may wish to see WP:IFD. Neıl ☎ 11:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Ante Perković requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Bit Lordy (talk) 14:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sada se stvarno ne ponašaš baš pristojno.

U čemu je problem? --NICrneGore (talk) 16:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dobru volju sam imao i tekako, jer niti jednog jedinog trenutka nijesam pomislio na ono najgore: da je u pitanju netrpeljivost bazirana na nacionalnoj osnovi. No nažalost, poslije svega ovoga, ne vjerujem da jednostavno ima više prostora razmatrati druge optcije, te mislim da je jedino fer da ovdje konstatujemo da je to najvjerovatnija mogućnost; ključni element našeg sukoba na hrvatskoj wikipediji.

Kako mislim da si postupio kako krajnje ne dolikuje jednom administratoru, odlučio sam da potražim druge metode žalbi. Nadam se da ćeš razumjeti.

Pozdrav; jako mi je žao što ovaj incident polako prerasta u skandal, --NICrneGore (talk) 17:27, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Da skandal... Uh, što neki pati od poremećaja shvaćanja osobne važnosti. No, to se savršeno uklapa u dosadašnje ponašanje. --Ante Perkovic (talk) 05:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ne osjećam se ja nimalo posebno važnim, niti što drugo, već samo inzistiram na poštovanju pravila wikipedije na hrvatskom jeziku. --NICrneGore (talk) 12:54, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

Je li dobro za sada? :) Lijep pozdrav. --NICrneGore (talk) 12:54, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Slovenian Exclusive Economic Zone, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slovenian Exclusive Economic Zone. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Eleassar ^{my talk} 13:14, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey 'you'. You have too many non-permitted 'self-edits' in some talk namespace, including my recent talk-edit on the English article about the best croatian bend-Magazin. It was a truthful edit, based on facts about the things, and by deleting it you won't change those facts. If it personally hits you as a cro-nationalist, that's your BIG problem nowadays. If you don't want your quazi-edits and other suspicious stuff you put around start dissappearing, please stop deleting comments on discussion pages, especially the ones that are meaningful and true. If you continue to behave like this, people might begin to think of you as of troll as well. The name of the game here is having the truth out, not placing personal wishie-wishies, that reflect the points of view of a small and limited group of individuals. Chirs.24.86.116.250 (talk) 17:14, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Thank you for your comment about the user. I'll try to monitor his/her actions and will block him/her if he/she misbehaves.

Please note that although the user may be irritating to you and making controversial comments he/she is not particularly disruptive to Wikipedia editing process and the fact that he has no main namespace edits is not damaging to Wikipedia per se. He/she isn't productive or cooperative either, so he/she should be warned about his/her behaviour and an impending block.

You can of course file a complaint as WP:BLOCK says to

• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
• Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

but I think the former is the right place in this case.

Kpjas (talk) 22:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You've participated in the debate about deleting of category:Former Towns of RSK 1991-95 [1]. Now, there's a similar voting on deletion on the article (created, although the results of discussion was delete, not listify). The links to the voting is here merger suggestion?. Since you've participated previously in the discussion, you're invited to participate again. Please, give your opinion. Kubura (talk) 14:33, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you take a look at this discussion and explain what you really meant with your map's caption? Thank you. --Yerpo (talk) 13:07, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Before you tag an article for speedy deletion, please review the criteria and use a template corresponding to the specific reason for deletion. Just using a generalized {{db}} template without a valid criterion makes more work for the deleting admin. Thank you for your interest in improving Wikipedia! --R'n'B (call me Russ) 09:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[2] I answer on the subject... --Čeha (razgovor) 08:18, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Zahvaljujem :) --Čeha (razgovor) 21:03, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ma nema frke, konstruktivna kritika uvijek dobro dođe:) --Čeha (razgovor) 14:38, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bok Ante!

Upravo prebacujem naseljena mjesta iz distrikta Brčko, pa usput uočih pogrešku na jednom od tovjih članaka.

Zamolio bih te da pogledaš stranicu za razgovor.

Hvala. --79.101.79.80 (talk) 22:40, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Per Wimmer 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/Per Wimmer until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Sandman888 (talk) 20:38, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vidi što sam napisao na meta:Requests for comment/2013 issues on Croatian Wikipedia/Evidence/Conduct#Suradnik:Kubura. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 10:54, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vestibule (architecture), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Split. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good Evening:

My Father was a Canadian Air Force military, stationed in Decimomanno Sardinia, June 1967 to September 1970.

I use to play on the Devil Saddle, above La Marina Piccolo on the Poetto. I understand that a submarine base internal to the mountain was found some years ago after 1970. Unfortunately, I can find little or no evidence online.

Would you be able to update me on such a story?

Regards, Kenny Hueston 25 October 2021 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenneth Hueston (talk • contribs) 06:31, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can't help you, sorry. --Argo Navis (talk) 19:17, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Argo Navis,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Joseywales1961 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged an article that you started, Borija for deletion, because it is unnecessary per one of the criteria at WP:G14.

If you feel that the page shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Joseywales1961}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

JW 1961 ^Talk 14:42, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Psychiatry in Croatia has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:29, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am trying to make a petition on the Croatian Wikipedia to remove the permanent block on my account. But I can't edit anything there. Can you please review my case? I have been blocked in 2014, only two days after I started editing. This is the link to my account: [3] Thanks in advance. --Tuvixer (talk) 18:24, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tuvixer, you are unblocked, I left you a message on hr wiki. Argo Navis (talk) 08:27, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Argo Navis Thanks. Tuvixer (talk) 09:24, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Argo Navis, thank you for creating this disambiguation page. Do you intend to create the article Giancarlo Berardi (politician)? as disambiguation pages must point to at least two existing English Wikipedia pages your page might be tagged for deletion as WP:G14 shortly as it now stands. Best wishes Josey Wales ^Parley 17:26, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not planning to. I was not aware of the rule. --Argo Navis (talk) 17:28, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Argo Navis,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Joseywales1961 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged an article that you started, Giancarlo Berardi for deletion, because it is unnecessary per one of the criteria at WP:G14.

If you feel that the page shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Joseywales1961}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Josey Wales ^Parley 18:24, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Beagle Island (Antarctica), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pintado.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Tributaries of the Sebiș indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:22, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Sebiș basin indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:46, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Baptismal font of Prince Višeslav, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Split.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Kalma (goddess) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not a god of the Finnish pantheon. Article is based on unreliable sources, see talk.

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. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 05:54, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]