Otberg

Careful with WP:3RR. Squash Racket (talk) 11:42, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I tried to start an diskussion ... --Otberg (talk) 11:49, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hallo Otberg,

What are you getting at? Nobody sad the Magyarization has not happened. Only the main article of Hungary is not a right place to this. Please reinsert it to the History of Hungary instead of Hungary because Im affraid of somebody deleting it again, again and again. I hope it will be a good compromise.Danke. Grüss--Nmate (talk) 19:18, 17 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hallo Nmate, it seems a little kafkaesk that the article is telling about the ethnic changes, but may not refer to the main cause. But I guess the compromise of mentioning the Magyarization in History of Hungary will be the best now. Greetings --Otberg (talk) 20:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

  Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Hobartimus (talk) 20:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

  What do you mean by that? This does not concern you. Please don't insult me any more, or you will be blocked. --Otberg (talk) 08:34, 2 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Why do you hate old medieval Hungarian pictures? Why did you delete them? Do you hate Hungarians? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.111.185.112 (talk) 08:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I don't hate Hungarians at all. If you write vandalism of anti-hungarian picture barbarians, my editcomment vandalism of hungarian nationalist seems appropriate. There are to much pictures in the article History of Hungary. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an art gallery. --Otberg (talk) 09:01, 2 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hallo Otberg,

I saw that you had worked a lot on this article. What does this article say about the circumstances of his death? Could i ask you? Unfortunately, i can't speak German any longer although i had learnt "your mother language" at high school.

Earlier i have also edited this article here. Had you read the English version of this article before you worked on the German one?--Nmate (talk) 11:10, 21 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hallo Nmate, the German article was to poor for such an important person, that's why I expanded it. Of course I red the English article and used some informations. About the circumstances of his death I found no good sources so far, so I didn't change someting. The German article says nearly the same about it like the English one: nothing is sure, but the main expaination is, the plane was shot down by Czechoslovak anti-aircraft artillery. Just some Slowak people believes it was an assassination in order to weak the Slowak policy. Greetings --Otberg (talk) 20:59, 21 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I agree with you, he was an important Central European historical person and there are no too many sources about him indeed. Although regardless of his importance, Štefánik is an almost totally unknown historical person in Hungary and - i just guess -same goes for Austria and Germany. So some expansion of this article could be helpful on every wikipedia. Grüss --Nmate (talk) 20:17, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

  Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Sanford, Maine has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Shadowjams (talk) 10:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

It would be better if you look on the edits you are reverting first. Do you really think you increase the quality of the article by reinvert sentenses like this?

"Polls showed that the average Male teenager found his sister and mother more attractive than other local females or normally highly attractive women. Scientist concluded in 1974, this was caused by high levels of radioactivity that caused a problem with Males hormone levels and optical sensory and perception. Now the newer generation of sanfordidians are inbred, angry and fat." Thank you! --Otberg (talk) 19:50, 16 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on Svetozar Boroević. While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 13:26, 1 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

  In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If you engage in further inappropriate behaviour in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article/topic ban. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 13:26, 1 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, it worked different here than in de, but it seems to work also. Regards --Otberg (talk) 14:25, 1 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I saw you Took the infobox off the Kingdom of Araucanía and Patagonia article but even though it never was fully recognized it still should have a infobox like the United Baltic Duchy article which is a proposed state and never recognized by anyone. Spongie555 (talk) 17:55, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

You are right, the United Baltic Duchy wasn't a state either. I remove the infobox there too. --Otberg (talk) 22:58, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

If you take their infoboxes off then you need to take the one off the Confederate States of America because they wernt a recognized state too. Spongie555 (talk) 00:11, 31 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

No, I'm not here to do BNS ... --Otberg (talk) 07:53, 31 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Diego Grez (talk) 17:04, 9 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

If you don't stop vandalising well souced informations you will be blocked. --Otberg (talk) 17:28, 9 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Interesting, this happened already. --Otberg (talk) 10:02, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

1. Infrastructure section:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria-hungary#Infrastructure

Can you help in the Telecommunication section? I need some data (similar to the Hungarian data about Telephone and Telegraph sub-sections) and references from the Austrian part of the empire. Thank you for your contribution! Best regards!--Balkony (talk) 21:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

is a NS-publication: [1] --Otberg (talk) 11:27, 4 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Pardon my French but the use of this book was openly discussed at the WPMILHIST talk page. With all the ins and outs. The general consensus was that it should be mentioned. Please feel free to reopen the discussion. Until the community decides otherwise it will remain. MisterBee1966 (talk) 21:15, 16 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

I found no diskussion about this Nazi book. You and your friends can not decide to allow Nazipropaganda in Wikipedia. --Otberg (talk) 21:19, 16 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

I reported your vandalism already. --Otberg (talk) 21:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello, Otberg. You have new messages at J04n's talk page.
Message added 12:02, 27 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.Reply

J04n(talk page) 12:02, 27 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Our first contact here on Wikipedia did not start out on the right note. In case we have another case of discrepancies of opinions let's try to make it a positive experience for both of us. Happy editing and enjoy, cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:38, 19 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, I hope so too. Regards --Otberg (talk) 07:16, 20 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria-Hungary#Justice

Can you complement the Justice section of Austria-Hungary article? (Austrian part) Thank you!

--Balkony (talk) 09:26, 20 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

This article was not a hoax, why was it removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bermudanights (talk • contribs) 19:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

There are no sources about a "Deutsche Karibik". You told us: In 1888 German naval engineers landed on Klein Curaçao, a small island southeast of Curaçao, to undertake the construction of a naval shipyard... This ist obviously nonsens.

It wasn't the first hoax you created. --Otberg (talk) 20:25, 2 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria-hungary#Aeronautic_industry

Hello!

Can you expand the Austrian part of the Aeronautic industry section of Austria-Hungary article? Forexample the first Austrian ballon experiment, the first Austrian flight with first Austrian made (incl. first in-line rotary etc.. austrian engine) airplane? The names of the airplane factories (and aeroengine factorires) with the date of their foundation) Countries included: Austria Bohemia and all the Astrian part of the Empire! (The section must be short, but effective like the Hungarian part of the text) Thank you for your reply & contribution!--84.2.151.75 (talk) 19:37, 5 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

See [2]

I'm not sure if I'm following the right steps, but the case is clear water to me. Tell me what you think, or comment at that page if you feel so.

As a side note, current affairs about the subject are rather tricky. There is little coverage/interest from independent media and the "official" sources are mere blogs. What's more, they are WP:PRIMARY sources so I'd say we cannot use them to determine who Prince Philippe's successor is. --Langus (t) 22:27, 6 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

The problem is, the Araucanía-"state" is a fake at all. It never existed in real, so do the "Pretenders to the throne". That's why there are no independent sources. --Otberg (talk) 06:56, 7 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

Otberg, ich habe zufällig das Gespräch zwischen dem Benutzer Koenraad und dir auf der Diskssionsseite des Artikels über den Genozid den Aramäern mitbekommen. Und ich möchte dich auf folgende seriöse Abhandlung zu dieser Thematik hinweisen: Gunnar Heinsohn: Lexikon der Völkermorde. ISBN 3-499-22338-4. In dieser Publikation findet der Völkermord an den Aramäern explizit Erwähnung.--95.114.14.172 (talk) 16:52, 24 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Is there any problem with the photo File:Pind-Meglen.png that you taken out from the article Principality of Pindus? Thanks. Wolfymoza (talk) 11:19, 18 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Yes it's self-created without any sources. The principality had no definite borders at all. The map is a fake. Yours --Otberg (talk) 16:02, 18 March 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) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 15:18, 14 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Users with indefinitely protected user talk pages". Thank you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:19, 27 September 2020 (UTC)Reply