User talk:Surix321

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 16:43, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hi WikiBosnjanin (talk) 19:02, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I trust you will be following your edits up with an explanation at Talk:Pristina about the merits of the source and/or a rebuttal of Amanuensis Balkanicus's concerns about it? —C.Fred (talk) 15:12, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amanuensis is being POV, Iljaz Rexha is a reliable author whose works are on academia.edu, He isn't nationalist and just does works on history, whether Amanuensis denies it or not, it's not in my interest, I did not write this in Prishtina page, @Truthseeker2006 wrote it and it should stay, all it says is that there was a presence of Albanians in Prishtina. Surix321 (talk) 15:15, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Posting messages such as this to like-minded users' TPs is WP:CANVASSING. [1] Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:39, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to violate 3 revert Rule, So I asked someone with more knowledge and experience to help in the discussion, If you think the argument is wrong, then you don't need to worry, you are already being POV and WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Surix321 (talk) 15:41, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's objectively WP:CANVASSING to post to the talk page of an editor who you know to share your point of view. WP:DIDNTHEARTHAT is not an excuse to continue in engaging in this sort of behaviour. I would encourage you to show good faith and engage constructively without turning to others to gang up on me, someone whose edits you don't agree with. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:45, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I opened a TP in Prishtina, Alltan is not a POV user, he is a neutral user. Surix321 (talk) 15:46, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"POV user" is your expression, not mine. Frankly, I'm not sure what it's even supposed to mean. We both know Alltan shares your viewpoint in this particular dispute. Refrain from WP:CANVASSING in the future. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:09, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proof he shares my viewpoint? Surix321 (talk) 16:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proof I'm being WP:POV and WP:DONTLIKEIT? Two can play this game. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:29, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

you removed several albanian sources on Pristina, Republic of Kosovo, and Demographic History of Serbia but kept the Outdated Jirecek one, Alltan pressed you on this matter. Surix321 (talk) 16:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There you go, precisely my point. Both you and Alltan agree that the dubious sources which I removed should stay and have shown absolutely no willingness to budge on the question of their reliability. And with good reason, from your perspective, because reliable English-language sources by authors from outside the reason don't make the sorts of absurd claims these sources do. Which is why you canvassed Alltan. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:44, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where did I write any of these things on the articles? Some topics relating to These issues are not always written by English sources as they are rather irrelevant, Best time to use sources are from people from the country since they are much more connected with the topic. Also what is my perspective? You still haven't answered me why you didn't remove Jirecek (1891) but you removed an Albanian source from the 21st century. There is nothing dubious about Albanians living in the Sanjak of Nis, take a look on google maps for the toponyms that they refer to. Surix321 (talk) 16:48, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since when am I obligated to remove things on your behalf? Talk about asking a person to answer a negative. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:55, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It shows POV, You removed The Albanian part as you did with Kosovo, and with Pristina, but you kept an WP:OLDSOURCES. Surix321 (talk) 16:58, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They were in the same section as well im pretty sure. Surix321 (talk) 16:58, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Do you really think anyone has time to go through all the sources in an article when the revision in question is related to material that was added recently? Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 17:01, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So you had time to remove the Albanian source but not the one saying multiple peoples lived in Serbia in medieval period? Surix321 (talk) 17:05, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, because unlike some folks, I don't spend my whole day scouring Wikipedia and parsing through mindnumbingly dense paragraphs of text looking for passages that are contrary to en.wiki's rules and guidelines. Maybe if I did, the POV-pushing in the Albanian topic area wouldn't be nearly as troublesome it is now. Now there's an idea. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 17:16, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Jirecek paragraph came before the Albanian section, directly starting after it, You didn't check it but removed that Albanians lived in South Serbia.. Surix321 (talk) 17:18, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is about your canvassing and my request for you to refrain from this in the future. If you wish, you may continue writing your train of thought on the other TPs. So this will be my last message here. I must say it is interesting that you messaged Alltan on their TP when Alltan is one such user who doesn't have their email enabled. Hmm. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 17:28, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nice projection, However, Why does email matter? Surix321 (talk) 17:31, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Koplik War, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Shkreli and Kastrati.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The page Battle of Travnik has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appeared to be a direct copy from http://csef.ru/media/articles/4418/4418.pdf. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition has been be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review. — Diannaa (talk) 22:29, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

says that Especially in scientific and academic fields, older sources may be inaccurate because new information has been brought to light, new theories proposed, or vocabulary changed. The source in question does not have this issue because much newer sources say the same thing. An old source is not problematic due to being old but only in case the much newer sources counter with its claims. Cheers Ktrimi991 (talk) 08:15, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Drago Obrenov Kovačević and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:15, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:15, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Stojan Kovačević, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:41, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Krupići (Bosanska Krupa), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 3% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Doric Loon (talk) 08:10, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Grand Duke of Grahovo".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 17:44, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ilija Tomić-Balotić, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:44, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Grahovo Topic, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:43, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Anto Daković, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:55, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Battle of Old Montenegro (1613), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 02:15, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Montenegrinization, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 05:43, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Grahovo Campaign, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 05:58, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Ilija Tomić-Balotić".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:19, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mlađen Vučetić, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Battle of Old Montenegro".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:06, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Grahovo Tribe, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:03, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Drago Obrenov Kovačević, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:01, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Drago Obrenov Kovačević".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 10:08, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Stojan Kovačević 2, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:01, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Surix321. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Stojan Kovačević 2".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:41, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

G’day. If you make an edit and it is reverted, the obligation is on you to start s conversation on the talk page. Reverting without discussion is edit warring, and will only get you blocked. The idea that the material will ultimately stay in the article just because you keep adding it runs contrary to pretty much everything we do here. So stop doing that, and discuss it on the talk page please. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 14:44, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have not broken the three revert rule. What is wrong with the source? It is quoted from a document of August Schmidhuber by Robert Elsie's site albanianhistory.net. If you go on the source, it provides the original document (here). Surix321 (talk) 21:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:53, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]