User talk:Director: Difference between revisions

Director is away on vacation and may not respond swiftly to queries.

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Director! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Since you have taken part in substantial discussion on this matter, I am informing you that an RfC has been opened on WP Yugoslavia [1]

Hello, Director. You have new messages at Talk:Draža Mihailović.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

◅ PRODUCER (TALK) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Smeat75 (talk) 17:49, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Nazism_sidebar#which_Parteiadler.3F and join the discussion 115.187.78.250 (talk) 22:36, 19 April 2014 (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 reviews: Hawkeye7 looks at Britain's War Machine Interview: Article writers discuss German military history

I realize we have a legitimate disagreement of opinion here, and I'd like to resolve it in a reasonable way. Rather than spreading it out to a million pages, Talk:Leon Trotsky seems like the best place to discuss this, and get third opinions, so it's not just you and me.--Pharos (talk) 05:11, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Its not about our "opinion", Pharos, but alright. -- Director (talk) 05:12, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will post details in a moment. Please be patient. Jehochman ^Talk 16:13, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

("Please be patient"? As if I have a choice :))

Well good day to you, Jehochman. I would expect the details (or at least the basic reason) would accompany the block, but since they did not, I look forward to them eagerly. And I'm sure they'll be very good "details" indeed - because if this is a joke, its not a very good one. I'm led to believe abuse of admin privileges to indeff block long-serving editors on a whim is generally frowned upon. -- Director (talk) 16:38, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This account is blocked indefinitely for tendentious POV pushing, disrupting the formation of consensus and for using article space to spread anti-semitic propaganda. It also appears that DIREKTOR (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and PRODUCER (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) may be related accounts working together in a way that is not allowed. Please see this discussion and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jews_and_Communism and Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2014_March_14. Sorry for the delay, I forgot to hit the save button before taking lunch. Jehochman ^Talk 16:13, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good one there. Seriously, though, you can stop now. I'm not buying you never heard of WP:TOOLMISUSE.. -- Director (talk) 19:01, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care what you buy. Jehochman ^Talk 19:09, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I hope you're aware of how inappropriate this action is, on how many separate levels?

• #1 Firstly, from what I am reading of the thread you linked, you are WP:INVOLVED in the discussion regarding the relevant dispute at hand. You've made it abundantly clear you are heavily biased regarding the ongoing content dispute, before blocking the opponents of the side you fancy.
• #2 Secondly, indeffing users on grounds of perceived "POV-pushing", without discussion, is against communal norms and policies. I dare say perhaps especially if the users have almost double your own contributions to the project and have been expanding it for almost a decade. I pushed no POV, in fact practically everything I did over there has been restoring the status quo ante, against changes generally opposed on the talkpage by Producer, myself, and a slew of other users you seem to have forgotten to block. As for your "antisemite" remarks, I believe they're plainly sanctionable.
• #3 Thirdly: said lack of discussion renders users accused of misconduct incapable of defending themselves, which might make it easier to miss things like this SPI report. Or this one. You also might try not posting a discussion I never heard of or participated in as evidence of my being a sock of Producer.

Now, I am biased of course, but so far as I can see nothing you posted demonstrates any kind of misconduct, beyond advocating an article alongside fourteen other people. Frankly I think if anyone should be sanctioned - its you, for abusing admin tools, as well vicious slander and personal attack. The more I read of that sad exchange over on Jim's talk, the more it seems to me you fancy yourself some kind of antisemite-hunting superhero.

Naturally I don't expect you will reverse your action, but this is quite blatant misuse of admin tools and I will of course be appealing. -- Director (talk) 19:38, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please relax the accusations and focus on the correctness or incorrectness of your own behavior. That's my advice for filing a successful appeal. Checkuser does not prove accounts are unrelated. You could be two people working together, or one person editing from two network locations or using a proxy. Checkuser is not any sort of magic. Jehochman ^Talk 20:19, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, but its kind of hard to "focus on my behavior" when you've got nothing but vague nonsense to go on from the block rationale. I can only really point out that I can't see any TE or POV-pushing in anything you posted, and that the block is suspicious. I will also request an evaluation as to whether you are, in fact, WP:INVOLVED. Though I agree that personal attacks and abuse of admin tools as such, are not related to the matter at hand.

As "flawed" as checkuser might be, its objectively a bit more to go on than "they might be working together!", with "they agree on this talkpage!" as support. As are the statements of virtually anyone who's worked with Producer or myself. -- Director (talk) 20:44, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for you to address:

1. Why do you and PRODUCER have such similar user names? Are you friends or otherwise working together?
2. Why does Jews and Communism look so much like the article on Metawiki.[2] ?
3. Do you think that Jews and Communism is a neutral article?
4. Can you say why Jews and Communism should be a different article than Jewish Bolshevism? How is J&C not a POV fork?
5. How is J&C not merely an attack page, thinly veiled anti-semitism?

Thanks. Jehochman ^Talk 20:55, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) All that said, I will point out this is the first time I ever heard of metapedia, and if Producer did in fact copy content from that site I am prepared to re-nominate the article for deletion myself. So far as I can see, however, that's just more of that distasteful slander I'm reading so much of: the Metapedia article was expanded through the typical "biaspedia" procedure of mirroring cherry-picked Wikipedia content - almost a month after the Wikipedia article was created by Producer. Before its expansion in March the article bore no resemblance to Wikipedia's article (I'd post the diffs but the site is apparently blacklisted). Its good to know Metapedia is apparently a place I can use to get anyone I dislike indeff blocked, by mirroring their contributions there. -- Director (talk) 20:44, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Jehochman:

• I agree with DIREKTOR that indeffing users who edited wikipedia for so many years, without any previous discussion, is against communal norms.
• Important note: I am involved editor, not only in J+C dispute, but also in many other disputes with DIREKTOR and PRODUCER, often as opposed to them. I don't say I disagree with your action, but I just think that communal norms should be followed, especially if they really deserve to be banned. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:21, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say "thank you", but I'm getting rather mixed messages from your post, Antid. -- Director (talk) 22:18, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bother with thanking. There is nothing mixed in my post, though I might have been clearer. The point is simple: the bigger misdeeds people are accused for, the more important is to follow the norms to sanction them.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:14, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to Senator McCarthy's inquiries above:

1. I explained that about fifty separate times, and I find it outrageously insulting that you indeff blocked me first, and asked me about it later. My username refers to a "director" in the sense of a business executive. You can tell by the use of the letter "K". Its a Serbo-Croatian word that can only mean director (business). Producer's name is in English, and is apparently derived from film-making terminology. Its also an appropriate pun, since he has apparently "produced" quite a bit of content on this project [3]. Why are the names capitalized? Well mine is capitalized because that's my childhood nickname (in an ironic sense), and its simply the way in which I used to sign into video games, which back in the day did not have lowercase - if I must go "full disclosure" here! Why Producer capitalized his username, I have no idea.
2. Because the psycho Nazis at that insane asylum selectively mirrored the Wikipedia article! A month later. As biaspedias usually do.
3. No, Senator. But I don't think it can be improved at all unless the participants stop trying to change it through edit-warring, and respect basic Wikipedia behavioral guidelines.
4. Because the standing consensus at the Jewish Bolshevism article (which I opposed!) is that the article does not include the topic. That's why the article was created in the first place. As to why The Four Deuces advocates diametrically opposite points of view whenever it suits him - you'll have to ask him that.
5. Because, so far as I can see, its written through strict and rigorous adherence to highest-quality reliable sources.

Please move the lamp a bit to the side now, I can't see you. -- Director (talk) 20:44, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I like the tone of your answers, even though I don't agree with your point 5. Nevertheless, I'm going to unblock you. One bit of a warning though: Pharos is cleaning up Jews and Communism. Pharos is another very experienced editor with a good reputation. Please don't obstruct his work. Thank you. Jehochman ^Talk 22:05, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I thought that's the tone you were going for. And after "roughing me up", you gently suggest my next course of action. How am I to interpret that? -- Director (talk) 22:07, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not involved in any way in editing the article in question, but have offered (as I recall) some advice on the talk page. I want to thank User:DIREKTOR for his (relatively) calm response. I also want to thank User:Jehochman for acting promptly in what he clearly believes was in defense of WP, and for unblocking DIREKTOR now. I think it is important for everyone to continue to focus on WP:AGF. JoeSperrazza (talk) 22:22, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jehochman's "bit of warning" just above launched AGF out the window for me. Whether or not Pharos' edits are beneficial, it seems to me Jehochman may well be using his admin tools to intimidate participants in a content dispute, in order to render an outcome he openly favors. -- Director (talk) 22:28, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No editorial outcome is pre-ordaned by my actions. My suggestion not to obstruct Pharos (or any editor) from improving the article is good advice for you (or any other editor). Please give him a chance and see in total what results, then discuss any diagreements. Jehochman ^Talk 22:40, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, its a suggestion and advice, not a "warning". That does sound much less like an open threat. -- Director (talk) 22:43, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Diffs

These diffs show the type of edit that is evidence of WP:OWN and WP:BATTLE. [4][5][6] I predict that if the editing dispute on Jews and Communism continues, the result will be arbitration and bans. If you don't want to be one of the editors who gets banned, please take the high road. I strongly recommend that you personally follow a zero revert rule. If you see an edit you don't like, go to the talk page and calmly, politely explain why and wait for other editors to respond. If any editor refuses to discuss, they are setting themselves up to be the ones sanctioned. Think long term, not about the article content of the next minute. Finally, you need to recognize that you won't get your way even half of the time. Make suggestions and take it in stride if they aren't adopted. It is better to get one third of what you want and have it stick, than to go for 100% and get nothing. Jehochman ^Talk 14:22, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to think they're evidence of WP:BRD and WP:CONS. Jehochman, the way to stabilize the article is to impose that policy on the participants. Simply following policy that embodies a lot of experience in conflict resolution. Anyone editing repeatedly to introduce changes that don't (yet) have consensus, or are merely still discussed - should be blocked. For a day, or two days.

Upholding policy. Its very, very simple, and it would be very, very effective. 0RR, if you'll pardon, is a terrible idea: I had to take one glance at the article to notice IZAK and others had already broken it, trying to take advantage of your roughing Producer and me up.

Hopefully it won't get to ARBCOM (I do know what that means), but if it becomes necessary, then so be it. I've had my share of experience over there, and I like to think the place has a function beyond being some kind of boogeyman. That said, I take your point, and I myself have decided to go by 1RR per day (at most, ofc). As always, I will certainly not revert-war for any new edits that are opposed on the talkpage.

Re Pharos, I appreciate your advice in modifying my (admittedly inappropriate) attitude, and I will certainly do my best to assume more good faith with regard to the user. However, I must ask: do you happen to know Pharos? Off-Wiki, I mean. -- Director (talk) 07:00, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe we live in the same part of the world and have met at a wiki meetup, but otherwise, no. I don't even remember his name is real life. Jehochman ^Talk 11:37, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah; my sock sense was tingling, apologies :). Used to go around hunting socks, with some success, if I do say so myself.

Well, all things considered, forgive me if I see it as rather ironic that you're more closely "associated" with Pharos than I with Producer. -- Director (talk) 16:02, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am alarmed by this edit [7]. You should never reference another editor's religion, race or nationality to challenge their edits or worse to suggest excluding them. This diff is ground to ban you from Wikipedia. Please remove it swiftly. Jehochman ^Talk 16:44, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I want it crystal clear: I did NOT suggest anyone's edits should be challenged, nor that anyone should be excluded, based on their religious beliefs. I suggested, as I had before, that IZAK is not a useful contributor, and should go away, NOT because of his religion, but because of his agenda-driven TE and POV-pushing. And that, I believe, is perfectly clear from my post. It is entirely irrelevant to me what religion he may subscribe to. What matters to me is that he follows policy, that he doesn't edit-war, or disrupt the talkpage.

Stating someone is religious, and is pushing a right-wing, religious agenda, is perhaps not entirely civil, but so far as I know - it takes a very liberal interpretation of policy to ban an editor for it from this project. The kind of "liberal" interpretation that an involved user might have.

Which brings me to my next point: you are very much WP:INVOLVED in that article. That is not really disputable at this point. I perceive you as biased towards a particular content outcome, and with regard to your off-Wiki acquaintances. According to WP:ADMIN, you are not qualified to issue sanctions to fellow involved users. Equally, you should not try to threaten and intimidate other users through "warnings". That is abuse of admin status.

This is setting aside that your insinuations and accusations, being little more than unsubstantiated opinions, are in effect perI think it is, in that I have stricken my request for IZAK to cease participating, and have made it clear my opposition to the user is not based on his religion or ethnicity, but rather his pushing a political agenda through edit-warring and TE. -- Director (talk) 18:30, 2 May 2014 (UTC)sonal attacks. When you say to someone he is pushing antisemitic propaganda, or presuming to exclude editors based on their religion - you are slandering that user.

I've reworded the post somewhat, to make my position clearer. And to avoid malicious misrepresentation of my comment. -- Director (talk) 18:17, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Frivolous invocation of WP:INVOLVED is not helpful. It is classic WP:BATTLE behavior. Look, you just need to strike through the piece of your comment where you mention IZAK's religion/ethnicity/race (whatever you want to call it). That's just irrelevant to the discussion and will only get you in hot water. You are welcome to discuss the edits. Jehochman ^Talk 19:36, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Not helpful"? I'm not attempting to be helpful, I am trying to preempt (what I perceive as) further WP:ADMINABUSE. You may view this as WP:BATTLE if you like, but I didn't indeff block you with no real rationale. Whether it is indeed "frivolous" or not, I myself believe its quite clear you are WP:INVOLVED in the article, not only on your own account, but also with regard to off-Wiki acquaintances you "warned" me not to revert. Requesting you not threaten to use your admin tools as if policy does not explicitly state you shouldn't (community ban? really?). If this goes on, obviously I'll have to see if I'm correct by requesting feedback on this whole issue.

I'm not trying to be abrasive though, so I will simply delete the whole comment. -- Director (talk) 19:53, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You've been needlessly hostile to me. What good thing does that attitude accomplish? Is it the truth? No, I have no relationship with Pharos other than that I met him once, and I recognize he's been an editor since 2004 and he has a sterling reputation. Is it mutually beneficial? No, you're harming yourself. Please rethink. Thank you for removing the concerning comment. Jehochman ^Talk 11:00, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly apologize, but I guess I'm not very friendly because the majority of our interactions consist of you indefinitely blocking me from the project, and then talking about banning me. I hope you can see how that might not be the best foundation for a productive relationship. Now, if you'd asked me your questions before blocking me.. -- Director (talk) 11:05, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The second time I asked before blocking you, and we seem to have resolved the matter. On that basis I hope we can go forward. Jehochman ^Talk 13:42, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. -- Director (talk) 15:15, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Diocletian's Palace, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Split (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:49, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jews_and_Communism_(2nd_nomination). Thanks. MarkBernstein (talk) 21:23, 9 May 2014 (UTC)Template:Z48[reply]

Director, I'm very happy that you have finally come to the realization that we were all "spending months in discussion on absolutely nothing." That's exactly how I feel. What really happened, whether you realize it or not, is that you blindly supported Producer (I have no idea why) and when the tide of support turned against him, you all of a sudden felt the need to change sides. Why do you "honestly feel nauseous" after reading a comparison? Why does it matter that the article was copied from an antisemitic site? Why does it matter where it came from? Any reasonable person should be able to look at information and decide for themselves whether the information is worthwhile, or propaganda, or whatever. I wonder if it may have something to do with being on the opposite side of the world (from me) and how propaganda is presented to you in your country compared to how propaganda is presented in my country. In any case, I'm really happy that you're able to see things differently, even though I don't understand your reasoning for changing your mind. I hope you know that I was giving you a hard time simply because it was so much fun, and also because you were sooooooo wrong! :-) I like you much better now that you agree with me. lol USchick (talk) 18:27, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I wasn't "sooo wrong", was I? :) I still think if the sources make the connection, then so should we. We have lots of articles like that.. But I'll be damned if I'll support an article based, even in part, on an an essay of that sort. As I said over there, my position is WP:Blow it up and start over. But I don't plan to be doing any "starting over" myself, though. Imo, if we do ever restart this thing, we should come to a consensus on reliable sources beforehand. -- Director (talk) 10:00, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I said thanks on my talk page but I want to make sure that you see a message from me saying thank you for my barnstar! It is very gracious of you and I am really touched.Smeat75 (talk) 23:13, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to second the sentiment of appreciation. Not everyone is able to change course so radically in such circumstances; in the face of a revelation that makes them as uncomfortable as this one clearly made you, some people will just find any way to deny or rationalize. You didn't and, despite all of the acrimony over that article and some misgivings that I had about your perspectives on things, when it came down it, you acted in a conscionable manner in the face of those unpleasant facts. Though I tried to stay out of the actual content debate until late in the game to focus on trying to advocate civility first as it broke down on the talk page, I think I can still speak for everyone when I say I'm glad we are all no longer divided on the issue. Sorry the situation had to end so uncomfortably for you, but at least we can all chalk it up to an educational experience. Snow talk 05:50, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fellas, the one thing I value more than anything else is rationality. If I perceive the objective point of view as being sidelined on the basis of emotion and personal sentiment - I will defend it to the last. It only follows that I in turn try not to be the one to get unduly attached to any viewpoint.

Yup. This wasn't a pleasant experience (could have finished three different projects by now..), but I guess it'll learn me to do more research before supporting something so strongly. My apologies again. -- Director (talk) 09:56, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to say to ignore some of the editors who seem bent on making this personal. I know it's difficult(believe me), but it's probably better in the long run. After all, I ignored some posts directed at me from a certain someone.  :-) In any case, have a good day. Dave Dial (talk) 15:43, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I agree with the above. There sure seem to be a lot of bad feelings out there. I think that what happens is that people take their eye off the ball. forget that it's all about content, that it's not about extracting apologies and acts of contrition (particularly since you've already apologized, which wasn't even absolutely necessary, as you had taken a stance in good faith). I'm no scholar on the subject. What I saw here was an article that was at the top of any Google search, an article that, as you aptly put it, made me a bit nauseous. It gave me a queasy feeling in my gut. But we have to rely on Wikipedia processes, and over time the process worked (or at least it seems to be working). More eyeballs came to the article. Smeat, after walking out, returned and made the discovery that he made. And you, Director, took an objective evaluation of the article and decided that yes, it originated on a racist website, and we can't have that. No one can reasonably expect more from you than what you've already done. Coretheapple (talk) 15:49, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. USchick (talk) 17:51, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We're discussing possibly opening another investigation of you for meat and/or sockpuppetry here. --Atlantictire (talk) 01:11, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Director,

Each day we discover new examples of dysfunction of the "internet community" system. Group behaviour is something fascinating but that should frighten all of us. Don't forget that the accusations that target you are just the results of such social mechanisms that lead to the lynching of the black sheep. Despite the basic and clever rules that were written to manage wikipedia, writing an encyclopaedia in such a context is more than a challenge. Good continuation. For your own wellness, but for no other reason, I advise you to self-ban from this article and topic. Pluto2012 (talk) 04:54, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I virtually did so right away I think. I said I wouldn't restart the article quite a while ago now. And I do also hereby self-ban myself from all topics relating to Jews and Judaism, which were never my interest at all. I also think Producer should be banned from that topic, but that banning either of us from the topic of Communism is objectively a bad idea. -- Director (talk) 11:37, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

USchick (talk) 23:15, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't. What's so damn funny, Chick? -- Director (talk) 00:21, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The only saving grace you have in my opinion, is your willingness to look outside yourself and to ask questions. I see this as an effort to improve as a human being. For this, I continue to like you, even though you make it very difficult sometimes. And you're also very funny, sometimes on purpose, sometimes in spite of yourself. Peace. USchick (talk) 01:12, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And you didn't throw me under the bus in your latest ANI nomination. Aaawwwww, that's so sweet! Thanks! :) USchick (talk) 01:51, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I am a riot at parties.. :) As regards the thread, well, I guess even when I make such a big mistake I draw the line at tolerating such poor diagnoses. And why would I mention you? I don't believe in quid pro quo ;). -- Director (talk) 02:01, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hahahahahahha! Love it! :) You shouldn't post links like that unless you want to reinforce your diagnosis. People around here have ZERO sense of humor! USchick (talk) 02:46, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've closed the AN thread that sought a topic ban against you as no consensus. I was going to leave it at that, but upon further reflecting, I think this warrants a little more than thread summary. I've run across you quite a few times on ANI and AN. I can't recall all of the times, but I know at various points I've supported and opposed some of the things that you've done in those threads. I also understand that you've taken a lot of heat in the last couple of days after you accepted that the article in question was sourced to a antisemitic article. So take this with however many grains of salt you choose to. However, I think what got you into this situation has been the same issues that has often led you to being at ANI. My impression of you has always been 'good editor, bad collaborator.' You seem to be right about 90% of the time I see you in these messes, and I think you're probably quite educated and informed. But I think this needs to be a beacon for you that other editors can be just as educated and informed. A little more patience and understanding of other editors is needed and would've helped you here. There were several editors saying that there fish stank and that more investigation was needed. Anyway, I'm just a kid from the US, not trying to be patronizing, so take whatever you find useful.--v/r - TP 21:20, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Director, I opposed the proposed sanction against you at AN. We've met on a couple of article talk pages in the past and, FWIW, my take on you is exactly as TParis puts it. DeCausa (talk) 21:31, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for your input. The way I see it, my mistakes were #1 being blinded by the bare fact that the sources were scholarly and reliable, and #2 what appears to have been an excessive confidence in Producer's work, built through years of experience editing together. Both others and myself have acquired a respect for the quality of his contributions. As such, I dismissed all the claims of some kind of antisemitic synthesis, presented without any objective evidence, as a kind of emotional reaction only to be expected in such a difficult article. My gut told me this could be fishy, but I do honestly always try to ignore it and go by the facts. I'm damn sorry for all this, and I just want to put an end to the animosity and move on. Or rather, take a wiki break. -- Director (talk) 21:40, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"other editors can be just as educated and informed" and obnoxious! Don't forget obnoxious (like me)!  ;) USchick (talk) 22:25, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you and Producer are safe and not affected by the floods. USchick (talk) 08:15, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, I'm on the coast. -- Director (talk) 08:59, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yah, just noticed this massive body of water already covering much of the landscape! Luckily I have located an ingenious device that may allow me to traverse it on my way to safety.. :) -- Director (talk) 16:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously? Your area is flooding?!?!?! I live in an area of frequent natural disasters and worked on disaster preparedness teams. The danger is not the flood, but the power of the water to carry objects with great force underneath the water, like telephone poles that serve as invisible missiles under murky water. The next danger is the disease floating around in the water from backed up sewers. If you're wading in it, all kinds of microscopic organisms enter through your skin and make you violently ill. More people die from that, than from drowning. Also, your tap water is probably contaminated as well. This is very serious, and if your general population is not already prepared for it, this will be extremely devastating. While you still can, I urge you to go online and read up on it. You should have a plan about what to do when you lose power. The water in your faucet is already compromised and shouldn't be used for drinking. Also, don't forget your animals. During evacuation, animals are often not allowed, so act now and leave if at all possible. Later, when lots of people want to leave at the same time, your options will be limited. This is a great time to take a vacation far away, you can always return later. Don't let your animals drink the flood water. Check on your relatives. Good luck and keep in touch! USchick (talk) 17:11, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, not seriously, I was joking; I said I was on the coast, when I said I see a "large body of water covering the landscape", I was referring to something like this. The Adriatic :). -- Director (talk) 17:25, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh good! You should still make a plan. Stock up on bottled water and filters (antibacterial AND antiviral). Filters are easier to carry than water. Prepare for refugees coming to your area. If not in your home, in your work and in your community. This will have ripple effects all over Europe. USchick (talk) 17:30, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sincerest thanks for your concern, but I live in a city on a (rather hilly) peninsula, surrounded by the sea on three sides, and very, very far from any major rivers. The danger of flooding is entirely non-existent.. The only thing we get around here are earthquakes, and that very rarely (if ever..). It'd be like getting flooded in downtown San Francisco.

But I hear its pretty bad up in the north of the country. -- Director (talk) 17:37, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your area is very beautiful. I understand why you don't think you need to prepare, which tells me that no one is prepared. I hope you're right. :) USchick (talk) 17:43, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, couple years ago we had a foot or two of snowfall (which is very very rare), and the whole city ground to a halt for three days. Yup, I'd say we're definitely unprepared.. but honestly I don't know if it makes sense to be prepared for something that never really happened. We do get tremors from time to time, but never a proper "earthquake" (though they are known to be a rare hazard in the region, more to the south). Serious flooding is pretty much physically impossible.. The worst that actually happens is you know, like a really bad storm, with torrential rain and strong wind, maybe somewhere a tree gets blown away, or a sailboat gets smashed against its dock. Or sometimes the 19th century drainage in Diocletian's Palace will be overwhelmed so a couple shops get flooded. Trivial stuff like that. -- Director (talk) 18:15, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but the idea behind using birth control is to prepare for things that "may never happen." :-) The idea behind disaster preparedness is to be prepared for any disaster. You never know, ANYTHING can happen and often does. And that's when you don't want to be the one suffering. Wouldn't you rather be in a position to help others instead of waiting to be rescued? At a minimum, that means having a solar device to power your phone, access to clean water, a predetermined meeting place to communicate with your loved ones when all communication is down, and an exit plan. That's all I'm going to say, because we can argue forever. ;-) And you don't scare me with your Yoda, I've been to the dark side and back. I can take you there on a field trip! lol USchick (talk) 18:34, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The probability of Direktor getting wet from the floods is like of a guy from San Francisco being affected by the rise of watter of the Great Lakes in Chicago lol... FkpCascais (talk) 19:44, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The worst natural disaster that may happend in Direkor´s city is to dive into the sea and hit an old Roman amphora with the head... FkpCascais (talk) 19:51, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, or get shelled by the JRM ;)

Anyway Chick, as far as having any direct effect on me, the floods might indeed be happening in the Baltic. And to flood where I currently am, you'd need to drain the sea, push the city down to sea level, and run a medium-sized river through it. For starters. Talk to Fkp here.. not sure where he's at, and if he's in Cascais he's about as threatened as I am, but he may know some folks in the endangered areas. -- Director (talk) 21:06, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very happy to hear that. I wonder how many of the 20,000 people who had to evacuate weren't prepared either and didn't have their important documents in one place, ready to go? With Putin on the loose, and rogue US drones flying around, who knows what can happen! lol USchick (talk) 22:15, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure a great many people were quite unprepared, as this appears to be by far the worst flood in the recorded history of the area. From what I understand, whole buildings were washed away, foundations and all. Re Putin, well, I'm sure he wouldn't be having such a fit if the US wasn't sponsoring coups in his private empire.

But where do you live (if I may inquire), that you are so well informed on the dangers of flooding? -- Director (talk) 01:13, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For time being I don´t think you Direktor need to wander if your town is going to be shelled by now. But if you really get me mad I may consider talking to Commodore Andrija Andrić of the Imperial Serbian Navy to lend me a 1929 River patrol boat named Stražar and when I go around Danube into the Black Sea and then pass Bosphorus, turn around Greece, and then get near you by the year 2017 I may throu little rocks at your window and challenge you to a nasty game of chess. If you accept of course, if you don´t, I may pee from my boat Stražar into your beatiful sea in revenge, and take a long trip back to my Serbian Empire... Yeah, I may pass to see my beatiful family old hollyday house (2 floors, nice garden, and the beach just 50m down) near Dubrovnik which we had to sell for few pennies at same time the shelling of Split happend because it was invaded, pillaged and painted with signs "Death to Serbs" "Srbe na vrbe" "Kill Chetniks" and so on ;)

Yes, I´m in Cascais as allways. I´ve been in Belgrade in March. I don´t have no one from close family or friends affected by the floods, but some family and friends are actively partcipating in the rescuing missions. There has been some nice solidarity around such a sad event. Till now it hit mostly non-densely populated rural areas (except a few towns), but the news are that Belgrade is expected to see the rise of the Sava and Danube rivers to very high water-levels in a day or two. We´ll see what will happend. FkpCascais (talk) 04:13, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of natural desasters, I survived the 1985 Mexico City earthquake. I was preparing to go to school that morning in my parents 6th floor apartment in the Polanco, Mexico City neighbourhood when sudently everything started brutally shaking. The earthquake lasted for an incredible time of more then 3 minutes. Those minutes seemed to never end. We had a living room with one wall in glass (an enormous window) from where I saw building collapsing and just waited along my parents and the paniking maid the moment our building was going to collapse too. It ended not collapsing and was just damaged on one side, and we immediatelly that day moved to a house far from any tall buildings. Its something I will never forget, and those images in my head of those building collapsing and killing all people inside... ufff :( FkpCascais (talk) 04:23, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes FkpCascais, deciding where to locate your household is definitely something to consider once you have lived through a catastrophe. I live in the Southeastern United States. During Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita people were being evacuated in helicopters and some of those people ended up in my region, far away from the disaster area. Somehow I ended up being in charge of communications for our entire region. Thankfully, I was prepared, because my organization had just finished disaster preparedness planning. At that time, there was a national mandate that required everyone to coordinate efforts and plan for natural disasters, but anyone with a brain understood that the real reason was a terrorist threat like another September 11 attack. It's a long story about how I ended up in charge, but I did. Since I was directly involved with the planning teams, I was probably more qualified than upper management to deal with the crisis. After each event, I was officially recognized by the government. The coordinated planning effort proved to be so useful, that people keep it in place and keep updating it. It's been used for all kinds of things since then. For all our faults, one thing we do very well in the US, is self organize.

We also have a lot of local disasters, but everyone in the South is extremely self sufficient, so some stories barely make the news. Anytime there's a disaster, you never hear other countries sending aid, people are so used to taking care of problems, it has to be something really serious before anyone from the outside takes notice. I would never live in a large metropolitan area with skyscrapers and subway systems. That's a terrible place to be stuck, with no way out and crazy people everywhere. USchick (talk) 04:58, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

USchick, it is admirable how you offered yourself to help in those situations and the way you dealt with it. It is people like you, practical and brave, that are most needed.

The situation happening in Southeast Europe is a bit different, in a sense that, well, while in the Southern states of US people know about the frequency of hurricanes, in Serbia and around it is not that often that big floods happend, so we can´t really blame the people for not being prepared to something rarely or ever happening. Also, if it would have been a minor flood, I guess people would have dealt with it easily, but once the flood is as big as moving houses out of place, hardly any individual preparation would help. Army and people made artificil barriers saving many places for further damage. FkpCascais (talk) 03:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding? It wouldn't help if the people had water filters? It wouldn't help to have their documents and medicines together so they could evacuate quickly? Seriously? I'm not blaming them, I'm just saying that there is a lot less suffering when people are prepared. The last big flood we had here was 2 years ago, it was 13 miles/20 km from my home and covered 44 miles/70km and no one died, no one suffered, it wasn't even a "serious problem" because people know what to do in these situations. I'm watching the rescue efforts in Europe, and the lessons learned from the big hurricanes are being used in the evacuation. Pets are going with people, security measures are being followed, neighboring countries are responding. Nice job! :) There are also 300,000 people without power who are not evacuating. Who knows how long they will be there without power. I hope some of them are prepared, so they can help their neighbors. USchick (talk) 05:20, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh for the love of Dixie, CSchick (which is what I'm calling you from now on :D)... When you have absolutely no reason to think you will ever have to be evacuated, because no one was ever evacuated from your area for any (non-Serb-related :)) reason - ever, then its just plain stupid to buy filters. You might as well carry around a lightning rod in case you're ever smitten by Zeus the Thunderer, or a tiny novelty umbrella in case an asteroid lands on you.. Or in case a volcano erupts under your backyard, etc. The documents, well, I suppose its always a good idea to keep them in one place, if for no other reason than to find them more easily when you gotta go down to the DMV. And I dare say most people probably do that regardless of whether they think they might be evacuated or not.

Fkp, I whole-heartily recommend the riverboat thing.. I doubt the canoes and slingshots of the local Navy would be effective, especially if you bring enough bricks to chuck at them.. Though I guess eventually NATO might send an official fishing trawler equipped with hand grenades, and then you'd be in trouble.. Re the Dubrovnik house, well, guess you shouldn't have sold it.. I'm sure you would have gotten it back eventually. If it makes you feel any better, my family also lost a house there for different reasons (and in the old town no less).. methinks that might be a general trend.. -- Director (talk) 13:28, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes USchick, Direktor is right. You can´t really blame people for not being prepared over there. It is not even a matter of being prepared or not. From what I hear people are actually responding quite well there considering the ammount of devastation the floods are making. Also, you said how when dissasters happend in the US how they mostly passed unnoticed because people are prepared. I´m not so sure about that, today we know when the tiniest village in US suffers something, and, thanks to the global communications, I am glad we all know. Also, we all saw for instance the huge fires in California (btw, same sort of huge summer fires happend in the coast of Croatia and in Portugal where I am now) and how they affected populations. It´s all relative. Also, you said how US doesn´t need help from other countries, but the US and European reality is quite different. European countries are more like separate US states. It is normal in Europe to have many countries helping eachother to cope with such events. It is not kind of "shame" or anything, it woyuld be stupid to a country to get proud and refuse help (it happend before in some cases with bad results). Also, only a few US states are capable of dealing alone with some major disaster, obviously the federal agencies take charge with halp from many states being activated.

So, it is obviously good to have the population aware and educated on how to respond in emergency scenarios, but when we face major disasters unfortunatelly it is "normal" to have things out of hand. That is when brave and prepared people like you become extremelly important in order to help and organise the most vulnerable ones :)

Direktor, it was my parents that sold the house, and basically because the news we were receving from one neighbour were that the house had been broked-in several times, robbed, vandalised, painted with those inscriptions, etc. and that neighbour even called the police, but at time police didn´t do anything. Everybody knew who had done that but no one wanted to have problems with them, neither would accept to be witnesses. So at that time it really seemed that going there again would be impossible, so selling it for a ridiculous price was the only option that seemed logical by then. I know some Serbs didn´t sell their properties and later they got them back, however at that time the situation was so tense that one was wondering if could even go there at all and what more will happend to the property if it didn´t go. You certainly remember the tension at that period. And defending the property and summer-houses of Serbs was not a priority, there was even speculation the local police was even involved in those actions. I didn´t wanted to talk any of this here, but you made me talk about it when you mentioned the shelling. It´s really hard to make an account of how much we all lost with the situation we all founded ourselfs in, if you suffered more by being affraid of being hit by the bombing, or me by loosing a noce house my family invested in with their hard work. One thing is trouth, beside a few profeteers and a minority, the rest of us (all in the region) we all lost, directly or indirectly. PS: Why did your family lost a house there? We lost it because everyone in the town (a small town near Dubrovnik) knew it was a summer-house of Serbs. FkpCascais (talk) 02:03, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I know that everyone has a different way of doing things, I wasn't trying to imply that our way is better. It's nice to see people getting along for a change, I wish they would do it more often, and not just during disasters. It's fascinating to hear your stories because, growing up, I always heard that Yugoslavia was so much more advanced than the Soviet Union, I never imagined you could have the same kind of idiotic things happening as in Ukraine, but it all sounds very similar. During your war we had a large number of refugees from your area come through my city in the US, and I became friends with them. They had some wild stories and they showed off their scars from whoever was chasing them and shooting at them. They tried to explain what the war was about, but it was nothing that made any sense to me. It's fascinating to talk to someone now who is still there after the war. Thanks guys! :)

Heh "still there after the war", hahah :). Um, so far as I know, FkpCascais is in, well, Cascais, Portugal. That aside, I thank you for the apparent commendation of my bravery. It can't be all that bad, though, if millions of people feel the need to crowd here every summer (lots of Americans too, by the bushelfull). 14 million last year, apparently.. which, I can tell you, feels like 50 in a country of just four million residents.

I many ways (ex-)Yugoslavia was more "advanced", and still kind of is, in spite of the wars. Before the breakup of course, and particularly before the 80s economic crisis, Yugoslavia was miles ahead of every country in the Eastern Bloc (mostly because it wasn't a part of the Eastern Bloc). Russia and Ukraine are huge countries, and as such vastly more significant on a world scale, however, given the choice between the two, its really no contest as to where you would prefer to live. The standard is far better, the economy more stable, job conditions more tolerable, the climate is incomparably better.. you don't share an apartment with other families as in many parts of, say Moscow... You might call the Balkans "Eastern Europe", but over there you've got the real Eastern Europe. A goodly chunk of the Balkans are now in the EU, my own country included.. We've got the "European seal of approval", heheh.. :)

This is of course not to say you'd not prefer "to live and die in Dixie", as the song goes ;). -- Director (talk) 07:26, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful when you use the word Dixie, some people get extremely offended by it. (Not me, I wasn't here and I don't claim responsibility for whatever was done here by people who I'm not related to in any way. lol) And yes, Director, I think you're very brave, and fabulous in every way. Almost. *rolls eyes* USchick (talk) 20:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I know I know, just poking fun. -- Director (talk) 12:02, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From the Dalmatia article, I see that it's not just me you like to argue with? Should I take that personally? I was thinking maybe I was the only one? I also see that those arguments are no match to my arguments, he may frustrate you a little, but he doesn't make your head hurt. You must miss me terribly! ;) LOL USchick (talk) 05:57, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still waiting for a very simple "thank you click" for the edit where I was defending you. I guess I should stop waiting, huh? USchick (talk) 01:07, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha ha, THANK YOU! Maybe if you weren't so mean to people, you wouldn't have all this trouble. Good luck! USchick (talk) 02:41, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Its 6 AM here, Chick - I was sleeping :) -- Director (talk) 03:53, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh........... what are you wearing? ;) USchick (talk) 04:30, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A white coat, what else? (though by now I'm at the hospital.. :)) -- Director (talk) 05:00, 4 June 2014 (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 reviews: Nick-D looks at The Lost Boys of Anzac Op-ed: Peacemaker67 on Featured Articles involving Yugoslavia in World War II

Hello, Director. You have new messages at IvanOS's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Director! I assume you'll be interested to take a look at edits recently made at Prime Minister of Yugoslavia, when you have enough time to do that. Cheers! --Sundostund (talk) 13:03, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can see no problems (aside from SnakeBG's bit), kudos. -- Director (talk) 13:09, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm talking about his bit. I didn't want to revert it myself, to avoid edit warring, etc... You spend a great deal of time working on that article, so I wanted to inform you about his recent edits. Please, take a look at that article from time to time, in case of some more "problematic" edits. Cheers! --Sundostund (talk) 13:25, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had a feeling that's what you were after, hah! :) -- Director (talk) 14:39, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you don't mind it! :) --Sundostund (talk) 14:43, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly not. Thanks for the heads up, and kudos again for the clever way in which it was relayed. -- Director (talk) 14:57, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Check it again, same thing. --Sundostund (talk) 23:38, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As for Marusic, I'd be perfectly happy if he discuss that issue with you. After all you added Marusic to the list about 9 months ago... I'd accept any solution over which you two can agree - you spend a big chunk of time working of that article, now he found out some document according to which Marusic wasn't PM... Anyway, please sort it out with him, I'm really not interested to jump into that discussion. --Sundostund (talk) 11:49, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question about the coat of arms of Croatia proper. At our page, Coat of arms of Croatia, it says that the coat of arms of Croatia proper, as represented in the coat of arms of the Republic of Croatia, is the image linked on the right. However, at Croatia proper, you've put the chessboard in. I don't know enough about the subject, but I figure that either the Croatia proper article or the Coat of arms of Croatia article is wrong, or perhaps I'm missing something. RGloucester — ☎ 19:15, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, firstly, the coa of Croatia (the republic) is something of a shambles.. Of the five arms that are supposed to make up the (rather tacky, 80s-style design) crown - three are incorrect. Apparently the dude given the job to put together the heraldic symbol of the country cared so much about heraldic accuracy, that he altered symbols so they fit his pretty colour scheme. I wrote a special section to showcase the accurate versions of the symbols.

Not to ramble, this is the accurate version of that coat of arms, but red didn't fit the guy's blueish crown so the thing is blue. All that said - I have no idea what the devil that coa is supposed to represent. Its supposed to be some kind of "earliest known symbol", but who knows whether it actually is such.. the Kingdom of Croatia had a checkerboard coa since at least 1495. In short, while it may be some old symbol used for god knows what, its not the latest symbol used for the Kingdom of Croatia. Hence I'm disinclined towards using it, unless someone can show that it actually is a symbol for Croatia proper in some way. -- Director (talk) 19:39, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Now if you'll excuse me, I must watch our team get steamrollered in São Paulo :). -- Director (talk) 19:55, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disagree with you, as I too find the "crown", if one can call it that, "tacky", and quite bizarre. I'm aware that the Kingdom of Croatia used the chessboard, so I suppose you are quite correct in that regard. I imagine that the Coa article should be adjusted at some point, though, so that it doesn't specify that as representing "Croatia proper" in that sense. RGloucester — ☎ 20:23, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! You already did it. Thanks very much. Enjoy the football. RGloucester — ☎ 20:25, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine they only added the crown because of uncomfortable historical associations carried in a flag with an "unadorned" coa.. -- Director (talk) 09:54, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I kindly ask of you to that you do not call me a sock puppet. There has been no reason to do so, especially on the talk page. Asdisis (talk) 19:57, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some of your comments arouse suspicion, I'm afraid. -- Director (talk) 19:59, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion about belligerents order for WWII in the talk page [8] which challenge previous consensus. Current change for WWII article is ranking USA above United Kingdom, ranking France above China and adding the leaders of Romania and Hungary into Info box. I thought you should know, as you seem to join the previous discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.38.217 (talk) 00:47, 21 June 2014 (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 reviews: Nick-D looks at life aboard a US aircraft carrier and Hawkeye7 considers the role of food in World War II

Please, don't go into a grand conspiracy mode... I've had enough of that this week on another front (pun intended). Nobody actually removed anything about the NOB from Wikipedia. Heck, I'd be much happier if we actually had people write more about it in such a summary article, whatever its name, because this one remains an article about WWII in Yugoslavia that hardly even touches on the context of the major elements of the war such as the persecution campaigns, concentration camps, the stories of the People's Heroes, the strategic bombings... --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:06, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going into conspiracy mode, I'm sure this is just a mistake, caused in no small part by my own neglect.. You simply can not deny, though, that by merging the Invasion with the Partisan war into one topic - we lost the Partisan war article. The NOB, for the first time, no longer has a dedicated article. Sure its still part of the scope, but its also part of World War II's scope, for example.

Sure, I always wanted to fix that place up, but didn't get much farther than the lede and infobox because of stonewalling from the Chetniks article crowd (ages ago). I eventually got frustrated with the title issue and left. But now I don't even care about the title (or even enough to fix the empty field in the infobox), since the scope itself has been altered from a very specific resistance war to "all conflicts in WWII occurring on the territory of Yugoslavia" (is Istria a part of that? Zadar? Lastovo? Albania?). I think you know this is not usually done in the sources: the guerrilla war is treated as separate, because it involved different actors, was fought in a different way, and occurred significantly later (as Peacemaker had pointed out). If an overview article is truly regarded as necessary by participants, fine - but then an NOB article is perfectly justified, because we do not have one. Sort of marginalizing the Invasion and pretending it isn't there in our current article, doesn't change the fact that its included now. The topic isn't the Partisan war - but "everything in Yugoslavia". -- Director (talk) 19:52, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Resistance war in Yugoslavia", or Yugoslav resistance war, now there's a good NDESC title.. -- Director (talk) 20:08, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Andrewjacksonclipper.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 21:23, 11 July 2014 (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 reviews: Jonas Vinther and Nick-D look at examples of electronic media Op-ed: TomStar81 on the shot heard around the world

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Director reported by User:NeilN (Result: ). Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:14, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As a result of a community decision, broad editing restrictions apply to all pages broadly related to the Syrian Civil War. These sanctions are described at Talk:Syrian Civil War/General sanctions and a brief summary is included below:

• Sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process.
• If you inappropriately edit pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or a topic or article ban.
• A one revert per twenty-four hours restriction applies to articles broadly related to the Syrian Civil War, with the wording listed here.
• Please familiarise yourself with the full decision at Talk:Syrian Civil War/General sanctions before making any further edits to pages related to the Syrian Civil War.
• Sanctions imposed may be appealed to the imposing administrator or at the appropriate administrators' noticeboard.

Sanctions may only be imposed after the user is notified sanctions are in effect. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.

This notice is effective only if logged at Talk:Syrian civil war/General sanctions#Log of notifications.