Juro

Hi!

Juro

==From Ihcoyc== I'm sure you'll get an official welcome later. Just wanted to ask if you were the same fellow who has added all of the interesting info to Jozef Tiso before you created a user page? Good job. -- User:Ihcoyc 18:43, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC) Yes. ==From Andre Engels== Don't worry about your mention on Wikipedia:Problem users. It just happens that User:Tester edited your User page, nothing else. Only User:Tester, User:Groessler, User:Wartortle and User:Donnie Ng are under suspicion, User:Josh Cherry, User:Opus33, User:Introscop, User:Jaleho and you are innocent bystanders. User:Andre Engels 12:08, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC) ==From Valasek== Hi, have a look on [http://sk.wikipedia.org Slovak Wikipedia] to help us improve that. Have a great times here!
Pozri si [http://sk.wikipedia.org Slovensk� Wikip�diu], v�tame ak�koľvek pomocn� roku. Str�v tu super čas!
-- User:Valasek 08:41, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC) ==From V�t Zv�novec== Vid�m, že jste opravil zpět opravy Vašich chyb. Mysl�m, že je nem� cenu diskutovat zvl�šť, tak to vezmu popořadě zde: # Edvard Beneš. Buď uzn�v�te Mnichov a dobu nesvobody, nebo II. exil a prozat�mn� st�tn� zř�zen�. Pokud to druh�, tak Benešova abdikace byla vynucen� a neplatn�. Proto byl presidentem nepřetržitě od roku 1935 a v exilu od roku 1938. # KSČ by nikdo za prvn� republiky do vl�dy nevzal, i kdyby vyhr�la volby. # Konservativismus je přesně definovan� pojem, kter� s komunismem nem� nic společn�ho. A krom toho Mlyn�ř a spol. za "konservativce" označovali Bilaka a spol., nikoliv centristy. # ''to control'' znamen� ř�dit nebo ovl�dat, nikoliv kontrolovat. Jakeš nebyl členem ž�dn� ř�d�c� n�brž kontroln�, tj. dozorč� komise. To, že to nějac� Američani takto překl�daj�, ještě neznamen�, že tomu rozuměj�. # V �stavě 9. května ž�dn� vedouc� role nebyla, ať už de iure, nebo de facto. Je mi l�to. # �stava z roku 1960 se naz�vala "socialistick�", nev�m proč tento fakt chcete censurovat. # Vlado Clementis i Gust�v Hus�k byli stař� kommunist�. KSČ z vl�dy ž�dn� nekomunisty nevyhazovala. -- User:V�t Zv�novec 17:18, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC) First of all, two points: * You should stop writing anything in other languages then English in this language version (even if the English should not be perfect), because the talk pages are supposed to be understable for everybody. Therefore I will answer in English * I am not the author of any of the articles corrected by you (except for the years sections under Benes and Gottwald). I simply have put them as public domain articles on Wikipedia. Since most of „my“ articles and edits regarding Czechoslovakia stem from a (quit good) official US government or Slovak Academy of Sciences text, I am obviously more suspicious towards any quick edit of these texts than in the case of other articles. And now your points: ::1. The fact that the Munich agreement is void does not mean that everything that happened after the agreement (even if it indirectly resulted from it) did not happen and is also void, because that would for example imply that the British, US and later Soviet government did not recognize the Czechoslovak government in exile (on July 21 1940) [because according to your argument the pre-Munich Czechoslovakia was still in existence, so that there could be no government in exile to be recognized] and so on. Imagine what riduculous consequences for the description of history we would get if we would “delet” all events that happened after an associated agreement was cancelled in retrospect. In our case the truth is that Benes abdicated (he was not forced to do so, although of course it was a consequence of the Munich agreement), then he was a professor in London (not claiming that he is still the president), and (only) on July 9 1940 the Czechoslovak National Committee established a provisional „st�tn� zř�zen�“ of Czechoslovakia, which included the Office of the President (Benes), the Government and the State Council. And it was only on July 21 1940 that he became president again, because only then the British government recognized this „st�tn� zř�zen�“ (as the first world government to do so), thereby recognizing Czechoslovakia. In other words, it is only from July 21 1940 onwards that we have three subjects of international law [Czechoslovakia (Benes), Slovakia (Tiso) and The Protectorate (or rather the Reich)] – of course depending on whether the country in question recognized the first one or the other two, but nevertheless there were three possible subjects. Furthermore, the interpretation in my original version is not my personal opinion, but the official opinion of all scientific Czech and Slovak encyclopedias I have (both from the Communist and from the present era) and particularly it is the opinon of the Slovak Academy of Sciencies, which is a reliable source. Therefore I will revert your change, but you can add your opinion as an interesting remark in the text if you want. :2. If the issue is that the Communist Party was nevertheless a relatively strong party and you think that the sentence with the unsufficient strenght was missleading in this context, then O. K. :3. The word Conservative has many meanings, I and the authors understood it in the meaning 2 of [http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary]. What you understand under Conservative was a special (negative) connotation the word received during a certain period within the Communist Era in some countries, but this is an official US text based on hundreds of sources and the way how the Americans called the wing at that time. :4. Here again to control also means to check or so (as you can see in any big English-only dictionary), although I know that one of the first things the English-learners learn is that control does not mean that. But since [http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=control] nowadays says that this meaning is archaic, we can keep your edits. :5. The last modified version did not say that, it only said that it enabled the Communists to become de-facto leaders. I mean, if a constitution is constructed in such a way that one party is able to stay at power permanently under the constitution, and it makes most of the economy available to the party (namely through the provisions on nationalization), what else does the party need to get its “leading role”?. And do you really think that the authors of the original version (which was even stricter then my last edit) did not have the English translation of the constitution when writing the text? – constitutions are usually the first texts to be translated. :6. Please write what edit you are referring to (But I can imagine two problems: a) the constitution was also in force after 1990, when it was not called Socialist anymore, b) for technical reasons the name of the article is the 1960 constitution of Czechoslovakia :7. First, again this is a language problem: In the US, government does not mean only “vl�da”, it has a wider meaning (basically all institutions governing the country – not only the ministers). The editor simply wanted to say that non-communists were removed from leading posts of the country. Second, the sentence on Hus�k obviously was not meant to be an example of the previous sentence. -- User:Juro 01:52, 26 Feb 2004 (CET) : OK, I'll answer in English. Sorry for Czech, but I've thought it would be easier to exchange views if we would talk in Czech and Slovak. : a) ''Official translations''. You must not rely on them. Even they have a lot of mistakes. I can give you two examples from Czech legaslation. ''Central authority'' was officially translated as ''centr�ln� autorita'', although correct should be ''�středn� �řad''. ''In force'' is officially translated as ''platnost'', although correct should be ''�činnost''. : 1. a) Munich Treaty. Not every legal act after 29 September 1939 is null and void, but every legal act depending on this is. : 1. b) Recogniction is a declaratory act (ex tunc), not constitutive (ex nunc). : 1. c) Statement, that "pre-Munich Czechoslovakia was still in existence" was argument of the whole Second Resistance, not only mine. : 1. d) Where the government is situated, whether at home or exile, depends on circumstances, not denying existence of a state. For instance, government was seated in Kosice, although the lawful seat was Praha. : 1. e) It is not only description of history (de facto), but first of all decrition of law (de jure). If Beneš lawfully abdicated, he could not be the President in 1940. Please respect London Provisional State Constitution. I can give tons of scientific articles about that, supporting that view. It is a pity that some historians do not recognize legal aspects of their claims. : 1. f) I can make a compromise: write about historical facts, but legal interpretation should stand first. : 2. a) http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=Conservative&x=0&y=0 stipulates my meaning - 2nd case. 3rd case is never related to politics. Therefore there are none conservative communists. : 3. b) Some Westeners accepted Communist perception of terms, but it was journalistic approach, not scientific. Therefore "conservative" communists is acceptable, but not preferable. : 5. a) The Constitution did not enable anything. We would have communism even if 1920 Constitution was still in force. Coup d'etat was on 25 February 1948, not on 9 May 1948. : 5. b) I don't know the intentions of writers of your text. But Ninth-of-May Constitution has nothing to do with legal or ''de facto'' leading role of KSC. It was only formal text. : 6. You are right. It was the ''original'' name only. : 7. a) The government. You are right. But purges were in the whole public life, for instance in economy, not only in government. : 7. b) Hus�k should have a separate paragraph then. : -- User:V�t Zv�novec 10:50, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC) We could discuss here each of the above points, especially point 1, for years, but since the current state of the articles is quite O.K. now, I'll only mention some points: ad 2a) This is simply not true. Of course there are conservative Communists in the meaning 3 of http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=Conservative&x=0&y=0 (just as there conservative members of any kind of party in the world), and of course case 3 is related also to politics. And the term conservative communists is even used very often both in English and in Slovak modern (everyday) texts nowadays even in terms of the pre-1989 Communism. But in relation to the article this is really not that important. ad 5b) I cannot imagine how the Communists could remain permanent de-facto (-because that's what we are talking about)leaders in the country according to e.g. the 1920 constitution, because there were e.g. no provisions that (so to say from now on) the whole economy is officially state-owned (as it was the case in the 1948 C.) and the Communists "were the state" at the time when the constitution in question was set up. And, of course a constitution (which is a formal text) has factual implications - as the supreme law of a country. ad 7b)O.K. (You can even rewrite the article completely, since - except for the years- it is not based on any special official source or so) : I agree that every disputed article is now correct. I am not satisfied with Communist Party of Czechoslovakia because lack of reformists, but this another case. : The term "conservative communist" is litteral "translation" of reformist expression. In communist countries there were not any Conservatives, that's why it was possible. But in Western countries it was rather absurd. There are no conservative liberals, no conservative socialists, no conservative anarchists etc. I agree some people in Eastern Europe use it in that sense, but this is caused by not knowing what Conservatism is. : Ad 5b. The National Front won the elections. This was the basis for absolute KSC power. Not the constitution which was important for the name and composition of bodies only. No one cared about human rights. They were not enforceable. : The whole economy was not officially state-owned. Officially there was no difference between 1945 - 1948 and 1948 - 1960. : Ad 7b. OK. But I don't the see reason for doing that. : -- User:V�t Zv�novec 10:32, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC) ==From Cautious== Rulers of Slovakia: The information that are missing I couldn't find in the text. Apparently Slovakia were ruled by Arpads under overlord rule of Poland? This is not making to much sense to me, since many times Poland and Hungary fought over Slovakia. I think I see the problem - the text uses the (almost invisible) abbreviation A for Arpads. And yes - Slovakia was rules by Arpads,who were in conflict with the Arpads ruling present-day Hungary, under overlord of Poland. Concerning other details see below Arpads. What were the borders of principality in Nitra? Did they reach Donau river? User:Cautious 08:35, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC) At the time in question (1000), the exact borders were approximately todays southwesten borders of Slovakia (ie also the Danube), and in the north maybe somewhere above the todays towns Trencin - Zvolen - Lucenec + adjacent northern central present-day Hungary. But note that the Poles did not conquer the Nitra principality only, but also the remaining present-day Slovakia (except for an easternmost strip), which was ruled many by unknown Slav/Slovak regional rulers around castles separated in various Slovak mountains and valleys (Slovakia is a mountainous country with many separate mountain ranges). User: Juro == Arpads == No, not much other than copyedits, as described in the commit log messages. I disambiguated a link after that. --User:Shallot 10:34, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC) ==Edit of Czech National Party== on your edit it of this article, The party was called national Socialist in 1896. Benes came in and changed it to add just the "slovak" part. What's your references that he changed it to the Socialist party?? User:WHEELER 15:26, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC) See the article. I have also added important information and moved it to the better known and longer lasting name version. User:Juro Thanks for your work on the article. You write: "In 1938, a part of the Czech membership entered into the Strana n�rodn� jednoty (Party of National Unity), while a part of the Slovak members joined Hlinka's Slovak People's Party." Can you please elaborate on this a little? Was this forcible or voluntary? Why did they join these parties? ThanksUser:AndyL 01:55, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC) I've created a Slovak People's Party article, feel free to make contributions etcUser:AndyL 03:32, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC) I have added an article on the Party of National Unity and later on I will correct the article on Slovak People's Party. User:Juro ---- Dear Juro, If the short form Spojen� št�ty is unusual in Slovak, then you should not enter it at all. It is enough to enter the full form under the next heading "United States of America". A separate entry for "United States" exists for languages in which the short form is in fact usual! :: I doubt that in most of the languages listed the form United States is as usual as in English. For example, the given German form is as unsual as it is in Slovak, nevertheless it exists. In other words, where the Americans say US, the Slovaks and Germans say USA and so on or yet in other words in some other languages, US is not the equivalent of the English US. But ignoring this - in my opinion very important - fact, actually we can keep Spojene staty, if you want. Also, there is a problem with listing "Holandsko" both under "Holland" and under "Netherlands", because there are many other languages in which the local version of "Holland" is used as the official name of the country. In those cases, no entry should be given under "Netherlands". However, as a compromise solution, I would suggest writing as follows: Nizozemsko (Slovak before 1830; since 1830 only Holandsko is used), Here I absolutely disagree. Even if the OFFICIAL name of the Netherlands in other languages (in which ones?- I really would like to know them) is by coincidence identical with one province, why not list these other language forms? In other words, eg. in Slovak the translation of the modern country of Netherlands is always (without exception) Holandsko, so it should be in the list (If the form Nizozemsko was not used in the Czech language, no normal Slovak would know today what Nizozemsko means). I even believe that this fact is a special reason for adding it to the list, because the Holla... form is not what the reader would expect, so it is an interesting information. And I also see no problem with listing Holandsko twice, if it corresponds to the reality. You cannot expect all languages to have the same number of words for the same number of objects - it is normal that one word in one language is used for two or more words in another language and vice versa. User:Pasquale 17:57, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC) ---- All right, sir, let's see. As for (1), thank you. I assure you, in any case, that such short forms as "Estados Unidos", "�tats-Unis", "Stati Uniti", etc., are extremely common, almost to the exclusion of the short forms; and even in German, phrases such as "in den Vereinigten Staaten" are quite common, in my experience. As for (2), you have a valid point. So, we'll just have to go your way. You are right that few other languages use the "Holla..." form as the OFFICIAL name for the Netherlands (you said you really would like to know which ones). The only other European languages I can come up with are Icelandic and Romanian; plus, outside of Europe, Bahasa Indonesia, Bahasa Malay, Japanese, and probably a few others. User:Pasquale 17:51, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC) == History of Hungary == Hi! Regarding on your edit "You cannot leave out the Treaty of Trianon !" to the article History of Hungary, maybe you would like to be more explicit about the periods of time that should be consider. The year 1920 is not a revolutionary (or counter-revolutionary) one. --User:Vasile 05:28, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC) You simply left out two important text parts from the text, that's all. I hope you did not do that deliberately. The heading is no problem.User:Juro 00:49, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC) : Be more explicit, please. I do not understand what are those "two important parts" that I left out from the text. --User:Vasile 02:17, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC) :: You left out the paragraph on the Treaty of Trianon and the preceding one. User:Juro 02:31, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC) == Rusyn language == Hi! I don't believe that the Rusyn language is an official language in Slovakia. That's why I reverted your change in the Rusyn language. Sorry. The Constitution of the Slovak Republic doesn't mention Rusyn as an official language: : ?l. 6 : (1) Na �zem� Slovenskej republiky je ?t�tnym jazykom slovensk� jazyk. : (2) Pou?�vanie in�ch jazykov ne? ?t�tneho jazyka v �radnom styku ustanov� z�kon. If you believe I am wrong, please specify the legal act which establishes Rusyn as an official language. User:Boraczek 15:01, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC) I've searched for more up-to-date legal acts and they support my view: http://www.government.gov.sk/mensiny/zakon184.html http://www.government.gov.sk/mensiny/jazykovy_zakon-navrh.html Rusyn is established as a minority language, not as an official language. User:Boraczek 15:15, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC) Rusyn can be used as "�radn�" (= appr. official) language (the constitution mentions the "state" language) in communities where they make up more than 20% (which however is very rare in reality). And the constitution mentions the Rusyn language as an official language, because it says that official languages are regulated in a seperate piece of legislation, which is a mention in the constitution. I also doubt that in Serbia they can use the language at the same level as Serbian. So I am pretty sure that it is quite the same thing, how ever it is called. I also think to remember that there was a kind of official declaration that " now we officially accept the language" or so. But I am not going to do a research in this field, so you can keep it out if you want. No problem.User:Juro 16:21, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC) I'm afraid you confuse three things: # officialy recognized language # language that can be used in official communication # official language An official recognition by a state doesn't necessarily mean that the recognized language can be used in official communication (in contacts with the administration, in courts etc.). Then, some minority languages are granted the right of being used in official communication in some regions, but it doesn't make them official languages. The official language status is an even higher grade. It means that, for instance, all official documents should be stored in that language and no other language has a higher rank. But the basic criterion is that the language is explicitly established as an official language in some legal act. So I can't agree that Rusyn is an official language of Slovakia. It's only an officially recognized minority language that can be used in official communication (under some conditions). The only official language of Slovakia is Slovak. I know this is complicated, but there are many subtle legal distinctions as far as minority rights are concerned. Anyway, I'd like to add that it's thanks to you that I got to know that Rusyn was officially recognized in Slovakia. So - thank you. BTW I live 2km away from the Slovakian border :-) User:Boraczek 22:04, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC) But does the language de-facto have the status, as you describe an official language above, in Serbia? There is also a big Slovak community in Voivodina, but I have never heard that the language would have such a status...User:Juro 00:35, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC) I don't know what it looks like in practice. But from the legal point of view in Vojvodina Rusyn language and Slovak language have the same status as Serbian language. The article 6 of the Statute of AP Vojvodina says:
''V Auton�mnej pokrajine Vojvodine sa rovnopr�vne �radne pou?�vaj� srbsk�, ma?arsk�, chorv�tsky, slovensk�, rumunsk� a rus�nsky jazyk a p�sma.'' User:Boraczek 07:18, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC) OK User:Juro 12:16, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC) ==Slovakian rivers== I believe that articles on rivers should include the word "river" in the title, as part of the river's proper name. ''E.g.'', "Hron River" instead of just "Hron". You have it right with the Ida River and Slatina River rivers. Also, please review the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). Numbers should use commas (",") to break up very large numbers every three digits, and a period (".") as the decimal point to separate the integer and fractional portions of decimal numbers. Yes, this is different than what you were taught in school and use in your everyday life. But it is the standard chosen by Wikipedia, and it is important to use it consistently throughout. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. - User:Kbh3rd 19:35, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC) (1) I am not ready to call any river "XY" a XY River, if it is not absolutely necessary (as with Slatina), because a) the river is not a part of the name as with many English river names, b) above all, the additional word "River" strongly complicates the writing of links in longer texts. (2) This is a copy from the German encyclopedia, therefore the wrong signs. I am sorry for that- I forgot to switch my "mind" to English once again...User:Juro 19:43, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC) == intl link to sk: == Regarding sk:Pavel Jozef Šaf�rik... I think this may be because sk isn't UTF-8. I know links to people with Š in the name to hr: and de: work fine. If you're an admin on sk:, maybe you can get something done regarding this... --User:Joy 13:25, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC) (1) I thought that sk is UTF-8 too because all characters work there (I am not an expert on character sets and those things)... (2) I am not an admin on sk, because I don't want to be one (for the time being at least). User:Juro 16:07, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC) == duplication here == After adding section headings and scrolling through it all it seems to me that most of this talk page is duplicated. You might wish to clean it up some time. :) --User:Joy I will archivate it if course. But what do you mean by "duplicated" ? User:Juro 16:07, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC) : Take a look at the #toc - content is duplicated roughly from #Arpads to the #History of Hungary. -- User:Naive cynic 21:07, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC) :: Oh, thank's indeed...User:Juro 22:43, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC) == Table for Slovakian Towns? == Hello, I was wondering if it wouldn't make sense to put the towns of List of towns in Slovakia into a table with "Slovak name", "German name", "Hungarian name", "Population" column headers. I could do this, if you agree. (BTW: I could also provide the IPA codes for the German names, should I insert them in the list?) --User:Daniel Dolinsky 22:43, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC) The user Law is working on a complete list of all Slovak communities (towns and villages) with all names and administrative asignments in the German Wiki {see there|, but it does not include all districts yet, I guess. So, actually I am planning to copy it from there later on, but, of course, you can put the list of towns into a table if you do not think that this will entail a duplication... User:Juro 23:07, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC) :Well, my list will be done in about 1 month. It's not that funny to put all the small villages into table-form. In addition to that, i'm first finishing to find all german names (if they have one) of these towns and afterwards add them to this list. The hungarian names won't be so difficult to find, though it will be hard to fill in ~ 1700 entries with the corresponding names. You can see the results of my work under http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_St%C3%A4dte_und_Gemeinden_in_der_Slowakei and if you edit the text, you can see at the beginning of the file until which okres i managed to fill in the data! --User:Murli 11:53, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC) ::Ok, i finished the list under , everybody might feel free to copy it and adjust it for his needs. --User:Murli 07:55, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC) == From Kristian, Spis == Hi Juro. Tell me, why my example about 16 towns of Spis was wrong? They were not incorporated in the Polish state, only polish kings made use of them as a kind of an advance. It is the same like Hongkong from 1898 to 1997 yet, isn�t it? Hongkong wasn�t incorporated in UK, it was still chinese land in UK�s temporary possession. :: There are so many differences between the two arrangements that saying "it's like Hong Kong" is strongly misleading (especially for an encyclopaedia). What is your source of this information: ''A small part of the territory (at the Rysy, today in Poland) became part of Austria (at that time the western part of Austria-Hungary) as early as in 1902. In 1918, when Austria-Hungary ceased to exist, the terrirory thus "automatically" became part of Poland.'' Rysy is on the Slovak-polish border, but I know anything about what you wrote about small part of the Spiš. :: For example Ernst Hochberger (from Liptov): Das gro�e Buch der Slowakei. It also includes a very nice map. Information about Germans expelled from Spiš after WWII was printed in Podtatranske noviny in August 2004, if you want I can send it to you in .jpg format, give me your e-mail, please. :: I will give you my e-mail, but do you mean this last point as an interesting addition or are you reacting to something particular?... User:Juro 13:59, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC) (PS: We use to sign here in discussions by typing ~~~~) I am sorry, I meant it about Slovaks expelled from polish Spiš, not Germans. User:Kristian Slimak 21:44, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC) == Slovakia == Historical regions Is it necessary to create new page for List of historical regions of Slovakia? These regions are still ,,alive" between people, you can also buy books, maps or turistic handbooks about them although they aren�t oficial regions of Slovakia. Their names are much more used among people to call their homeland than present-day regions (kraje). In my opinion, it is better and more useful to display original names and their map on main page about Slovakia. --Kristo 16:15, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC) The reason is that this is not done anywhere else in the Wikipedia for other countries and the part on administrative regions is meant to show the PRESENT ADMINISTRATIVE units and it contains a clearly visible link to the List of historic regions. The country main pages are designed to contain only basic information and then links to more detailed articles. In addition, what you are saying about the regions holds only for the Spis, Orava (Kaysuce), Saris, Liptov and maybe Turiec and Gemer. And even there the statement that the use of historical names is "much" higher is certainly an exaggeration... User:Juro 17:40, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC) == Presov (and other Slovak towns) == Hi Juro, thanks for fixing History of Presov. You have changed ''Evangelical College'' to ''Evangelical Lutheran College''. On the Internet, I have seen it called either ''Evangelical College'' or ''Lutheran College'' but never ''Evangelical Lutheran College''. What do you think is the correct name? I could probably write a short stub about it once we decide on the name. :: Evangelical Lutheran is - strictly speaking- the correct translation of "evanjelick�", but there is generally a big confusion about this term. Also, intuitively, "Lutheran" is important for the correct meaning, while "Evangelical" in order to have a word at the beginning that is similar to the Slovak name... I was also thinking it would be good to have a standard Wikipedia:Infobox for Slovak towns where we could record basic data such as population, geographic coordinates, okres, kraj, and especially the car registration plate which is now annoyingly at the end of each article. What do you think? User:Brona 20:50, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC) ::A good idea, of course - if you have the time you can take the maps of regions and districts (under the articles Kraj and Okres etc) and maybe also the infobox from the German wikipedia, where there is a (once) very diligent user dealing with this... User:Juro 01:04, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC) :::Hey, i'm still diligent, though i do not have that much time to write for wiki as i had in summer!! Since my list of cities and villages in slovakia is done now, i can go on with other things like a map of slovakia for example. --User:Murli 07:57, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC) ::::Oh, I absolutely did not mean that you got lazy, and I know about your "time problems" ... "once diligent" was supposed to mean that you wrote a lot on the topic in the summer and do not so now anymore, that's all - I thought "(once) diligent" was shorter :):) ...User:Juro 21:12, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC) ==Souces of early Hungarian history== I would correct the spelling error in this title (''Souces'' for ''Sources'') but do not know how to edit the title. User:PaulinSaudi_17:10,_4_Nov_2004_(UTC)">User:PaulinSaudi 17:10, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC) Just move the whole aricle and type the correct title there ...User:Juro 03:49, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC) == Czech monarchs == Hi Juro, I noticed you removed the :Category:Czech monarchs tag from Samo. There is currently a discussion going on on User talk:Itai and Wikipedia:Categories for deletion about the categorization of Czech rulers. Your input might be helpful here, since the :Category:Czech monarchs is to be delete in favor of :Category:Bohemian monarchs. I was wondering whether Samo and the rulers of Great Moravia should somehow be included in the categorization. Apparently, they were not Bohemian, but Czech (or in the case of Samo, partly ruling proto-Czech subjects, if I am not mistaken) at least in some sense. Your opinion would be appreciated. User:Martg76 00:58, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC) == Article Licensing == Hi, I've User:rambot#Free the Rambot Articles project to get users to Wikipedia:Multi-licensing all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (''CC-by-sa'') v1.0 and v2.0 Creative Commons Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The ''CC-by-sa'' license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_number_of_edits Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at ''minimum'' those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information: *User talk:Ram-Man#Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered *Wikipedia:Multi-licensing *User:rambot#Free the Rambot Articles project To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "" template into their user page, but there are other options at Wikipedia:Template messages/User namespace#Licensing Templates. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page: :Option 1 :I agree to Wikipedia:Multi-licensing all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below: : OR :Option 2 :I agree to Wikipedia:Multi-licensing all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below: : Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "" with "". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. ''Please let me know'' what you think at my User talk:Ram-Man. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- User:Ram-Man ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new comment]| User talk:Ram-Man :You are correct that WikiTravel using parts of our articles would be a copyright infringement. But whether or not people disobey the law, doing so puts the entire project at risk and as such this can't be done. If you truly feel this way, why not multi-license, as you already believe that people will steal your edits if they want to anyway. At least let people like myself be legal. User:Ram-Man – User:Ram-Man ^{([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new comment]) (User talk:Ram-Man)} 22:57, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC) ==Ashgabat???== Hi. I don't know how often you visit the List of European cities with alternative names these days, but there has been a controversy on its Talk:List of European cities with alternative names#Ashgabat??? for the past ten days or so, and I was wondering if you would care to review it and possibly intervene. Thank you. User:Pasquale 18:13, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC) == OCS == I fear it will be necessary to take VMORO to Requests for Mediation soon. Such a process requires two people. Would you be willing to join me? I'll do the work of writing up the actual text of the complaint, but I would be grateful if you could give a voice of support. User:Crculver 00:48, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC) Of course, just tell me what I have to do, because I have never done something like that here. But I think we should wait first what will happen now ...User:Juro 01:09, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC) ==Euro-geo-stub problems== Dear Juro - I must apologise to both you and User:Bronafor the extra work I caused you when i was putting stub messages on various Eastern European geography articles yesterday. My browser - even when set for Central European fonts - somehow glitches any diacriticals that are written in unsafe (i.e., non-unicode) characters. Usually I manage to catch them, but I was rushed for time yesterday and wasn' as careful in checking as I normally am - hence the problems with articles like Liptovsky Mikulas. Sorry again, and thanks for catching the glitches! User:Grutness|^{User_talk:Grutness} 23:24, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) ==J�n F�geľ== Hello. I'm interested to know why you moved the article to Jan Figel, without diacritics. The software can't cope with the ľ character, but it can cope with normal acute accents above letters like "a" and "i". I chose to put the article at J�n Figel', with an apostrophe after the "l", as the nearest approximation. You'll see I made a note of this on the talk page but I notice you didn't respond. It seems also that there's supposed to be an accent above the "i" as well, but when you added this in I wonder why you didn't just move the article to J�n F�gel' (accent on the "a" and the "i", apostrophe after the "l")? — User:Trilobite User_talk:Trilobite 16:38, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) The answer is very simple: (1) since there are many various accents in Slovak and other languages, as a rule, we write the word without any accents, so that authors of other articles that include e.g. the word F�geľ as a link do not have to guess how this word might have been written by the original author of the original article...that`s the only logical procedure, otherwise there would be quarrels with each new Slovak, Hungarian, Czech etc. article (2) there is no apostrophe behind the l (rather , ľ is one special character), so the original version was wrong in the first place...User:Juro 02:51, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) :: Juro, I believe J�n Figeľ does not have accent on "i". See for example his commissioner website [http://europa.eu.int/comm/archives/commission_1999_2004/figel/index_en.htm] or any Slovak newspaper articles. User:Brona 02:47, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) :::: I think that's a frequent error, because I have checked that for the German wikipedia months ago on Slovak pages and always found a long i...Figeľ would sound rather weird phonetically either...But if you are persuaded that it's a short i, change it...User:Juro 02:51, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) :: In a quick google search I have not seen any F�geľs, but Figeľ is used on his website (see above), in his CV at KDH website [http://www.kdh.sk/zivot_figel.htm], Radio Slovakia international [http://www.rsi.sk/slo/EU/txt/040128_text002.html], etc. Probably the short "i" comes from Vranov dialect. Some I will change it.... User:Brona 03:17, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) :: OK, then, I do not know any more where I have looked up it last time...Sorry for the additional workUser:Juro 03:46, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) :::When I created it I was confused about whether there should be an accent on the "i", especially because the German Wikipedia had it, but after looking around the internet I decided it probably shouldn't be there. As for the ľ character, perhaps I didn't make myself clear in my message. I know it's a single character, but I put the article at l apostrophe because to the casual reader it looks the same. You'll notice that in the text of the article itself I used the proper character throughout. It's only article titles that the software won't allow to have certain characters in. Also, I wonder if you could point me to some piece of Wikipedia policy where it says that articles should be located at names with no accents whatsoever. It seems to me that it's best to put the article at the nearest approximation possible, and then make redirects to it from all possible alternatives people might use, including most importantly the version with no accents. I made plenty of redirects, including with combinations involving the accent above the "i" in case anyone typed this in thinking that's how it was spelt. When the article was moved, all these were broken. Because of the redirects, authors of other articles who want to link to this one don't need to worry about which accents are included; readers will be redirected to something that looks completely correct, even if strictly speaking the software doesn't allow us to get the ľ quite perfect (maybe one day that problem will be sorted). — User:Trilobite User_talk:Trilobite 12:05, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) : What I have described to you is a kind of unwritten rule for CEO articles. Thousands of articles have been named basically in the way I have described to you, without any special discussion - which implies that most people came to the same conclusion...Of course, you can change this rule by creating redirects, but the (big) problem is that editors, including me, don't have the time and do not feel like creating (in some cases up to 10) redirects for each article...User:Juro 18:37, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) ==Slovakia regions -> counties== Hi Juro, if kraj means county and not region, why not calling it like that? Thus also bringing it more in line with Hungarian counties. Additional county seems to be more official than region to me. Are you from Slovakia? Maybe you also like to look at name harmonization on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Subnational entities#Current use regards User:Tobias Conradi 03:14, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC) Linguistically, kraj does not mean explicitely "county", it actually rather means something like "country". In my opinion, the translation "county" is closer to the true meaning. Technically however, kraj cannot be translated as "county", because there were counties (in Slovak �upy, i.e. comitatuses inherited from the Kingdom of Hungary) in Slovakia in the past, and even nowadays the krajs are called �upy (counties) if they are meant as self-governing entities. In other words there is a difference between the Hungarian counties and Slovak Regions. Therefore we need both the term county and a second term, the second term being almost always "region" in English texts (although this can be confused with the general term region existing both in English and in Slovak). To make at least some disctinction, I suggest to write the krajs as Regions with a capital R. User:Juro 00:54, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC) == From Liberal Nationalist == Hello, Juro! Thanks for the edit of the Slovak National Party article. I'm just not so sure that in 1929 SNS was in elections coalition with a Ruthenian party. I think I have read that it was ethnic Russian. My source was Encyklop�dia Slovenska from 1970s and 1980s, but I don�t have it by hand right now. Please check it if you can in the article about SNS. User:Liberal Nationalist 15:01, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC) I would also like to ask you not to change the headline SNS in the common Czecho-Slovak state. My explanation is in the Talk:Slovak National Party. Liberal Nationalist 18:58, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC) Mr. Juro, I ask you preventively not to change the word ludaci to Slovak People's Party in the Slovak National Party. In 1901 they weren't organized as a party yet. I suggested to call them "Populars", but it seems that you don't want to accept the word. So I hope you won't be doing any trouble ;) . Liberal Nationalist 13:33, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC) See the SNS talk, Mr. Laddy :-). And do not be so touchy for such details, you can be sure that one day someone will make much bigger changes in your article then me. User:Juro 03:12, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC) == Československo vs. Česko-Slovensko == Juro, Czechoslovakia po Slovensky je Československo aj pred aj po 1990-tom. Martin 1. It's not - since 1990/1991. You should learn Slovak orthography. The explanation is on the corresponding talk page. 2. It's po slovensky, not po Slovensky 3. We communicate in English here. User:Juro 18:29, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC) I have to admit that I sholud not have edited "Czechoslovakia" before discussing it. I was not right at all and it was very rude. Juro, think about changing translation to Česko-Slovensko. I wrote to Institute of Linguistics and they recommend it. I know, you discussed it but just let me know whether you are interested in their replay. Have a nice day. Martin 1. I am afraid I do not understand from your answer, which form you are advocating now. 2 . All current dictionaries of the Academy of Sciences prescribe and all standard history books use Cesko-Slovensko. In other words, using Ceskoslovensko without a special reason is a normal error of orthography. I do not understand why a recommendation should be needed in such a clear case...That's like asking whether the correct form is riba or ryba... User:Juro 13:22, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC) I want to use only �Česko-Slovensko� not �Česko-Slovensko/before 1990 Československo�. What did happen in 1989/1990? It looks like before 1990 should have been officially and grammatically correct used form without hyphen. I don't think so. Martin. The answer is very simple. In 1990, the country's name in the Slovak language was changed from Československo to Česko-Slovensko by a constitutional law. The "Pravidl� slovensk�ho pravopisu" published in 1991 (which is the obligatory codification of Slovak orthography) and all the subsequent editions of it and of other dictionaries and encyklopaedias etc. have been using this form since. In other words there has been a change in orthography in 1990/1991. User:Juro 17:58, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Social Democratic Party of Slovakia == Hi, I've just written a stub for the Social Democratic Party of Slovakia. Information about them is a bit tricky to find, especially since I don't speak Slovak; could you have a quick look at it and see if I've let any mistakes slip through? (I apologise for appearing like this; you have several edits on the Smer page, so I guessed you would know something about the more minor parties). Thanks. User:Shimgray 09:23, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC) ---- == Bratislava == I have reviewed the history of this article -- seems like you have done a lot of great work there. Major kudos to you. I believe your comments were less than friendly and I have decided to revert my "corrections", as you have sarcastically referred to them. I stand by my view however, and the article would benefit greatly from some stylistic changes or possibly a complete rewrite by a copy editor. If I'm not mistaken the particular paragraph in question was last copy edited by User:Picapica and you have then made some additional changes to it. I'm not sure what you meant by "has already been completely reedited several times by native speakers". If I may suggest something -- work on you attitude a bit. Everyone would benefit, including you :-) Have a great day dude! User:Jbetak 02:38, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) The article has been completely reedited several times, because it is quite old. I did not say you have to revert your edits, I have only replied to your "remark" that there is a lot to do here or so (I do not remember the exact words) and to the language corrections you have done (I have done this repeatedly to other users too so that they know how they are "correcting" themselves mutually) - such "remarks" used in a wrong place - instead of writing articles - and provision of wrong numbers in an encyclopaedia (30 instead of 65 km! is a big difference) are what should be changed here... don't you think, "dude" ...User:Juro 03:28, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) Juro, thanks for elaborating on this. My comments are directed at others as well as at myself. I might not have as much time as some others and when I return to my previous contributions, it helps me to remember where I have left off. I considered my changes "work in progress", hence my comment. I felt it was best to back it all out -- before I had to take even more crap. If I may, I'd suggest to tread more lightly. More often than not, things are not what they may appear to be - you might be barking up the wrong tree. Just out of curiosity - do you understand the contextual meaning of "dude" here in California? User:Jbetak 06:50, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) As for "dude" - one can never be sure with English language slang, therefore I just took the word and used it in an analogous way as you did...:) What exactly does it mean in your usage? User:Juro 16:52, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC) ==Spis== Tak a look at Spis article and talk page. I think the current shape is highly POV. I will try to reshape it significantly. They were some errors in article (as e.g. blaming Poland for refusing to make plebiscite, while it was rather Czechoslovakian fault) and similar User:Szopen 12:45, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC) No problem basically...User:Juro 23:13, 2 May 2005 (UTC) == The Czech page the last time == Hi Juro, while you probably feel angry and that you've given up, I'm very glad that someone eventually did stop the revert war and I respect you for that. We all are tired by the endless attacks and reverts. I'm sure there are plenty of other articles on Wikipedia that you can alter to perfection without making controversy (be it even because of other people's ignorance!). As you know, I myself have no problem with Czechia although I personally would wait for some more time, after it will have been made more official, and perhaps spreaded a little bit more, too. If the two (or three if you count me too :)) are ignorants and you are right, they will sooner or later go, and your version will win in the end! BTW, you promised me to find the source of Czechia being in the official UNO list of countries, which I doubt it exists, but should you be fed up with that matter now, don't worry about it. Anyway, I wish you good luck and enjoyable editing! User:Matt_Borak User_talk:Matt_Borak 18:56, 20 May 2005 (UTC) I am sure I would refind it if I felt that I have the time to spend at least half a day with a topic I have dealt with already extensively and knowing that even if I find it nothing will change - I have been observing the Czechia issue here for a long time, there is always someone who deletes all occurrencies of the word (they even ask: "Does the word exist?") and it is even getting "worse" - from my point of view. But maybe I will find the time for your personal information. You can read the transcript of the corresponding debate of the special Czech Senate meeting in the meantime - it's quite interesting to read (only approximately the second part is relevant).User:Juro 00:36, 22 May 2005 (UTC) :I see. I read the Senate debate some time ago and, interestingly, it was ''this'' document that pointed me to the IMO fact, that Czechia is still ''not'' in the official UNO list. Your reply made me check this again and in my opinion it clearly stands out from the speaches by Misters Jeleček and especially Paŝek. Both of them have also shown big disappointment because of this in their speaches. Anyway, you are probably right that even such a "proof" would not change anything. Wikipedia is apparently not ready for "Czechia" yet nor are many others. I still have the article on the history of the usage of the one-word name of Czech Rep. in my mind, but God knows whether it will ever realize. With best regards, User:Matt_Borak User_talk:Matt_Borak 18:36, 23 May 2005 (UTC) ::If you read carefully (up to the end), you will see that all the experts (by virtue of their profession) say that Czechia must me used and all others (like normal senators) say "I will use what I want to use" (which is quite symptomatic). The experts say in sum: it must be used not only because it is systematic, but also because it is (even in its English form) explicitely prescribed by Czech laws and standard specifications for geographic terminology and by the Czech Academy of Sciences (linguists). Secondly: no, one of the speakers (after those menationed by you) says somewhere near the end of the document that the name was included in the long UN list at the end of the 90s (which is the list with long AND short forms which unfortunately does not seem to be on the internet). User:Juro 12:41, 25 May 2005 (UTC) :Well, I'm unable to find what you state in the document. You might mean the famous ''Names of States and their Territorial Parts'' document from 1993, made by the Czech catastral office, where they explicitely state Czechia as the offical short name, but this change did not make it to the other official lists at the UNO, as it seems. Even quite recent sources, such as this [http://www.national-geographic.cz/detail.asp?id=951] confirm, that while the situation is clear from the Czech laws point-of-view, it is not as well clear from the UNO itself, as they are waiting for an official approval from the Czech authorities, which does not come. This is my understanding of the whole matter, from the publicly available documents. The [http://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/ungegnwgroups.htm UN Working Group on Country Names] periodically issues an official list of recommended country names (both short AND long), but the latest, [http://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/N0241147.pdf E/CONF.94/CRP.11], unfortunately has no mention of Czechia (page 36). :Being neither linguist nor lawyer dealing with international matters, I of course don't know or dare to judge the precise formalities needed for a country name change to be included in the official lists, but my common sense tells me that our authorities (the government, or the Ministry of Foreign affairs), for some reason, are afraid or unwilling to officially impel this. Nevertheless, I'm leaving this off for now, I also have other things to do :) . Thanks anyway. User:Matt_Borak User_talk:Matt_Borak 14:28, 25 May 2005 (UTC) == Ask for help with an article == Could you please add details about Slovakia into Switch to right side driving in Czechoslovakia or ask someone here who may know about this? Thanks. User:Pavel Vozenilek 17:39, 30 May 2005 (UTC) : Thanks. User:Pavel Vozenilek 00:04, 31 May 2005 (UTC) == CSR/SSR == I (vaguely) remember this: for more important laws confirmation was needed from: * 1. Snemovna lidu * 2. ceska cast snemovny narodu * 3. slovenska cast snemovny narodu * 4. vetsina cele snemovny narodu * 5. Ceska narodni rada (nevim presne v jakych pripadech) * 6. Slovenska narodni rada (--//--) So perhaps "uncountable" would fit best here ;-). User:Pavel Vozenilek 02:30, 31 May 2005 (UTC) OK, so why don't you write "6" then...User:Juro 01:50, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC) == List of traditional regions of Slovakia == Perhaps the explanation u provided on the discussion page could be added to the actual "List of traditional regions of Slovakia" for less informed readers. User:Freestylefrappe 03:38, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC) == Thanks for Zamarovsky == Thanks for Zamarovsky - especially the English short descriptions are useful. In the article I wrote first name as Vojtech (because most websites do it) though the books I have show Vojtěch. Is that correct? User:Pavel Vozenilek 22:18, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) Before 1993 his official name was Vojtech (because there is no ě in Slovak and he was born in Slovakia ["n�rodnosť slovensk�" on forms... :)] and has no ě in his original Slovak editions). Vojtěch could be either his new name since the time he (also) got Czech citizenship (after 1993) and/or his artistic name for Czech texts (I cannot think of another possibility). So, if you see Vojtěch on his books PUBLISHED before 1992, I assume the second case holds. But I have no proofs...User:Juro 00:23, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) : The book was decades old so the name got translated as well. User:Pavel Vozenilek 02:47, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==Diacritics (reply)== Hi Juro, To be frank, I don't understand you. To me, it clearly seems that the normal, common and widespread policy in the English Wikipedia is leaving all diacritics which are available in the ISO Latin-1 character set. Just to name a few examples from a couple of languages (see my earlier contribution at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English)): :La boh�me, R�sum�, Cr�pe, Ch�teau, D�j� vu, M�nage � trois (French), Hans Christian �rsted, S�ren Kierkegaard, Tor N�rretranders (Danish); V�clav Havel, Emil Z�topek (Czech), Kurt G�del (Czech-Austrian), Ernst Th�lmann, Max M�ller (German), B�la Bart�k, Ferenc M�dl (Hungarian), Niccol� Machiavelli (Italian), Jos� Saramago, Diogo C�o, Lu�s de Cam�es, Nuno Gon�alves (Portuguese), Ildefons Cerd�, Antoni Gaud�, Salvador Dal�, Benito P�rez Gald�s, Luis Bu�uel (Spanish); Sabiha G�k�en, Turgut �zal (Turkish). See also Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (technical restrictions)#charset_issues, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (technical restrictions), Template talk:Titlelacksdiacritics. Best regards,
User:Adam78 19:34, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) Firstly, the point is that normal people (including me) normally do not know the various character sets. Secondly, I can understand if names are written with an accent if that's all what they contain, but I find it quite weird - i.e. very unintuitive - to leave out some diacritics (like š) from a name but to keep some other diacritics (like �) - every normal English article writer simple leaves out, if any, ALL the diacritics (I am correcting this almost every day) and, unless redirects are created for every single article, we have a problem, because links in texts are without diacritics. Therefore I think it is easier to simply create the title of an articles without any diacritics, if there is even one single unusual diacritic sign in the name. User:Juro 19:59, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) * I don't know the Latin-1 charset either, but we can both check it here: ISO 8859-1 (note that all available special characters are linked in their original forms, e.g. � and �). * As a rule, ''each and every article with diacritics should have redirects'' from the versions without diacritics (I don't think it's my own idea; it seems to be common in English Wikipedia). * I don't think you should bother about yourself or other Wikipedians who leave out accented letters from titles if they are unsure. Sooner or later these titles will be corrected if any letters with diacritics can be included. The fact that they are not aware of the possible diacritics doesn't mean we should depart from the general Wikipedia policy. In short: everyone should feel free to use titles without diacritics; these all can be renamed. * This above applies to links as well. If there exist redirects (as they always should), you don't have to worry: both kinds of links will work. After all, that's what redirect is for. * However, one can easily skim the chart at ISO 8859-1 and find those Slovak language#Alphabet (I think you're Slovak) which are not present in this character set: ** present: � � � � � � � � ** missing: č ď ľ ĺ ň ŕ š ť ž (+dž) – as you can see, it is a pleasant surprise: one can freely use all possible Slovak vowels, but one is not supposed to use any of the specifically Slovak consonants (except for ''dz'' and ''ch'', of course). * As far as titles with both kinds of diacritics are concerned (i.e. existing in and missing from Latin-1), I don't quite agree with you. To me your reasoning sounds like "if we can't correct ''all'' the mistakes in a book, let's leave the whole without correction". I think we should aim to include ''all'' the diacritics which are available – because we can't possibly eliminate inconsistency ''in itself'' anyway, as long as some diacritics are not available. * Perhaps it's not decisive, but all the Hungarian titles in the English Wikipedia work like what I've described. Take S�ndor Petofi as an example: the ''ő'' is not available in this character set, so it is replaced with ''o'', however, the ''�'' is retained in the same title. I suppose there have been quite a few readers and administrators who have seen this article and they didn't find it disturbing. I may be wrong, but to me it seems like a tacit endorsement to this practice. User:Adam78 21:23, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) Well, I am not trying to persuade you to change your policy and I understand your aguments, but I am just pointing out the problems. I can create redirects, but my experience here (which you cannot have, because you do not have so many problematic characters in Hungarian) is that if Slovaks/Czechs that are new to the wikipedia or generally people not knowing those languages create articles and write links in texts they either write all diacritics (which is wrong) or leave them all out (which is now wrong too, unless there is a redirect) - nobody leaves out only the several specific characters (for obvious reasons)- and they create no redirects (I do not know how they possibly could be informed of the necessity of these redirects, given that even I myself did not know this until recently). Finally, you are assuming that everything here gets corrected but that is simply not the case, therefore in my opinion we should account for possible "imperfections" of users (after all Mikul�s and Mikulas are both simply incorrect, since the only correct form is Mikul�š). If I was to correct all such formal mistakes I would have to spend "24" hours a day here :). User:Juro 00:22, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) I accept everything you say (including that almost nobody will leave out only the specific characters) – but remember that if I actually move (or anyone moves) a page to a new (more correct) title, redirects will be automatically created, so no matter people will look for titles in a way you propose it or in a way I propose it, the links will be working. I think on the long run redirects should be made to each article with diacritics, independently of what kind of special characters they include. It's not difficult to realize that several hundreds of millions of people have only English keyboards and we should ideally enable them to make searches about Slovak/etc.-related terms. This is why having redirects without diacritics is a ''must'', at least on the long run. If there exist redirects without diacritics, links should be eventually working – and ''if'' people happen to have time, they might correct these sooner or later. If they don't, the links will still work. – However, we might include into the Slovak language page that all Slovak vowels (and no Slovak-specific consonants) are available within the ISO 8859-1 encoding; perhaps it is not too hard to remember. User:Adam78 07:18, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) I have inserted the text in the Slovak language article. User:Juro 03:01, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Př�ručn� slovn�k naučn� == ''SUCH reference'': it is encyclopedia, covers non-political items quite well and mentions such obscure figures as Janousek. User:Pavel Vozenilek 02:06, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC) I did not mean that it is a bad reference, but people do not use to cite general encyclopaedias as sources here (I did it once and I have been wondering until today why I actually did it) User:Juro 03:01, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC) : Hi Juro, I do not agree. Although general state of references in most articles is quite bad, there is a drive to cite sources as much as possible in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Cite sources. Encyclopedias are sources as any other. There is even a template :Template:Citeencyclopedia to cite encyclopedic articles. User:Brona 23:25, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Nitra == Please look at Talk:Nitra. I realize that you wrote in about October '03, but is this section simply a list of Slovak kingdoms where Nitra was the capital? If so, it might be better to break it out in a couple of sentences (or even a list with bullets) instead of in parenthesis. -- User:Ricky81682 (User talk:Ricky81682) 20:43, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC) Please contact me about the copyedits you have reverted. User:Jbetak 02:33, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Administrative divisions of the Kingdom of Hungary == Hi Juro, I just came across this page and made a few minor edits. You seem to be pretty active around here and especially on this specific page, so I wondered if you could go over my changes to make sure I'm not reverting something that has been discussed earlier. Also, it would be nice if you could set up a disambiguation page for "Banat(e)", or tell me how to do that -- see the edit in Administrative_divisions_of_the_Kingdom_of_Hungary#The_Banates to see why this is needed. You could also have a look to the first paragraph under Administrative_divisions_of_the_Kingdom_of_Hungary#15th__century. It is mentioning "Slovakia", but as far as I know, the lands constituting present day Slovakia were at that time part of the Hungarian Kingdom, and not termed Slovakia by any authority of the time. So this reference seems to be out of place to me. Please reply on user_talk:kissl (too). Thanks in advance for any reply/comment. User:Kissl 15:12, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

See other meanings of words starting from letter:

J

JA | JB | JC | JD | JE | JF | JG | JH | JI | JK | JL | JM | JN | JO | JP | JR | JS | JT | JU | JW | JX | JY | JZ |

Words begining with Juro:

Juro
Juro
Jurojin
Jurokk
Juromaru
Juromaru
Juromaru
J�romaru
Juromaru.art
Jurong
Jurong_(disambiguation)
Jurong_BirdPark
Jurong_Birdpark
Jurong_Bird_Park
Jurong_East
Jurong_East_MRT_Station
Jurong_East_New_Town
Jurong_East_Station
Jurong_Island
Jurong_Lake
Jurong_Port
Jurong_Technologies_Industrial
Jurong_Technologies_Industrial_Corporation_Limited
Jurong_West
Jurong_West_New_Town
Juror
Jurors
Juroujin
Juroumaru
Juro_Janosik
Juro_Kobayashi
Juro_Kobayashi