
Scribble. --User:VKokielov 02:00, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC) ==Edits== Thanks for the message. I'm aware of Twain, but unaware of any reputable links discussing the merits of the Schiavo case in relation to Twain's article. That's where the original research comes into play. Do you have some good citations for your comparison? --User:Viriditas | User_talk:Viriditas 07:18, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) :For all I know, you could be 100% correct, but if it's original research, it's not allowed on Wikipedia. See: Wikipedia:No original research. --User:Viriditas | User_talk:Viriditas 07:25, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::I think it's a good thing to discuss ideas, so you should bring them up on the relevant talk pages if you feel the urge. --User:Viriditas | User_talk:Viriditas 08:58, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Re: Chetniks == : ''On the other side, Croats and Bosnians still see Chetniks as some kind of a fascist movement, not dissimilar to the fascist groups of their own, such as the Ustaše and SS Handžar Division'' You removed the latter part of that sentence. However, it's wrong to remove it, because this is exactly the analogy drawn among the Croats and Bosniaks - Chetniks were essentially no different than the Ustase and SS Handschar, they collaborated with the occupying forces and killed semi-random people just because they didn't like them. I see, however, that the rollback function went too far, and also dropped a valid edit of yours (fractions -> factions). I'll go fix that, sorry, too much automation sometimes doesn't work out well. --User:Joy 17:31, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) The new wording is fine. I'm not still sure why you didn't like the old one... --User:Joy 22:53, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) But, you see, the Ustase were not the Croatian army in the same manner the IDF is Israeli army. They were an organized group that took power illegally (after German and Italian occupation) and only *claimed* legitimacy, but in reality had less legitimacy than the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. Their ideas back in KoY about Croatian independence had merit, sure, but once they started mass murdering people, that all became irrelevant. This core issue is a majority opinion in Croatia. The opinion that the Ustase were a legitimate Croatian army in WWII is not even in a plurality, let alone in a majority among the Croats. You are, of course, correct that the whole point is to avoid the holier-than-thou attitude.
An additional point is that the Serbs still seem to be having much more of a problem making up their mind as to whether the Chetniks are Good(tm) or Bad(tm), whereas the Croats and the Bosniaks seem to be mostly settled on the issue, they by and large think that their such groups were Bad(tm). --User:Joy 23:14, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Your message == I must admit that you had me completely baffled, until I remembered the Serbia/Poland thing. It's always easy to simplify an idea when someone else has done the main work first. User:Mel Etitis (Μελ_Ετητης)">User talk:Mel Etitis 22:15, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Oxford student == One statement that might belong somewhere in the article—"In 2003, an Oxford professor personally denied admission to an Israeli student on political grounds, for which he was made to apologize ([16] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/3031528.stm))"—except that the "political grounds" go unexplained, suggesting implicitly that the student was banned for being Israeli, which I doubt. What do you doubt? --User:VKokielov 20:00, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) #Please, when leaving a remark on a user talk page about a particular article, indicate what article it is about. I have about 2000 articles on my watchlist. It took me a bit of time to work out the context of this question. #I doubt that the student was banned merely for ''being'' Israeli. As I understand it, the incident related to the student being in the Israeli army. Given the near-universal conscription in Israel, I suppose that almost amounts to the same thing, but that should not go without saying. #Why didn't you ask this question on Talk:New anti-Semitism? I will copy your question and my response to that page. -- User:Jmabel | User talk:Jmabel 20:08, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC) == Gender pronouns == Were you referring to something I wrote in a particular article? --User:L33tminion User talk:L33tminion 08:38, May 1, 2005 (UTC) Yeah, yeah... "You" is singular, too, you know, and it didn't used to be. "He" is gender biased (that's been clearly demonstrated in statistical studies), "he or she" is awkward (and probably still gender biased), "she or he" is even more awkward, and nobody uses Spivak pronouns (although they are fairly straightforward). There's got to be a better solution, but singular "they" is the best choice, in my opinion. Not that I feel strongly about it, I'm just pedantic as well. :-P --User:L33tminion User talk:L33tminion 21:38, May 1, 2005 (UTC) == Re: Stevanovic quotes == I think that's okay, although you'd have to structure it better :) It would be even more useful if you could find something like that for the standard languages, as well as for štokavski and other dialects. This information really just draws parallels to an existing knowledge of the standard, and we can't really assume that from readers. --User:Joy 09:40, 25 May 2005 (UTC) == Obesity == Don't worry, rather Be Bold in updating pages. I don't think "humans" is inappropriate. In scientific parlance it is the best way to distinguish various mammal species. "Human beings" emphasises the individuality of each subject, which is not quite consistent with the style of the rest of the article. You may have found it is now on WP:PR, so if you have anything to contribute to this article, please do so! User:Jfdwolff | User_talk:Jfdwolff 10:32, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
Scribble again. --User:VKokielov 05:39, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) Kribble. boo
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with VKokielov:
VKokielov
VKokielov
VKokielov
Scribble. --User:VKokielov 02:00, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC) ==Edits== Thanks for the message. I'm aware of Twain, but unaware of any reputable links discussing the merits of the Schiavo case in relation to Twain's article. That's where the original research comes into play. Do you have some good citations for your comparison? --User:Viriditas | User_talk:Viriditas 07:18, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) :For all I know, you could be 100% correct, but if it's original research, it's not allowed on Wikipedia. See: Wikipedia:No original research. --User:Viriditas | User_talk:Viriditas 07:25, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::I think it's a good thing to discuss ideas, so you should bring them up on the relevant talk pages if you feel the urge. --User:Viriditas | User_talk:Viriditas 08:58, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Re: Chetniks == : ''On the other side, Croats and Bosnians still see Chetniks as some kind of a fascist movement, not dissimilar to the fascist groups of their own, such as the Ustaše and SS Handžar Division'' You removed the latter part of that sentence. However, it's wrong to remove it, because this is exactly the analogy drawn among the Croats and Bosniaks - Chetniks were essentially no different than the Ustase and SS Handschar, they collaborated with the occupying forces and killed semi-random people just because they didn't like them. I see, however, that the rollback function went too far, and also dropped a valid edit of yours (fractions -> factions). I'll go fix that, sorry, too much automation sometimes doesn't work out well. --User:Joy 17:31, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) The new wording is fine. I'm not still sure why you didn't like the old one... --User:Joy 22:53, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) But, you see, the Ustase were not the Croatian army in the same manner the IDF is Israeli army. They were an organized group that took power illegally (after German and Italian occupation) and only *claimed* legitimacy, but in reality had less legitimacy than the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. Their ideas back in KoY about Croatian independence had merit, sure, but once they started mass murdering people, that all became irrelevant. This core issue is a majority opinion in Croatia. The opinion that the Ustase were a legitimate Croatian army in WWII is not even in a plurality, let alone in a majority among the Croats. You are, of course, correct that the whole point is to avoid the holier-than-thou attitude.
An additional point is that the Serbs still seem to be having much more of a problem making up their mind as to whether the Chetniks are Good(tm) or Bad(tm), whereas the Croats and the Bosniaks seem to be mostly settled on the issue, they by and large think that their such groups were Bad(tm). --User:Joy 23:14, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Your message == I must admit that you had me completely baffled, until I remembered the Serbia/Poland thing. It's always easy to simplify an idea when someone else has done the main work first. User:Mel Etitis (Μελ_Ετητης)">User talk:Mel Etitis 22:15, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Oxford student == One statement that might belong somewhere in the article—"In 2003, an Oxford professor personally denied admission to an Israeli student on political grounds, for which he was made to apologize ([16] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/3031528.stm))"—except that the "political grounds" go unexplained, suggesting implicitly that the student was banned for being Israeli, which I doubt. What do you doubt? --User:VKokielov 20:00, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) #Please, when leaving a remark on a user talk page about a particular article, indicate what article it is about. I have about 2000 articles on my watchlist. It took me a bit of time to work out the context of this question. #I doubt that the student was banned merely for ''being'' Israeli. As I understand it, the incident related to the student being in the Israeli army. Given the near-universal conscription in Israel, I suppose that almost amounts to the same thing, but that should not go without saying. #Why didn't you ask this question on Talk:New anti-Semitism? I will copy your question and my response to that page. -- User:Jmabel | User talk:Jmabel 20:08, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC) == Gender pronouns == Were you referring to something I wrote in a particular article? --User:L33tminion User talk:L33tminion 08:38, May 1, 2005 (UTC) Yeah, yeah... "You" is singular, too, you know, and it didn't used to be. "He" is gender biased (that's been clearly demonstrated in statistical studies), "he or she" is awkward (and probably still gender biased), "she or he" is even more awkward, and nobody uses Spivak pronouns (although they are fairly straightforward). There's got to be a better solution, but singular "they" is the best choice, in my opinion. Not that I feel strongly about it, I'm just pedantic as well. :-P --User:L33tminion User talk:L33tminion 21:38, May 1, 2005 (UTC) == Re: Stevanovic quotes == I think that's okay, although you'd have to structure it better :) It would be even more useful if you could find something like that for the standard languages, as well as for štokavski and other dialects. This information really just draws parallels to an existing knowledge of the standard, and we can't really assume that from readers. --User:Joy 09:40, 25 May 2005 (UTC) == Obesity == Don't worry, rather Be Bold in updating pages. I don't think "humans" is inappropriate. In scientific parlance it is the best way to distinguish various mammal species. "Human beings" emphasises the individuality of each subject, which is not quite consistent with the style of the rest of the article. You may have found it is now on WP:PR, so if you have anything to contribute to this article, please do so! User:Jfdwolff | User_talk:Jfdwolff 10:32, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
VKokielov
Scribble again. --User:VKokielov 05:39, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) Kribble. boo
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
V
Words begining with VKokielov:
VKokielov
VKokielov
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
