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

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Albanians. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you.

Please stop removing sourced references to Kosovo from articles, and removing the reference to border with Kosovo from Republic of Macedonia. --Enric Naval (talk) 20:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about any "fascist POV". I already made my arguments on Talk:Republic_of_Macedonia#Kosovo.3F, using the sources I could find. I don't find the mention of Kosovo as a bordering terrotory (it doesn't even say that it's a country) to be non-neutral. --Enric Naval (talk) 17:37, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If you engage in further inappropriate behaviour in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban. Thank you. (please notice that I'm not an administrator myself) --Enric Naval (talk) 20:35, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please, don't edit GDP data of Serbia. --Gggh (talk) 17:35, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Battle of Košare, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

this article is based entirely on one partisan non-english source and a recent IP editor has suggested deleting it in the absence of any verification - see Talk:Battle of Košare#NATO_collusion

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Timberframe (talk) 18:58, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Srpska Vojska je postojala do 1918,posle toga Jugoslovenska kraljevska Vojska,JNA,VJ,VSCG,i sve ratne aktivnosti pripadaju tim vojskama,gde sam i premestio bitke i ratne operacije,osim toga dokazano je pred sudom u Hagu da Srbija (SRJ) nije ucestvovala u ratu u Bosni.Vojska Srbije ponovo pocinje da postoji tek od 2006 god.88 godina kasnije kad su se ove bitke vodile u medjuvremenu pod drugim vojnim formacijama. pozdrav --Boksi (talk) 18:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notice: Under the terms of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Digwuren, any editor working on topics related to Eastern Europe, broadly defined, may be made subject to an editing restriction at the discretion of any uninvolved administrator. Should the editor make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, he or she may be blocked for up to a week for each violation, and up to a month for each violation after the fifth. This restriction is effective on any editor following notice placed on his or her talk page. This notice is now given to you, and future violations of the provisions of this warning are subject to blocking.

Note: This notice is not effective unless given by an administrator and logged here. PhilKnight (talk) 23:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User_Forsena_-_violation_of_editing_restriction.Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement#User_Forsena Gerardw (talk) 15:47, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under the terms of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Digwuren, you are banned for 1 week from editing articles, including talk pages, that relate to the Balkans. PhilKnight (talk) 23:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for Edit warring. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Per a complaint at WP:AN3. EdJohnston (talk) 04:41, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to Serbian Orthodox Church (Evidence).Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you. -Angelo De La Paz (talk) 19:59, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you are going to change the map on the Serbia article, please comment on the active discussion regarding that map at Talk:Serbia#Marking Kosovo on the locator map. In fact you should always comment when reverting another editor's edits. Prodego ^talk 00:57, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you satisfied? As I mentioned on the talk page, I'm working on updated maps for all European countries, but this will take time and your obstinacy doesn't help. I suggest you sit back, relax, and wait for progress instead of getting in the way. Thanks. Bosonic dressing (talk) 23:44, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a pretty massive change to the casualty count. I have no idea what the real numbers are, but could you cite the source you are using on the article please? See WP:REF for info on how. Prodego ^talk 19:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Err, disregard that, I misread 14,000 as 140,000. But if you have a source, it would still be nice to cite it. Prodego ^talk 19:39, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I had actually misread your edit as changing a number by a factor of 10, so it isn't actually so big a change. Seems reasonable to me, and if you have a source, you should mark it on the page using the citation format explained at WP:REF. Prodego ^talk 21:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit to the page Serbia appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any other tests that you wish to make. Do take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. --> Gggh ^talk/_contribs 07:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]