User talk:Laughing Man

Leave a message...

I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes. // laughing man

 

Vandalism

Report vandalism here. The vandalism you encountered has already been dealt with, for now. --estavisti 03:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Tesla

You cannot apply same rules on Edison and Tesla. Besides that Edison stole ideas and patents from Tesla - Tesla was in America just another immigrant born in a region were many facts are even now being disputed. He was not not just Serb, nor "Austro-Hungarian", nor just born in Croatia, and he was not just an American... so why can't you leave it be? His nationality and his place of birth are listed in his bio..., and everything is clearly explained within article... I haven't done this edit, nor will it be me who will remove it, but be sure that your action just started avalanche, once again...-- Vladimirko 16:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to mention something. Reference mentioned (the one you placed back along with his nationality)is highly disputable because the article in mention is full of incorrect data, and it seams that author specificaly doesn't like authorities in Croatia. Facts are far from truth. Tesla is Serb and it was never disputed - anywhere, but he was born in today's Croatia, and Croatia honours him, obviously it comes in a way of some people's militant ideas - so it shouldn't be mentioned! Just today (on July 10, 2006), presidents of Serbia and Croatia are in Smiljan and are opening renewed memorial village and Tesla's house... Lookup through Croatian and Serbian media today! -- Vladimirko 17:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Hrvatska.ogg

Sorry, I made a stupid mistake. I copied the Audio template from the Croatia article and indended to replace it with this recording I had made earlier for the Serbia article, but I seem to have forgotten that detail and left the Hrvatska recording from the Croatia article. I apologize, it was surely not vandalism, just an oversight. Sorry again :) --GOD OF JUSTICE 04:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Glad to hear that :). You seem to have an interest in Yugoslav articles, where are you from? (if I'm allowed to know :)) --GOD OF JUSTICE 04:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

No source is perfect :), Wikipedia is so far one of the more neutral sources of information, and this is why I have decided to help out. I have been reading texts from it as a hobby for a few years now, and most of the articles are pretty OK. I was shocked to see that Yugoslavia was in such bad shape, I hope I fixed that at least to an acceptable level. It still pains be to see some users from the Former Yugoslavia (mostly from Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia) "at each others throats". The wars have been over for over 10 years, but it's still fresh. I preferred the union of all South Slavs, and hope that the EU will bring us all together again. My name is Avdo, what's yours? :) --GOD OF JUSTICE 04:56, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Lowg, I know things will not change overnight. What bothers me the most is that some people are not even trying to forgive and forget. When I talk to different people about the war, it's never one story with slight modifications, it's 3 completely different stories! Thanks for your compliments concerning the Yugoslavia article :) --GOD OF JUSTICE 05:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Ref:Javier Clemente

Before you started changing too many Spanish club names, please note the following; Real Madrid were originally known as Madrid FC and did not add the Real until 1920. During the Spanish Second Republic the club dropped Real from their name and were known as Madrid CF . In 1941 a decree issued by Franco banned the use of non-Spanish language names. FC Barcelona and Sevilla FC thus became CF Barcelona and Sevilla CF and Athletic Bilbao changed the spelling of their prefix to Atlético. RCD Espanyol were known as RCD Español until 1995. These are main name changes among the better known clubs. Atlético de Madrid have also changed spelling of name/name several times. Djln--Djln 16:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

List of Serbian NBA players

Actually, category "Serbian basketball players" is quite OK for that article. There is no rule that this category should be only for persons. Anything related to the subject, including the list, could belong there. PANONIAN (talk) 22:53, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Flags

Since Serbia-Montenegro do not exist any more, its flag should not be used for anything. If one team represent only Serbia, then flag of Serbia should be used for it, if it represent only Montenegro, then only flag of Montenegro, but if it represent both, then both flags (flag of Serbia and flag of Montenegro) should be used, but flag of former country is something that we should not use. PANONIAN (talk) 23:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Serbia kits

Where did you find a picture of the kits?--Kwame Nkrumah 12:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Really nice kit. The article refers to white socks, are they confirmed by a photo?--Kwame Nkrumah 18:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks--Kwame Nkrumah 18:46, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Serbia National Team

Thanks for the Trisovic fix. I also noticed that you update the Serbia national team site regularly and wanted you to take note of how I did the Ukrainian national team current player's section myself. It's based on the England national football team page and in my opinion a lot clearer and easier to follow than whats currently on the Serbia page. Maybe you're interested in replacing that section with that similar to the one on the Ukrainian national team page? Cheers, --Palffy 01:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks foy edit to split current / recently called up players. Would you like to fix France national football team, Italy national football team, Brazil national football team, Argentina national football team, Ivory Coast national football team? Matt86hk talk 06:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Segundo Castillo

Sorry for being sceptical, but the news I haven't heard of on any Serbian site, or even Serbian most prominent sport daily newspapers appeared here, signed by an anonimous user, obviously from Ecuador (judging by his previous contributions). I am very glad it turned out to be true, because it shows how good source of informations Wikipedia can be if taken seriously. Thanks for the info, you are doing some amazing job here. Good luck, Vitriden 07:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Drazen Petrovic

Wolff's article has two pages. The text supporting the claim that Drazen resented Divac's handling of the Croatian flag is mentioned on the second page. Read carefully how I describe the incident and revert to my last version of the article, because what I wrote is supported in Wolff's piece. Damir 06:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

First of all, the article is not about Divac, it's about Petrović; a section in "Vlade Divac" article named "What Divac thought of feud with Dražen Petrović" would be the appropriate place for your addendum. More importantly, the portion of the article in question deals with a particular event, the finals of the 1990 World Championship and the post-game celebration that ensued; Divac's opinion has nothing to do with that event, while Petrović's does. Not to mention that the claim about WHEN Petrović stopped returning Divac's calls cannot be verified on account of the tiny issue of Dražen being dead and not able to defend himself. Damir 09:22, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

And, despite of what Wolff heard from Divac and wrote down, Petrović's father is not a Serb, but a Montenegrin. Damir 09:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Interesting now how Wolff as a source is uncredible when he doesn't support the POV you are trying to portray? I thought the statement should have been removed from the beginning, glad to see you now agree when I present an alternate POV. // Laughing Man 14:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Wolff's good intentions aren't in question, even if he is just slightly misinformed. Like I said, Divac's opinion doesn't belong there because it has nothing to do with 1990 WC finals; listing it in "Vlade Divac" article would be appropriate. My comment portrays Petrović's state of mind and his experience of the event - because the focus is the event and because the article is about Petrović. How that can be considered POV is beyond me, since I am talking about something he FELT and COMMUNICATED, as is clearly stated. What Divac felt and communicated is equally important - it just doesn't belong THERE. The statement, originally, communicated only that there was once a friendship between them and there wasn't anymore; Divac's role in the feud wasn't even specified, only Petrović's state of mind. The purpose of the whole statement is to reflect how these political tensions echoed in the moment of Petrović's greatest joy and were imprinted in his mind. Even when a description of the incident was introduced by a third contributor, I edited it to reflect the fact that Divac felt provoked at the moment he acted - i.e. I was mindful of his mental state because it was relevant to the event of 1990 WC finals. Alas, despite my good intentions, I just don't have the stomach or resources to be bullied in edit wars with every pro-Serb contributor/administrator on Wiki. Damir 20:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

It's POV because you are only presenting one view where the statement is made. Saying that one side is worth presenting, but the other is not is clearly not NPOV. You're and painting a one-sided picture of this 'political tension', one must represent all significant views fairly and without bias. "All significant published points of view are presented, not just the most popular one. It should not be asserted that the most popular view or some sort of intermediate view among the different views is the correct one. Readers are left to form their own opinions." This is not bullying by a 'pro-Serb' contributor, it is simply correct to state both views, and this is a fundamental policy of Wikipedia. // Laughing Man 20:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

How is it that a person reporting their own feelings (in this case, Petrović talking about Petrović's feelings) needs to be scrutinized identically to a third person commenting on someone's thoughts (in this case, Divac talking about Petrović's thoughts)? The article had clearly stated that Petrović referred to that incident as a reason for cessation of friendship - it did not argue that this was indeed the reason why the friendship ceased to be: that is something that could be argued and supported or discredited with opinions of others, but not what Petrović said about it. I'm not "painting a picture" of the political tension, just reminding that tension existed - the same way someone could add how Divac felt through that period in the "Vlade Divac" article without there being a need to present the opinion of every other person in the world on the topic of Divac's thoughts, as long as it is specified that what is written are thoughts of Vlade Divac recorded by a third party, and not a third party's conclusions or theories. Damir 05:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

What kind of a statement exactly is a "weasley" statement? Damir 23:38, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Photos

Being a newbie I can use all the help I can get, so thanks for the advice, I appreciate it, I'll try to find out as much info as I can when I upload images. --Maleevafan 17:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Yugoslav wars

Hi! I see you just reverted a paragraph in the Yugoslav wars article I worked on. I think you should check the text of the introduction and the new Background section: I have moved some information there. Your edit now duplicates some statements. I don't think that I have deleted any important information from the article. So, maybe you could check the article again? — Hrvoje Šimić 21:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi again! I see you reverted the same sentence three times today. I would really like to hear your arguments on the talk page, next to mine. It seems you have some, but I wasn't able to figure out what they are. Also, if you have any personal messages for me, please leave them on my talk page. — Hrvoje Šimić 20:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad we could work it out. I was just about to give up on you, I thought you were ignoring me. I can see you behaved hasty lately, and I really hope you'll take the time to think things through in the future. Thanks for the compliment, and I think it's good to have one's edits reviewed by "the other side". It's just that arguments will do a better job than reverts ;-) -- Hrvoje Šimić 17:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Timeline The timeline was not so "brief" and it was really messy. I tried to remove everything but the most important milestones, and along it many POV statements. If you feel I removed something important, please add it back to the article using a clean, telegraphic style - I really think it's more appropriate. I'll work on it some more, so you can wait and see how that turns out. But please, let's move forward and not back. Unless you think the old timeline was that good. -- Hrvoje Šimić 22:37, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply to Seicer

np. I caught this in the detection software and looked at the gross number of edits by what I thought were the same IP range. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 04:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

CASB userbox

I see no reason not to, though it would be a better idea if a template is created for the purpose. Nikola 17:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

It's good to be back! --estavisti 10:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

SuperLiga

Your edits are exactly what I thought of. Now it is quite ok for a seasonal article so I will remove the expansion note. Avala 18:12, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Please discuss the battle box

on the talk page, i have strted a new topic conversation. Cheers.

THE MILJAKINATOR 07:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe you may want to comment Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 October 3. Nikola 20:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Y would u not like to discuss it!!! THE MILJAKINATOR 08:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I dont see the problem

THE MILJAKINATOR 11:37, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Me too. I love Mateja Kežman very big footballer. bye.--Profesor 00:41, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Your images for football kits in templates

You should upload all your images for football kits (like Image:Kit left arm blueborder ser.png) to Wikimedia commons so other wikipedias can use it too. Thanks. --SasaStefanovic • 21:12, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Odgovor

Well, the cross is frequently used in grafitti. It's not the only example of its use we should have, but I see no reason why we shouldn't have it. I'm not really bothered, if you really want to delete it, go ahead. --estavisti 18:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Miloš Krasić on Serbian National Football Team

Recap of Serbia-Czech Republic match on August 16.

As you can see, Krasic was a substitute in the game. Both him and Branislav Ivanović were injury replacements for Marko Lomić and Marko Baša. They were the only two players to play for the U-21 team and NT against Czech Republic. MK013 00:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks 2

lol Thanks :-) , but I must say that there's something really really wrong in rewarding people for finding "little excuses" to delay an obligation for another three minutes: I should be getting "get back to that boring book, you lazy man !!"-barnstars instead. - Regards, Evv 20:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Antwort

The way you phrased it, it sounds like the script - not the language - is the barrier for you. If that's the case, you might be interested to know that Serbian Wikipedia is available in the Roman script as well. You might not have noticed the "latinica" tab at the top of each page. --estavisti 02:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The thing with any language is to practice, practice, pratice. You can watch RTS on the internet, you can listen to B92 radio etc. Another good thing I'd recommend is Serbian hip hop :-) --estavisti 03:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Знам, знам, ал' хвала на упозорењу...--estavisti 02:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Cheers man. The first Serbian FA, as far as I know :-) --estavisti 03:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

poster

Really, that´s not an original one, and not italian too, but french. But now it is, the yugoslavian one, uploaded from the site you showed me. The US poster isn't appropriate for wiki en, about foreign films, this is not an US wiki, but english language wiki. Poster for foreign films aren't the same in US, UK or Australia. Then, the appropriate is we have the original one, ever than possible, because is accurate and historic.

Almost all Cannes Festival winners films are with its original posters here. This is an enciclopedia and we must be as exact as we can. And that poster isn't even a film poster but a DVD cover. And the writings aren't about a DVD, but the film. The same thing about When Father was Away. An US DVD Cover as leading poster for a serbian movie picture when we have the original? Are you kidding, pall? Thanks. Machocariocamachocarioca

Yes, is a VHS cover, but in original language, the original one from Yugoslavia, far better than a dvd cover in english to illustrate a foreign film, pall. Machocarioca 01:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)machocarioca

maintaining neutrality and acheiving consensus

LM,

I attempted to initiate a discussion with you on maintaining neutrality here at W; I would have also liked to have come to a consensus on what does or doesn't constitute an acceptable reference. I thought I was more than polite and reasonable, however you repeatedly deleted what I wrote. If you are interested in discussing the issues you yourself raised (and I did appreciate your tip re: signing messages), please do elaborate, if not, then by all means say you have no further interest in the discussion. Simply deleting messages without replying gives the impression that you're dodging the conversation (for whatever reason), and it comes across as impolite. - r70.70.183.154 08:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I've tried to help you by pointing out some helpful links and policy, but you either refuse to read or simply did not accept it and instead accuse editors of bias when I pointed out problematic edits you have made (ex. [1] [2]). Frankly at that point I simply felt you were "trolling" and did not want to waste any more of my time on it as I feel I have more productive things I can be doing on Wikipedia. And yes, you can take that as I do not have any further interest in this discussion. // Laughing Man 22:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

NATO bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

Hi Laughing Man, As I get the impression that there is an edit war unfolding, I took the liberty to jump in. I have edited the infobox to quote directly from the NATO press statement. Please note that the Casus Belli implies that "a government [needs] to demonstrate that it was going to war only as a last resort", therefore the non-acceptance of the Rambouillet terms is the casus belli, that what ultimately led to the war unfolding. Regards, Asterion^talk 18:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions Asterion, your version is the most neutral and encyclopedic. // Laughing Man 19:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Hope it will please everyone, if not I will place a Request for Comment to get a second opinion. Regards, Asterion^talk 19:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Shinichiro Watanabe.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Shinichiro Watanabe.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 20:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Vlade Divac.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Vlade Divac.png. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 02:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi!

To celebrate that Steven day as national holiday in RS is UNCONSTITUTIONAL and therefor I must point it on the article.

Alkalada 12:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Tnavbar header question

Hello Lauging Man, would you take a look at User:Laughing_Man/sandbox/Tnavbar-header and tell me how Template:Tnavbar-header2 is comparing to Template:Tnavbar-header? I've been working on header2 and I think the new code might be ready to replace the old code. Please let me know. Thanks. (→Netscott) 18:34, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Nice! A little bonus :-) . Based upon your response and my own testing I've gone ahead and implemented the new code. Thanks for the assistance. ;-) (→Netscott) 19:04, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Answer

Yeah, everything's fine. I haven't died, I'm just trying leave WP and get my account deleted.--Еstavisti 01:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Just tired of all the POV pushing, wasted energy, pointless arguments etc. There is too much shit to deal with. I spend 90% of my time here cleaning up shit which is promptly returned, and less than 10% writing something new. The point of Wikipedia has become Wikipedia itself to a large extent. I just don't feel that there's any point contributing under the present system - there remains a lot to be done, but I'll only do it when/if the system is fixed. I appreciate that Wikipedia is an open system, but it gives too much power to any old fucker with an internet connection. Why should a hormonal brainwashed teenager have the same voice (or more) as a university-educated expert? I just can't be fucked any more, jebi ga. // 86.134.161.218 03:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I've heard of Citizendium, hopefully it will deal with the problems, but I remain sceptical. The problem is that Wikipedia works becuase it's basically open to anyone with an internet connection, and yet that's the main problem. Striking a balance is bloody hard. I've been meaning to leave for a while now, but I always wanted to tie up just a few more loose ends. Now, when Belgrade has been the Main Page FA. is as good a time as any. Thanks for the compliments, by the way, at least my presence here has made some positive impact despite all the problems.--86.134.161.218 12:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[email protected]

We have a policy of not including email addresses in user names. User:Zoe|(talk) 01:38, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You must unblock [email protected] (talk · contribs · logs) immediately or I will request other admins to intervene shortly and report you for abusing your admin roles. This user has had nothing but extremely useful contribs to articles that really need it.

It not in the policy to block users for having an email address in the username.

Wikipedia:Username:

"E-mail addresses: As of September 26, 2006, the MediaWiki software has been changed so the users may no longer register usernames with "@" in them. Previously, these usernames were discouraged. Preventing the usage of @ stops editors from receiving spam, reduces work for administrators and prevents hurt feelings due to being blocked, which may have led editors to simply leave in the past. Existing usernames with the sign are not blocked, but editors should be encouraged to change their names as the sign interferes with some MediaWiki functions."

Thank you. // Laughing Man 16:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

The user has not even once acknowledged that he needs to change his user name. His first edit was November 29, which means that he created, or at least first used, his account after September 26. Take it to WP:AN if you think I have done anything inappropriately, but you will find that I will have consensus for the action. User:Zoe|(talk) 20:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)