User talk:Balkantropolis

Welcome!

Hello, Balkantropolis, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barakovo[edit]

Is this your edit? Rklawton 16:17, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Inter16[edit]

Is this also your edit? Rklawton 16:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IP Block[edit]

Given your use of personal insults, blanking, and profanity, consider yourself fortunate. Indeed, I should block this account as well for block evasion. There are appropriate ways to challenge articles, and your approach is not one of them. If you think the Barakovo article is inaccurate, fix it. If you think it is fiction, you may nominate it for deletion. You may not, however, disrupt the editing of this encyclopedia. Rklawton 16:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I second Rklawton. You may be right that there's something fishy about the Barakovo article; I'm on the case and will take appropriate steps if it's confirmed to be a hoax. But stop the attacks against Inter16, who is just a good-faith "recent changes patroller" and did the right thing. And stop the ethnic slurs and insults, as Wikipedia is not a battleground. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:48, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've nominated the article for deletion, so you can cool down now. Thanks for spotting the hoax. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jezik[edit]

Zamolio bih te samo da umesto "Serb Cyrillic" koristiš "Serbian Cyrillic", jer je u engleskom naziv za srpski jezik "Serbian language", a ne "Serb language". Inače znaci za kosa slova uglavnom ne treba da se koriste za ćirilična imena jer ne mogu sva slova da prikažu pravilno, pa bih te takođe zamolio da ne dodaješ ni te znake tamo. PANONIAN (talk) 15:20, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sarajevo Сараево (Saraevo)[edit]

Question : Isn't the Serbo-croatian "Сарајево" prononced the same way as the Bulgarian "Сараево" ? I.e. "Sah-rah-yay-vo" ? Or do the Bulgarians actually say "Sah-ra-ey-vo" ? If yes, then Сараево is an exoynm. If not, it's just an (alernate) transcription due on the fact that there is no letter "j" in Bulgarian, akin to things like Munchen or Lodz Travelbird 19:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia! --PaxEquilibrium 21:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blanket revert[edit]

Hello Balkantropolis, blanket reverts like this [1] are considered rather unconstructive. If there was something specific you disliked about Macrakis' modifications, it would be preferable to just change those particular points, rather than discard his whole edit, which had obviously been quite a piece of good-faith and reasonable work on his part. Thank you, --Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note on my page. How do you want to move forward? Obviously I thought my changes were all improvements, but apparently you disagree. Could you point out specifically which parts of my edit you would change? Thanks, --Macrakis 16:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your recent edit. Looks good. --Macrakis 17:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, good to see you worked it out. Thanks, Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know nothing[edit]

So you took out Barakovo just because you couldn't find it on a map. Fat excuse. You obviously know nothing and you don't know your facts. Your pretend Yugoslav nation never existed and Kosova is Albanian, forever. Death to Serbs. Shqipman 16:24, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 1994 census indeed is outdated.

I found the results of the 2002 population census. According to it, there were in 2002 129 Croats in the Republic of Macedonia. --PaxEquilibrium 20:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, they mostly left, under invitation of Franjo Tudjman (they were given free apartments and other, mainly due to large loot after the Serbs were ran out). 2,000 isn't such a huge figure, considering that thousands and thousands of Croats across the globe moved to Croatia in the late 1990s.

The same case is especially with the Bulgarian Croats. Didn't you watch the news? --PaxEquilibrium 09:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

I see that you're really neutral, but... how to ask ya this properly... why did you call you-know-who you-know-how? --PaxEquilibrium 19:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greek civil war[edit]

Ha! Why a predominant population needs outside support to impose itself? Two reasons:

Because in a guerilla war it is the guerilla who has the advantage; not tactic forces, as strong as they may be.
Because the guerillas had also outside support. After all, the Greek Civil War was not won by the Greek Army and Papagos, but lost by the communists, when their camps were driven out of Yugoslavia by Tito.

I should also mention here Kissinger's comment in Diplomacy that the Malaysian and the Greek guerilla are after the Vietnam guerilla the two most successful guerilla wars in modern war history.

I hope all these can give you some hints about why "a "predominant" number with (indeed) full control" of most of the country needed external help to win. In any case, the study of the Greek Civil War is indeed very interesting and didactic. And I am happy to see your interest in this war.--Yannismarou 09:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Without a significant amount of enthusiasm from a relatively high number of Greek individuals". Yes, this existed, but this does not mean that they were majority. If they won, how would they remain in power? Some analysts, taking into consideration the people's participation in the election of 1947, estimate the power of KKE at about 15-20%. After the war was over, and the KKE illegal, its affiliate party in Greece EDA never had in elections a percentage higher than 25%. Now, if we accept these estimations and say that roughly 80% of the population was anti-guerilla (centrists, liberals, right-wing, ultra-right, even center-leftists like Sophoulis who was prime minister of Greece during the civil war) and 20% was pro-guerilla, then if the communists had won, a minority of 20% would have imposed itself on a majority of 80%. Well, if this minority of 20% is united, phanatic, enthusiastic, then believe me, it can impose its rule for many years on a divided, mealy majority. We have many examples from history. Greece wouldn't have been the first nor the last example in this case.

Why external help by Tito was vital? Because the communists did not control Greek territory, except from two mountain summits in Gramos and Vitsi. But they needed proper logistics, and these two strongholds were not enough. When Tito removed its support from the communists, then guerilla logistics collapsed. At the same time, Papagos achieved more than 90% control of Greek territory. Without more than 10% control territory in Greece and without the camps beyond the borders the war was over for the guerillas. I must also mention here that the primary reason Tito aided the Greek communists was not because he had aspirations on Greek Macedonia (maybe this was a motive as well), but because that was what Stalin had ordered, and Tito had excellent relations with Stalin, and wanted to support the international communist movement. Not to mention that he wanted to impose himself as a prominent regional figure, and expand his political influence. Later, his relations with Stalin deteriorated, the Soviet ruler is said that wanted him dead. It was at this moment that Tito promoted his relation with the Western powers. But Britain and US wouldn't support him without quid pro quo. One of the terms they imposed was the halt of any military support towards the Greek communists. And I do not think that it is a coincidence that it was from this moment that the course of the civil war radically changed. So, external factors do matter in any war, and in a guerilla war as well!--Yannismarou 11:07, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Balkantropolis. Do you think you can keep watch on Dado Pršo over the next few hours if you happen to be online. One of the incognito is again finding amusement in removing Yugoslavia. If it's not too much. Evlekis 04:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Reply[edit]

You have it all wrong. As a de-facto republic of Yugoslavia but de-jure a province with all powers of a REPUBLIC we were really happy. We had our schools, laws, police, representative to League of Communists, etc. I do understand the Kosovar minority started to get upset that they know faced a reality under a new leadership, but I do not accept this alternative reality that albanians made it hard for the serbs as a way to run them out. Perhaps I am wrong, but I know one thing is for sure, I lived in Kosova and I would have heard if some person in charge was telling us to get rid of the Serbs. BTW watch the BBC documentary on breakup of yugoslavia (google video) and see how the nationalist party in Kosova makes that rally and fakes it and lie to Slobo about "they're beating us" where Milosevic says the infamous "no more will you be hurt". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kosova2008 (talk • contribs) 14:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Storm[edit]

You can see your version has not survived and it will not survive. Like I have writen on article talk page personal thinking is not important (not even rebels thinking). Your comments and explanations in article are against Wikipedia:No original research rule. It will be OK if you will read and Wikipedia:Verifiability rule. I must warn you about 3 RR rule or you will be blocked if you revert article 4 times in 24 hours. Similar to that you will be blocked if you revert article many times during few days without breaking this 3 RR rule--Rjecina (talk) 21:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Balkan related edits[edit]

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. Toddst1 (talk) 00:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Russell Brand[edit]

Hi! The paragraph you keep re-adding to Russell Brand does have the quote “He’s a challenge to my heterosexuality” but that doesn't really fully support your paragraph - especially the last sentence. I've tried for a synthesis that uses the source. Ϣere Spiel Chequers 14:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shocking. I go on holiday and take a two year break and ciome back to find this. Unbelievable. Blocked for being the same person as Sinbad Barron. Thick. Balkantropolis (talk) 14:23, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Balkantropolis (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am a sockpuppet of Sinbad Barron? That is unthinkable. How did that come about and why was I not questioned about this crazy ideology? The most I can think of is that our IP addreses may have once clashed but the nature of our editting is 100% different. I never vandalised pages once in Wikipedia nor got into nasty ugly feuds with fellow users. I dearly wish for the ban to be lifted. I admit I use public spots for my internet usage but now I have own laptop and can use that. Please, lift the ban. I was a user for much longer than Sinbad Barron, so atleast if you think there is anything fishy - call ME the puppetmaster and not him, I believe the rest of the blokced users are his sockpuppet, but definately not I.Balkantropolis (talk) 14:22, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This block was made by a checkuser, who have access to technical evidence that is generally very reliable. I don't feel that this request outweighs that, and can't undo this block based on it. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:53, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.