User talk:Maleschreiber

Archives

/Archive

Hello, I'm Pixius. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks.Pixius talk 14:03, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lost in all that text is me and El_C agreeing that maybe you could have a DRN with Alexikoua over the elections section. If you're down. I'd rather have the other editors (myself, Ktrimi, Khirurg) sit out, imo, it would probably be most focused that way. --Calthinus (talk) 01:39, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Plav-Gusinje massacres (1912-13), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Serdar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:20, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see note on your DYK review. Yoninah (talk) 18:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The full reference for Elsie 2003 is missing. Could you add it please?

Also if you install User:Svick/HarvErrors.js, you'll be notified of those issues in the future. If you don't know how to install it, let me know, I'll walk you through it. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:52, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good find! I must have forgotten about it.--Maleschreiber (talk) 06:50, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I see you are an experienced Wikipedia editor who has done work with pages about massacres and persecution of peoples. There is a bit of an edit war in the Genocide of Serbs in the Independent State of Croatia article. There is also an ongoing debate about the lead and Background section, the chronological order of events, broader context etc. And unfortunately is a bit charged. I figured a person such as yourself would be a a good neutral party to take a look and provide some input on the issues of the article. It would be much appreciated! Cheers. OyMosby (talk) 02:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cem (river) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Martian-2008 -- Martian-2008 (talk) 06:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Cem (river) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cem (river) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Martian-2008 -- Martian-2008 (talk) 06:21, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your friend Bato had three (and possibly four) reverts at Pelion (Chaonia) today. Did you a) miss that, or b) notice it but decided not to warn him? Khirurg (talk) 01:08, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Saying that "s/he did it too" is not a good argument in any situation IMO. I didn't notify Bato because he's the writer of most of the articles in Illyrian-related topics, an extremely experienced editor and an administrator on Albanian wikipedia. He definitely knows when he's reached 3R IMO. You've reached 3RR in two articles and because you're an experienced editor who definitely understands the concept of edit-warring, there was no formal need for a warning. If you reached 4RR, it could have simply moved to a community procedure. The warning exists to advice editors that they are close to crossing a certain threshold. It's for their own benefit and it also prevents a very unpleasant procedure. Just to be clear here, I don't believe in blocking, sanctions or bans as punitive measures against the editors. I only see them as a last resort to protect the integrity of a procedure, so even if I reported you if you reached 4R I would ask for something to the effect of "if Khirurg accepts to limit his reverting, there's no need for this to continue".--Maleschreiber (talk) 11:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Gusinje Municipality at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Guerillero | Parlez Moi 00:02, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see note on your DYK review. Are you familiar with Earwig's Copvio Detector? Normally a low percentage like 15% doesn't need to be checked, but in the case of a new nominator, it's good to look at a few of the line items. In this case, the nominator was liberally pulling phrases out of the sources instead of rewriting in his own words. Yoninah (talk) 23:43, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is confirmed that this editor used sockfarms (revealed thanks to multiple checkusers). I wonder what makes you believe you are connected with this pattern.Alexikoua (talk) 11:19, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not connected - you made aspersions that anyone who made that very valid argument is a sock. Anonymity is no excuse for involving editors with whom you've had content disputes in misinformation campaigns.--Maleschreiber (talk) 13:00, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's your personal view. My comment was about Rolandi+ and his socks I fail to see your involvement with this.Alexikoua (talk) 13:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bua (tribe), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arbëreshë (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:13, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dukagjini family, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diwan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:22, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	"...and the truth shall set you free!" Thank you mate, you inspire me. Atlonche (talk) 21:43, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oy how you doing mate? Hope all is well. Since you're interested in articles about tribes and the like, I thought you should check this out Mijaks and have your input in it. Kind of a obscure subject but if you have the time take a look at it. Best wishes Alltan (talk) 11:10, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Mijaci are not a community of common patrilineal origin. Their Y-DNA haplogroups show these differences. Mijak more or less refers to a microregional identity that developed over time, but it's not an identity like that of the fis or that of its slavicized variant, the pleme.--Maleschreiber (talk) 12:54, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ohh I see, its basically like the Gorani or Suliotes. Thanks for the clarification! Alltan (talk) 16:23, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dimale, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Illyrian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:37, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Male, could you take a look at Pamalioti? I stumbled upon it accidentally and am not sure if we can add it to the template or not. So I thought id ask the guy who knows most about this stuff. Flm paraprakisht!Alltan (talk) 20:25, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I will check it later in the day. Valentini's compendium definitely has some stuff if you want to check it yourself [1].--Maleschreiber (talk) 15:22, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ohh nice thanks dude, heads up btw Noel Malcolm says theyre an Albanian family like the Bruti and Bruni, but maybe its like with the Bua were its a family within a tribe. I also think we could do some stuff with the macure krici and spanje, but all in its own time i guess. Good talking to ya mate Alltan (talk) 15:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All of these families came from a fis and their power base was that fis. Anthropological and genealogical (Y-DNA) research as part of an interdisciplinary approach has highlighted great finds.--Maleschreiber (talk) 16:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thats really interesting, you think it could be something like the spanje tribe= spani family? Or krici= crutta ? This part of wiki is really underdeveloped. Alltan (talk) 16:12, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed that you removed well cited assertion with this diff and disguised it with "cleanup and expansion" description in edit line. I reverted your bold removal. Please do not repeat this kind of behavior in future.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:36, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can move your "well cited assertions" about Chetniks and "Communist propaganda" against them to a website that is more welcome to these beliefs. Wikipedia mirrors bibliographical consensus, not partisan debates.--Maleschreiber (talk) 15:49, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

With this edit (diff) you violated WP:AGF and falsely accused me for attempt to include Bojan Dimitrijević in a FA's bibliography in order to legitimize his later use in other articles although Dimitijević has already been included in FA's bibliography for more than 6 years. Having in mind that the discussion at this article talkpage (which you never edited before) is not the first you joined to contradict my opinion, somebody who does not AGF might conclude that you followed me with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance, or distress to me. Will you please be so kind to refrain from such behavior in future.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:28, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You started that discussion as an offshoot of the discussion about RP in which you presented Dimitrijević as RS. I took part in that discussion and I repeated the same arguments in the new section you specifically created about BD. If you don't like the fact that many editors have been pointing out the obvious POV you're pushing forward, maybe you should try another website that is more welcome to those beliefs. Just like I said when you were complaining that Pajović's anti-Chetnik activism, both in his real life and his works, is actually openly glorified as something good and normal: There are of course websites in which celebration of the anti-fascist victory against Chetnik Nazi collaborators is not considered "something good and normal". Wikipedia is not of those places. --Maleschreiber (talk) 19:01, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your reply only confirmed what I wrote. Yes, before you followed me to PĐ you followed me to RP (diff). Again to repeatedly contradict my work and WP:CANVASS another editor against me. Instead to acknowledge the issue with your editing with your reply you continued with violations of AGF. There is no other explanation except that you do it on purpose, hence this will be my last comment in this discussion with you. All the best.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:37, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, since day one in wikipedia I've been involved in articles about Montenegro. That includes Radoje Pajović. I tagged the article and pinged an admin to check it, not because he's an admin but because he genuinely knows a lot more than I about WWII in Yugoslavia. Then, I made some changes and he reworked the article entirely. Now, if you're going to cast WP:ASPERSIONs and argue that an admin was involved in the article because of canvassing do that directly on that admin's talkpage or even better report us both on WP:AE.--Maleschreiber (talk) 01:49, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mirëmbrema! Sa per faktin qe Mid'hat Frasheri ka kolaboruar me nazistet nuk ka as edhe 1 fakt. E vetmja evidence qe ka perdorur propaganda komuniste ka qene armepushimi i perkohshem (qe dmth se deri ne ate moment ka luftuar nazistet) qe ka bere per te ndaluar luften ne 2 fronte. Nga njera ane me partizanet (lufte e filluar nga ana e komunisteve pas prishjes se mareveshjes se Mukjes) dhe nga ana tjeter te luftoj edhe pushtuesin qe ishte shume me i fuqishem. Eshte e vertete se ka individe nga ana e Ballit qe kane kolaboruar por jo Lumo Skendo. Te sugjeroj te lexosh keto libra per me shume informacione: Marrëveshja e Mukjes- Shans i bashkimit, peng i tradhtisë nga Uran Butka si dhe Vepra te zgjedhura te Mid'hat Frasherit vellimi 1, ku i gjen dokumentet origjinale te kohes te ruajtura ne arkivin qendror te Shqiperise. Sa per anen morale si shqiptar nuk eshte e hijeshme te nxjerrim para botes shqiptaret si kolaboracionist nazist edhe ate me se paku te birin e nje nga rilindasve tane me te medhej Abdyl Frasherit edhe sikur te ishte kolaboracionist (qe perseri nuk pajtohem se ishte) se ne kete menyre humbim kredibilitetin e njerit nga nenshkrueseve te aktit te pavarsise si dhe ish-ministrit te shtetit tone. Nuk eshte aspak morale te njollosur figurat tona me te ndritura kur kombet tjere nga hici krijojne heronj. Te pershendes! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albanian Ballist (talk • contribs) 20:15, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Created an account to message you. No idea how this stuff works. Please contact me. I have quite a bit of info on the Dukagjini family as I am of the branch that is in Aleppo Syria(well I'm in Los Angeles, but most of the family and our waqf is there) stemming from DukaginzadeAhmed Pasha. I'm also the same member of the branch that the Albanian Bloodline Project had a Y-Chromos dna test done on. Please reach out or reply. Thanks OmarBeg (talk) 07:49, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow!! @OmarBeg: you can also use the e-mail function if you want to send files etc. --Maleschreiber (talk) 10:12, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Maleschreiber, hope all is well. I found another version of that 1551 source. They are slightly different as this one has an added line when talking about Progon Dukagjini(I think it's the wife's mother's name and family/title, I mean it's in midievel Italian so I may be wrong). Not sure which version came first as I'm sure these things were hand writen. Anyways, let me know if you want me to send it to you. Thanks OmarBeg (talk) 09:17, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Male how you doin, hope all is good and well. Is there modern consensus about adding Macure as an Albanian tribe? In the article all except erdeljanovic call them albanian. Thought id ask the guy who knows best. Cheers mateAlltan (talk) 00:34, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Alltan - how are you? Yes, you can definitely add it under the historical tribes section. It's not entirely settled because we have very little information, but that is the dominant hypothesis.--Maleschreiber (talk) 00:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok great! Should i rework the article in any way or should just adding the template be fine? Alltan (talk) 00:40, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do whatever you consider to be the best contribution in the article. As long as you have the sources, it can't be challenged in a fundamental manner.--Maleschreiber (talk) 00:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! I hope im not bothering you too much with these questions, but better safe than sorry! Have a good one mateAlltan (talk) 00:46, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're not bothering me at all! I said the above to encourage you to edit around freely. Be WP:BOLD in your editing, you'll get better results and you'll learn much faster how things work.--Maleschreiber (talk) 00:49, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No worries mate! I'm not the most active of editors so I try to talk to guys who i know have more experience than me, and it really encourages me to hear people like you who are always willing to help! I hope I can grt the hang of it, sooner rather than later. So yeah, thanks again!Alltan (talk) 01:01, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SUMMARYNO. This [2] had better be last occurrence of this behavior. You've done it before, too [3]. If it happens again, I will report you. Third time's a charm as they say. Khirurg (talk) 17:14, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think that I mocked you? There many things that each of us doesn't know and it's an absolutely normal thing. There's nothing wrong with it. I wouldn't report someone because they pointed out something that I might not know, but you're free to report anyone you want. --Maleschreiber (talk) 17:22, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't play dumb. You know what you did. And if you do it again, you will be defending it AE instead of here. Promise. Khirurg (talk) 17:24, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, do that, if you feel that it is the right thing for you to do. I'm being honest with you though when I'm telling you that there's no mocking in highlighting things that someone may not be aware of - when it's done in the context of information sharing, like I did. It's a natural process by which we all learn and I hope that one day you see it in the same way too. But if you don't perceive such instances in the same way, I'm happy to discuss them with you. But I don't think that it's the best course of action for you to come to my talkpage and start a discussion with "promises" of reporting me to AE. It seems rather counter-productive.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:35, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Counter productive", says the guy who deliberately mentions other editors in edit summaries in a mocking manner. Anyway, I don't care about your complicated explications. You have been made aware of WP:SUMMARYNO, so there won't be any more warnings. Have a nice day. Khirurg (talk) 17:37, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can have the interpretation that you consider to be the right one. I don't think that it's a correct interpretation, I may ask from an admin to explain it to me though. Have a nice day.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:49, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be transparent here, I asked an admin about how SUMMARYNO can be used User_talk:EdJohnston#Use_of_summary_interpretation.--Maleschreiber (talk) 18:34, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There was absolutely no mocking in the cited examples of Maleschreiber's "edit summary" explanations, but the insult that editor Khirurg made at the MS's expense, in his overly adverse reproach, clearly stand out. If anyone should end up at ANI board then it is that editor who does not hesitate to openly throw insults at his colleagues.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 16:01, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rhizon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Agron.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:24, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Male How are You? To be honest I'm not very sure about the proposed move to Malishevë. Are we allowed to have two move requests at the same time? Should we close the current move request to go for a new one? What do You think of waiting for the result of the current RM and go for Malishevë after that? I'm just curious because I don't want Wikipedia to keep the undeserved Serbian name for that article. Crazydude1912 (talk) 13:29, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion here is that you should close Malisheva (although it still has more results than "Mališevo") and start a new one with a Malishevë, to which Malisheva is the definite version.--Maleschreiber (talk) 13:36, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your opinion. Crazydude1912 (talk) 14:07, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Maleschreiber, regarding Peć/Peja comments, feel free to move both of our posts where you think more fitting or appropriate - I really doubt that editor who posted bellow my own comment would mind if you move his/her as well. Take care and stay safe, also good luck with a Request.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 15:20, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Vlashnjë at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 16:14, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Of course that you have been warned, i should have guessed already. Thank you. --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 15:55, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The DS alert is not a warning. I didn't warn you about something you did when I placed that on your talkpage. It's an alert which is placed to let you know about the framework of the editing process in the Balkan topic area.--Maleschreiber (talk) 16:01, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are recipient no. 2443 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:28, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your very kind message and thank you for your humanness.--Maleschreiber (talk) 23:42, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gatoclass (talk) 12:02, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello friend, I hope you're doing well. Since i know you're essentially contributing to important articles related to the Balkans, I was probably thinking of you when I saw the issue within the Ancient Macedonians article [4]; if you're not too busy maybe you're interested to give your input as you have a good historical understanding regarding the topic about ancient peoples and tribes in the Balkans. Faleminderit për kontributin tend!--Lorik17 (talk) 10:58, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it is more complex than the approach which the editor who started the discussion is trying to put forward. Ancient Macedonian identity evolved from a tribal identity to state identity and then to an imperial identity. In every stage of its progress, it became more inclusive of other elements - as all identities of the citizens of expanding states do. The "original" language was definitely closer to ancient Greek than to Thracian.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:55, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've left some comments in the review for you to address—hardly any, really. I'll add some copy editing suggestions in due course. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 21:23, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Cem (river) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Cem (river) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 19:00, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October

music today, - enchanting, said a critic about the Mendelssohn that I heard on 3 October, - this video is older, and the YT in the article comes with a Bach encore as she played for us. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16 October memories --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:25, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting, @Gerda Arendt: thank you! I'm exploring Ernst Krenek's work these days.--Maleschreiber (talk) 01:06, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Three short operas were played at Oper Frankfurt, entitled Drei Opern. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:12, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.academia.edu/39720890/Epigraf%C3%ADa_pol%C3%ADtica_del_Epiro_II_El_Koinon_epirota It's on page 96 with Spanish translation and a different rendering. Why don't you create the Article, Inscription of Phoinike? Edion Petriti (talk) 07:24, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I think they deleted the file. Still me, Edion Petriti (talk) 12:11, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKI5zEpmE1o&t=1078s 15.50 in this video, Prince Abbas Hilmi clearly states that Muhammad Ali Pasha's father came to Kavala from Turkish city Konya. Also he says that Muhammad Ali Pasha's native language was Turkish and that almost all members of the dynasty can spoke Turkish. If his father came from Konya, how could he be Albanian? Also there's no evidence that he's an Albanian. I want the ethnic origin parts changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mnl0g 044 (talk • contribs) 18:38, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is based on reliable sources if there is an overwhelming consensus about a topic, you need even more authoritative bibliography to put forward another narrative because in your case you'd have to explain why Fuad I of Egypt claimed the throne of Albania or why Albanian Egyptians were specifically targeted when the regime was overthrown.--Maleschreiber (talk) 18:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Parga, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arta.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:34, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I start discussion at WP:DRN so it would be nice for you to join us to resolve this in good faith, thank you. Mikola22 (talk) 17:57, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will check it but today is a rather busy day for many reasons.--Maleschreiber (talk) 21:50, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

—valereee (talk) 00:01, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The photo for this DYK was super pretty; glad to see it on the front page! {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:14, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nikšić, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Doclea.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:21, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:03, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want and have time you and @Joy: could make a report at AE as El_C stated.--Miki Filigranski (talk) 03:47, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you and @Joy: should check Talk:Višeslav of Serbia#DAI discussion.--Miki Filigranski (talk) 15:52, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Is there any template that guides readers to such articles as Congress of Dibra, Congress of Elbasan, Frashër Assembly (1880), Convention of Kuçi? If not, do you think one should be created? Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:59, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging @Iaof2017: Ktrimi991 (talk) 19:01, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If we can define its scope, perhaps a template about congresses and meetings could work. --Maleschreiber (talk) 00:07, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Id argue for it being a row in a Rilindja template. --Calthinus (talk) 04:25, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, @Calthinus: I was actually going to ping you :) I can not give more input to this now, as for a few months I need to focus on others (hopefully, will not need to make more Balkans-related edits for some time). Are you and/or Mal interested in creating that template? Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:25, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will soon create the template. @Calthinus: and Maleschreiber, do you have further suggestions? Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:51, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One row for rilindas individuals themselves, perhaps ordered by either surname or birthdate. Another for major events. Lastly, one for pages about specific works they made or about specific ideologies -- i.e. Albanian nationalism, Secularism in Albania, Albanian alphabet etc. All just suggestions!--Calthinus (talk) 00:12, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good ideas, Calthinus :) Thanks, Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:08, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete my edit ? Historyandsciencelearn (talk) 09:12, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits were written in the form of WP:ESSAY and lacked WP:RS. Reading ESSAY/RS will improve your writing on wikipedia.--Maleschreiber (talk) 23:24, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I live in Montenegro and you have to understand that the old government in power (DPS) invented the Montenegrin language. I never changed another language including Albanian from any of the pages because Albanian actually is a proper language, which was not invented in the 90's like Montenegrin. Another thing you have to factor in is that the majority of the citizens in Montenegro speak the Serbian language; this is also agreed upon universally by world linguists, who have established that the Montenegrin people have been speaking the Serbian language for over a millennium. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrnogorskiKralj (talk • contribs) 23:36, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for what you said on Yoninah's talk, - see also Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2021-03-28/Obituary! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:10, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's the least that could be done. This reminds me of a poem by Arseniy Tarkovsky:

All are immortal. All is immortal. No need
To be afraid of death at seventeen
Nor yet at seventy. Reality and light
Exist, but neither death nor darkness.
All of us are on the sea-shore now,
And I am one of those who haul the nets
When a shoal of immortality comes in. --Maleschreiber (talk) 23:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article Albesian Mataj has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While tragic, does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:NSOLDIER.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:27, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Çkemi Male? Shpresoj tjesh mirë dhe me shëndet. Im editing the articles around Albanian clans,but i ran into some issues. 1) I cant find much material on older tribes like maleshi, krici, niksici and the like. Could you perhaps link me any good studies on the topic or pdfs? It would be of great help. And 2nd)I took a look at Kuqi, and although theres plentz of material to support their albanian origin, Im not comfortable to add them to the sidebar at the moment. Theyre id say a special case cause they still exist, so you cant add them to *Historical*,but theyre also primarily slavic nowadays, so im not sure i can put them with tribes like Krasniqi or Shala. Maybe the example of say Shkreli/Škrijel would be a good model? Si Mendon?.Tung! Alltan (talk) 16:27, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Alltan. Hope you're well. I think that you can add Kuçi in the historical tribes section because a part of them remained Albanian until very late and a part in KS and Plava-Gucia are Albanian even today. In the article, I've tried to put forward a balanced version between historical origins and modern identities. In terms of demographics, most Kuçi today are in fact Sandzakli Bosniaks, so they're quite close to a division like the one about Shkreli. I have many sources about Krici and other such tribes - mostly Serbo-Croatian ethnography. I can e-mail you a tranferfile link or send them directly via e-mail. --Maleschreiber (talk) 23:52, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok i will add kuqi tommorow (good work on the article), but sadly i havent added an email to this account yet. I will let you know when i get to it (probably friday, busy week). Thanks in advance though! Tung! Alltan (talk) 00:00, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the consistent work and attention to bibliography! :) --Maleschreiber (talk) 00:04, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I enabled the email function, write to me when you can! Alltan (talk) 12:35, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How you doing man?. Well the "principality" or the autonomous entity was build upon several bajraks or 12 bajraks in which all of them were ruled by a single prince or kapedan. It's similarly as Prince-Bishopric of Montenegro in which at first it was a small autonomous entity but it expanded afterwards by the unification of surrounding bajraks, so i think it's ok to call it a principality due to the fact that it has been refereed as such by several authors and the rulers themselves were refereed as such--User:Dardania0 (talk) 19:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some descendants of these bajraktars call it a principality and in 1921 the last bajraktar tried to form a principality - Republic of Mirdita - but Mirdita wasn't an autonomous entity. It was a group of bajraks under a hereditary bajraktar. The bajrak was a military institution which granted semi-autonomy in terms of taxation and property rights, but it's not the same as political autonomy and semi-independence. If Mirdita was a "principality" because it was under the bajrak system, then there were tens of principalities in Albanian lands. If there is no bibliography which discusses it as a principality, we should have wider community discussion about a merge to Mirdita.--Maleschreiber (talk) 22:28, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Spani family, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Emporium.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Albanians in Montenegro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brda.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You need to stop conflating the city of Bar with the municipality of Bar. The municipality of Bar Wikipedia page already has the Albanian version in it as 6.51% of the population declared Albanian as their mother tongue. Meanwhile, for the city of Bar a measly 0.91% of the population declared Albanian as their mother tongue, which does not constitute it as a minority language for the city. Also, about 0.56% of the population declared Russian as their mother tongue, that does not mean we should also add Russian in the language header at the start of the article. The main point I am trying to make is that since such a small percentage of Bar city residents speak Albanian as their mother tongue, it should be put with Italian and all the other languages in the name section where it rightfully belongs! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BalkanKing (talk • contribs) 22:41, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you used Balkans and Islam: Encounter, Transformation, Discontinuity, Continuity as one of the sources in the Bar talk page so I went and also used it for Bajram Balota can you take a look at the article? Thanks. Excine (talk) 01:17, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know much about this figure but I can definitely check for more sources. @Excine: Do you know his patronymic surname?--Maleschreiber (talk) 00:43, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mccapra (talk) 08:40, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, if you have knowledge of Italian I suggest you take a look at [5]

I have been researching archives and libraries for several days now as more books are being digitized day by day. One of which is the Archivio Studi Adriatici which is the open-source digital portal for free access to the heritage of books, papers, documents, and historical and modern scientific collections of the ISMAR-CNR Institute of Marine Sciences in Venice. Use the search bar to find what you want, for example: Albania. The book L'Albania by Vico Mantegazza (1912) might capture your interest. All are free to download in PDF. Bes-ARTTalk 23:38, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Bes-ART:. Some of these sources are valuable because they have archival material which may have never been recorded in modern publications. We can also share offline publications which might be useful via e-mail, if you want to. I have access to JSTOR and other digital libraries.--Maleschreiber (talk) 23:56, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, they are the archives of Venice and especially for the northern part of Albania there is unstudied material. Many modern studies seem to be based on these sources. Example: L'Albania: notizie geografiche, ethnografiche e storiche published in 1901 (which I miss-quoted in the comment above), a few years before independence where it talks about the origin of the Albanians, the language, the territorial extent and everything else is very interesting. It seems that these books are little or not used on Wikipedia. @Alltan: may be interested in Albanian tribes, and this archive is full of material to study. Bes-ARTTalk 09:21, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Albanoi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gradsko.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Writer's Barnstar
	The only thing more astounding than your contributions is how long overdue this barnstar is. Calthinus (talk) 10:45, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Maleschreiber. Maybe you know a little more about what the user Griborski deleted[[6]]. I thought to return, but maybe it's really WP: OR as user Griborski says so take a look. Bye78.0.131.98 (talk) 17:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bosniaks in Kosovo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gorani.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have added short cite to "Milosević 2013" but no such source is listed in the bibliography. Can you please add? Also, suggest installing a script to highlight such errors in the future. All you need to do is copy and paste importScript('User:Svick/HarvErrors.js'); // Backlink: [[User:Svick/HarvErrors.js]] to your common.js page. Thanks, Renata•3 01:27, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for noticing it. It seems that I placed a cpe without moving the relevant sources from Plav-Gusinje M. to Avro Cem.--Maleschreiber (talk) 18:06, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Leka (Paulician leader), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. scope_creep^Talk 18:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep: Which of the three sources which I used is not RS or IS? And which sentence(s) are unsourced? --Maleschreiber (talk) 01:21, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Maleschreiber: A miss on my part, I think. I think, submit it and I will promote it. scope_creep^Talk 01:26, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep: It's ok, such things are bound to happen from time to time :) I submitted it. --Maleschreiber (talk) 01:35, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the use of {{qn}} (diff) is meant for general references such as Hamp & Ismajli (2007)? I searched for an alternative template regarding general references specifically, but didn't manage to find one. I believe that the creation of a new thread in the talk page, addressing your concern, would receive more attention. Furthermore, ideally and per WP:GENREF, WP:CITESHORT, and WP:ILC#References/Notes_section, the current "References" section should be renamed "Notes" or "Footnotes", and the "Bibliography" section should be divided into "References" and "General references"; the latter should include Hamp & Ismajli (2007), etc. Demetrios1993 (talk) 19:17, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to mention that we have the Template:More footnotes needed, which relates and can be used for both articles and sections (not "References" section), but isn't appropriate for trivial cases involving only one or a few general references; to be honest, i haven't really checked the article properly, to see if there are more than just Hamp & Ismajli (2007). Demetrios1993 (talk) 18:36, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Demetrios. Hope you're well. I think that it can also be replaced with {{vn}}.--Maleschreiber (talk) 18:42, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am doing ok; hope you are as well. Actually, {{vn}} is Template:Verify source. At first glance it might seem more appropriate, though, it likewise isn't meant for general references under the "References" section, but for specific passages in the article. The problem with general references is that they aren't linked to any particular text, and thus, text–source integrity is lost; it makes verifiability very hard, and the editors who add them tend to summarize large parts of a source (chapters, entire book, etc.). I did a quick search in the edit history to find out who added the aforementioned reference; it turns out that it was initially added by User:Aigest back on 14 May 2009, with a footnote that supposedly summarized the reference (diff). This is already mentioned and referenced to Hamp & Adams (2013) in your recent edit (diff); thus, Hamp & Ismajli (2007) can be removed altogether after all, since it pertains to the same author and view, albeit from a prior publication. Demetrios1993 (talk) 23:27, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Messapic language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bato.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it did Exist? Did you not see the page??

Also that besart guy wont let me add the league of lezhe flag on the historical flag section he says its "to off topic" when its literally the first albanian flag that basically made us have our flag today. Would adding the flag of Mercurio Bua on the albanian flags page be fine cause I dont want another of my edits to get deleted

@Arberian2444: It really didn't exist - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Principality of Mirdita. Besart is trying to help you. The historical flag is discussed in the background section. He didn't removeit. Bua's CoA is his personal CoA, it wasn't used as a flag. It's like saying that the Muzaka CoA was a flag. The best way to get started is to read a lot about a subject before you edit. If you want to I can give you access to my source collection (contact me via e-mail).--Maleschreiber (talk) 20:04, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding! But I dont get what besart is doing cause I want to add the League of Lezhe Flag on the historical section of the page cause it was a Historical Flag of albania it was a physical flag that was risen in kruje in 1444. Also on mercurio Buas page it said its a physical flag that was made in 1510. Thanks for responding again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arberian2444 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a CoA can be a physical object. But it's not a national flag. A national flag is a collective symbol of a people, but a CoA is the personal symbol of a historical figure.--Maleschreiber (talk) 22:29, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

League of Lezhë as far as I know doesn't have a flag. At least the sources I consulted. Even if did have one (the one you're trying to include) , it is a direct derivative of Kastriotis flag which is currently mentioned. Again, the article is about "the Flag of Albania" the country that was constituted in 1912... and as such everything else is off-topic, except the origin of it. The origin is mentioned by Konica, Schiro, De Rada etc. and it is cite: "the flag of Skanderbeg". Thanks Bes-ARTTalk 22:38, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So I cant add any flags of albanias history like the Principality of Albania (medieval) ? or The principalities on this page? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arberian2444 (talk • contribs) 06:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alot of Places say he did have a flag on all these different sources? And how did we even get our flag today if he never had one I dont get how that makes sense? "he raised a red standard with a black double-headed eagle on Krujë" It is even said on Britannica "On November 28, 1443, the national hero of Albania, a prince known as Skanderbeg (George Kastrioti), raised his flag over the fortress of Krujë in defiance of the Turks who ruled the country" Which is a trusted website with trusted authors both identifiable and credible. And The first siege of Krujë by Jost Amman shows the albanian flag on the wood carving as well? So Im confused How it wasn't a real flag?? Our flag is even the Fifth oldest continuous flag in the world. Thanks again for responding

Don't post unjustified warnings such as this one (Special:Diff/1073988609) on my talk page again. Thank you. tw^sabin 19:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have 3 reverts at Kosovo Liberation Army. Informing you that you have reached that point is for your own benefit and for the protection of editing process.--Maleschreiber (talk) 19:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't made three reverts, look at the diffs to understand the nature of my edits. Only two are reverts, and one hardly even counts toward 3RR as a revert of a potentially disruptive edit: unexplained removal of sourced content—I directed to editor to offer an explanation, on their talk page, and after they did, and initiated a discussion I subsequently did not revert, but discussed the content. My third edit which removed something else, that had been there for a long time, and was not the actual content point that was disputed, is not in this context as a revert, and is simply me working on the article. When people work on the article some of the diffs register as subtractions and some as additions. Read Wikipedia:WikiProject User warnings for instructions on issuing warnings and you will find: You should check that the user has made harmful or disruptive edits before issuing a warning ... and You should ensure that you are familiar with the content of templates before issuing them. If the tone or content of a template isn't appropriate, don't use the template — just say it normally, because it likely would violate basic WP:CIVIL. I am assuming good faith here, and presuming that you are concerned about an edit war occuring on that page, which is great. But you can not just go around slapping the 3RR warning on the talk page of people indiscriminately, without good grounds. Be more careful in the future. tw^sabin 19:54, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have 3 reverts and you received a generic warning for 3RR - just like the other editor did [7]. This is done as a means to help you avoid further troubles as this article is directly under AE oversight. If you want to read it as something which is not helping you, you can do that too, but I don't think that it's the best course of action for you or the other editor. Thank you.--Maleschreiber (talk) 20:04, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not make three reverts, and have explained why. You don't seem to be interested in facts, and seem intent on giving out baseless warnings. I still think you are acting in good faith by trying to prevent something bad from happening, but the way in which you are doing it is not helpful. If you post a spurious warning on my, or anyone else's, talk page again, I will consider this to be disruptive, and will seek counsel and help from other editors, in order for this behavior to be reviewed. tw^sabin 20:11, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And as someone who has seen many 3RR cases I can tell you that you definitely reached that threshold. You can do with that information whatever you want from now on, but don't except that the argument you used above as an explanation for 2RR would be considered a legitimate one at 3RR noticeboards. I just saw that you created your account on January 27, 2022. Have you had an account in the past or edited as an IP?--Maleschreiber (talk) 20:17, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you keep pushing the baseless acussation about edit warring, and particularly the added implication of other accounts, I will alert an administrator as you are nearing a point at which I would consider your attitude an attempt to intimidate me. Actually I think it's probably too late, as I can't realistically predict a constructive resolution to this thread without outside help. tw^sabin 20:22, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @Twsabin: you have made 3 reverts there [8][9][10]. In the three cases you add the US to the lede. The other editor explained their rationale in an edit summary, so reverting them as merely a disruptive editor/vandal does not prevent you from breaching the 3RR. In any case, I think that both you and the other side of the dispute did not aim to damage the quality of the article, and the dispute seems to have been solved. The best thing to do in such cases is to play it safe and wait to see if things can be sorted out on the talk page by discussing with the other side of the dispute, or if that fails, open an WP:RfC. You do not breach the 3RR only if the other editor is removing content without providing a reason or if they insert clearly disruptive material (such as insults). Read WP:Vandal for more examples. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:07, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What, you're counting that as a revert? See WP:BRB. That is not even similar to the disputed fragment that was subject to reverts. That edit is what came from the discussion after I had taken into account Butrint10morina's arguments (immediately after they offered them, doing so for the first time), essentially accepting their point, and writing a completely different version, that incorporates their criticism, and is simply what follows from the body. tw^sabin 21:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You added the US twice and then the other editor wrote on the talk page: As such the sentence "It was considered a terrorist group by Yugoslavia and the United States until the breakup of Yugoslavia." needs to be modified to "It was considered a terrorist group by Yugoslavia until the breakup of Yugoslavia." thus removing the part "and the United States. That editor on the talk page kept his position that the US should not be in the lede. Your reaction? You added the US again for the third time [[11]. That is an addition of the US, no matter if you slightly reworded it. Hence you have 3 reverts there, not two. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Twsabin I posted an edit warning template to your talkpage and to the talkpage of the other editor. Per WP:OWNTALK don't use my talkpage to continue a discussion about your reverts. The article talkpage is the place to have a discussion about edits. Ktrimi991 Discussions about content edits can continue at the article's talkpage. Thank you.--Maleschreiber (talk) 21:45, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I am not interested in participating at that content dispute. I just saw a confused new editor and gave some advice. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:47, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferret: (edit conflict)Hello. I wanted not to address any specific administrator, so I tried this (that which was removed), but Maleschreiber removed it from this talk page (their choice). I am therefore seeking your input on this conduct dispute, as I think that it's clear enough and not urgent/intractable enough to need wider community input, such as at ANI. The only reason why I am pinging you and not any other administrator is because I remember your username and your being an admin. Thanks for any guidance you can offer here. tw^sabin 21:49, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not at all interested in getting involved in a content dispute in this topic area. If you want to use the Admin Help template you should do it from your own user talk. Maleschreiber's removal from their talk page is 100% valid. Or even better, use the article's talk page to discuss the dispute. -- ferret (talk) 22:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferret: This is not about content but about conduct (spurious warning and accussation of abusing multiple accounts). I'm not complaining about their removal of the Admin Help template, but about a conduct issue that has to do with WP:HARASS in light of the above discussion. Can you give me any advice on how to proceed? tw^sabin 22:09, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My advice? Drop the topic and don't violate WP:3RR. Giving you a warning about 3RR in a WP:GS area is not WP:HARASS or a conduct issue even remotely requiring intervention. -- ferret (talk) 22:15, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ferret Thanks, I left a standard notice to both editors because they might not be aware of 3RR and AE issues. This was done purely to help them understand the situation without getting into unnecessary trouble. If they continued reverting each other, then what would happen is that there would have been admin oversight which would likely lead to blocks eventually.--Maleschreiber (talk) 22:19, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferret:How can I participate in discussions and work on articles if I'm seen as someone who is edit warring (when I was not) and who is abusing multiple accounts (you didn't comment on that)? This is simply an attempt to intimidate me from participating in that topic area. tw^sabin 22:20, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you see the accusations (unless I missed something)? He just asked you if you had a previous account in Wikipedia, and considering that you are conformable enough with Wikipedia policies, is seems that is true. Nothing wrong about that. Bes-ARTTalk 22:20, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Twsabin Edit-warring is something that many editors do from time to time. It's not an inherent trait but something which should be avoided. Bes-ART I didn't even insinuate that they're socking. I just asked them if they have any previous accounts or if they have edited as an IP editor - both of which constitute a legitimate practice and don't necessarily mean anything related to WP:SOCK. --Maleschreiber (talk) 22:25, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My inherent trait is that I am not edit warring, and I will not have that brought into question with spurious warnings and insinuations. tw^sabin 22:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You made multiple reverts to an article under general sanctions. Do you understand that an admin operating by the strictest letter of the rules could have blocked you right off? You are harassing someone who gave you a standard warning instead of immediately reporting you to admins. Exactly what is your goal in this discussion? To argue Maleschreiber until they say "You're right, you were not close to violating 3RR.". Because I'm telling you as an admin: You were close to violating 3RR. -- ferret (talk) 23:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ferret Well then you're wrong as an admin. I was not close: Relevant diffs and links, in chronology:

• my fist edit that Maleschreiber counted toward 3RR – revert of unexplained removal of sourced content, no summary no nothing. The editor repeats the removal and is reverted by another editor. At this point I realize that this is a potentially disruptive editor, and I start looking at which notice/warning to use
• second edit in the meantime, I revert the unexplained removal of sourced content again; this is simply trying to protect the article from apparent disruptive editing
• A notice I gave to the editor whom I reverted, informing them of unexplained removal and BRD—importantly this was followed with that editor starting a discussion on the talk page (diff), and redoing the removal, but adding a summary to their edit diff; I considered then my talking to that editor to have been an unmitigated success, and the normal editorial process restored
  • regardless, Maleschreiber issued that editor, after the issue having been resolved, with a 3RR warning, completely needlessly (diff)
• third edit (not something that anyone disputed, just normal work on the article)
• fourth and fifth edit, which resulted from the discussion. This is not a revert.

This is evidence that I was conducting myself completely collaboratively and did not make any edit warring actions. My goal in this discussion was to tell Maleschreiber not to post unjustified warnings, and not to make menacing suggestions regarding other accounts, as as way of imposing in a topic area. --tw^sabin 21:10, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can choose to argue this into the ground and risk a block for disruption and harassment, or let it go. You made multiple undoes to that article in a short period of time less than 24 hours. That is a potential 3RR violation, and you received the standard warning for it. That's all there is to it. -- ferret (talk) 23:45, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I could not have known that I was not reverting vandalism, being faced with removals of sourced content without summaries. When I understood that it is not vandalism, I did not revert any more and stuck to the normal editorial process. I was not edit warring. My approach was completely collaborative. That's my closing statement here. tw^sabin 23:49, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Twsabin is now checkuser blocked. -- ferret (talk) 00:34, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I had some suspicions, but I couldn't figure out exactly who they were.--Maleschreiber (talk) 01:12, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Typo Team Barnstar
		Thanks for the help given by arranging the syntax and spelling in the article Taksim meeting. Bes-ARTTalk 18:04, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bes-ART: M'fal se skisha kohe te pergjigjem ashtu sic desha. Ke shkruar artikull te mrekullueshem, asgje s'bera une :) --Maleschreiber (talk) 17:57, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

--Blablubbs (talk) 10:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Maleschreiber, good evening. I was wondering if you could see or spectate the talk page in "Crnojević noble family" since I have started to get annoyed with Sideshow Bob, I am still fairly recent on wikipedia So I'm not sure which measures should be taken however he is using heavy terms and automatically assuming ethnicities, he made aggresive comments such as here , here, and here Since you are a well experienced Wiki User, and your neutral I think you could help this situation well. Thanks!Surix321 (talk) 15:54, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, hope you're well. I don't have much time to check the full discussion but anyone who tags an article has to provide a full explanation at the talkpage--Maleschreiber (talk) 20:06, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Maleschreiber,

Thank you for creating Llapçevë (site).

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

University theses tend to present original research (see WP:OR), which is not compatible with Wikipedia's core content policies. Is there substantial coverage of this site in secondary sources: reliable, independent ones?

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Paul W}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Paul W (talk) 18:05, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Llapçevë (site), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Paul W (talk) 18:06, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have been asked to coordinate discussion of the issue of the reliability as a source as Pellumb Xhufi. You are one of the editors who has either used Xhufi as a source or expressed a concern about the use of Xhufi as a source. The place for the discussion is at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Pellumb Xhufi. Your participation is not required but is encouraged, and may be the best way to have your opinion considered. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:23, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]