Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Wikipedia

Talk:Osijek

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

Providing references

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Instead of removing my request for references [1], please provide a citation. Everything must be verifiable on Wikipedia. Thanks. // Laughing Man 22:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Citations provided per request. --Factanista 23:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Picture of - now - concathedral of St. Peter and St. Paul

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Why is there no picture of church of St. Peter and St. Paul? This is an instantly recognizable symbol of Osijek and should be on this page! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.198.165.4 (talk • contribs) 18:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

I agree. I have a few photos of it but they're not very good because the church is so tall that it's difficult to get it all into the photo. I've looked on Commons and I can't find any there either. Cordless Larry 12:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

The bridge of youth - picture needed

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please somebody put a picture of the bridge of youth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.198.165.4 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 22 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This was added on my talk page, just wanted to post here for others to review. // Laughing Man 00:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)Reply


Please, do not remove external link Osijek Online because tis is very imortant portal. It is independent city portal created by voloteers of Osijek and exist for a 6 years. Meny people from outside of Croatia visit that portal and in my opinion it deserved to bee a as external link, rahter then still cammera of Jware company. Thnx. Darac_os —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Darac os (talk • contribs) 02:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC).Reply

Coat of arms

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Who deleted the Osijek coat of arms? Stop sabotaging the page you vandal! // —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.30.198 (talk • contribs) 05:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

This was removed from my user page as well, with the reason given as "Image has invalid licence". However, there is art on Zeljko Heimer's website that he has given permission to wikipedia for use. (See the discussion here.) I will upload an image from that site for use on wikipedia. Alcarillo 19:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Done. I also uploaded the Osijek Flag. Alcarillo 20:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Suleiman I wooden bridge

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Well, I guess my english is not so spectacular, but I've red that this bridge of Suleiman was one of the wonders of the world... But this list was suppossed to be done by Herodotus of Halicarnassus. At least not in this one. It should be more accurate or be deleted this part of the sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Transducción (talk • contribs) 17:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Could somebody please find out and tell us what happened to the wooden bridge? By whom destroyed and when? Thanks. Fatidiot1234 (talk) 01:30, 13 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Fair use rationale for Image:Osijek Coat of Arms.gif

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Image:Osijek Coat of Arms.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation 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.

BetacommandBot 10:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Etymology of the city name

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Quote: The name was given to the city due to its position on elevated ground which prevented the city being flooded by the local swamp waters. Its name Osijek comes from the Croatian word "oseka" which means "ebb tide".

The whole chapter, not only first paragraph, is discussing etymology, but without any reference! Mak13 (talk) 20:19, 17 January 2010 (UTC) Mak13 (talk • contribs) 20:16, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

File:Flag of Osijek.svg Nominated for speedy Deletion

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

An image used in this article, File:Flag of Osijek.svg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 18 November 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:43, 18 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Copacabana Open/Built

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I travelled to Osijek in August 1978 and the Copacabana swimming complex was in use. I'm not sure where the information came from that Copacabana opened in 1980. A search of the net about when Copacabana opened quotes the Wikipedia page. Someone should have the correct date. Maybe a plaque at the Copacabana. Kombidreamer (talk) 06:38, 11 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Osijek. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:17, 29 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Assessment comment

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Osijek/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
==November 2012==

Assessment as a part of 2012 WP:CRO drive, performed on 5 November 2012:

  • B1 (referencing) - criterion not met: The article has significant shortcomings in terms of referencing. There are substantial parts of prose without any references. It is absolutely necessary that each paragraph contains at least one reference to a WP:RS, hence the criterion is not met. Even though {{cite web}} and similar appropriate referencing templates are not required I'd recommend applying the templates if GA or better quality is aimed at. At present the article employs a mix of the citation templates and bare-url references - which is not an obstacle for B-class in itself.
  • B2 (comprehensiveness and accuracy) - criterion not met: Several major aspects of the topic are not covered comprehensively (or at all). The gaps include: geography (which should include climate), cityscape ("sights and attractions" could possibly be a part of that), administration (which could use contents of the "politics"), media, education and public services.
  • B3 (article structure) - criterion met in sense that there are appropriate sections of the prose. Still, there are parts of the prose which are apparently misplaced. There's culture in history, for instance, as well as an odd section on "institutions and industries" which would best be split into culture (i.e. a part moved to another existing section) and new "economy" section where transport and tourism could be moved.
  • B4 (reasonably well-written prose) - criterion met. Not good enough for GA or better though.
  • B5 (supporting materials) - criterion largely met - except for occasional sandwiching of text between images which should be avoided.
  • B6 (appropriately understandable presentation) - criterion met - however there are several awkward structures used in the prose which require clarification - those are tagged now.
A lot of work went into this article, but it still falls short of the B-class considerably. Consequently downgraded to C-class.--Tomobe03 (talk) 14:09, 5 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Last edited at 14:09, 5 November 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 01:59, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Osijek. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:52, 28 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Osijek&oldid=1212163532"