Talk:Belgrade Metro

New Page, help needed

Any help to expand this page would be much appreciated. There is more info here, sr:Београдски метро (LAz17 (talk) 17:55, 18 November 2008 (UTC)).

New Page Needed!

This article shows that the Belgrade metro doesn't exist and it was just another abandoned project. In fact, the belgrade metro does exist, here is the evidence:

• List of Belgrade metro stations
• sr:Београдски метро (in Serbian) Wiki

1st evidence shows how many stations there are in the Belgrade Metro 2nd evidence shows all the relevant information of the existing Belgrade metro.

i can't do all of this by myself! --ArchontBeograd (talk) 22:04, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

These are not metro stations, but commuter rail stations for the Beovoz. Jeeze. (LAz17 (talk) 21:50, 23 August 2009 (UTC))

You might want to read up on the second link which you provided, on the Serbian wikipedia. It clearly states that there is no Metro in Belgrade. (LAz17 (talk) 21:51, 23 August 2009 (UTC)).

Page Expansion under way!

I have started to drastically revamp this page. Yay! (LAz17 (talk) 21:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)).

BG Voz

The BG Voz is not the belgrade metro. I do not mean to be rude, but what on earth is one thinking when they change the page to be like that??? The BG Voz is clearly part of the Beovoz system. The metro is yet to be built. (LAz17 (talk) 05:09, 27 May 2011 (UTC)).

BG:VOZ has the distinct advantage of being a metro-like system that is - in existence. D'oh. If an actual metro is in fact wishful thinking only, then how does this non-existant topic merit a standalone article? Once again, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, more specifically the policy clearly states that Wikipedia is not a collection of product announcements and rumors. If you intend to insist that the existing light-rail system has nothing to do with metro, then this article is a clear candidate for merging or deletion. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 17:35, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Metro-like??? I don't give a rats ass if it looks like the moon or if it looks like a metro or like a bird. BG Voz is part of the regional commuter rail system called Beovoz and that has nothing whatsoever to do with the Metro.

And yes, this is not a crystal ball, but it is nonetheless sourced, and this will be built one day. Feel free to list it for deletion, you won't get far, for official reports speak of it, and it is labeled as one of top three most important projects in the country. (LAz17 (talk) 19:58, 24 June 2011 (UTC)).

I looked at your crystal ball link. Apparently you are trolling. The crystal ball means unverifiable speculation. This article is sourced. It's verifiable factual information. Therefore you either did not bother to even look at the article, or you causing problems on purpose. The key is in the sources, you can find them at the bottom of the page. Learn how to use wikipedia before you insult people by calling their owrk unverifiable speculation. And if that doesn't convince you then see the sixty-some sources on the serbian wikipedia, [1] , they went into much more detail. Plus, I could also link you to articles from this year, last year, the year before, the year before the year that, etc, that talk about this. Unverifiable speculation... man, what kind of joke are you trying to pull here? Do you hate the Belgrade Metro or something? Are you jealous? What's your problem? Sorry if I sound rude, but destruction of pages to promote certain agendas is simply unacceptable. (LAz17 (talk) 20:05, 24 June 2011 (UTC)).

I'm glad you at least looked at the policy, even if you didn't seem to comprehend it. Verifiable speculation is still not encyclopedic content, and no amount of publicity can change that. You should also read up on WP:AGF. I cannot "hate" the Belgrade Metro or anything of the sort because it doesn't exist. Your problem here seems to be WP:OWN. I noticed now that there exists another article about BELAM. Both of these should be upmerged into Transport in Belgrade because they are unsupported by actual reality and therefore simply do not warrant standalone articles. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:22, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Both articles are sourced and are quite decent. If you feel that it warrants a merge/delete request, please do not hesitate to list it as such. (LAz17 (talk) 05:31, 26 June 2011 (UTC)).

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Belgrade Metro. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150619221034/http://www.ekonomist.co.rs/magazin/em200/sic/sic7.htm to http://www.ekonomist.co.rs/magazin/em200/sic/sic7.htm

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:27, 18 January 2016 (UTC)