Jump to content

User talk:Ronline

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hello, Ronline. You have new messages at Ronline's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Archive
Archives
  1. October 2004 – May 2006
  2. June 2006 – March 2007

LGBT WikiProject newsletter

[edit]

SatyrBot 05:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any Proof that Slovenia is a developed Country?

[edit]

User:Kingj123Kingj123 20:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to weigh in at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 April 15#List of songs containing covert references to real musicians, since you were involved in a previous discussion of this article. - Jmabel | Talk 05:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

[edit]

Quick note to thank you for doing a lot of the updates on the Economy of the European Union page. I started to bring it up to date, but had to leave the article unfinished, and when I returned, you had completed much of it - much appreciated! FusionWarrior 15:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there.

Why do I get the feeling that everything I say on Talk:Sotho language is being ignored? Oh right -- because everything I say on there IS being ignored!

I am not lying through my teeth when I talk about working on the article offline -- you would have seen this if you had checked the history to see why the article had grown so long.

You're probably going to say "no", but could you possibly delete the articles you created, because it will cause HUGE problems tomorrow when I implement the changes I've been working on for the past month (trust me -- I didn't just split the articles and create a template and category like you did; I made several big changes and 1 HUGE one).

I've brought the article this far with my strange editing habits (which I'll explain if you'd like to understand them), I need you to trust me for just 1 more day. You may send me an email if you wish. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 09:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so very much!

Be sure to check the article(s) about 15 or 16 hours from now for a pleasant surprise...

Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 17:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You forgot [[Category:Sotho language]]...

Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 17:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Could you possibly delete Sesoho tonology which I accidentally created with a misspelled title?

I'll also be putting a question on Talk:Sesotho tonology — perhaps you might be able to help me?

Thank you for your patience.

Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 10:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitrare

[edit]

Salut Ronline, am o întrebare pentru tine. Sînt implicat într-o arbitrare legată de articolul Transnistria [1]. Unul dintre arbitrii care au acceptat cazul este Kirill Lokshin, rus de origine. Mă întreb dacă nu ar putea avea un partizanat la această arbitrare. Îl cunoşti? Există posibilitatea de a recuza un arbitru, iar dacă da, crezi aşa ceva oportun în cazul de faţă? Şi despre ceilalţi arbitri te rog spune-mi dacă-i cunoşti şi dacă ţi se par serioşi.--MariusM 20:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mulţumesc pentru răspuns. Observaţie: "arbitrar" în loc de arbitru, "involvat" în loc de implicat arată de parcă n-ai stăpîni chiar bine limba română. Nu eşti născut în România?--MariusM 22:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ronline, a question to you:

Did Marius express doubt in user:Kirill Lokshin's credibility, based on his ethnicity ("rus de origine") and asked, whether his status as an arbiter can be challenged ("a recuza un arbitru"), because he cannot allow opposition into his arbitration ("nu ar putea avea un partizanat la această arbitrare") in his first post above (please correct me if I mistranslated something)? If true, then this is a remarkable display of ethnicity-based prejudice, IMHO, because Kirill didn't even voice his opinion yet. I would like to add this as evidence of disruptive behavior to the arbitration, in such a case. If not, my sincere apologies will go to both of you. --Illythr 00:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, so it's "...because he may have a biased opinion". A slight mistranslation on my part it is, then. While it's not nice to assume such things based only on someone's name, it probably doesn't qualify as "disruptive behavior". I think I'll let this slip, then. After all, considering that Marius' opposition has been mostly Russian-speaking, I find his request understandable, but not justifiable. Thank you for your time and effort. If you'll need some help in translating something in the en-ru-de area, please let me know. --Illythr 11:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Buses WikiProject

[edit]

I notice that you have edited lists of bus routes recently. You might be interested in helping with the new WikiProject buses, especially the proposed Bus route list guide. We are also working out when a bus route should have its own article and other issues. --NE2 15:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help logging on

[edit]

Hello, you have been randomly selected from the list of admins for a request for assistance. Specifically, this assistance is that I am for some reason unable to log on. When attempting to log onto my account, the login page informs me that I input the wrong password, and clicking on the new password button results in the page telling me no email is on record, though I was under the impression that I had given one. I have not changed my password recently so I don't know what could be going wrong. The user account is User:Niroht. If you can help me with this, I would appreciate it, but I do recognize that due to security issues there may be nothing that can be done. In that case, I am quite willing to start a new account. --149.152.63.107 01:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP: not a soapbox

[edit]

Am observat noua ta menţiune pe pagina personală, de susţinător al independenţei Transnistriei. În acest context doresc să-ţi reamintesc ceea ce ţi-am scris în 5 Noiembrie 2006 00:55: "Nu te preocupa de imaginea României, ţi-am scris că nu-ţi cer să acţionezi ca român ci ca administrator la Wikipedia". Cererea mea se bizuie pe politica "wikipedia is not a soapbox". În ceea ce mă priveşte, te asigur că nu îmbunătăţirea imaginii României în lume este ceea ce mă determină să contribui la Wikipedia, deşi s-a insinuat despre mine că aş fi în slujba serviciului secret român [2]. Urmăreşte în continuare arbitrarea despre Transnistria şi ghidează-te strict de politicile Wikipediei, nu de opţiunile politice. Ceea ce m-a făcut să te contactez este propria ta declaraţie că eşti împotriva cenzurii, nădăjduiesc să fie sinceră această afirmaţie şi să accepţi necenzurarea informaţiilor contrare convingerilor tale politice. Dacă faci vreo afirmaţie despre mine, totdeauna să ai diffuri care să-ţi susţină afirmaţiile (cum spuneam în 21 octombrie 09:42: "Încearcă să nu te bizui pe zvonuri ci pe fapte").--MariusM 14:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eu apreciez puncte de vedere şi criticile de bună credinţă de la alte persoane. Dacă cumva ai impresia că am scris ceva la Wikipedia care se poate numi dezinformare, te rog anunţă-mă, respectînd regula care am pomenit-o mai sus: "să ai diffuri care să-ţi susţină afirmaţiile" (în mod excepţional, fiind implicat în arbitrare, aş prefera să primesc prin e-mail exemple despre eventualele mele greşeli). În rest, cred că n-ai citit cu atenţie mesajul meu: eu NU intervin la articolele de pe Wikipedia pentru a îmbunătăţi imaginea României. Cred că drepturile omului în general, ale moldovenilor în special, sînt încălcate în Transnistria iar oamenilor de acolo trebuie să li se apere drepturile independent de părerea guvernului român (care, de fapt, nu prea se amestecă, contrar cu ceea ce cred unii opozanţi ai mei din Wikipedia). Ca să fac o paralelă, ungurii din Ardeal pot cere respectarea anumitor drepturi independent de poziţia guvernului Ungariei.--MariusM 11:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject newsletter

[edit]

This month's project newsletter (hand delivered as SatyrTN and Dev920 are away). Best wishes, WjBscribe 03:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Great Sesotho Debacle of 2007

[edit]

Hi.

I thought of undoing your moves but I felt that it might not be a great idea after all. However, it is my view that vandalism (let's not lie to ourselves -- that's EXACTLY what "Dawntreader"'s edits were) should be reverted, not accepted and worked around.

The same reason why I edited the articles offline is also the reason why I didn't just revert him (and I have rather little patience for persons with certain behaviours).

The argument is not really over, and the consensus is false. This issue is rather complex. See the recent discussion on Talk:Sotho people for a related and ongoing debate and an example of the true nature of this "consensus" (Mark has taken a short week break, thus the cliffhanger).

What do you think is the optimal action for now? The vandal is not dead quite yet (check the histories and follow the 3 anonymous vandals).

Tebello TheWHO!!?? 08:58, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I do think it's vandalism since:

  1. The articles looked just fine
  2. am anonymous user shows up
  3. he makes abusive statements
  4. then he makes extensive changes, within comments, text, and links, obviously not caring about the adverse effects
  5. then, after I alert to 3RR in an edit summary, he decides to report me for violating it (at this stage I was ignoring his actions, so I wasn't reverting)

This sounds like vandalism and trolling.

Wait before you answer while I explain the prefix situation...

The "Se" in "Sesotho" does not mean "language." It is a noun class marker which is an inalienable part of the morphology of the word. That's simply the way the word looks.

For example, "education" is derived from "educate" through a change in morphology. The change implies that the word is a noun, but it is not valid to simply use the root without the suffix.

"-sotho" is a root, which is made meaningful with class markers (Sesotho, Basotho, Lesotho, etc).

The "Se-" marker in this case does indicate language, but the class has many other types of nouns.

  • seponesa the police force
  • sefofu blind person
  • sefate tree
  • seanamarena traditional blanket
  • sekgathe verbal tense

etc.

So yes, it is a tad complicated...

Tebello TheWHO!!?? 11:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

[edit]

I just need to thank you for the vote and comment here. I feel honored. Dahn 22:02, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism?

[edit]

What exactly is my vandalism?--194.225.166.11 12:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For example this and this. Ronline, why aren't you blocking this guy? If he's not Bonnie, then he's his twin brother, and he has provided plenty of reason. He has also called me an irredentist here and even in an edit summary here. KissL 12:57, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing words that are not backed-up with sources it's not vandalism. My source is CONSTITUTION. Who cares if there was for months before there. That's not an argument. Have you solid sources to back-up your version? I need a link from constitution.--194.225.166.11 12:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you to register at the Wikipedia and read the discussions so that you completely understand the topics you would like to be involved in. Everybody is interested in reading what your opinion is, try not to behave as an outsider. --KIDB 13:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I don't know the exact regulation regarding the use of minority languages in Hungary. (Don't know if there is a 20% rule like in Romania.) There are minority self governing bodies with elected representatives on settlement levels, also on county and national levels - eg. there is a country level Romanian Minority Self Government with elected leaders.
And I don't mind at all if the Romanian name appears in the infobox. If there is somebody reverting you I will try to convince him/her. Are there more ethnic Romanian settlements in Hungary? --KIDB 13:56, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update: There are three settlements in Hungary with more than 20% Romanian inhabitants. The third one is Pusztaottlaka, I changed this article too. --KIDB 16:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Hungary there is no such clear-cut limit like the 20 % in Romania. It is mainly the business of te local municipalities whether they use minority names or not, according to the wishes of the minority self governing bodies. So nobody should worry about that Romanians in Pusztaottlaka constitute only 17 % not 20 % - the Romanian name is used by the Central Statistic Office also. Zello 19:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answer

[edit]

I saw the discussion of Romanian and Hungarian users about names of the places in Romania and the conclusions of that discussion are wrong even for places in Romania not to mention attempt for imposing this solution to places in other countries. The main question here is whether reason for such usage of names is scientific or political. Wikipedia is not a place for promotion of political ideas no matter if such idea in this case is irredentism or minority rights. Purpose of Wikipedia is a scientific one and from scientific point of view, the reader of Wikipedia indeed should have information about varios names of such places, but you people (Hungarian and Romanian users from Talk:Odorheiu Secuiesc) turned the question of where such names should be written into the pure political question and that is not good direction into which Wikipedia should develop, not to mention that your "compromise" (or what ever) is against Wikipedia naming conventions. In another words, since Wikipedia is a scientific encyclopaedia written in English language, names used here are those that are used in English. I can give you concrete examples of the whole problem: let just pick any random article, for example Bogojevo. So, it is village in Serbia with Hungarian majority and Hungarian name for the village is there if somebody (from scientific point of view) would like to know this name. Now the question is whether we should writte there bolded "Bogojevo or Gombos" instead just bolded "Bogojevo". Usage of more than one bolded name here is justified if such names are used in English, but it is not case here. For geographical purposes, English language use only official names used in these countries (i.e. if alternative English (but not non-English) names for such places do not exist). In the case of Bogojevo, it is very well illustrated here: http://www.fallingrain.com/world/YI/2/Bogojevo.html You can see that only official name that is commonly used in English is listed here in the beginning, while all other non-official, non-English names are listed below, but not in the same place where official name is listed. Also, if you try google search, you will see that Hungarian name Gombos is indeed not widely used in English and that it could mainly be found in Hungarian-language websites: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=bogojevo+gombos&btnG=Search Furthermore, the first sentences of the articles should be brief and should not contain too much data of low importance that would only confuse readers. In another words, I do not see scientific reasons (if there is any please say which one that might be) for usage of non-English non-official names bolded in the first sentence. Also, Wikipedia is not obligated to follow any official policy of any state including policy of usage of minority languages - such state policies are made with only purpose to help to members of such minority to preserve their language and culture within the country, but that still does not mean that English language use names in their languages for geographical purposes and that such names should be written in Wikipedia in the first sentences or in the infoboxes (unless you want to turn a scientific question into political one, which is, as I said, not appropriate on this non-political web site). For example, I see a scientific justification that we writte Hungarian names in the infoboxes of Senta or of Palić because such names are used by majority of local inhabitants, and therefore it is likely that readers of English Wikipedia would saw such names in other web-sites, books, etc, so this information indeed could be useful for them, but I do not see a point of writting Romanian or Hungarian name in the infobox of Bela Crkva because such names could not be of any use to Eglish readers (of course if somebody still want to know such names, there is a "Name" section in the article where he can found them, and that is quite enough from the scientific point of view). Regarding usage of bolded Serbian names in the first sentences of Sviniţa, Pojejena and Socol, that is equally wrong as this what I previously spoke about, but since I do not have time to work any more on the articles about Sviniţa, Pojejena and Socol it is your chooice what you will do with these articles, but I want to ensure high quality of the articles about places in Serbia and therefore usage of Wikipedia for political naming purposes (instead for scientific ones) cannot be acceptable. PANONIAN 09:54, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And just one more illustration how ridiculous whole question is: if we start to writte non-English names bolded in the first sentences of the articles, we would also have to use Serbian Cyrillic for such purposes and therefore, we would not have "Bogojevo or Gombos", but we would in fact have "Богојево or Bogojevo or Gombos" and that would be nothing but stupidity. This also illustrate how wrong usage of bolded Serbian names for Sviniţa, Pojejena and Socol really is when you do not use Serbian Cyrillic (and Cyrillic is a primary Serbian script). PANONIAN 10:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as for official names of the places, in Serbia there are no other official names of the places than Serbian ones. Only official use of minority or regional languages is regulated by law, but there is no official regulation about official names of the places. I understand 20% population limit used in Romania (and for example also in Macedonia), but such limit does not exist in Serbia: for example, in Novi Sad, besides Serbian, also Hungarian, Slovak and Rusyn are in official use, no matter that these ethnic groups are not larger than 5% population. Also, the fact that these languages are in official use do not obligate local authorities to use multilingual road signs, as you can see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Welcome_to_Novi_Sad.JPG (Table in the entrance in Novi Sad is written only in Serbian Cyrillic and Serbian Latin, while some other road signs are written only in Cyrillic). Therefore, usage of official languges of Vojvodina is not same as usage of official names - all official publications of Serbian and Vojvodinian government (published in Serbian language), use only Serbian names of the places, while Hungarian, Romanian or Slovak names are used only in publications published in these languages, i.e. non-Serbian names are used as any other word from non-Serbian languages (and only as part of official usage of such languages). Basically, this mean that Hungarian, Romanian or Slovak names are in use only in the Hungarian, Romanian or Slovak texts, but not in general official use (In opposite case, Serbian texts would be also obligated to contain such non-Serbian names, but they do not have such obligation). Regarding your motivation for "spirit of tolerance and pluralism and a greater use of minority languages" that is still an example of political motive. No matter if political motives are with good or bad faith, that is still something very different from the basic purpose of this web site and that purpose is to collect and present knowledge. Therefore, if you want to present knowledge about Romanian names for places in Vojvodina and Serbia, I suggest that you writte new article similar to these two: List of Hungarian exonyms in Vojvodina and German exonyms (Vojvodina). PANONIAN 14:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And by the way, why you changed this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=L%C3%B3r%C3%A9v&diff=130533042&oldid=130522399 Aesthetically, sign "-" is much better than "/", not to mention that I really hate "/" sign used in such cases. Although, we speak here about one same name written in two scripts, imagine that this road sign say "Нови Сад/Novi Sad": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Welcome_to_Novi_Sad.JPG No, that would be just too confusing...PANONIAN 15:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ronline, I would like to thank you for adding Hungarian names to the leads of many Slovak articles. Good work. As to your other idea, please find my response under your comment on my talk page. Cheers. Tankred 15:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In any country where official bilingual names of the places are used, state government is obligated to use equally all official names in official publications no matter in which language such publications are published. i.e. in the case if these minority place names are official, government in Belgrade would be obligated to use such names in its publications, but it never use such names, which means that state does not recognize these names as official. As I said, we have here two very different things: "official usage of languages" and "official usage of place names" - these terms are very different and if state recognize "official usage of the language" that does not mean that it also recognize "official usage of place names" (The basic problem is that you mixing these two terms). Regarding Novi Sad, you did not understand at all what I wrote to you about it: Novi Sad IS the place where minority languages are official (no matter if minorities comprise 1% or 6% or 20% or 40% of population - that is completelly irrelevant for official language usage in Vojvodina). And what I said is that if minority languages are recognized as official in this municipality that DOES NOT obligate local authorities to have multilingual road signs because minoririty names of the places are not considered official in Serbia. And I am really not sure do some localities in Vojvodina have bilingual road signs (perhaps northern municipalities with Hungarian majority have them, but I am not sure about this anyway). Regarding "/" sign, for me, it is very ugly that it stand between two names with no empty space between "/" and the names (And it is not ugly but it is hard to read and too confusing for readers). PANONIAN 09:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My 2c

[edit]

I'm not going to interfere with your friendly exchange >;), just to throw in an info:

The law on the protection of rights and freedoms <of> national minorities

Article 11:

§2. The unit of local self-government is obliged to enter the language and alphabet of a national minority in official use always if the percentage of that national minority in the total population on their territory reaches 15% according to the latest census.

...On the territories from paragraph 2, names of public authorities, names of units of local self-government, of settlements, squares and streets and other toponyms shall also be displayed in the language of the respective national minority according to respective orthography and grammar rules and tradition.

Duja 08:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that Duja! So, that means that in localities where minorities make up more than 15% of the population, the minority name should be listed in the infobox and in the lead. That's the model currently being implemented in Romanian localities, such as those with Serbian populations of over 20% (Socol, Pojejena, etc.) My intention here is in no way nationalistic - in fact, I was the one who supported the boldening of alternative names in Hungarian or Serbian at Romanian localities, and I have argued with many Romanian users over this. I'm just very frustrated that Panonian is absolutely unwilling to compromise. It would be great to reach a consensus over this as well have done, peacefully and rationally, at Talk:Odorheiu Secuiesc. Ronline 09:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, by his own admission, Panonian is a bit short-tempered, but can be compromised with (although requiring handling in gloves :-). ). Actually, he's fairly tired of defending Vojvodina-related articles, and the subject of naming was a long-standing subject of nationalist attacks from various sides; he come up with the compromise solution of creating #Name sections and he's certainly reluctant to change it.
Now, I don't have a sensible suggestion (note that we do have name_alt parameter in {{Infobox Serbia municipality}}, which is [hopefully] used for said 15%+ municipalities, like Kanjiža). Note that, since all 6 languages are official but the percentage of minorities highly varies from town to town, and there are historical German, Turkish and/or Latin names, having a "Name" section ensures that everything relevant is listed without cluttering the lead. Personally, I don't have a problem with your [[#Name|alternate names]] suggestion. Duja 09:35, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I understand why there is a separate Name section: because Vojvodina has 6 official languages and because indeed all those names may clutter up the lead. That in itself is not a problem, since a "Name" section is a valid way of placing alternative names. However, if such a section is established, then there should be a link from the lead. Panonian was also concerned (mainly with regard to Slovak rather than Vojvodinian articles) that a multilingual infobox may be confusing, as the reader will not know in which language each name is. However, this can be achieved through language tagging, which I have implemented on a provisional basis at Bač, Serbia. Do you think that would work? Ronline 09:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, it looks plain ugly; I'd rather suggest this form, where the 15%+ minority language name is stated in the lead, and others go to #Name section; in that way, it becomes immediately clear. I'd also propose not using the "alternate name" in lead everywhere, e.g. for purely Serbian settlements with no other relevant names, like Ruma (but I'd also like Panonian to comment). Duja 09:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I think your model is better. The only reason why I implemented the tags were because Panonian said that the infoboxes also needed some specification. I think the current model works well. As to "alternate names" link, I'm not sure at what level it should kick in. I agree that in a locality that's 97% Serbian it would be awkward. I guess it should be used where we would normally use alternate names in the lead. Ronline 10:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The law presented by Duja is not a law of the state of Serbia, but law of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and this state does not exist anymore. Anyway, as I already said, Wikipedia is not obligated to follow official policies of the states, therefore even if such 15% limit exist in the state, there is still no reason that Wikipedia use it. Purpose of Wikipedia is to collect and present knowledge not to implement policies about minorities. PANONIAN 15:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is a law of Serbia as well, by the Constitution Law, until Parliament of Serbia brings a new one. I do agree that it doesn't bind Wikipedia though. I also fail to see the rationale for this WP:LAME; over & out. Duja 15:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But that law does not say that we have to write minority names into the infoboxes. Does it? PANONIAN 17:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop...

[edit]

...your disruptive edits in Serbia-related articles. I understand that you have to prove your political point, but that is against everything that Wikipedia is - you will receive longer answer from me when I come home, but until then, please try to do something useful for wikipedia instead to push your personal views about wiki policies and usage of the names. Thank you. PANONIAN 19:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I came home from my job, so longer answer now: first, I do not know why you think that agressive revert wars that you started will solve any problem? I had in the past to deal with much more agressive revert warriors than you (do not consider this offensive), so I just want to suggest that you do not waste your free time for nothing. Second, I already asked you to provide scientific reasons for your edits, and you did not done such thing - the only reasons that you presented are political ones and such reasons are not acceptable for scientific web site. Now, please explain your last edits in Vršac and Bela Crkva articles, i.e. please answer this question: do you believe that readers of Wikipedia are so stupid that they cannot find "Name" section for themselves so that you are sent by God to point them into that direction??? I would really want to know this answer. Of course, here is my explanation for my edit: names that are not widely used in English are not so important thing that should be in the first sentence of these articles - the first sentence (and first paragraph as a whole) should contain only most important informations about the subject, i.e. basic informations about location and population of the place. If you think that this is wrong, then please tell me reason why these names would be important enough to be posted in the first paragraph? Regarding WP:NCGN, it is ridiculous that you remind me that I should respect it when you do not respect it by yourself in Romania-related articles. Anyway, WP:NCGN is only a guideline or "friendly suggestion", but not obligation that must be followed blindly (no matter that I follow it for the most part). Also, why you again mixing "official languages" with "official place names" when I explained to you difference between these two terms - if you want to see that explanation again, just read my previous posts on your talk page. Also your claim that "no one here so far has advocated that these names be implemented because these cities somehow belong to neighbouring countries" is just ridiculous because if you see edit histories of many Wiki pages you will see that you are very wrong - irredentist claims are main reason for inclusion of such names into articles for many users. Also, if "this is not about neighbouring countries at all" then why you as a citizen of the neighbouring country want to push POV that could be seen as irredentist by some people (no matter if you really have irredentist intentions or not)? Also, my basic reason why I do not want to see "known also by several alternative names" sentence into first paragraph is because such sentence make article ugly and disrupting main story line of the article. Also, it is very correct that such "alternative names" are irrelevant and unknown because, for example, "Romanian" and "Hungarian" names for Vršac are nothing but twisted versions of the Serbian name, and that is a case with largest number of place names in Vojvodina (and in Romanian part of Banat as well, by the way, but it is a question that I do not want to raise anyway). As for you refering to the "rest of Wikipedia", I really regret that much of Wikipedia has been taken over by various irredentists from various countries who waste their free time to prove "rights" of their country or of their people to certain outlandish teritories and their presence here is indeed a big damage for this project. PANONIAN 21:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

[edit]

Mulţumesc - for your efforts to make en-wiki a more tolerant, friendly and pleasant place. Zello 20:39, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Zello. Multumesc foarte mult. --Koppany 05:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, --KIDB 07:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusion...

[edit]

Now Ronline, let me tell you my opinion about best naming policies in Wikipedia:

  • (1.) In the first sentences of the articles and in the infoboxes we can use only generally accepted most common English names (We primarily writte Wikipedia for English-language readers and we should not confuse them with so many names in the infoboxes and in the first paragraph of the article where other more important things should be)
  • (2.) If English-language readers want to know other names used for the subject, such names could be written in the "Name" section where they easy can find them
  • (3.) We can have separate article sections named "Language" where we can describe official language policies, i.e, we can say which languages are used as official by local or state authorities.

From the scientific point of view, my opinion is very logical and very much in accordance with scientific purpose of Wikipedia. There is really no any logical reason for usage of so many non-English names in English texts because such names do not mean anything to English-language readers. Of course, since I am tolerant person and since all rules can have exceptions, I did not removed minority names from the articles about places where ethnic minorities are in majority (places like Subotica, Senta, etc). But of course, since every tolerance have its limits (especially when there are no scientific reasons for things beyond those limits), I am kindly asking you not to start more revert wars about articles about Serbian municipalities. If you want to discuss with me how we can improve these articles from the scientific point of view, I am always open for such discussion. In fact, perhaps we can cooperate and improve those articles: we can find all alternative names for all places and we can post them into "Name" sections of all arrticles or we can write "Language" sections in all these articles where we would describe official language usage policies in these municipalities, but please, do not push something that have no basis in science and in common sense and that is rather disruptive than anything else. PANONIAN 21:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bilingual infoboxes in Romania

[edit]

A Romanian user, Roamataa began deleting minority language names in the infoboxes, see for example Bistra and Moldoveneşti. Indeed Roamataa deleted Hungarian names all over the infoxes in Cluj County (about a dozen villages). As far as I know there was a consensus among Romanian users that they accept bilingual infoboxes (with 20 % population limit), and there was no problem with them in the past half year. Please try to speak with Roamataa if it's possible about his campaign. Zello 00:47, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

[edit]

But why do you say the infoboxes are not bilingual? In fact their are in 5 languages available and personally I added a lot of names in Hungarian (here, here, here, here (Unirea don't have 20% hu but the hu name is specified in the infobox) and many other). The Romanian, Hungarian, Ucrainian, German and Latin name are displayed on many of them. Please explain why do you think they are not multilingual. The only thing I changed is their title.

You know as good as me that these articles are about communes (the NUTS IV administrative level of Romania), areas, administrative divisions of Romania and their names exist only in Romanian (the same of Romania development regions or counties) and this has nothing to do with how many people live in. The Popeşti village may be called Varfalva, but the commune is is an area which name it is oficially only ro.

And it was not me who decided these are communes (I did not created the articles, I did not added the Template:CommunesCluj). Please check also the ro infobox on communes and you'll see that in the title it write clear "commune" and it is in English a commune (it's not important what you or me believe).

Şi câteva cuvinte pe scurt: Acum putem să stăm cu toţii să ne contrazicem sau să colaborăm. Văd că la Unirea, Alba ai atins un consens corect. Dar văd şi că există o campanie iniţiată de câţiva utilizatori decişi să schimbe / elimine numele româneşti şi care au transformat totul într-o prostie politică. Nu eu am stricat consensul existent ci cei care au vrut ca numele oficiale româneşti să fie schimbate cu altele. Ştii bine că ar putea fi acum invocate şi proceduri ca WP:NCGN sau altele şi să fie cerut să apară doar numele oficiale engleze, cf procedurilor. Dar poate că avem alte lucruri mai bune de făcut. Iar legat de cutia pt comune, trebuie să apară specificat faptul că e comună. Asta nu înseamnă că nu se poate găsi o soluţie rezonabilă şi acceptabilă pt toţi. Dar nu soluţii care să ne fie impuse cu forţa, atâta vreme cât oricum politica de acceptare a numelor la localităţile transilvănene este deja foarte permisivă, spre deosebire de altele. Dacă vrei să găsim un consens corect eu sunt deschis spre a-l stabili.--Roamataa 06:30, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You mean something like Comuna Călăraşi and Harasztos Kommuna? I think this is fair enough for both sides. But where is the convention for infoboxes at Wikipedia that the name is displayed in all officially-recognised languages of a locality? As far as I know the convention is to use the official English name in titles. I don't mind to have it writen in other languages, by respect for the people that live there (I too have hungarian friends and relatives), but where is the obligation to do this? I will check the rest of your observations.--Roamataa 07:55, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK about the infobox title. It is fine for me to have the title of the infobox containing a title like Comuna Călăraşi/Harasztos Kommuna. --Roamataa 08:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Roma series template

[edit]

Hi, good initiative. In fact, I had this also in mind, but I planned it for later, when I would have added more info about the Romani people and culture, since now most of the articles are in a sorry state, are not really describing the Roma. Thanks, Desiphral-देसीफ्राल 08:46, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't understand

[edit]

Why did you added all the hu names to Template:Municipalities and Towns of Harghita County? --Roamataa 11:54, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice signature!

[edit]

How do you get the link to your User Talk page in your signature, please? I've tried putting this:

'''[[User:W. Frank|W. Frank]]''' [[User talk:W._Frank|✉]]

in the SIGNATURE box of my user preferences and ticked RAW SIGNATURE but the envelope symbol still doesn't seem to link to my Talk page. W. Frank 16:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Communes name

[edit]

For some of the communes and villages in Romania I will have to move them to a name consisting in their name and the name of the county (Băişoara -> Băişoara, Cluj), like on rowiki. This is because I intend to create the articles for the existing villages and otherwise will have duplicate names. --Roamataa 17:16, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

kommuna

[edit]

Thank you for including this expression, I think, however, there is a better Hu word for this: "község" meaning settlement, also, community. There would be another word, too: "járás", but until we can specify the best solution, I would suggest "község", like on the homepage of Ilieni Commune (www.illyefalva.eu) Kommuna in Hungarian rather means Commune (intentional community) --KIDB 21:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with KIDB. Indeed kommuna makes me think that in Romania anarcho-sindicalist groups began to flourish :) Zello 23:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"sockpuppet" hunt

[edit]

Hi Ronline, and thanks for the clear-eyed and helpful contributions to the various naming-convention wars. I have a specific concern, unrelated to the recent debates but related to one of its participants. User:PANONIAN has just embarked on a massive campaign of tagging about 20-25 anonymous IP contributors' userpages and the userpages of two registered users as "suspected sockpuppets of banned user VinceB." I didn't bother looking into all the IPs contribs, since they are all from Vince's established IP range and I do know he's been still hanging around, but what concerns me is the registered users. Neither of them bear any resemblance to Vince to me, especially not this Lazio fellow. They both appear to be rather nationalistic Hungarians still sore about Trianon, but that's hardly anything unique. Their writing styles are completely different from Vince and in Lazio's case, his command of English appears vastly superior.

I don't know much about sockpuppet-tagging procedure, but common sense tells me that Panonian may be out of line here with his little witch-hunt. I just wanted to let you know in case something needs to be done in a case like this. K. Lásztocska 14:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update: never mind. Looks like we have more of a real sockpuppet invasion than I thought--ugh. K. Lásztocska 16:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Erdeniss

[edit]

Thanks for doing the reverts, I was lazy to do it last night and now I see I have nothing to do :-) --KIDB 07:05, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

?

[edit]

Can you please tell me why are you are reverting my edits? Do you have something against showing pictures and names of Romanian villages? Please stop. --R O A M A T A A | msg  13:54, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]

I started a discussion at Talk:Cătina, Cluj. Your opinion is welcome. --R O A M A T A A | msg  08:17, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of GayOne

[edit]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on GayOne, by 74.220.207.95, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because GayOne is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting GayOne, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate GayOne itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 02:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right causes

[edit]

Hi! I was passing by, I saw your current userpage and I wanted to express my support for your promotion of these right causes. Otherwise, I keep being busy in real life, so my work here is still going on a slower pace than I would like. Desiphral-देसीफ्राल 17:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered on 16:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 16:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

László Almásy

[edit]

Hey - I see that you've put László Almásy in Category:LGBT people from Hungary. There is no reference in the article - do you have one available? Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 20:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have you gotten a chance to look this up? Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 21:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Palmerston North

[edit]

Hi Ronline. Do you feel like answering the points raised by Rossnixon on the PN Talk page? Just feel I should back off slightly for a while. Kahuroa 09:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mobile networks

[edit]

Ronline, I placed a message on the Talk:List_of_mobile_network_operators_of_Europe, because the ratio of mobile phones in Hungary is now over 100%. --KIDB 21:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Panonian

[edit]

Can you please advise how to protect Wikipedia from the anti-Hungarian activities of User:PANONIAN? On the disambiguation page of Greater Hungary he is doing a revert war against three users (including me), pushing his POVs.

  1. My position is that Greater Hungary basically means the former Hungarian Kingdom. A simple Google search proves that most sources use Greater Hungary in this meaning. However, Panonian thinks that this meaning is only of secondary importance. He is convinced "Greater Hungary" as a political goal of Hungarian extremists, is more attached to this expression and the latter should be the first in the disambiguation list.
  2. He is also convinced that a biased editorial should be included in the disambiguation page which I, as a Hungarian, consider rude and offensive against my Nation.

For me it is now obvious that Panonian is using Wikipedia to do anti-Hungarian propaganda. His revert war against three other editors has been going on for 4 days. He never violated the 3RR rule because he waits usually for many Hours until his next revert, but he did 7 reverts during these days. We tried to discuss it with him but it is an impossible mission, he always writes a couple of sentences trying to demonstrate he is right. Can you possibly suggest an administrator who could deal with this issue? --KIDB 21:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One more note: I would support an NPOV article similar to Greater Romania, Pannonian seems rather to be a supporter articles full of "citation needed" marks. --KIDB 06:59, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --KIDB 15:55, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zanya/Zanea

[edit]

Hi! I recently made the article for the Zanya neighborhood/village of Ciurea. Currently in this commune there are recognized 7 villages. Usually Zanya/Zanea was included in the village Ciurea as a neighborhood. In the recent years, informally, it started to be named also as village. I see that here Zanea is named as village, but still the number of official villages is 7. You have much more experience in locality official names on Wikipedia, so I'd like to ask you which name you think it should come first. In fact, first of all, I'm not sure when an inhabited area is officially considered as an informal neighborhood which name should have priority. Thanks, Desiphral-देसीफ्राल 12:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, after more study of the Google search, I see that also the Romanian name is used (in fact only this variant appears). I didn't know about this exposure, that's why I considered first the Romani variant. Desiphral-देसीफ्राल 13:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Btw,

Thanks for the info. Actually the idea to start such articles (I have in my mind others too) came when I wrote at Wikipedia:Notice board for Romani-related topics about the List of Romani settlements, now a list of articles selecting mostly negative and steretypical features. However, I'm still thinking how to tackle that unrealistic list. About the portal, yes it is necessary too, just I'm looking for more available time to write about the fundamentals of the Romani culture (the same as it was the case of making public Roma series template). Desiphral-देसीफ्राल 14:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Salut :D

[edit]

Hello, I was just wondering...are you the same Ronline that posted all those O-zone and 3rei Sud Est music videos on YouTube? Nat Tang talk to me! | Check on my contributions!|Email Me! 19:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Salut! Would you, by any chance, be interested in voting here? --Kuaichik 04:07, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Query

[edit]

Hi, Ro. I have a quick question: do you happen to know why the template for the Romani project includes all pages it tags in template and banner categories (like it does here)? My guess is that it is a script error, but I am prestigiously incompetent when working with templates, so I can't be trusted to try and fix it. Dahn 22:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. Judging by Talk:Kalderash, it doesn't need to be reviewed page-by-page. Dahn 00:56, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

question!!!

[edit]

if romania isent a slavic courty im nto saying all of it is im sayign abotu 60 percent is why do they find the racial genes of nordic peoples livign there and the percent of those people are about 60 percent of romanians.and why do we find so many slavic words in romanian languge i would nkow im half romanian and i lived there.the real romanians have tan skin black hair and dakr eyes i have resaerched the analasis of dacian remains and they show hight consetraion of millinia in upper derma wich means that that dacians were a dark complexioned dark eyed people.wich today the slavic romanians call by diffrent names ether then its onw there are to groups of people in romania one is light people blue eyes brown or ligth hair and the other real romanians dark hair dark eyes and tan skin.so in my aswere yes romania is a very slavic coutry seeing as about 45 percent of people in romania are beeing of slavic ansestry.

wat i have meant...

[edit]

no that is not wat im trying to prove at all.i am trying to prove that most of the people are slavic thats why they have a slavic mixed languge abot 60 percent of them are.as for romanian languge yes it is a latin and should belong to latin europe but only the laungede most people there dont have anythign with latin to do eople exepct for the ones mixed with romans.the people there are romanized slavs romanized germanics the majority of them are and the 30 percent or so romanized thracians.thracians did not belong to any latin group of people but rhater to near eastern people ranging from iran all the way to west turkey thats were the proto-thracians lived int he years wehn they migraited to europe in the south of iran ofcousre not the north im not sayign that thise thracians were iranians but studies of culture and there heritage reveal them as a near eastern people that belonged to there own group of people or one other group of people whos languge has been also extincted.but i said that because i come to my conclusion why would u call it latin europe when the people there have little to do with latin people at all exept of there langgue wich they adapted and exept those peopel mixed with roman colonists.u can only use that term as a top term to classify them in that cultural languge group.but if u want a term that is more into the subject u can not say that they are a regular latin courty.same goes for latin america were in some areas the people jsut speak spanish but have little to do with spaniards exept the mixed ones.u can only say it as a top term.im not arguing with u im just trying to say that so u dont jsut have black and white decsisios but also alternatives..thats all im trying to say.

Rjecina's proposal

[edit]

Please read Croatian user, Rjecina's message on my talk page. He also had problems with Panonian. What do you think about his proposal? Thanks. --Koppany 18:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Szetey

[edit]

You may beinterested in this news. Roll down the page to see the whole article. --KIDB 10:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. tell me when you are ready with the article, I will cross-check it with Hungarian references. --KIDB 10:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, bundás kenyér is quite a heavy stuff and is the best if you can have some paradicsom (possibly some onion, too) with it, similarly to vinete, which, I suppose, Hungarians learned from Romanians. About Demszky - he is a politician after all and this says everything. Even if he was a brave anticommunist and was harrassed and beaten by the police of Kádár, many people think that the 17 years he has spent in office as the Mayor of Budapest was too long. --KIDB 08:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Demszky

[edit]

I can't assess his activities as I am neither a politologist nor an urban planner, but the POVs about him :-) from left and right can be read in the Gábor Demszky article. The overall perception? It depends. If you talk to a supporter of conservative parties, you will learn that he is an evil person destroying the once-beautiful Budapest. If you listen to Socialists or Liberals, you will hear that he is the only person able to save the city from evil FIDESZ politicians. --KIDB 11:25, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

[edit]

Ro, I am deeply honored, since you are one of the editors I look up to. I'm actually glad we get to collaborate on at least one project (though my contributions there are somewhat limited in scope). Thank you, and not just for the barnstar. Dahn 18:55, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I echo Dahn's sentiments. Thank you very much, Ronline, for your generous award of the barnstar, and so much else. I appreciate it. Biruitorul 00:25, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Autistic South Bolzon

[edit]

Regarding your edit here: There is a discussion on Talk:South Tyrol about that (again). In short: Brittanica calls the province "Bolzano/Bozen" [3], while the autonomy statute on the official website uses "Province of Bozen - South Tyrol" [4]. Incidentally, that website itself and several other places use "Autonomous Province of Bozen - South Tyrol" (in the copyright tag at the bottom). The website of the Provinvial Statistics institute uses "Autonomous Province of Bolzano". Other official sites use only "South Tyrol". Some have pointed to WP:NCGN, saying we shouldn't necessarily be looking for or using the official name at all, but instead use the widely accepted English name. Someone objected to the bilingual naming and removed the "Bozen", and of course there are sites that use only "Bolzano" for the prvince as well...

I'm out of ideas right now, but using Bolzano/Bozen or Bolzano exlusively seems to me to be confusing for the reader. The widely accepted English name seems to be either "Alto Adige" or "South Tyrol", when you search Google and Google news. —AldeBaer (c) 19:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I agree that "ST" is the least confusing compromise, and that was the version used until an IP changed many articles. It was reverted twice, first by Delirium, then by me, and then another user came and changed it again. I don't think consensus will be easy to find on this one. —AldeBaer (c) 00:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
joined your conversation at Aldebaer's talk page. Note that it has been South Tyrol for a long time because a large set of users with a particular POV have made it this way. It is by no means a compromise if you understand the political implications. Icsunonove 01:26, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

I just created this article on this very topical subject. The subject matter would make for a good featured article, so I am hoping to enlist your help to get it there qualitatively. Ohconfucius 02:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Query

[edit]

Hi, Ro. I know you have been involved in creating various Romania-related templates, and I could use a second opinion on a particular detail. I left a comment at Talk:Piteşti#Crest. Thank you. Dahn 14:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about false map

[edit]

If you want to see something interesting you must to look article Borders before and after Yugoslavia, PANONIAN map of Serbia in 1918 and our discussion about this map. Discussion is on discussion page of article for which I have given you link. In last week I am fighting with PANONIAN that this fantasy map in which even Pecs and Timisoara are Serbian territory be deleted on wiki. ---Rjecina 19:50, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help

[edit]

Hi, I see that you are an admin here, so please help me about this: User:Rjecina harassing me claiming that I am "fundamentalist" and accusing me that I said things that I did not said: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABorders_before_and_after_Yugoslavia&diff=146127770&oldid=145876340 Can you please tell him not to call me "fundamentalist" and twist my words because these false accusations are really not pleasant. Also, you can see that he call other users "fundamentalists" as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ANikola_Tesla%2FNationality_and_ethnicity&diff=146129581&oldid=146118836 As an admin you can remind him that he should behave civil and provide arguments for the subject of dispute not to harass other users on personal basis. I would really appreciate your help here. PANONIAN 20:30, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At least the map of Kingdom of Serbia in 1918 is false indeed. Baranya and other territories were under military occupation of Serbia, but noone recognised the occupation. Otherwise another map created by PANONIAN suggests that the unconstitutionally created and short-lived Serbian Voivodship was a voivodship of Serbia while the Principality of Serbia under Ottoman rule had nothing to do with this Voivodship. I support the deletion or modification of these maps. --Koppany 21:59, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Koppany, this was already discussed on the proper talk page, so why you do not read whole discussion there? These regions officially united with Serbia and SHS Kingdom in 1918 and this Kingdom was recognized by the international community in 1919, while Hungary was officially recognized one year later (in 1920). Also see Hungarian source that I used as a source for borders in my map: http://terkepek.adatbank.transindex.ro/kepek/netre/167.gif Also, Voivodship of Serbia certainly was not "unconstitutionally created" and reasons why these two territories are showed with same colour are also explained on the proper talk page. You are welcome to participate in discussion on these talk pages if you want because talk page of user Ronline is really not a proper place for that - I only asked here user Ronline for help about one specific question and this is not place where other questions should be discussed because all these articles and images do have their own talk pages. PANONIAN 22:46, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bačka

[edit]

Hi Ronline,

I would like to ask you to help me on the discussion page with user PANONIAN regarding to the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ba%C4%8Dka. As summarization: PANONIAN wrote the Demograpics part with some explanation. I think PANONIAN's work is a very good summarization of the viewpoint common among Serbs. But there exist another viewpoints, in this case Hungarian, which may differ form Serbian. For example: in the article it is written that the 1941 census was unreliable, but nothing is written to censuses 1921 and 1931. Hungarian historians think 1941 census was relaively reliable, but here were many problems with 1921 and 1931 censuses. I don't want to say that Hungarians hold the divine truth and the Serbs not, but according to Wikipedia's NPOV every relevant viewpoints has to be presented in a fair way.

I don't want to write here all my problems with that section; I think I've summarized them in a fair way. At first please read Demographic (2) part on discussion page, there are 4 (in fact: 3) points, which I think not neutral, the explanation why I consider it not to be neutral, and a proposal.

Thanks for your help in advance: Csaba Faragó

Fcsaba 12:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help

[edit]

Can you help with this user: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Wallak I suspect that it is sockpuppet of banned user Bonaparte and he vandalizing various articles related to Romanians and Vlachs. Can we do something about it? PANONIAN 19:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you also translate for me what this link say: http://www.adevarul.ro/index.php?section=articole&screen=index&id=25504&search=Timoc PANONIAN 19:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I told you one more time: I'm Wallak and don't remove sourced information because you'll be reverted.--WallakTalk 19:46, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Use this link also: http://www.adevarul.ro/index.php?section=articole&screen=index&id=25504&search=Timoc

Iugoslavia recunoaste apartenenta vlahilor din Valea Timocului la minoritatea romaneasca (66 afisari, 2002-11-06) Prin acordul privind minoritatile, semnat, luni, la Belgrad, de catre presedintii Ion Iliescu si Voislav Kostunita, statul iugoslav recunoaste dreptul apartenentei la minoritatea romaneasca din Iugoslavia al celor aproape 120.000 de vlahi (cifra neoficiala), care traiesc in Valea Timocului, in Serbia de Rasarit. Reprezentantii romanilor din Iugoslavia, profesori, ziaristi, scriitori, i-au multumit, ieri, la Pancevo, sefului statului pentru aceasta intelegere cu guvernul de la Belgrad. Acordul este considerat de importanta istorica pentru romanii din Valea Timocului, care, din timpul lui Iosip Broz Tito, traiesc fara drept la invatamant si viata religioasa in limba materna, practic nerecunoscuti ca etnie. "Nu vom face ca fostul regim, sa numim noi care sunt minoritatile nationale sau sa stergem cu guma alte minoritati", a spus, ieri, Rasim Ljajic, ministrul sarb pentru minoritati, la intalnirea de la Pancevo a presedintelui cu romanii din Iugoslavia. Deocamdata, statul iugoslav nu a recunoscut prin lege statutul vlahilor de pe Valea Timocului, insa de-acum va acorda acestora dreptul la optiunea etnica, va permite, in decembrie, constituirea Consiliului Reprezentantilor Romani si va participa in Comisia mixta romano-iugoslava la monitorizarea problemelor minoritatilor sarba si romana din cele doua state. In Iugoslavia traiesc cateva sute de mii de romani. Presedintele Ion Iliescu s-a angajat, ieri, pentru o politica mai activa privind romanii din afara granitelor: "Avem mari datorii fata de romanii care traiesc in afara granitelor. Autocritic vorbind, nu ne-am facut intotdeauna datoria. De dragul de a nu afecta relatiile noastre cu vecinii, am fost mai retinuti, mai prudenti in a sustine cauza romanilor din statele vecine. (...) Ungurii ne dau lectii din acest punct de vedere", a spus presedintele, precizand ca romanii trebuie sa-si apere cauza "pe baza de buna intelegere".

There isn't a strong controversy. Everything related to the Vlachs (Romanians) of Serbia can be add it in the main article Romanians of Serbia. Even the Serbian Gov. recognize them that they are Romanians so there isn't any need to create artificial articles about new minorities. --WallakTalk 15:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vlach language

[edit]

Panonian, the point here is that it must be mentioned that in the census there is such thing as a Vlach language. I'm not saying we shouldn't mention that. "They are officially recognized as separate languages" --> Yes that should be mentioned. However, in truth they are the same, so it cannot be asserted that the "Timok Valley Vlachs" speak "Vlach". There is no such thing as Vlach! It is one thing to say that "The Vlachs of Serbia speak Vlach" and another one to say "Serbian authorities consider Timok Valley "Vlachs" to speak the Vlach language, even though the language they speak is identical to Romanian" or even "Many Vlachs say that they speak the Vlach language, but this language is identical to Romanian" What I'm saying is - as per the NPOV policy, it's not wrong to mention the word "Vlach". However, it shouldn't be stated as truth. Ronline 11:30, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See my reply on my page. As much as you want to be NPOV, here you're very POV if you support Serbia's Gov. POV. --Brickoceanmonth 08:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

01 august 2007 Azi 01.08.2007 la sediul din Negotin al CNRS a sosit confirmarea inregistrarii Consiliului National al Rumanilor din Serbia (in limba sarba se utilizeaza sinonimul arhaic pentru roman,“vlasi”). Consiliul reprezinta comunitatea romaneasca din Timoc si are precizat in statutul sau utilizarea ca limba materna a limbii romane literare, transmite corespondentul Romanian Global News din Timoc.Necesitatea inregistrarii acestui consiliu a fost data de faptul ca romanii din Timoc (peste 250.000) au o situatie diferita de romanii din Voivodina (circa 35.000), iar obiectivele fiecareia dintre cele doua comunitati sunt diferite. Daca cei din Voivodina au avut si au scoli si biserici in limba proprie inca de pe timpul Imperiului Austro-ungar, romanii din Timoc de mai bine de 200 de ani sunt supusi unui intens si agresiv proces de asimilare care a lasat numeroase urme in mentalitatea si onomastica comunitatii si a facut ca in zona Timocului sa nu existe scoala si biserica romaneasca.

Have you read this? or you ignore it?--Brickoceanmonth 08:09, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you Ronline, and please don't ignore simple facts that happend these days. This is history for the Romanians of Serbia!--Brickoceanmonth 08:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are proved to be a fighter for the minority rights, regardless of their ethnicity, sex..etc. It's the same problems with the minority rights of the Romanian community from Serbia. keep up your good work! ;-) --Brickoceanmonth 09:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why they say I'm Bonny? can you ask a CheckUser?--Brickoceanmonth 18:47, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Inserting constant POV

[edit]

See

where Mikkalai is inserting Transnistria in the list even if it is a breakaway region of Moldova and so it will last forever.--201.225.40.228 06:44, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

Chronic fatigue syndrome

[edit]

Just a note to inform you that I've reverted your forking of chronic fatigue syndrome. Firstly, there was no discussion whatsoever to make such a move, which should have happened given that the talk page on some days gets at least 10 edits a day. Secondly, different treatments are proposed by different "schools of thought"; disconnecting this information would lead to fragmentation of the article and an opportunity for the proponents of either school to take control of a subarticle. Thirdly, there are other sections that would equally well benefit from splitting off.

If you still think the article should be split up, please let me know. At any rate, it cannot happen without discussion. JFW | T@lk 11:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered on 17:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC).

The difference between Romania and Poland

[edit]

This is a cool link showing the difference of treatment between Romanian and Poland. You will see that the latter is actually respected, regardless of its shortcoming (which are important) [5]. Dpotop 23:07, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revisiting an issue

[edit]

Hi, Ronline. On Jmabel's talk page, I have raised some issues involving an older problem. I don't know if you want to get involved in assessing the arguments and counterarguments, but I would welcome any input from you, given the extended and volatile nature of the polemic on this topic, its importance to present-day politics, and the one-sidedness nature of virtually all arguments brought up against the text. Thanking you in advance, Dahn 00:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cyprus economy

[edit]

Hi. You added the following statement to the economy section of the article about Cyprus, and I have two questions. "Its per-capita income is slightly lower than that of the big four European economies, but higher than the European Union average." 1 - Am I safe in assuming that the "big four" are the U.K., Germany, France, and Italy? If so, then I will clarify that in the article. 2 - Is there a reference for this information? The paragraph makes it appear that it comes from the existing reference. I appreciate your help. Saraalan 02:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Montenegro

[edit]

...why precisely did you add by linguists? --PaxEquilibrium 14:35, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It cannot be connected with Bosnian because of several things. Firstly, the Bosnian language factually exists, i.e. those who want to understand Bosnian can do so by finding Bosnian-language-educated professors, reading Grammars and Primers. There are works specifically written in Bosnian language. However, there is no such thing with the Montenegrin language - it doesn't exist beyond a paper adopted into legal act (politically) several days ago. Additionally, 100% of speakers of the Bosnian language consider their language a language - over 80% of the speakers of the Montenegrin language, consider it a dialect of Serbian, while only 20% think it's a separate language.
In the end I understand what you want to say - but see Moldova and Talk:Moldova#.22Moldovian.22_Language.3F. I am trying to pair up for general neutrality of the Wikipedia, and hence that. As you can see, all my proposals were rejected - and the current version is in my opinion a bit too POV, and probably even more from your edge of view. --PaxEquilibrium 15:19, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Petrom logo.jpg)

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Petrom logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered on 12:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

[edit]

Delivered on 20:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 21:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

salut, ai un e-mail sau o adresa de messenger?

[edit]

salut, ai un e-mail sau o adresa de messenger? vreau sa discut ceva cu tine urgent Adrianzax (talk) 12:53, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ping

[edit]

Please read your en wikinews talk page. (I've also emailed you. sorry for spam). Bawolff (talk) 11:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Partidul Popular logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ferentari riot

[edit]

Hello. Could I ask you to look at 2006 Ferentari riot, in particular Dl.goe's edit and Jmabel's talk page message? I'm pretty sure my version (really yours) is more accurate, but since you wrote the article, I thought it would be a good idea to inform you of the issue. Thank you. Biruitorul (talk) 00:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Compasiune

[edit]

Îmi exprim compasiunea pentru necazul tău. Dacă n-ar fi armata rusă, la fel ar păţi separatiştii şi în Transnistria.--MariusM (talk) 20:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

[edit]

Delivered sometime in January 2008 (UTC). SatyrBot (talk) 23:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Treaba buna

[edit]

A bit late perhaps, but great job on getting CFR featured. Thanks again, Basketballone10 23:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:M2 colour

[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:M2 colour requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{tranclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:04, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:M3 colour

[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:M3 colour requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{tranclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:M4 colour

[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:M4 colour requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{tranclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:M4 link requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{tranclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Romania

[edit]

Congradulations on the promotion of CFR, however late it is. If you have not already done so, I suggest you join the Romanian WikiProject. Cheers, Basketball110 proof that this user is crazy 23:31, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of British Caledonian in the 1980s

[edit]

An editor has nominated British Caledonian in the 1980s, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British Caledonian in the 1980s and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of British Caledonian in 1979

[edit]

An editor has nominated British Caledonian in 1979, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British Caledonian in 1979 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of British Caledonian in 1978

[edit]

An editor has nominated British Caledonian in 1978, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British Caledonian in 1978 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

[edit]

Delivered by SatyrBot around 17:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC) SatyrBot (talk) 17:55, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Planeta maimutelor

[edit]

Uite, stiind ca esti ateu militant, iti trimit link-ul asta, sa te ingrozesti:

http://www.jurnalul.ro/articole/118803/planeta-maimutelor

Cand vad cat de bigoti sunt unii, incep sa iti inteleg frustrarea (nu insa si alegerea filozofica a ateismului). Dpotop (talk) 08:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I expected, the provocations of User:Xasha become clearer, and there is an involvement of User:El C and User:Mikkalai. There is also Bonny, but I'm concerned another edit war will start. Dpotop (talk) 10:54, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also resent the message on User:90 1 AQ. I have seen no such message before. At last news, chauvinism (including Romanian one) is not punishable here. Or, if we choose to write it, then we should also say "Russian chauvinist", "Communist extremist", etc. Maybe Mikka should be warned about this policy breach. Dpotop (talk) 10:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, there's Irpen, too. And I got warned under the blanket "Eastern Europe" decision of the Digwuren ArbCom. By El_C, of course. Dpotop (talk) 12:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Am propus articolul pentru a primi statutul de articol de calitate, însă cererea mea a fost repsinsă. Au existat multe obiecţii (chiar multe care nu aveau nicio legătură cu criteriile pentru WP:FA), şi le-am îndeplinit până acum pe toate (mai puţin unele dintre ele care erau păreri personale, şi nu ţineau strict de criteriile pentru articole de calitate). Acest lucru îl poţi vedea pe această pagină, unde se află conţinutul de la Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cluj-Napoca/archive1, la care am adăugat comentariile mele despre ce s-a făcut şi ce nu. A mai rămas doar textul articolului (proza), care după cum relatează ceilalţi utilizatori nu este foarte corect (calitatea limbii engleze folosite este slabă). Am înscris articolul pe pagina Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors/Requests, numai că va dura destul de mult până ce se va găsi un corector ortografic, care să verifice articolul. De aceea dacă ai timp, te invit şi pe tine să faci unele corecturi la articol. Cu mulţumiri, --Danutz (talk) 11:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Romanian check

[edit]

Hello Ronline. Could you please verify this edit? Thanks. Regards, Húsönd 21:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rate on quality scale

[edit]

Hi, I am working on Taiwanese opera and trying to expand it.You wrote you are interested in Taiwan so I would like to ask you to watch that article and rate on the scope of Wikiproject China or give me some opinions or comments on this article. This is my first time to contribute on wikipedia.I will be thankful if you could give me more ideas about this article.ThanksQwaszxfish (talk)04:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Any thoughts on this ? Ha! (talk) 15:25, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you seem to be a fairly prolific editor here at Wikipedia. So, I don't understand why you would change 'are' to 'is' in Coldplay if it explicitly states NOT to change it? I would imagine that if there was a note explicitly asking not to change it, then one would question why that was there. Anyways, please see the Talk page next time an inline comment like that is made because a note like that usually suggests that an issue was previously brought up on the Talk page and was subsequently resolved with the inline comment. Thanks. (The relevant discussion can be found at Talk:Coldplay/Archive_2#Is_.2F_Are_Dispute) Gary King (talk) 03:11, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on my talk page Gary King (talk) 03:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Fair use rationale for Image:Be An Angel logo.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Be An Angel logo.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 23:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Voting

[edit]

Hi! Here is a voting about Bendery/Bender/Tighina: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bender%2C_Moldova#Statement_of_Title_Solution --80.142.252.220 (talk) 19:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This newsletter was delivered by §hepBot around 16:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC). ShepBot (talk) 16:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Get back to work bitch! I'm Ronline's pimp.

Proposed deletion of RATB route 136

[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article RATB route 136, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?

If you can add a some references and expand the article, than it doesn't need to be deleted, but in it's current state, something should be done.Remilo (talk) 21:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GayFest GA Sweeps Review: On Hold

[edit]

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria and I'm specifically going over all of the "Culture and Society" articles. I have reviewed GayFest and believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. I have left this message on your talk page since you have significantly edited the article (based on using this article history tool). Please consider helping address the several points that I listed on the talk page of the article, which shouldn't take too long to fix with the assistance of multiple editors. I have also left messages on the talk pages for other editors and a related WikiProject to spread the workload around some. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:05, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter (July 2008)

[edit]

Vitoria-Gasteiz

[edit]

May be do we need your comment on this Talk:Vitoria, Spain#Requested_move?? Thank you. Zorion talk 03:36, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note

[edit]

I posted a question on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Romani people#Help needed. Please have a look. Thank you. Sebastian scha. (talk) 00:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:PC logo small.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 05:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This newsletter was sent by §hepBot (Disable) at 21:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC) by the request of Moni3 (talk)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:PD logo small.png)

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:PD logo small.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may be able help me with this

[edit]

Hi, Ro, nice to see you're back. I have a query you may help with. I'm not familiar with the finer points of electoral systems and how they are paralleled by Romania, but, after going through several pages, I concluded that Romania's new system was most likely a variant of mixed member proportional representation. I urged those contributing to the 2008 election article to add this info or at least look it up. The variant I wrote down on the talk page was more or less copied into the article by another user, whereas a third (who was apparently stalking me over stuff in some other article) strongly objected to the terminology and claimed that I was wrong. For all I know (and care) he may even have been right. However, the text in the article was then modified to this: "proportional mixed member system". So fine, I'm wrong, but then why on earth would they keep the text, avoid a specific link, and link to a vague article? If I was right the first time, why not just keep the link to "mixed member proportional representation"? If I was wrong the first time, why is it that they modified the link to something vague, but kept the text very much as it was?

Anyway, if there's anything you can do to sort this out, I'd greatly appreciate it. And if it turns out I was right the first time, could you please modify the link back to what it was? Thanks. Dahn (talk) 02:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many, many thanks. Hope you keep in touch: I'm sure I speak for all of Romanian wikipedians (the ones who matter) when I say that we have been missing your great input and contributions. I was going to ask your opinions on several other stringent matters, but I myself have been backlogged for a long while and not so keen on getting involved in the "capital issues". If you have the time, please look over Romanians and the corresponding talk page - I can't begin to summarize all the problems raised there, I we haven't yet summarized them all, and the debate involves one of the new and most destructive trolls (who has previously ran amok on the article) - so I'd understand if you should want to postpone it. It could however be something within our common areas of interest. Cheers, Dahn (talk) 06:56, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re-ordering of Template:Same-sex unions

[edit]

Hey, I just saw that you re-organised the mentioned template. Although I added the categories LGBT rights in Europe and LGBT rights in Oceania I have to agree that it's indeed too much clutter. However, I do think it is relavant to the table since both articles give an overview of the specific rights per country of both continents. Is there a way, without creating too much clutter in the table, to include them in some way? Take care, LightPhoenix (talk) 12:33, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: New project AdminWatch (working title)

[edit]

Hi, only found out today about your project WP:OMBUDSMAN, which got off to a good start (I read through the project page and the discussion page) but faltered on the way to completion. A new project that a bunch of us are working on is AdminWatch (working title). Please feel free to drop by at any time and weigh in with your thoughts and your experience.--Goodmorningworld (talk) 22:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Roma as a Romani group

[edit]

There are discussion for the creation of an article about Roma as a Romani group, but there are some problems about the best way to do that. Can you take a look, if you have the time, please? The discussion are mostly at Talk:Roma people. Thanks! AKoan (talk) 10:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Admins on ro.wp

[edit]

Hi. You've got some lectures for this week :D Cheers. --Gikü (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ron. Related to what Gicu wrote above, please check your talk page on ro.wp. Cheers. — AdiJapan 14:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


[edit]
File Copyright problem
File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Death Penalty World Map.svg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. — neuro(talk) 09:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Same-sex marriage in California

[edit]

I read on an earlier talk page that you too agreed that only MA and CT should be listed under same-sex marriage, yet a user keeps putting CA back with [status in flux] despite the fact that the marriages are no longer able to be performed, only recognized. I don't believe that CA has any place there, but the user seems to think otherwise. How do we resolve this or make a compromise? I honestly find its inclusion in the category to be confusing. Vickiloves08 (talk) 02:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting cut-and-paste moves

[edit]

Next time you find that someone has done many cut-and-paste moves, don't revert them with the page move function. Instead, just do a normal revert. When you reverted these moves with the move page function, like at Danshui, Taipei, you deleted all of the page history before January 2009. I only found out about this problem while checking out my old deleted contributions. I'm currently in the process of cleaninng the page history messes up. Graham87 03:10, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Rio Grande do Sul

[edit]

Hi, Ronline. There is much confusion between gay and activists here in Brazil and certainly those of Rio Grande do Sul are the most prominent, but misunderstand what happened (and have more access to the press than in other regions of Brazil). And unfortunately the news of the BBC contain large errors (possibly also the journalist did not understand very well what was happening) ...

Federal law in Brazil (Law 6015 of 1973, article 127) provides that "The Registration of Titles and Documents will be made a transcript ... of particular instruments, to evidence the obligations of any conventional value. " Based on this article, valid throughout Brazil, homosexual unions are being recorded, as if a contract on any trading arm etc. As some registrars felt that the homosexual union can not be registered to go against the Constitution, refused it. The Court of Rio Grande do Sul in 2004 ordered the registers that record such contracts, based on the above article. This happened in other parts of Brazil also, but there was so much news in the press. The contracts are recorded even in areas where no such order of the court, because many registrars never refused the registration or have been doing so since that decision in Rio Grande do Sul (in the city of São Paulo, had similar decision well before that, in september,2002, see http://www.irtdpjsaopaulo.com.br/1Vara.UniaoEstavel.htm, in portuguese). Two other states have the same administrative order to register: Roraima (http://www.athosgls.com.br/noticias_visualiza.php?contcod=24661) and Piauí (http://www.meionorte.com/noticias,tj-pi-obriga-cartorios-a-registrar-uniao-homossexual,49632.html). See that the law is federal. The fact that some states clarify that contracts must be registered does not mean that the contracts in other states can not be recorded. In many places the contracts are recorded because there is no doubt that really can be.

But the contract can not compel a third person to do something (and unrelated to the peace courts, which celebrate marriage, which are recorded in another public registry). The order (not law, only an administrative order of the court) does not require judges and judges of peace, only the records that record all such contracts. The great mistake in the BBC report is referring to "judge of peace" which are those that celebrate marriage. There is no rule about that in Brazil. And as Article 22 of the Constitution, only the Union may legislate on civil rights (which includes the right to family, marriage, inheritance etc.).

See the old and the current figure. At first (left), only the Rio Grande do Sul (the southern most state of Brazil) appears as allowing civil union; in the new one (right), all Brazil appears. That seems much more correct, then the Brazilian law is the same and these contracts are recorded in various parts of Brazil.

Thus, I expect the text to make clear that the legislation on marriage or civil union is the same anywhere in Brazil, as already occurs with the final figure. Thanks, Luiz30 (talk) 13:36, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New response

[edit]

Hello, Ronline! I want to response your question to Luiz30 (in fact, he has writed to you because I ask him. I am graduated in Law (sorry my poor English...) and I know reasonably about gay rights in Brazil. I have problems with my account here (I want only “Jur” as pt.wiki, but I didn’t have sucess).

Yes, all gay couples can register their partnership anywhere in Brazil. In three states (RS, RR and PI), and in São Paulo city), the civil law notary must to register. In other places, there is no explicit order (I guess). This does not mean that the civil law notary do not respect the law (which is federal). In such states, if the civil law notary refuses to register it, he is committing an administrative violation. In locals where there is nothing written, the civil law notary interpret the law, but if anyone disagree, he can contest him. In Rio de Janeiro, I found this document where the civil law notary explain the same-sex civil union can be register there. In Brazil, a private agent similar to civil law notary can register contracts, any contracts. In Brazil, the Public Registers Act, (Act 6015 of 1973) lists several kind of notary where you can register something: Registration of Real Estate, Civil Registration (births, marriages, deaths), Registration of Legal Entities (associations, foundations, small businesses ) and Registry of Titles and Documents (where you register any other type of contract). There are thousands of such civil law notary in Brazil, known as "notary". The people in general does not know the difference between different sort of notary. But they are all headed by individuals (which is subject to public contest), but the registers are public (when the owner leaves, he must pass the entire collection to the next responsible for the registers). An official marriage (between man and woman) is registered in the Civil Registry, but these contracts (same sex) are registered in the Registry of Titles and Documents (for generics contracts), but all these registers are the responsibility of an individual who receives a delegation of government (civil law notary).

What rights have the partners? None! It is only a contract between two capable people, which may create rights and obligations between themselves. Register it in office means that everyone must recognize that union exists; none can say “it don’t exist”. But that does not give automatic right to inheritance, tax advantages, immigration rights, social security. It can not generate obligations to third parties (only the obligation to recognize that the contract exists).

This contract is not similar to the PACS in France or Portugal, because it don’t creates rights against third parties. These contracts are registered in a generic civil law notary where, for example, I can register a love letter or the owners of two dogs can register the marriage of their dogs ... The Registry of Titles and Documents (in Portuguese:”Registro de Títulos e Documentos”) is a notary that accepts registering anything that is not against the law. In the decision in the city of São Paulo, it was decided that there it´s possible to register the coexistence of a man still married with another woman. What effect has this contract or another between two men? In practice, only to facilitate proof in a future prosecution (about inheritance, for example). There is much controversy in Brazil if such unions are or not treated as stable unions between persons of different sex (the last are in Federal Constitution). The rights are still depending on each specific court decision.

The bill in 1151 is very different, because its text provides rights for social security, immigration, discount in income tax, and provides that the recgisters are made in the Civil Registry (the same civil law notary where marriages are registered). In this bill, the registered partnership will modificate marital status (I guess this is too strong and the bill current text - as emended in Low House - don’t contain this). For register, they must prove that they are not married or have no partnership with another person (currently there is no control in that generic register).

A current right for same-sex unions is the social security (only for workers in the private sector). But that is not in law but in a court decision of 2000 that forced the INSS (the Federal Social Security Institute) to recognize the homosexual partner as beneficiary. The justice forced the INSS to issue an ordinance allowing this, but the case was not finally dismissed until today (there are several appeals against that decision pending the trial). The partnership is now registered in this office is a generic way of proving to the INSS this partnership.

The text that you showed ([8]) is very good and very technical and looks great, without errors, I guess. See that large advances on civil partnership in Brazil are in the field of judicial decisions, which are gaining more importance as confirmed by higher courts in Brasilia. In terms of laws, I agree with the text that there are few state and local laws granting rights to social security to the gay partner of local public server (I don’t know exactly what states are these, I have to find it, but I remember I have seen some news about it).

In conclusion, it is correct to say that in Brazil the fact unions can be registered anywhere in the country. However, there is not a standard contract, the partners choose what to write, but the simple registration does not provide any automatic right for the couple (except social security for private workers, until the court decision requiring the INSS to recognize it). Sorry the extense message... Hugs, Jur in pt (talk) 23:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FAR

[edit]

I have nominated Căile Ferate Române for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) 02:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:GayOne-screenshot.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:GayOne-screenshot.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media 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. Stifle (talk) 13:43, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jhonghe vs. Zhonghe

[edit]

I see you moved the entry for Jhonghe City to Zhonghe City. It looks like you are saying that this is the new official transliteration? Can you please indicate a reference for the official change? I just checked the official city website [9], and they have Jhonghe in the banner. Thanks! AJseagull1 (talk) 22:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AJseagull1, as of January 1, 2009 Hanyu Pinyin officially replaced the various older Romanization systems in use in Taiwan. Except for the name of Taipei (Taibei in Hanyu Pinyin) most other place names will likely slowly migrate to the new standard. --Everlong (talk) 05:49, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter (June 2009)

[edit]

Romanian Wikipedia

[edit]

Wouldn't you like to return to the Romanian Wikipedia? I don't know what was the reason of your departure, but the project needs as many administrators as possible. I hope to see you back there! Remigiu (talk) 18:53, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What to do about Vlax Romani?

[edit]

I'm currently taking the lead on figuring out what to do about the Vlax Romani Wikipedia (rmy:). Its only administrator, Desiphral, has been abusing his account on various languages' Wikis, letting other people use it for paid editing. I firmly believe that he should not be an administrator anywhere, given his actions and his support of paid editing.

However, I realize that in suggesting he should be de-sysopped on Vlax Romani, I need to suggest some kind of way forward for the Vlax Romani Wikipedia. This is particularly difficult because (a) I know next to nothing about the language, and (b) it's a situation I have very little control over because I'm just an en: admin who does very little inter-project coordination.

I see that you've done some editing there, and you appear to know the language. If, as I hope, an effort starts on Meta to find one or more people who are willing to become rmy: admins to replace Desiphral, would you be willing to do so? Do you know of any other trustworthy contributors who speak Vlax Romani?

Thanks, rspεεr (talk) 01:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

:O

[edit]

OMG, you're an atheist ROMANIAN? I never knew there was such a thing! And I thought I was the only Romanian living out of the city I was born in... :P sorry, not wiki-related... X( --68.49.32.245 (talk) 13:43, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Court of Cassation (Tunisia) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. L0b0t (talk) 18:31, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Version of Nuclearvacuum to international LGBT map

[edit]

The version of LGBT rights international may by Nuclearvacuum is wrong and has many mistakes. For example in countries like Oman or United Arab Emirates homosexuality is illegal. Pleas have a look on the mistakes by Nuclearvacuum. GLGermann (talk) 11:28, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ronline :), considering how up to date you are with the status of same-sex unions around the world, I was wondering if you knew if the common-law scheme mentioned here was still on the table, or if the debate has died for the time being. I was going to add it to the Same-sex marriage legislation around the world article, but even after some careful searching, I couldn't find any recent updates. Thanks for being such a great contributor on the same-sex marriage articles! VoodooIsland (talk) 02:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for finding out about the current status, as you mentioned, the status in Italy seems to be pretty unpredictable. I found the links to be of great help and appreciate you helping me out with the information.
It will also be interesting to see how the status in Greece plays out. While the country seems to be very socially conservative, I'm been surprised by how many high-ranking religious leaders and additional government officials have been relatively apathetic towards same-sex marriage. I remember reading a while ago that originally the partnership scheme was intended just for opposite-sex couples, so I assume the party adjusted their platform. I know there's a similar proposal in Bulgaria, but this article seems to be a bit cloudy on the subject, first stating that a registered partnership bill is included in the family code but does not benefit same-sex couples and then slightly implying that the government intends to introduce such? Or at least that's just how I read it.
Anyway, thanks for clearing up what's going on Italy. Considering how far behind they are when compared alongside other Western European nations, it will be interesting if a future government decides to just go ahead and introduce a same-sex marriage bill. VoodooIsland (talk) 02:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, I guess it's simply wishful thinking for Italy to go ahead with full same-sex marriage, and despite increasing support, as you said, the Vatican still remains a heavy influence. It will be interesting to see how the status plays out within the Balkans and surrounding countries, as these nations seem to have even less gay-friendly attitudes than those in the Baltic states. The push for same-sex marriage in Albania is what really surprised me, as I remember when I created the Recognition of same-sex unions in Albania article I initially thought of abandoning it as I never thought that developments would ever occur within the decade, especially since as of now, it's one of the few European countries without an anti-discrimination law. It seems like more and more surprises from countries that seem the least likely for such continue to have progress concerning same-sex marriage, and it will be interesting to see how it develops in Asia, particularly East Asia. Thanks again for being so helpful. VoodooIsland (talk) 16:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Romania/archive2; unless you concur that the article is ready, the nom should be withdrawn. If you concur it is ready, you might want to add your name as a co-nom. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:14, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For your consideration...

[edit]

...as they say: Ion Negoiţescu. I thought it was about time the article was expanded - but please review my edits if you have the time and feel like it. Anyway, I hope to see you around more often. Best, Dahn (talk) 22:27, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly request

[edit]

Good evening! I wanted to take a moment to thank you for the poll results that you added to same-sex marriage in Maine. I also wanted to ask you if you wouldn't mind using edit summaries in the future. I realize that you're an admin, and I hope I'm not crossing a line or anything, but I'm sure you know how helpful edit summaries can be for those of us who are checking our watchlists. Thanks. :-) –BMRR (talk) 23:55, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More poll results

[edit]

Hi again; I thought you might be interested in some new poll results for same-sex marriage in Maine. Here is the link: http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2009/11/02/Maine_Poll__51__Yes,_47__No_on_1/BMRR (talk) 23:45, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Help

[edit]

NU stiu exact unde sa apelez. Am contribuit de mai multe ori la articolul American Pit Bull Terrier dar tot timpul e sters de aceeasi user. Acuza fals. M-am chinuit zile intregi sa fac ceva cu articolul respectiv dar tot timpul e sters de acelasi user. Ce pot face?? Il pot reporta?? Multumesc foarte mult.k84m97 (talk) 01:39, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Guerrilla

[edit]

Could you look in on Radio Guerrilla? Looks to me like it is accumulating vanity material, but I don't know enough of what is going on in Romania today to dare to take it on. - Jmabel | Talk 02:48, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Orphaned non-free image (File:DJ Project Spune-mi tot ce vrei.jpg)

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DJ Project Spune-mi tot ce vrei.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 23:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Orphaned non-free image (File:DJ Project Experience.jpg)

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DJ Project Experience.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 23:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

[edit]

Hi Ronline! Thank you for raising the issue at my talk page. I think you were practical to remove Australia from the list, as even while the bill is not technically dead, we do have to apply a fair degree of probability to the worldwide status as it changes so frequently and remains so unpredictable. I had once pondered over whether or not Taiwan should be included, but I deemed for a change in that present legislation to be too unlikely to be worthy of inclusion. I think Australia, and any other similar case that should arise for that matter, should be treated proportionally. It's a shame that Australia is lagging behind, particularly when greater (potential) progress is being achieved in Albania, though on that subject, I've found it a bit strange to not have discovered any surfacing updates since the initial report. While in most countries the lack of a public vote is crucial to preventing anti-same-sex union bans from being passed or marriage laws from being repealed, it's a little disappointing that the government isn't responding to the public opinion, but once again, as far as these matters are concerned, that tends to be a good thing; just not in Australia's case.

Hmm, as far as the listings for officially dead bills are concerned, I'm personally a bit wary of including legislation that had been presented but never voted on, and subsequently died due to time but not by any form of vote. A mirroring example of this would be with Israel, where a same-sex marriage bill was introduced, but never voted on and later expired after a changing of government. Examples that would correspond with Australia would be Latvia and Switzerland, where a registered partnership bill and a same-sex marriage bill in the latter had been introduced, but voted down by a committee. These had been added several months ago, but were swiftly removed. I'm similarly wary about including these listings in the article, as it would contradict with past criteria for other like-minded articles, such as Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States. I'm sure that there have been quite a few measures introduced and then rejected by a committee across the world, such as Paraguay (civil union) and Costa Rica (same-sex marriage), and I feel the list would grow far too complicated and overcrowded if such were to be included, and I would imagine that it would be difficult to track down the majority of such votes, especially when they have occurred in countries as backwards towards LGBT rights as Paraguay and Latvia. My personal criteria would be the following:

  • Include a listing if the bill had been rejected in the Upper House or Lower House
  • Include a listing if the bill had passed, but had been vetoed by the head of state

Two hypotheticals that I can think of would be if such a law had been rejected via referendum (such as if Switzerland had rejected the registered partnership law), in which we would make a note under final outcome of its repeal. The other hypothetical would be concerning a status akin to that of Venezuela. Currently, the quasi-civil union/anti-LGBT discrimination/sex-reassignment recognition bill has passed its first reading, but has yet to proceed. I think that if the bill was somehow to expire, than it would be worthy to list Venezuela as failed, and failed whenever the bill expired. I'm very open to any changes for a criteria for the article and I think that your suggestions were great should we choose to list cases like Australia. Anyhow, let me know if I somehow misunderstood one of your points and I apologize if I rambled a little bit.

Anyhow, I agree that 2009 has been a truly fascinating year for same-sex marital rights. It's been very exciting to see so many South American nations showing signs of eminent progress, and I believe that Argentina has a reasonably positive outcome upon its horizon. The announcement in Mexico City looks also fairly promising, as the district has taken some overwhelmingly liberal positions on various other issues as of late (such as abortion), so I'm encouraged by the news. I've almost stopped trying to guess where same-sex marriage developments are going to occur, as if I had been asked to guess which would be the last country in Europe to legalize same-sex marriage, I think I would have selected Albania—even when considering the likes of Serbia, Bulgaria, Belarus, or Russia. But again, I've found it slightly alarming that no updates have surfaced, and the announcement definitely rang me with the "too good to be true" vibe. But I suppose it's too early to be making any final assumptions. The same-sex marriage "movement" in Asia is what fascinates me the most. You would think that at least one Asian country would have legalized gender-neutral marriage by now, but in a way, it's also not much of a surprise due to cultural outlooks and little pressure to do so. Whether or not either make progress (though the latter is not even in Asia), I believe that should same-sex marriage be legalized in Nepal or Albania, I feel that some fairly surprising countries could also join the bunch; inspired by possible economic outcomes. Particularly in Nepal, where progress looks unpredictable yet fairly promising due to continuing pressure from LGBTs inside the government, I think that if SSM was legalized and garnered the country some notable profits, this could possibly raise the issue of SSM in other less-wealthy nations, though Nepal's profit from such weddings would first have to be publicized, and S-S couples from western nations would also be preferable. Due to the fairly passive attitude towards homosexuality in many Southeast Asian countries, it could be possible that some would want to jump on the bandwagon after having seen its profits in Nepal; the most likely candidates being those of Thailand or Cambodia. Getting back to Nepal, it would be truly interesting if the issue is raised singularly and not included within the forthcoming constitution like commonly reported, as I'm quite curious to see how such a vote would be handled by a communist-dominated legislature, particularly since most communist states or states with predominantly communist legislatures seem very eager to push the entire issue of LGBT rights under the rug as quietly as possible. As far as Japan will go, I honestly think it will be quite a while before same-sex marriage is legalized there, primarily due to apathy in the country. China and Vietnam will be other interesting places to watch, though I won't be holding my breath for progress in either of these countries any time soon. And to wrap myself up so I don't keep going on and on :), it looks like the future of same-sex marriage in Uruguay looks to be encouraging, as Broad Front was reelected as expected. Considering that they were able to pass a gay adoption bill (a subject that seems to be even more of a taboo than same-sex marriage for the world apart from the US), it's possible that it could be added to the list by next December. VoodooIsland (talk) 01:53, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

[edit]

I have sent you an e-mail. --Tenmei (talk) 01:35, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blue in File for Jersey:Jersey voted to allow civil partnerships

[edit]

File:Same sex marriage map Europe detailed.svg Hy Ronline, i saw on the file of Same sex marriage map Europe detailed, that the island Jersey is yellow. But it should be have a blue colour. Civil partnerships are allowed on Jersey. GLGermann (talk) 05:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Cncd-logo.png

[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Cncd-logo.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media 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. SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:25, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I miss an english article over gay author Donn Teal in Wikipedia. Maybe you can write a biography over Donn Teal ? GLGermann (talk) 20:47, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

[edit]

Hello Ronline! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current 16 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

  1. Sulfina Barbu - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  2. Romaniţa Iordache - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:59, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Same-sex marriage

[edit]

Hi, you voiced your opinion on this, about the inclusion of the Coquille Indian Tribe. Please do so in the new debate. Thank you, CTJF83 chat 10:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Salut

[edit]
De ce nu mai contribui pe wikipedia în limba română? Nu înţeleg de ce vrei să contribui pe un proiect care are aproare tot ce îi trebuie, te sfătuiesc să te întorci pe wikipedia în limba română. Mersi. --79.118.29.196 (talk) 11:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vaughn Walker

[edit]

I have no objections to the category add, but it's more likely to stick if you add the material and the cite within the article as well. The article could use expansion, and the cite provides nice biographical details. THF (talk) 11:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help w/ U.S. marijuana maps

[edit]

Hi there! I notice you contribute to and discuss the same-sex marriage map of the United States. I am continually impressed with how up-to-date that map remains, and how much activity the talk page receives. I am finding it difficult to keep the three U.S. maps relating to marijuana found here up to date, so I was wondering if you might take a look and perhaps even add the images to your watchlist. I tried updating this one over at Commons, but the image has not updated yet (see NJ here). I am not sure if you have an interest in the legal status of cannabis or not, but I could sure use some help with keep the maps current. If interested, take a look! Thanks! --Another Believer (Talk) 18:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taichung County

[edit]

In the Taichung County article, it seems you removed references to Tongyong pinyin and replaced them with Hanyu pinyin. However, the county's official website consistently uses Tongyong pinyin. The central government has not forced local governments to officially adopt Tongyong pinyin as yet. Those initial plans have been delayed. However, they are no longer funding new signage in Tongyong pinyin. As you can see from the site, the county government still uses Tongyong pinyin and nearly all street signs in the county use either Tongyong pinyin or have legacy Wade-Giles signs remaining. http://www.taichung.gov.tw/english/index.asp ludahai 魯大海 (talk) 08:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Inklusiv-cover.jpg

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Inklusiv-cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 03:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Signiture

[edit]

I liked your signiture so much. Can you help me to make a signiture for me. Multumesc. (I will be in romania in the end of this month). Maverick16 (talk) 13:01, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Anti-article-200-march.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Anti-article-200-march.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:53, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Portal

[edit]

Hello, User:Kerem 233 is it new creation ; Portal:Trucks to be useful ? I have french version to page fr:Portail:Camion Is my creator. you welcome. --FrankyLeRoutier (talk) 20:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Gay Film Nights 2006 poster.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Gay Film Nights 2006 poster.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:45, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

A tag has been placed on Institute for Tongzhi Studies requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} at the top of the article, immediately below the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate), and providing your reasons for contesting on the article's talk page, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

You may want to read the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. Lionel (talk) 21:41, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Administrative levels of Romania sidebar has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Bsherr (talk) 18:30, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion

[edit]

Hi. Could you add your opinion? [10] Regards Ron 1987 16:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Articole despre România

[edit]

Bună, Ronline. Sunt foarte impresionat de site-ul Wikipedia şi mă bucur că am găsit aici articole despre România şi despre români. Mi-ar plăcea să adaug şi eu informaţii şi să creez pagini, doar că nu ştiu să vorbesc cursiv engleza. Pot crea însă articole în limba române şi mi-ar plăcea ca cineva să traducă şi să le adauge şi pe Wikipedia în limba engleză. Răspunde-mi te rog la propunere. Mulţumesc! --MJ for U (talk) 16:08, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Dacia

[edit]
Hi! From your edits, it looks like you might be interested in ancient Dacia. Would you like to join the WikiProject Dacia? It is a project aimed to better organize and improve the quality and accuracy of the articles related to these topics. We need help expanding and reviewing many articles, and we also need more images. Your input is welcomed! Thanks and best regards!

--Codrin.B (talk) 21:54, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Bucharest metro stations

[edit]
Hello, Ronline. You have new messages at Template talk:Bucharest metro stations.
Message added 19:06, 11 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Notification

[edit]

Hello. This message was sent to notify you about this ongoing discussion (Iaaasi (talk) 14:11, 3 February 2011 (UTC))[reply]

The article Andrei Galut has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

With the greatest respect - no sources on google - not notable

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MarkDask 12:57, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Gazeta Sporturilor logo.gif

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Gazeta Sporturilor logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:46, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Bucharest metro stations has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. —Justin (koavf)TCM04:36, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you give your opinion? [11] Ron 1987 (talk) 22:14, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Jolie Ville Galleria has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This 12,000 m shopping center exists, but appears to be non-notable.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Epeefleche (talk) 07:00, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MSU Interview

[edit]

Dear Ronline,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.9.34.167 (talk) 20:54, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of China article

[edit]

Since you said on your user page that you are from the Republic of China, I guess you are interested to share your view at Talk:Republic of China#Requested Move (February 2012). Thanks for your attention. 61.18.170.113 (talk) 12:27, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Czechs in Romania has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced for over five years, fails WP:V

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Stifle (talk) 22:58, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:PDL logo.png

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PDL logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 23:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Romanian Senate election, 1996 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DH85868993 (talk) 10:29, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Romanian Chamber of Deputies election, 1996 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DH85868993 (talk) 10:31, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitravel's future

[edit]

Hi Ronline. I know it's been a long, long time since you have been active on Wikitravel, but given all your hard work on the project in its early years, I thought you might be interested to hear about its future. As you may or may not have already heard, Wikitravel's community is looking to migrate to the Wikimedia Foundation. A good overview of the process and reasons for the migration can be found in this FAQ [12]. We also have an open RfC on Meta. --Peter Talk 21:31, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

[edit]

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

  • Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
  • Research: The most recent DR data
  • Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
  • Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
  • DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
  • Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
  • Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

You and Betawiki:

[edit]

Dear Ronline,
I'm Nemo from Betawiki/translatewiki.net and I'm writing to you because I'm collecting some information about the history of the project and the people and facts who made the difference in it. You are user number 14, so you're probably among those; maybe you even remember that it used to be named Nuka-Wiki (from 2005 on).
It would be wonderful if you could tell me something about how you first reached the wiki (who/what told you about it and how), why you decided to register and contribute, what it meant to you, what made you come back (or not) in the following years, if you spread the word about it, what have been in your opinion the most important facts or discussions in these years, etc.: just anything you want and as much as you can or want.
You can reply on my talk (I'm watching it), or email me, or just use this page to add comments, missing points and/or links to other resources, summaries, blogposts, articles, wiki or mailing lists discussions, as you want. Thank you very much for you help!
Regards, Nemo 10:48, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you give your opinion here? Ron 1987 (talk) 12:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Local government areas in Australia: religion and other demographic data

[edit]

Thanks for your great work in the updating 2011 Australian Census data for religions in local government areas. This, along with other demographic data, has required updating for sometime, and is on my "to do" list. I was thinking of creating a wikitable that mapped out factors such as religion, population profile, income, employment, country of birth, etc. The table may also have Australian/State/capital city data to compare how that local government area stacks up against the mean/average. I know this sounds a little complicated from just free text, but I think that once you have the structure in place, it will be easy to populate with numbers. What do you think? Rangasyd (talk) 00:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

[edit]

I want to inform you that I have nominated this article for deletion: List of towns in Romania by Romani population. Saywhaaaaaat (talk) 21:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ronline, as the creator of this article, I ask you to give some sources. Did this airline ever operated any aircraft? If so, which? Did it ever become operational at all? Best regards and thanks for your effort. --FoxyOrange (talk) 12:55, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. User:Ronline has been indefinitely fully protected since May 2007. Could you please unprotect this page? --MZMcBride (talk) 21:07, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:OM listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:OM. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:OM redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Technical 13 (talk) 17:35, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of bus routes in Bucharest for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Bucharest is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bus routes in Bucharest until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. -
→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 15:22, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Pride 2014

[edit]

Hi Ronline. In case you are not aware, there is an upcoming campaign to improve coverage of LGBT-related topics on Wikipedia, culminating with an international edit-a-thon on June 21. See Wiki Loves Pride 2014 for more information. If you are interested, you might consider creating a page for a major city (or cities!) near you, with a list of LGBT-related articles that need to be created or improved. This would be a tremendous help to Wikipedia and coverage of LGBT culture and history. Thanks for your consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions! --Another Believer (Talk) 15:52, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

[edit]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

[edit]

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

[edit]

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Permisiunea de administrator

[edit]

Bună ziua, sunt un steward de pe meta. O noua politică a fost creată, despre permisiunile avansate (administrator, birocrat etc.) a fost adoptată de comunitați mai recent. După politica aceasta stewards revizualizează activitatea administratorilor de pe Wikipedii care nu au deja o politică de inactivitate.   Dumneavoastră sunteți in criteriu de inactivitate (nici o editare sau acțiune în jurnal) pe rowiktionary, unde sunteți administator. Din cauza că rowiktionary nu are proces de revizualizare se aplică cea globală.   Dacă doriți să mențineți drepturile, trebuie să notificați comunitatea că stewards v-au trimis această informație despre inactivitate ca să discutați. Dacă comunitatea dorește să păstrați drepturile, contactați stewards la m:Stewards' noticeboard, și dați un link la discuția din comunitate, unde declară că vor să mențineți drepturile.   Noi, stewarzii vom evalua răspunsurile. Dacă nu este primit nici un răspuns într-o lună, vă vom retrage permisiunile. În caz de îndoială, vom evalua răspunsurile și vom verifica răspunsurile şi vom înainta o discuţiei comunităţii locale pentru a disputa.Dacă aveți vreo întrebare, contactați-ne pe m:Stewards' noticeboard.   Cele mai bune, Rschen7754 03:19, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

[edit]

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated , please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. WJBscribe (talk) 11:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Bucharest RATB route

[edit]

Template:Infobox Bucharest RATB route has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Alakzi (talk) 14:19, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!

  • What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
  • When? June 2015
  • How can you help?
    1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
    2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
    3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.


Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa

Nomination for deletion of Template:Bucharest sectors

[edit]

Template:Bucharest sectors has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Magioladitis (talk) 18:55, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Romanian political party has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox political party. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PanchoS (talk) 11:06, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Pride 2016

[edit]

As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?

  1. Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
  2. Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
  3. Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.

This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:42, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite

[edit]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:27, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We're on Twitter!

[edit]
WikiLGBT is on Twitter!
Hello Ronline!
Follow the Wikimedia LGBT user group on Twitter at @wikilgbt for news, photos, and other topics of interest to LGBT Wikipedans and allies. Use #wikiLGBT to share any Wiki Loves Pride stuff that you would like to share (whether this month or any day of the year) or to alert folks to things that the LGBT Wikipedan community should know. RachelWex (talk)

RachelWex 17:49, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BlueAir logo.png

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BlueAir logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Șoapte for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Șoapte is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Șoapte until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mattg82 (talk) 22:47, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:DJ Project Soapte.jpg

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DJ Project Soapte.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:09, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About that changed redirect...

[edit]

---Deleted by the user --- Thisuserisepic (talk) 15:00, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thisuserisepic I restored the redirect, as I told you on IRC it's not suitable for main space as it contained no sources. Work on it in draft space. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 15:01, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Romanian legislative election, 2008

[edit]

Template:Romanian legislative election, 2008 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Steel1943 (talk) 00:50, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Portal:Bucharest

[edit]

Portal:Bucharest, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Bucharest and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Bucharest during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:04, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Portal:Romani people

[edit]

Portal:Romani people, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Romani people and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Romani people during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:DJ Project Povestea mea.jpg

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DJ Project Povestea mea.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:28, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:DJ Project Lumea ta.jpg

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DJ Project Lumea ta.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:20, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikimedia LGBTQ+ User Group is holding online working days in May. As a member of WikiProject LGBT studies, editing on LGBTQ+ issues or if you identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community, come help us set goals, develop our organisation and structures, consider how to respond to issues faced by Queer editors, and plan for the next 12 months.

We will be meeting online for 3 half-days, 14–16 May at 1400–1730 UTC. While our working language is English, we are looking to accommodate users who would prefer to participate in other languages, including translation facilities.

More information, and registration details, at QW2021.--Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group 02:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Template:Romanian politics/party colours/PSD has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 11:36, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Latvia Labelled Map

[edit]

Template:Latvia Labelled Map has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:16, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Municipalities of Maguindanao indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:33, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:PC logo small.png

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PC logo small.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:27, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect BlueAir has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 30 § BlueAir until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]