User talk:Luxem

Welcome[edit]

Hello Luxem! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! Carabinieri ^T_T^a_a^l_l^k_k 14:02, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Useful templates • Categories • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Tools • User scripts

German Communist Party[edit]

Hi Luxem,

You recently moved the article German Communist Party to Communist Party of Germany (1968). I am going to revert that move, because that's just not the name of the party. It is called German Communist Party and not Communist Party of Germany. That's why it's abbreviated DKP and not KPD. The founders of the DKP refrained from naming their party KPD intentionally in order to avoid being banned.--Carabinieri ^T_T^a_a^l_l^k_k 14:02, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If a reader, who knows a bit about the history of the German left, will be especially confused if he/she sees an organization everyone but Wikipedia calls the "German Communist Party". Further, which name is used is very important. Because the "Communist Party of Germany" is banned but the "German Communist Party" is not. That's why the former is campaigning for an end of the ban of the latter.--Carabinieri ^T_T^a_a^l_l^k_k 19:14, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Johan Deprez[edit]

Yes, I did inventigate the article before removing the speedy tag and replacing it with a notability tag. Thanks. Zsinj^Talk 17:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the gallery of tags (with the exception of the AFD notice) and replaced them with the notability one. As this is the key issue, it should be addressed first. Why not start a to-do on the talk page? Zsinj^Talk 18:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flemish (linguistics)[edit]

Rather than delete, lets talk. Sentence structure is A-OK. and, topical.--Buster7 (talk) 20:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Being a Jew in Antwerp[edit]

Hi, You wrote here : "I know tt is not good to be a Jew at Antwerpen, or Arab en even Muslim." I believe you are wrong in this matter, you really shouldn't believe all you read in the papers. Antwerp has one of the largest Chassidim-communities in the world outside Israel, only surpassed by New York. These people mainly live in the city centre, and are very visible by their traditional clothes. There very seldom are problems. I would think that if it were that bad, being a Jew in Antwerp, this community wouldn't be this size. --Luxem (talk) 08:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Luxem,

It is less what I read than what I heard from reliable friends.

Flanders is one of the few european region where it is discussed to forgive to collaborators. And given what occured at Antwerp during WW2, what the historian Bart de Wever said is not acceptable. Let's not even talk about revisionist historians working for the VB.

The existence of a community is not a proof of anything. The biggest Jewish community in Europe in 1940 was in Poland. Everybody doens't have the opportuny to perform the Aliyah and everybody doens't reliaze where is the real danger.

But I recognize that the situation for Arabs and Muslims is worse. If Jews has to suffer humiliation (it is forbiden to wear the kippah in a cafe...), a Muslim woman was (already...) shoot in the street.

With all my respect, let me tell you that I don't consider "pertinent" to pilpul about such a topic.

Ceedjee (talk) 08:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tussentaal[edit]

At Flemish linguistics you hint at a growing use of Flemish as a dialect and a daily language apart from Nederlanse (is my guess). Do you have any info or a source I could investigate. I would be very interested, Bedankdt!--Buster7 (talk) 12:11, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Luxem...Thanks for your reply. Had you visited my user page you would see that the dialect that I speak is directly from the 1950's. My parents and friends came to America with their language and it was not influenced by any other since 1951. When I visit Belgium, it is only the old timers that understand me. Your corrections (while appreciated) are inaccurate. WE say Nederlanse and bedankdt.(sometimes with a d sometimes without). (I thought, perhaps you had more info, but thanks anyway. I'll keep searching.--Buster7 (talk) 17:56, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no difference in pronunciation between 'bedankdt' and 'bedankt'. --Luxem (talk) 18:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, Luxem. Thank you for stating the obvious. We write it both ways. Over 50 plus years, of course, we have Americanized it when we speak, but that is actually a 3rd version, a spoken version. When we correspond in writing it is old Vlaams from "op Tromp"--Buster7 (talk) 18:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm saying...I don't write Dutch---I write Flemish! (to my family in Belgium) and not that well since I was not educated in Europe and do not know the correct spellings for pronunciations. And, as you surely know, one of the disadvantages of the Flemish dialects, is the fact that they were not a written language. It's a pet project of mine. A personal thing. --Buster7 (talk) 19:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow...exactly....Mijn onkle is van Holland...nan Hollander? I'm trying to recreate something that didn't really exist. Not an easy task. I'm creating a personal woordenboek with the help of an internet friend in Antwerp. My parents and aunts and uncles have all passed away so they can't help. And yes, they would call it "Vloms", "Schoen Vloms" or "Holland". But, from what I have gathered here at Wikipedia, the Dutch do not like to be called "Hollanders" I never knew that! Thanks for your time. Bedankt...:>)...--Buster7 (talk) 20:09, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flemish[edit]

Thanks for helping at Flemish with reverting HP1740-B's edits. He just reverts all my edits without any reason (while I gave valid reasons). The only reason he gave was completely wrong: Belgian Dutch is the standard as used by the government etc, while Flemish is what's spoken by the people. Why does he keep reverting everything to a Dutch-Dutch POV? Sigh... SPQRobin (talk) 19:52, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Federalism[edit]

I edit too quickly. But this is the issue of the Belgian federalism: three or/and two. I am searching new better citations. I am agree with the fact that the Federalism is with two components in the sense that we have two important groups of political parties; the Dutch-speaking one and the French-speaking one. But, on the other hand, the French- speaking political parties refuse that Brussels would be governed by the two great Communities. And some Flemish politicians in Brussels refiuse it also... De jure, Brussels is independant from both Wallonia and Flanders, also de facto. It is a big challenge to explain that. Sincerely, José Fontaine (talk) 11:40, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are right about the fact that the paragraph is too large. Original research? I don't know. It is a pity that I cannot remember where Robert Senel said that there are three important entities in Belgium: Flemish Community, Walloon Region and Brussels-Capital Region. The difficulty is that we have in Belgium two views : Federalism with two and Federalism with three. And I think it is possible to have citations (in order to avoid original researsch), which are explaining that these two views are also in the Belgian Federalism itself (not only in the opinions of militants or something else). I had conversations in 1984, 1985... with journalists of Knack saying to me it is impossible that Brussels would become a Region à part entière. François Perin published just before may 1988 a book where he wrote that because of the Flemings (I am only reporting what he said), Brussels would never (never, never, never... ), become a Région à part entière. The following month Brussels was an independant Region...!!! On the other hand, I think that we are also in a Federalism with two components. The political parties are Dutch-speaking or French-speaking (it is thus two), and the political parties have the actual power. But on the other hand there are really three important Federating units. This is a complicated situation but interesting, I agree with you. I am not against the politicians, the members of the Parliament since 1970. I think they try to find a good solution to the conflict between Walloons, Flemings and the population of Brussels. Synchronism published for some hours a new version that I find good, perhaps not the best but better than that was wrote until his diff. I think both in French-speaking books, papers (etc.), and Dutch-speaking books papers (etc. Robert Senelle for instance), it is possible to find good, verifiable sources about all theses discussions . Friendly, José Fontaine (talk) 01:05, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 16:18, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]