User talk:Themightyquill/Archive3

Template:Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Pacific_Northwest_Coast

Have a look at the template I made. It' s a work in progress so any suggestions would be appreciated . Thanks!OldManRivers (talk) 04:19, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Prague Spring

Thanks! I've found a fair amount of sources and I put the article up for peer review. I think the ultimate plan would be to make it a GA, then make Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia (1968) a GA, merge them back together, fix them up and bring it to FA. By the way, is it really necessary for the article to be called Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia (1968), there was only one invasion, unless you count the 1945 liberation.--The Dominator (talk) 22:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

You have done some excellent work on the article before me and I think you'd like to know that I'm nominating it for good article, so standby and let's see how that goes, be ready to improve any criticisms that come up.--The Dominator (talk) 16:29, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, don't you wanna join the Czech Republic WikiProject?--The Dominator (talk) 22:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank You

Thanks for the copy editing! OldManRivers (talk) 23:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Damnit! I keep doing that on your page. Fixed it now! lol OldManRivers (talk) 00:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Photos

Hi Themightyquill. As you seem to be the one that upload the Nisga'a Memorial Lava Beds Provincial Park photo, is it possible you could upload photos of the other Canadian volcanoes on Flickr? Most of the Canadian volcanoes need photos, such as Silverthrone Mountain, Mount Edziza, Eve Cone, Mount Cayley, Rainbow Range, Nazko Cone, Mount Price, Mount Fee, Meager Group, Mount Minto, Sidas Cone, Nahta Cone, Nisga'a Memorial Lava Beds Provincial Park and the Wells Gray volcanoes, such as Pyramid Mountain. I looked on Flickr myself and photos exist for these volcanoes, such as lava flows. Also, if you search Nisga'a Menorial Lava Beds Provincial Park (with the "s" on Bed) on Flickr, you will find more. I'm asking you about this because I don't know anything about uploading photos (I moved this discussion from Commons because you seem to be more active here). Black Tusk 06:23, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I did everything you told me to do and there's barely anything. The only ones I found so far are Mount Garibaldi and Pyramid Mountain. Black Tusk 16:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Too bad the Silverthrone Mountain photo dosen't have a commons license because the volcano is in such a remote location there's barely any known about it. Not lots of photos of it ether. Black Tusk 03:23, 29 Januray 2008 (UTC)

You Like?

You know doubt seen all my crazy edits in the past couple days. I thought I'd just let you know about the changes since I did some major updates. Also see the Talk page for some discussion I started. Thank you so much for all your copyediting work. I don't expect you to do this all at at once, but do you think you could have a look over and see what can be spruced up? Thank you!!! OldManRivers (talk) 10:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Re Wikiproject

I would still like to see you as a part of the project, we could use an editor like you.--The Dominator (talk) 17:39, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Prague Spring made it to GA! Thanks for all your help, you pretty much made the article what it is now.--The Dominator (talk) 23:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

British Columbia Treaty Process

I've made it and updated it! Some good ol' Mightyquill copy editing would be awesome. I'm really grateful for all the help you've been doing with the article I've either started, cleaned up, or added content to. It's really cool so thank you. But have a look around this article and see if there is anything. Any suggestions would be well appreciated. Not sure if you know much about the BCTP though. Eventually I'm going to go through all the media-related articles out there and add significantly to the history section. Have a look and see what you think. OldManRivers (talk) 17:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Edward Curtis Photo

[1] is the image I'm talking about. I got a message saying I need to say who's photo it is. Is there a special thing I can post on there and Edward Curtis photographs are okay since it was over 50 years ago in the US, right? Thanks for any help. OldManRivers (talk) 05:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

More Edward Curtis

I found about 3 or 4 images that are Edward Curtis photographs. They are all Kwakwaka'wakw related photo's. Problem is, I found them on a Facebook group for Kwakwaka'wakw people. I'm not sure where else they would be. Is there a book published with his photographs? Anyways, I could use some help on sorting them all out. Was going to put them straight up on commons, but I still need help navigating everything. Thanks for any help Mightyquill. OldManRivers (talk) 09:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Vandalism

Very odd indeed! I was actually kinda pissed off when I first received his "warning" (accusing me of editing "key dates", an edit which I have never made), but had a laugh when I realised I wasen't the only "victim". Anyway, could he be a potential sockpuppet? I personally have not been involved in any related disputes, and I cannot pinpoint any possibilities.--Huaiwei (talk) 20:28, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the initiative!--Huaiwei (talk) 21:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The Two-Headed Serpent and The Serpent Slayer

Using my sandbox to build the history page. Check out what I wrote. Copyedit if you want. I'll be adding more stories to that page tonight, plus a lot of information from Conversations with Khatsalano. A friend of mine put the entire book in pdf. format. If you want it, send me a email and I can send it to you (Probably through yousendit.com). Later MightyQuill! OldManRivers (talk) 20:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Numbered treaties

Hi, as soon as I finish starting articles for the Nishnawbe Aski Nation set of First Nations, I will go back and add in Numbered Treaty template into them and other WP:IPNA/Nish articles for Treaties 1, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 9. CJLippert (talk) 00:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Kechewaishke

Hi, will you do a copyedit on Kechewaishke, as you have a good sense in details and flow? User:Leo1410 have put in a great amount of effort into this article, and feels after the copyedit, it could be nominated for GA. Thanks. CJLippert (talk) 23:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Baker Lake case

I just read your message from February 6, 2008. I'm semi-retired from wikipedia for the time being, however, I do hope to come back sometime and do some more case summaries. I'll keep that one that you mention in mind. --PullUpYourSocks (talk) 22:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Some info here about the case. --Mathew5000 (talk) 17:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Bill Reid

Regarding: [2]. Why do you assume that it has to be public domain? Because it isn't a public domain image doesn't mean that has to be removed. It was used under a claim of fair use and was applicable per WP:NFCC. I see you added another image to the article from the WikiMedia Commons as a replacement, but don't remove images simply because it isn't free. — Save_Us † 03:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

And now there appears to be a different problem. Image:Raven-and-the-first-men.jpg, the image you added as the replacement is facing deletion as it is a potential copyright violation because it is non-free. In other words, you're "free" image is marked is now marked as non-free and going to be deleted. I readded the old image to the article, the one you removed, because that image was being used correctly already. — Save_Us † 03:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah ok, I didn't see the comments on the deletion page itself. Freedom of panorama appears to apply here. I have readded the public domain image and removed and tagged Image:Raven-bill reid.jpg for deletion since it is used under a claim of fair use. — Save_Us † 04:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Using Template:Cfd-notify

Hey there, Glad to see you made use of Template:Cfd-notify for the "terrorist org" CFD. There was a slight problem (which I've already taken care of) due to not "substituting" the template -- which causes the newly created section to link to Template:Cfd-notify! (yikes) Anyhow, I've clarified the instructions for using the template, so hopefully future users won't run into that problem -- you weren't the first. :) Regards, Cgingold (talk) 03:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Gradual civilization act - pdf to text

I can convert from PDF to text. Just tried it on An Act for the gradual enfranchisement of Indians the better management of Indian affairs and to extend the provisions of the Act 1869 and it works. I will submit that one too I think. Never submitted anything to wikisource before though. If you want to have me convert to text and do the basic wikisource upload I will do so. send to (turniponion at canoemail dot com). Thanks Fremte (talk) 17:04, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Article 198.237.103.101

Just wondering what's going on at 198.237.103.101 (its in the mainspace). Perhaps it should have been in Userspace? -Reuvenk_{T C} 17:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds great. Thanks for all of your contributions, and sorry if that came off as rude. Re-reading my message now, it doesn't sound too nice. -Reuvenk_{T C} 17:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Lehi (group)

Yes, the edit protection can be removed from Lehi (group). Thank you. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 22:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Oka Crisis

My thoughts exactly re: Good Article. I don't think there's too much more work to be done to make it front-page worthy. Geoff NoNick (talk) 00:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:HU

Thanks for your help with the templates. The other two projects will possibly be merged into this one. Squash Racket (talk) 05:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

2006 merger discussion at Talk:History of Czechoslovakia (1918–1938)

If you get a chance, could you please swing by the above talk page? I'm really unclear why the merger proposal you largely supported has turned out the way it has. Thanks :) CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 00:53, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Spring!

Happy First Day of Spring!

A Beautiful Cherry Tree in Spring Bloom

Theres nothing like seeing a field full of spring flowers.

Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~

If you live in the Southern Hemisphere and are entering the season of Autumn not Spring then I wish you a happy First Day of Autumn {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}!
To spread this message to others, add {{subst:First Day Of Spring}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

CS template

I've started a discussion with a few proposals here, and as one of the tireless editors on that template I'd appreciate it if you gave your thoughts and opinions. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 02:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Winter Salami

Why not describe the process that make s Winter salami unique? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Savolya (talk • contribs) 00:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Naming debate at Sněžka-Śnieżka

As a participant in the last, unsuccessful bid to change the name of this article, you should be advised of a new debate to move the article about Sněžka-Śnieżka. Your views on the current proposal would be especially welcome. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 05:34, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

FAC

Left a suggestion on the FAC page, take a look. The Dominator (talk) 05:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Mighty Quill, I've created an article called Prague Spring reforms and we should focus on details there. In my opinion it's the best solution since up until now the Prague Spring article was an over view and a comprehensive detail-oriented article about the reforms and this was kind of conflicting. Now we can keep the Prague Spring article as an overview one. Do you think this is a good solution? The Dominator (talk) 16:02, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

FYI new/old tribal/history resource

Pls see Talk:Coast Salish where I posted a link to a summary of old ethno write-ups used by genealogy.com; the link is to Washington but if you click around you'll find stuff on Canada-side peoples; interesting list of villages not seen anywhere else, also some breakdown of languages/groups I haven't seen before; esp. re Interior Salish and lower Columbia peoples.Skookum1 (talk) 14:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting btw in that it says that the Chilliwack-area Salish were originally Nooksack speakers rather than "Cowichan" (which the page uses for the Halkomelem-speaking group(s)).Skookum1 (talk) 15:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

List of Canadian Peacekeeping Missions

Just have to say, this is a fantastic idea for a list. Bravo. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 00:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Kriegel

I am amazed by your interest in František Kriegel - where does it come from? I proposed the article to the DYK[3] section on the main page so I would be obliged to you if you could check the grammar and maybe change the sound for native speakers... Thank you very much... Aloysius (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:51, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk:German occupation of Czechoslovakia

done --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 15:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Quite the contrary I have been moving pages back which have been moved unilaterally without a consensus to move them. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 15:32, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

See my comment at Talk:German occupation of Czechoslovakia --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 15:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Besides why "Nazi Germany" and not "Third Reich" if one is going to name the state because according to a search of Google books (1510 on intitle:"Nazi Germany" and 1449 on intitle:"Third Reich") they are about as common as each other? --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 15:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

BC Provincial Archives

Has there been anything new on the BC archives claim to rule all public domain images? I read your posting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject British Columbia/Archive/Archive Mar 2007. Clearly they have only copyright in their text, not in the PD images, and the letter from the archives admits this. I'm wondering if there has been anything new on the issue of whether it is okay as far as Wikipedia is concerned to simply crop off the meritless claims of PABC in the margins around obviously public domain material, such as postcards published in 1912, then post to Wikipedia? Mtsmallwood (talk) 22:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

(Hi Quill) Sssssh We're not letting on ;-). I think MQ will agree we've uncovered that {{pd-50}} applies, {{pd-100}} for stateside images. They can't own copyright, whteehr they claim to or not, on images where the photographer has been dead for more than 50 years; in Canad, that is. Grey areas abound. If you read their wording closely they only assert ownership of the negatives and prints, which is all they can charge for. Many images are also part of other estates, or haefv long sicne gone publ.ic in private collections of postca;rds and old pamphlets; all without copyright now because of their age. It's like the copyright on map data we've been disucing on Talk:Columbia River - User:Pfly has a whole campaign to overturn state copyright legislation (US gov has none). In my view, it's the bottom-line user-pays mentality of the government that's trying to squeeze money out of these images, when tye've already spent the money acquiring them (i.e. the taxpayers have already paid for it). in doing so, they're trying to bluff people into paying for use of images that aren't copyrightable. I think you'll find Steamboats of the Upper Fraser River in British Columbia and Steamboats of the Skeena River made by User:CindyBo and other articles were fleshed out with these; I know of links for countless other topics but just haven't got around to rendering/stripping them (see Talk:New Westminster, British Columbia). I do know that some of the images the Archives claims copyright on are also claimed by the family of the photographer Artie Phair, so that's hitting the courts at some point (this is on the q.t., as if this was private), and they're contesting ownership of the negs also by the way; bot hparties are likely to find out that neither or them own anything, and this would be precedent-setting and probably bringan end to the Archives' sale of images; except the prints, which is a service; I used VPL's and it was very disappointing; give me the negative, let me do the print for pity's sake, but no the gave me something "flat" and not evcen worth framing, myuch less uing in a reproduction like say for a book. Amateurs! (aid with hauteur).....Anyway sorry tblather on your page Quill, I'm all for using the pubic archive as a public heritage, and make it public....strip' em already..... ;-).23:57, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually I just found this on the New Westminster talkpage, about a {{PD-Canada}} tag which I didn't know had been invented....Skookum1 (talk) 00:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Restart

The idea of a restart is a whole new FAC, fresh look, previous FAC was stalled, previous comments wiped out. If previous comments are still completely applicable, they can be copied over, or you can start over if new commentary is warranted. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Homli, Relative of Yellow Bird

Hello there,

I was just curious about your change in the caption of the photo in the Yellow Bird page. would you mind letting me know where you got your information about the picture being Homli instead of Yellow Bird? I'm attempting to track down information on Homli for a patron and I'm having all sorts of difficulty nailing down which is the right name for the man in the photo. The print of this photo that we have in our archives states on the back that it is Yellow Bird, however in another picture of the same man, he is described as Chief Homli. Thanks for your help

OrcaG (talk) 17:11, 17 April 2008 (UTC)OrcaG

thanks so much for your help!

OrcaG (talk) 18:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)OrcaG

Sure

The IP edited tendentiously multiple articles (check the contribs) always inserting the same excessive unsourced population data from a time where no reliable censuses were done anywhere in the world because the level of technology did not allow it. Also had some other changes which I felt were tendentious. All these articles need major rewrites and reorganization (my old plan of going with chronology and dates). Btw did you check this link WP:HU ? Everyone can help who has an intrest in these types of articles. Hobartimus (talk) 15:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Btw the same IP just returned (rather the same person with a different IP) to make the same edits. Hobartimus (talk) 17:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hongcouver

According to the infamous Nat'l Geographic article using it as its title, the term was coined as a brag by new-Chinese immigrant kids; it's not surprising the Sun avoided talking about this given its ongoing distortion of BC politics and history. I tried finding the Nat'l Geog article in their online database but either it doesn't go back that far or they've had a post-facto change of title; maybe i can find it in the Dalhousie Library's periodicals collection to get the issue; it was c.1984 as I remember.Skookum1 (talk) 17:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:AFN-Logo.GIF

Thanks for uploading Image:AFN-Logo.GIF. 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 escription 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. --19:56, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Josef Smrkovský

Hello again, I have had a little hard-work time lately but I am here again with a Prague Spring contribution - this time about Josef Smrkovsky. Could you help me again to make the article work in "real" English? I do not know if they considered Kriegel a Israel spy but certainly kept him away from the negotiations because of suspiction that he was not a "reliable"... Thank you for help... I want to try to suggest the article to DYK, too. (talk) 21:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I did a very bad job:( However, where you placed the for citation I gathered the ïnformation from the first mentioned source and I explicitly noted that in the reference... do you think I should put the citation on each of the points? Thanks again for your time and answer. (talk) 16:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

First Nations leaders

I'm pretty sure it's no worse than filing them directly in "Province politicians" (which is where almost all of them were sitting previously) is...but for what it's worth, we do have several other instances (people by county/city, etc.) where we've categorized people by geographic divisions that didn't actually exist in their time, but now encompass the entity that actually did exist. Frex, anybody who was from the Ontario towns of Galt, Preston or Hespeler goes into Category:People from Cambridge, Ontario even if they died before Cambridge actually came into being. If you have a better idea, though, then by all means, feel free. Bearcat (talk) 16:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Walter Dieter was also head of a Saskatchewan-specific body earlier in his career. Bearcat (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorrry to butt in, but I know OldManRivers prefers "indigenous" over FN as a term; and being "from" BC when some indigenous peoples don't recognize BC.... anyway maybe Category:Indigenous leaders in British Columbia might work? "First Nations leaders" also has a vague syntax, could mean leaders of First Nations governments, in the capital-FN sense, instead of the ethnic-adjective sense better filled by "indigenous" or "aboriginal". simplest of all is Category:Gitxsan leaders, Category:Sto:lo leaders", Category:Kwakwaka'wakw leaders, Category:Dakelh leaders etc; a catch-all parent cat is still needed, maybe Category:Leaders of indigenous peoples in British Columbia. Suggest you confer with User:OldManRivers and maybe also User:Billposer also re in/from etc..Skookum1 (talk) 16:38, 25 April 2008 (UTC).

Wickanninish, Maquinna, Hunter Jack, Gunanoot, Nicola were not in the politicians cat....though Nicola, Spintlum and Kowpelst, and others, will be in a "magistrates" cat....Skookum1 (talk) 16:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

The "Assembly of First Nations chiefs" category already covers his national role. If he hadn't also been chief of a First Nations organization in Saskatchewan he wouldn't even have been in "First Nations leaders" at all, because that category is meant for band chiefs at the local "analogous to a municipal mayor" level rather than leaders of national bodies. National leaders, such as AFN chiefs, are categorized elsewhere.

I'd be very much in favour of renaming the categories to "chiefs" instead of "leaders", since that's the term that's actually used by most FNs and would be a lot less ambiguous as to its intent. I'm not entirely sure why the original creator used "leaders", to be honest. Bearcat (talk) 16:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Not all of those on that list are "chiefs". I agree with what Skookum said about what I would say (lol). First Nations is the band governments, and he's right that some of these people don't recognize BC, and true, weren't around when BC was here. At the very least, [:Category:Leaders of indigenous peoples in British Columbia]] would be a good one. OldManRivers (talk) 16:55, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Whether they recognize BC or not is kind of irrelevant; if their land lies within what other people recognize as BC, then WP:NPOV pretty much dictates that we list and categorize them as being in BC. I recognize that it can be a complex and sometimes contentious issue, but Wikipedia isn't really the place for that kind of debate. Bearcat (talk) 17:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[unindent]Gunanoot wasn't a chief, and as recently explained to me by OldManRivers, August Jack Khahstahlano wasn't a hereditary chief anyway, although he was si:yam (as the temr is spelled in Halqemeylem, not sure about Swkxwu7mesh snichim; similarly Hunter Jack was called Chief in English, he was kukpi7 in St'at'imcets, doesn't mean the same thing either, and was a status rather than a title as also si:yam....point is "chiefs" then only sets the category for band-council chiefs; Maquinna and Wickaninnish in period accounts are "kings", no less....Category:First Nations kings (by your logic)??...."Leader" is teh standard set in the indigenous peoples' project categories e.g. Category:Native American leaders. And much as I didn't like having someone send it to me re my website's St'at'imc history page, there's a UN Declaration on Indigenous Rights calling for the observance of the indigenous point of view when writing about them; usually elders but around here OMR is the main FN input/viewpoint, we're actually trying to enlist more to help with many articles in eed of doing.. I won't be observing it for my own privately-written page, but I'd venture that the onus is on the Wiki community, as a public and very global organization, to respect it, or at least cope with the sensitivities involved. The Sta't'imc Nation for example, does not see itself as being in Canada. yes, that's POV, but so is the "normal" view that they're in Canada; in legal technicality it happens that they are not. Like most BC tribes west of the Rockies, in fact, because there have never been any treeaties to bring them or their lands into Crown sovereignty (this was just upheld in the Xeni Decision). The only way to cope with NPOV about all this is to make sure the indigenous point of view is accounted for; we've been trying to do this in discussions to do with indigenous-peoples templates out here, which necessarily have to be crossborder in order to observe native realities and sensitivities (see Template talk:Native peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast for starters...so yes, the common perception is that they're "in BC", and in a purely geographical sense they are; but not in a political or cultural sense, that's for certain. So do we entrench the common misperception, or do we set for an NPOV account? The NPOV account meaning an orientation respectful/sensitive to indigenous perceptions/cultures/realities, or go with the outside-world view, one where the majority overrides them and decides for them how they should be organized/presented/spoken of? To me, it's pretty clear that the only path to true NPOV here is to deal with the views of who's being talked about, not dictate to them what we think is best....Skookum1 (talk) 17:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Romany vs. Romani

Filtering out the term "Romania" didn't help too much because the term "români" (the plural form of the Romanian word for the Romanian people) can't be filtered out. It does'nt matter weather you write "â" or "a", because the google search engine searces in all the cases as an "a". Besides, the form "Romany" is more accurate, because the confusion with other terms (see: Romani) is partially avoided. --Olahus (talk) 16:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Canadian residential school system deaths

I saw your comment with the edit concerning deaths in the Canadian Residential School system. I agree that the source is sufficient. I have read the source you provided and I must say that I am astounded. It adds an entire new dimension to this tragedy. The earlier edit that I deleted referred directly to a Globe and Mail article that was poorly cited and I was not able to find it. Your source clears that up. Thanks for providing this new (to me at least) information. It is a valuable addition to the article and warrants further research. I have also come across some other sources [4], [5] and [6] and will be keeping an eye on this issue. --KenWalker | Talk 16:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Be very careful here; see [http://thetyee.ca/Views/2008/04/30/TruthAndAbuse/ this rticlea esp. read the forum comments at the bottom; be very careful of pov sources; we don't need an invasion of 'truth mongers' - they silenced debate at the tyee by yelling at everyone.Skookum1 (talk) 16:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Conestoga Lake

Thanks for the help on the article.

Does Wikipedia generally add the type of substrate, normal pH level and such about lakes? It was actually this that I was looking for(and unable to find anywhere) when I added the article, and I think if a stub tag was added to the end of the disambiguation page, then perhaps it could be improved? --Tehol (talk) 22:13, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BlackCandle.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BlackCandle.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) 06:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thak you so much for the mofongo pic on the PR Cuisine article!

Está muy buena... --Portorricensis (talk) 18:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Doncaster Secondary College.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Doncaster Secondary College.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

You say erb, I say herb, let's call the whole thing off.

This came up in discussion last night; turns out someone I know pronounces it 'erb' as well, which would seem well out of line for a Melburnian, even a somewhat pompous one (unresolved issue the first). This post references a dictionary which explains that, well, pretty much the British got it wrong, by pronouncing the leading 'h' of a word derived from French. Because North America had already been populated by British subjects by then, the original pronunciation remained unchanged. This of course does not explain why exception words such as herbicide -- which may have entered the mainstream awareness later -- did not have the silent 'h' rule applied (unresolved issue the second).

One thing's certain: I won't be making that mistake again!

Ah, etymology -- possibly the most fascinating of all armchair pursuits :-D . --pmj (talk) 10:05, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I doubt a Melburnian would seriously consider that the correct pronunciation, if you tried saying 'uh-rb' in Syndey you simply wouldn't be understood at all, and considered strange if you were insistent on that mispronunciation. Just my input. I'll go away now. :) +Hexagon1 ^(t) 06:14, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Map

It looks good, though I am not an expert on the matter, just noticed some things that were completely off on the source map. I have a scan of a beautiful and detailed map of Czechoslovakia from 1938 (made between then and 1947, not sure of the copyright) if you want it for comparison/tracing, though I can't think of a way to get it to you (70.6 MB). +Hexagon1 ^(t) 06:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I take that as a no, you don't want it? :) Btw, you may want to update Image:Czechoslovakia 1939.SVG with the map changes you have made on Image:First_Czechoslovak_Republic.SVG. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 05:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm uploading the map to my web server as we speak, I had to shuffle a few things around to make room for it and it may take a second, but it is slowly progressing. I don't know why I didn't think of just using my web server, I think I've dropped about 100 IQ points since the start of the current scholastic year... I actually stole the map from a website a while back, they had it split into a thousand pieces in an image protection thing (Zoomify, I think it is called) so I had good fun getting around the protection and reconstructing the map piece by piece in Photoshop. I don't think nicking it off them was illegal though, I strongly doubt they owned the copyright, and in fact I would be interested who does own the copyright today (if only to see if we can use it at Wikipedia). I totally agree about it being fascinating, I'm thinking of getting it printed and put up somewhere, it goes into an amazing amount of detail in an intriguing period. It's at 21% now so if you hold on I think I should be able to give you a link within 30 min. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 14:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Here you are. I strongly recommend you right click and Save Link As, for peril be upon those who open a 70mb file in their browsers upon the Internet. Unless that browser be Firefox. In which case it works (just testing it as I write - you bastard, you made me use up 70mb of my usage :) ). I go to bed now, it's 00:49 and I am really tired. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 14:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Longhouse references

Hey MightyQuill. I'm looking for books that have illustrations or information about Coast Salish styled longhouses. The only source I have right now for longhouses related to Skwxwu7mesh ones are from Conversations with Khatsalano. I would like to find sources to cite that are more accessible. I know I've seen some books talking about them, but if you know of any, I would appreciate the help. Thanks OldManRivers (talk)

Numbered Treaties template

Hey, I have just adjusted the Treaty 4 article by adding in the Regional Chiefs' Councils. As not all council members are Treaty 4 signatories, or if they weren't by are considered part of Treaty 4, or have signed Treaty 4 when they're in other areas, I have made a note of those cases... however, it now also looks quite complicated. Could you take a look at the article, make it visually easier to digest, and then update the Numbered Treaties template that you've put so much effort in? Also, what do we need to do to request the deletion of Template:Treaty_4_First_Nations_in_Saskatchewan, as your Numbered Treaties template is so much more superior than it? CJLippert (talk) 23:57, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

6/17 DYK

On 17 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alén Diviš, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford ^Pray 23:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Żeligowski's Mutiny and LoN

Re: [7] - perhaps we can create a better category, something like Category:Events of interest to League of Nations (this is just a draft title to convey the category idea). A similar cat should be created for the UN.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Versailles = Signed under extortion

Thanks for your comment. I did'nt know that Wikipedia Sources are not allowed on Wikipedia....no problem because i have plenty of other.

But, as for reliability, You contradict yourself. A 6 hour's work has been deleted, with sources from official boards. You will hardly claim that the Bundesarchiv (Federal Archives) are not a reliable source, containing all the original Files from the Weimar Republic. You have, a few hours ago, deleted original speeches from the ministers and politicians signing the contract, with sources like Federal Archives, British history projects and The New York Times. These are sources that can hardly be accused of being one-sidedly too pro-German. Actually, all my sources are, if not balanced, at the most inbalanced to the advantage of those trying to maintain a filtered "Allied" Version of History.

It seems to me, someone is trying to prevent the truth from leaking out. Namely the truth that the Signature under this human rights-violating "Peace" Treaty was never given voluntarily, but under the threat of armed conflict and murdering children. In legal terms, this is called "Extortion", and any person would be in prison for that.

The only reason why the "glorious" Victors were not put into Prison is simply because there was no judge to do so.

I don't think an encyclopedia's task is about feeling good about one's country, but about discussing the truth. If the original quotes of the people who were forced to sign a fatal treaty are not a reliable source, then i don't know what a reliable source is.

regards

Peter

PeterBln (talk) 22:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Kieran Prendergast

On 21 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kieran Prendergast, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 11:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Source deleted

The Nazi Party was founded on 5th January 1919, under the name DAP (Deutsche Arbeiter Partei). It changed its name one year later into NSDAP. Before 1919, the Nazi Party was nonexistent. All this is a proven historic fact, and easily verifiable to anyone.

Under this sentence: The claims of the Treaty would codify the basis for public support for the emerging Nazi Party which never existed before 1919, I had put a reliable source from an American University College.

Who has deleted it, and why?

PeterBln (talk) 11:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Not at all! Thank you! --Kuaichik (talk) 19:16, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Alaibot, BC Coast vs Interior

Thanks for pointing that out. The offending category seems to be Category:Skeena Country, which is in a "Coast" category. As it seems to be predominantly in "Interior" cats, though, I've changed it to that. I'll check for other possible instances of overlap between the two when I'm a little more awake... Alai (talk) 03:50, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's a list of everything that's in the "overlap" between the two categories. I'm checking these myself now, but a pair of more knowledgeable eyeballs might no go amiss, either...

• Usk, British Columbia
• Babine Lake
• Babine River
• Chutine Peak
• Skeena Mountains
• Mount Currie, British Columbia
• Kitseguecla, British Columbia
• Kispiox, British Columbia
• Pebble Creek Formation
• Morice River
• Mount Callaghan
• Little Canyon (Skeena)
• Kitselas Canyon
• Kitselas, British Columbia
• Cedarvale, British Columbia
• Klootch Canyon
• Waddington Canyon
• Great Canyon (Homathko River)
• Cottonwood Canyon (British Columbia)
• Hagwilget Canyon
• 'Ksan
• Kitwanga Fort National Historic Site
• Glen Vowell, British Columbia
• Kitwanga River
• Gitanyow, British Columbia
• Hagwilget, British Columbia

Thanks again for pointing out the problem. Alai (talk) 12:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

As the crator of the Skeena Country category, guess I should explain that it was intentionally placed in both Coast and Interior categories - since it intrinsically includes Terrace, which I think is to be conceded as "Coast" rather than "Interior". Another category that's "binary" between the regions is the Sea to Sky Country - another "corridor" region, come to think of it, cutting from the Coast into the Interior; I guess that's why Mt Currie shows up in this list also.....Sea to Sky's a tricky one, in that the upper part of the Sea to Sky is historically/traditionally part of the Lillooet Country - very pointedly Interior - but becasue of the orientation of traffic nowadays on 99 the Pemberton Valley/Whistler is now considered (or feels like anyway) "the Coast" although you still hear Pemberton (but not Whistler) referred to as "a town in the BC Interior". Chutine Peak is up northwest of the lower Stikine; not sure why it has "Coast" in it but maybe somebody thought bnecause it's in the Boundary RAnges it's coastla; but there's nothing coastal in BC north of Stewart. Note also that some places are in dual, sometimes triple, region categories if they're in a "border" area; in some cases up north I admit I was confused as to whether it's Bulkley/Omineca/Nechako so I cinluded all three ;-); but in non-confused situation somewhere like Little Shuswap Lake is inherently both Thompson Country and Shuswap Country because it's the division point; ditto with overlapping regions such as Fraser Canyon which overlaps the Thompson Country, the Lillooet Country and the Cariboo and Chilcotin; not that this has relevance to your Interior/Coast botting problem but it may in future....Skookum1 (talk) 14:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I see... I think! :) I'll defer to (both of) your vastly superior knowledge if you want to fix any more of these, or re-fix my fixes. If any given article straddles both, then just revert back to BC-geo. There are lots and lots of other such stubs that don't seem to have any regional or RD categories, so I've just left those where they were for the time being. (I was able to bot-sort enough to take it off the "oversized stub type" list, which is at least a start.) If someone reminds me at a later date, I can check again to see if another batch of articles have acquired such categories, or indeed infobox data relating to their location. Alai (talk) 16:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Map request

Hello. Thanks for your Czechoslovakia maps. You have requested on WPP Czech Republic some feedback and possible correction, therefore I have one tiny request. Could you please adjust Image:Czechoslovakia 1939.SVG a little? The case is the Zaolzie area annexed by Poland in 1938. I have an impression your map "gave" larger territory to Poland. Compare with Image:Zaolzie mapa.jpg and follow the Polish-Czechoslovak border in 1938. Much appreciated. Thank you. :) - Darwinek (talk) 10:43, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

It should be narrower. Note also that a very tiny territory from Slovak part was annexed (due to strategical purposes) but I don't know if such a small area would be visible on the general CSR map. Thanks. - Darwinek (talk) 14:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

defaultsort

I see that you have the "defaultsort" template listed as one of your Helpful Links. Using this template is actually imperfectly Helpful: the template is only intended as a safety net for cases when people don't use the correct default sorting markup. —Paul A (talk) 02:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not saying that you shouldn't add a default sort key; what I'm saying is that the Defaultsort template is not the correct markup for doing so. In the section I linked to, the bit I was trying to draw your attention to was the last paragraph, the one beginning: "The default sort magic word is sometimes mistaken as a template. Template:DEFAULTSORT exists to correct such mistakes, but it should not be used." —Paul A (talk) 03:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hello... just thought I would let you know that you probably should avoid using the term "anti-choice" in edit summaries when referring to protests, as you did here and here. That term is considered to be somewhat provocative (see Pro-life#Term controversy and Pro-choice#Term controversy). Furthermore, looking at the text you added, it isn't necessary to describe the changes you made. Cheers. --Ckatz^chat_spy 20:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

BC region cat-names

Hi; just figured you might be an interested party in Category talk:Interior of British Columbia.Skookum1 (talk) 21:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

And about that inline comments thing on the immigration article; yes, I'm lazy, and no, sorry, I don't have copies of Morton handy, which is where a lot of my additions come from, so I can't improve the cites without having page refs. I've found Scholefield & Howay online recently, also Wade's The Thompson Country (linked on the Thompson Country page) which has bits and pieces in it; there's lots that could be added to that article from all sides; if I had more time I'd live up to my musings and make History of German immigration to Canada and History of Scandinavian immigration to Canada and likewise for Italisn, Ukrainian etc.; Strangers Entertained, ironically, I could probably find in teh Dalhouse Library here in Halifax, though there's little else about Bc in any of the libraries here (or the Public Archive which I live across the street from; if you want something on Amor de Cosmos or other BC-Scotia conenctions let me know).Skookum1 (talk) 21:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Passive resistance

Hi, thanks for nominating my article for DYK. Unfortunately, I'm quite busy these days, so I don't think I have enough time to improve the article, provide it with adequate footnoting, etc. Anyway, this was quite a compliment and a great incentive for me to improve it further when I have the time, so thanks again.:) Zigomer trubahin (talk) 09:45, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

biaised categories

Hi Themightyquill,
In fact, we agree on the analysis and the problem :-) but not on the way to solve this ^-^...
We both agree these categories should not exist but :

• you live with that and try to use them as well as possible given there exist and there is no consensus to remove them
• I still point out we should delete them and prefer the political violence.

In fact, I am not aware of the consensus on wp:en. On wp:fr, where I contribute mainly, we chose to remove several unmanageable categories sur as terrorist, terrorist organisation etc as well as antisemite etc.
I think it is just a question of time : when there will be enough people aware of an issue, they will gather to solve this and remove the categories. I don't think it is good to start with this difficult article anyway. It is today the focus of too many controversies between editors.
Ceedjee (talk) 17:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thx for your comment/Merci pour ta réponse !

Hope to see you soon (but on another topic - this one is ... ;)

Kind Regards,

Ceedjee (talk) 19:23, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Romani people

I noticed this comment. I would like to ask you for help because I am not quite sure what to do about it. Does it count as "general discussion of" the Romani people or as a question concerning the content of the article?

The thing is (as you may know), contrary to what this guy seems to be suggesting, I did not delete his comment "just because it is not politically correct." I deleted it just because it was a general discussion of the Romani people. Personally, I wouldn't really mind addressing this comment; I've addressed it before when it came from another user. Besides, I could just point out that there already is something in this article about the long-debated "Romanies and Crime" issue (third paragraph of this section. But on the other hand, it is pretty much asking for a general discussion, at least ultimately.

So what should I (or someone else) do? Delete or reply? --Kuaichik (talk) 04:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

it includes eco terrorism

but not french terorrism or spanish terrorism. it's by genre, not by nation. sub-cats won't do. It was done by Jewish people, it's not a genre. It's "terrorism in the british mandate of palestine" - if sourced and not a violation of WP:WTA. It's Palestinian/British mandate people terrorism", because it was by Jewish Palestinains (not yet Israelis). Amoruso (talk) 14:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

actually I didn't. read carefully. i added zionist poltiical violence instead btw. the reason black september is there is because it's also an event. Black September in Jordan etc. Amoruso (talk) 14:42, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

CFD

The related Category:Nationalist terrorism has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for Discussion page.

3RR

you violated 3RR. it's 4 reverts. you should revert. And if it was placed there like KKK, it's mistaken. It's redundant as already mother category British mandate of palestine is there already, and it includes zionist political violence article. Amoruso (talk) 15:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Please show me my three reverts, and I'll apologize. I've added it twice, you've reverted twice. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 16:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

you have 4 reverts, i have 3:

1. (cur) (last) 16:43, 19 July 2008 Themightyquill (Talk | contribs) m (81,344 bytes) (Reverted to revision 226636175 by Themightyquill; not good enough: that's 2 reverts, by the way. (TW)) (undo)
2. (cur) (last) 16:41, 19 July 2008 Amoruso (Talk | contribs) (81,285 bytes) (i added zionist political violence instead.) (undo)
3. (cur) (last) 16:40, 19 July 2008 Themightyquill (Talk | contribs) (81,344 bytes) (Sorry, no. Look at Black September (group) - it's listed under "Category:Terrorism in XXX" for multiple countries. You are free to add other groups to this category) (undo)
4. (cur) (last) 16:36, 19 July 2008 Amoruso (Talk | contribs) (81,285 bytes) (→See also: this relates to events, not organizations. or else all palestinian organizaitons will be in terrorism in israel, they aren't.) (undo)
5. (cur) (last) 16:23, 19 July 2008 Themightyquill (Talk | contribs) (81,344 bytes) (→See also: avoid any possible confusion with religious terrorism) (undo)
6. (cur) (last) 15:37, 19 July 2008 Amoruso (Talk | contribs) (81,251 bytes) (jewish terrorism is part of religious terrorism. the group is secular.) (undo)
7. (cur) (last) 15:25, 19 July 2008 Themightyquill (Talk | contribs) (81,280 bytes) (it doesn't need to be designated: "This category deals with topics relating to events, organizations, or people that have at some point in time been referred to as terrorism, terrorists, etc.,") (undo)

that's how the rules indicate 3RR (they don't have to be indentical). you need to self revert or face blocking... Amoruso (talk) 16:12, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

You challenged my edit, and suggested another option which I accepted, and then you reverted that twice. No one would accept my behaviour as a violation of 3rr. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 16:22, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid that they will. I didn't suggest what you inserted at all. I said if it doesn't WTA and sources and it does... and not in addition to other categories. Amoruso (talk) 16:25, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe you've reverted three times, so I'm not going to report you. If you feel I've reverted three times, you are free to report me. I'm copying my comments here to my talk page, in case you do. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 16:27, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I did revert 3 times but you 4 times. 3RR is after 4 times, not 3. You should self revert. Amoruso (talk) 16:29, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I've explained myself, and as far as I see, I've added text (that you suggested) twice, and you have reverted that text twice. If you want to revert again, I'll happily add it again. Feel free to notify whomever you want, but I'm not going to argue this with you anymore. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 16:36, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

There, now I've added it once, and reverted twice, thanks to an anonymous editor. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 17:10, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Romani people II

Thanks for dealing with that issue :) By the way, I mentioned a possible complication with that "citizenship" issue on the talk page. --Kuaichik (talk) 17:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Bugzilla failure

Dear Quill

It's here: [8]. It became much ado about nothing, not helped by multiple suggestions on how to achieve it technically (it's not straightforward), the fact that it appears to be a substantial tech job, and the need to capture the interest of WikiMedia (not Wikipedia) voluteer developers, which we failed to: Brion Vibber, their chief developer, is just not interested: it's very hard to get WikiMedia to do anything, we've discovered. In addition, developers just hate doing things that might carry any risk of technical glitches or political difficulties. The 88-person petition (linked) I organised is about half-way down the page.

My own attitude has evolved since then, especially since the realisation that it doesn't work for our readers. So I've changed from trying to make it work to dropping it altogether. When you look at the multifarious disadvantages and the plain-sailing without it, I can see why I'm having little difficulty in persuading people of that view. You might be interested in reading this, which I wrote after the discussion we both participated in at MOSNUM talk.

It might seem ironic to some people that a major reason for dropping autoformatting is to maximise the effectiveness of wikilinking. I think it's been compromised by auto.f. and the undisciplined linking of trivial items; I think WP is finally becoming more conducive to the notion of disciplined linking. Tony (talk) 12:28, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

categories

You are right. There is that one and certainly some others. But if it is proposed for deletion, it will be deleted with high probabilities. Particularly given its content in fact... Ceedjee (talk) 17:35, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

FYI. Ceedjee (talk) 19:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello,

I think it will be closed by a "no consensus" (too sensitive).

But this will have been a good "further step" toward what I think is the only solution.

FYI :

• there is Palestinian political violence but Islamic terrorism.
• there is Zionist political violence suggested to be merged in Jewish terrorism (no less).

This illustrates the issue. Because, factually, they are nearly the same. But it is true "numerous people" consider Palestinian are (partially) victims while Islam is an enemy.

That is quite "pov".

On wp:fr, I (personally) did this :

• fr:Résistance islamique = Islamic resistance
• fr:Terrorisme islamique = Islamic terrorism
• fr:Violence politique islamique = Islamic political violence

It is explained the first two are two different ways of "globally" designing the third.

Ceedjee (talk) 06:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Irgun

I wanted to remind you of WP:3RR. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 19:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I know. I felt I had to warn you since I left a warning at User talk:Shevashalosh as well. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 19:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Typo

Do you mean "universally accepted", not "universally excepted" in your CFD of unqualified terrorists? Andjam (talk) 03:14, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Nlaka'pamux image

Just curious or noting about the pic you uploaded for the Nlaka'pamux page; this isn't just any family group, that's a chief; I'd guess Chilliheetza, of the Nicola/Scwex'emx (sp?) because of his profile at the time nad partly by the type of apparel; could be Lytton or ?? but my guess is that this photo is of Chilliheetza (Tsilaxetsa), the son or grandson of Nicola (both were named chilliheetza). Nothing in the Nat'l Archives to indicate the place this was taken or who it was of, huh? Hmmmm.....says a lot about the Nat'l Archives; maybe a Nlaka'pamux historian/tribe member will show up and ID the image.....Skookum1 (talk) 16:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Roma revert

Just saw your revert on the talk page. While I agree it's a load of unstabstantiated crap, I don't think its worth removing all together. I don't know, but perhaps someone can talk it over or some figure about crime or something of the sort comes out, its worth keeping. It seems like censorship to remove just b/c we think its crap (i bet most of us think so). Lihaas (talk) 20:58, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

In all fairness im not opposed to what your saying (i hope you understand). I guess the first part he (same person?) started suffices. Lihaas (talk) 22:24, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Masset

I just made a query about that on the talklpage at Mid-Canada Line, which I think it was a part of but hte map on that article indicates otherwise; I said "see the Queen Charlotte Islands article" when I made it; guess I'll amend it ;-).Skookum1 (talk) 22:24, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

edit clash

No problems. The message in the history was to tell you that I was aware there was a problem with the other section and that I'd fix it. BTW, I put in the other section. The order was from whatever list I was copying, probably the ICJ, but it makes sense to have them in alphabetic order. I did not finish the details on all the men in that section just because I ran out of time on that day and to date no one else has finished it. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 08:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi!

Most of the anti-Romani users (registered or not) are clones of Rezistenta or Olahus, I recognize their style and ideas. But it's useless to try to stop them, cause its very easy to "hide" or create another clone. Some of them were already proved, other are under suspicion. But you are wright, I shouldn't have written that there. Best regards. AKoan (talk) 12:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Invitation

You are invited to join the Romani WikiProject, an attempt to build and maintain an extensive and neutral database of Romani related articles on Wikipedia. To join, simply add your name to the members section of Romani WikiProject.

Thanks for your many constructive edits. —Zalktis (talk) 14:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

An interest and a healthy dollop of neutrality are two things that you can positively contribute with, even if you don't want to join the fray over minutiæ...—Zalktis (talk) 16:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Good idea, I also thought you should be invited, you worked more on the subject than most of our current members. Hope you will join. AKoan (talk) 09:29, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Some thoughts

I think it is good that you moved Etimology up, but I think it would be better to be an independent section from Terminology, cause I plan to put something on the other branches names.

You also added "although it is often used in this way". This is, strictly speaking, original research, cause there is no source to say that it is often use this way, but i think it should remain, cause it's true. AKoan (talk) 09:37, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

New category for deletion

I've nominated the category "National liberation movements" for deletion. It is listed here. Andjam (talk) 09:35, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Your opinion

Hi! Can you please participate in this discussion, regarding the terminology for the Romanies [9]? AKoan (talk) 10:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Your attempts to hide historic facts

You wrote

"Yes, this is a known fact, however, there was no reference for its relation to the treaty of Versailles."

If its a known fact, how come nobody knows it? I have attended German schools and universities, and we have not been taught any of this at school, as for all other Allied crimes the same. I have a University diploma in Economics and Politics, so i would not regard myself as "uneducated". NONE of all this was ever taught to us. So how can you say, it is "known", when nobody knows it? I think you attempt to hide inconvenient facts.

You wrote:

"It's also known fact that Dick Adams didn't exist before the Versailles Treaty".

In this case, i really dont know who this Mr. Adams is. Has he founded an extremist party in the same of year of the Versailles treaty, and has his party tried to reverse this criminal anti-democratic Treaty, and has his party been voted by millions of people after they were thrown in mass-poverty by "good" allied nations, and has his party started a World war? In that case, please feel free to include your unknown Mr. Adams in the Versailles treaty article. Go ahead, please. Frankly, i never heard of anybody called Adams, and i doubt that he played a vital role in the rise of extremist parties. However i think that a person like Adolph Hitler is not really irrelevant, is he? You are trying to falsify history and to suppress facts. Hitler was known to violently ranting and railing about the Versailles treaty in public. In 1919 he became member of the DAP (NSDAP) party, the very same year that the treaty was signed, so you are trying to deny that there is a relation? You try to keep facts under wraps, what is your aim? Hide Allied responsibility for this criminal and inhuman treaty, that put millions under tyranny and alien yoke? And after Hitler finally came to power, one of his major OFFICIAL aims was: To revoke the Versailles treaty. So how can you say, there was NO CONNECTION? I think it is simply appalling, the way you try to suppress important and most vital history facts! How come, people like have the right to do that? But i am not surprised, your Government (in case you are American or British) are still controlling our schools and media, in order to hide your own atroticies and crimes. "Winner's justice", "history is written by the winners", now please dont ask me for who said that. It is one your glorious "winners", somebody who lacerated children alive and targeted 500 000 refugees, mainly mother and children, and who is responsible for an Ethnic Cleansing or over 14 Million people, out of which 2 Million got brutally MURDERED by Soviet raping bandits. But i am not surprised this is unknown in your country, as it sheds an evil light on you. But again: History is not about making you feel good about your country, but about facts - the way they happened, nothing more, nothing less. It is not about getting drunk and yelling a mindless "rule britannia".

"but unless I have a reference demonstrating that these two things are related, it shouldn't be included."

Yes, i am asking you again: Has this Mr. Adams done all that? In that case he would be related.

I think it is appaling, the way you try to suppress historic facts. What is your aim?

Oh, by the way i do have several references.

The Birth place of the NSDAP was not Munich 1933, but Versailles 1919

Quote: Theodor Heuss, 1st Federal President of the Fed. Republic of Germany.

(I hope you don't accuse Mr. Heuss of having "sympathies" for the Nazis, when he was forbidden to WRITE newspaper articles under the Nazis. )

Instead of trying to hide and suppress all the historic FACTS i mention, instead of trying to censore me and censoring the truth, why dont you search for these fact yourself? You have internet, you have libraries, you have books, you have complete access to everything.

Are you Czech? Are you Canadian? In my country, you go to PRISON for denying the Jewish Holocaust. So why dont you go to Prison when you deny e.g. the British-India Holocaust? I think you Allied people are appalling, the way you try to hide your evil history. Sorry but this is disgusting. Can't you become honest? You try to hide facts like Versailles, now look at what the President said, so you are a more reliable source then the President? If he was unreliable, if he had any Nazi-Sympatheies, i wonder why Allied-occupied Germany made him President?

You Allied people just try to sweep all your heinous sins under the carpet, but alas: Truth comes out, sooner or later, my dear. You can try to delay that process, which you seem to do at the moment, but in the long run you cannot prevent it from being revealed. Sorry.

The alleged "war guilt"

You wrote:

"All these points seem reasonable and I don't disagree with them, but your exaggerated language like "murder" "hypocritical" "totally unreasonable" etc, is POV. Whether or not Germany was solely responsible is a matter of opinion. I don't believe they were, but it's still a matter of opinion, not something black and white which can be demonstrated with fact."

"Believing" is something we do in church, but this here is about science and about facts. It is also not a matter of "opinion" whether cubes are round. Cubes are not round, whether you believe it or not. It is proven that England, for example, wanted to wipe out an economic competitor which was trading more successfully than she was. Only, people like you try to hide that fact. And then go and call their arguments, based on facts being kept under wraps, "opinion".

You Allied nations have committed so many genocides, atrocities and heinous crimes, so why is NONE of all your mass-murders etc. in your school books? Because "history is written by the winners", but i think history should be about facts - whether you like them or not. History is not about making you feel good about your country.

Versailles

You wrote

"I'm well aware of what you want to say. But what you want to say is irrelevant, unless you can find a reference to someone else saying it."

I did that. Only you have not read this:

Cartier, Raymond: The 2nd World War , Paris 1952

or try

Blanke, Richard: Orphans of Versailles

Instead of trying to suppress historic facts and questioning the role of the "morally superior" allies, why don't you search for Facts yourself? Plenty of books,sorry i have no time to write them all down here. Blanke's book you even read in the internet, free. So why you keep on asking me? I guess you are an adult, so please look for yourself, i am sure you are capable of finding the facts yourself.

"Yes there was hostility toward Germans in Czechoslovakia, but without the requirement of references, what is to stop some Czech from coming along and saying that the treaty liberated Czechs from centuries of oppression under Hapsburg rule?"

Excuse me? Being "freed" means, you have to be the oppressor now yourself? This makes no sense, what you are saying.

Why do you try to hide the fact, that this treaty "freed" some Czechs and Poles, while at the same time putting 10 Millions of Germans under Alien rule? This treaty was based on revenge, rather then on sincere peace,and you know that very well. If you don't, you should start reading, not trying to discuss when you have no knowledge. This treaty was mainly the work of France, they were "hereditary ennemies" for centuries. When you base a treaty on hate and revenge, rather than on justice and democracy, are you surprised that another war breaks out? I am not.

(I hope you are not trying to tell me, that forbidding 10 Millions of people the right to VOTE is "democracy"?)

The "Czecho-Slovakian" State was not a nation, but an artificial construct of several nations that never existed before. If you are Czech, you know very well that the Slovaks speak a similar language, but that does not mean that they want to be in one state with you. Or why have they split up, as soon as they could?

The CSR was a miniature-version of the Habsburg Empire, only in reversed roles, this time the Germans the minority and the Czechs not even the majority (half of the people in the "CSR" were not Czechs). But the main point: It was not as tolerant as the Habsburg Empire. Thats why it did not last.

Search for: Massacre of Saaz, Postelberg, and many others. About 3 Million innocent Germans had been killed not only during the war, but also in times of "peace", most of them due to an Ethnic Cleansing of at least 14 Million people, perpetrated by the Allies, by Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt, out of which two million got brutally killed. Churchill called the "transfer" to be carried out in an "orderly and humane manner", are you trying to make me laugh, friend? These people were tortured, raped, child-abused and brutally murdered, regardless of their personal guilt. And it was mainly mothers and children, not soldiers.

You claimed to fight concentration camps, while at the same time you placed millions innocent people in Stalin's concentration camps yourself. So you are proud of that? Sorry, but your ways of hiding history are simply disgusting for every honourable man.

Try to become a little honest.

Peter —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterBln (talk • contribs) 14:02, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hi - I'm sure the factual basis of your edit is correct, but do you have a specific source that we can use as a citation in the article?

Thanks!

BWH76 (talk) 05:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Khrushchev shoe.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Khrushchev shoe.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:18, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Budapest Metro M4 color

A tag has been placed on Template:Budapest Metro M4 color 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>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Native Education Centre logo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Native Education Centre logo.gif. 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) 05:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token f1988f75edfc3235e71f5e9b9d258053

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Roma people to Romani people

Hi Mighty. Could you at some stage before the RM closes add a few of the most important reasons why you support. It would be a great pity if ,after all this effort, an admin. not familiar with the issue would not give your opinion sufficient weight. I'm waiting a little to see if major counter-arguments are given before posting why I support. Nil desperandum! RashersTierney (talk) 17:17, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token ca5c21b0f33bfb224f0b944d1ba8db0a

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Congrats. Excuse my ignorance, I've followed the link, but still don't know what exactly TUSC is? RashersTierney (talk) 22:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Requested moves

As with the Georgian cuisine articles, please contribute to these discussions:

• Cuisine of Bangladesh to Bangladeshi cuisine - (discuss) over redirect.
• Cuisine of Burma to Burmese cuisine - (discuss) over redirect.
• Cuisine of Cambodia to Cambodian cuisine - (discuss) over redirect.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 05:14, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Lotusland (British Columbia)

Hi. Please see this.Skookum1 (talk) 02:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC)