This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Per your request, I have created the article Húsareyn for you. Be sure to add enough information to it to avoid speedy deletion, and make sure your content obeys Wikipedia's rules on verifibility and citation of sources. Good luck, and if you need any more help, let me know! --Jayron32 00:02, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Hazhk. A reply to your request at the Map workshop has been made. If you are satisfied, please copy/paste the following code and add it to your request: {{resolved|1=~~~~}} You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{GL Map reply}} template.
WikiProject Arminianism
Welcome to WikiProject Arminianism! Will you help clean up the project page the way that you did the portal? Some of the boxes are disjointed and need work. The color scheme also needs to be changed, etc. Can you help? Thank you again for your work.Theseus1776 (talk) 14:27, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Arminius image
Howdy, I saw you changed the Jacobus Arminius image and then changed it back. To tell you the truth, I've often wondered about the provenance of that image (File:James Arminius 2.jpg), because I've never, ever seen it in any books (it's not in any biographies of Arminius I've ever seen), and, to me, it doesn't look like the engravings of Arminius that I have seen. I'd like to see some more on the image first. TuckerResearch (talk) 21:38, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
But, when it comes down to it, if it is indeed Arminius, I don't mind the image change. TuckerResearch (talk) 22:22, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Well, according to information on Commons, the artist is David Bailly and the portrait was "obtained from Arminius, Arminianism, and Europe: Jacobus Arminius (1559/60-1609)". The image certainly dates from the seventeenth century, and from a book on the topic of Arminius... I assume it is authentic. I'm sure you've probably read the Commons file information too, but I really can't tell you much more about it than that. Simply, the reason I main reason selected the image is because of its good quality and also because it's a colour image - which always a bonus.
Do do you think it should be included in the Arminus article, or reinstated on the {{Template:Arminianism}} template? Peter (talk) 22:25, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Like I said, I've never seen it in any other books or anywhere else, and I have yet to snag a copy of the book in question. I am wary of what people put on images and how they upload them. For instance, I actually got into a wiki-argument with someone over an image of P. B. S. Pinchback that was labeled Homer Plessy. I had to show a Wikipedia editor a book reference to prove there are no known images of Plessy, even though the picture was a direct copy of the Pinchback picture! But, since I think I am one of the few who has Arminius on his watchlist, if you think it's a good image and a legit one, I don't mind. TuckerResearch (talk) 15:23, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I can understand the scepticism. I "investigated" a little more - I looked up the book, Arminius, Arminianism, and Europe: Jacobus Arminius (1559/60-1609), and doing so I came across a preview on Google Books ([1]). As you see, the portrait of Arminius on the front cover is very similar (same clothes, general appearance and painting style) I assume it was also painted by David Bailly. This confirms to me that our image on Wikipedia is valid and is also in the book (although we can't be sure that the uploader didn't mistake their image in question for the one found in the book... I hope not.).
I went ahead and added the image to the Arminius article, but if it is challenged again I really have no issue with it being replaced with another image. It's really not worth any serious arguments over! - Peter (talk) 16:25, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm all for the change of the image. And thanks for the Google preview. I've wanted to buy that book before, but it costs way too much. I just received it via interlibrary loan and scanned the relevant articles on the images of Arminius, if this ever comes up for any of the images. It appears the reason the images of Arminius all look so similar is because they all descend from a bust made just before his death. TuckerResearch (talk) 18:46, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Just want to know why you made that edit to the article; I haven't seen any recent discussions related to it. If because of an older discussion, please let me know. If not, please explain on the talk page. I'm not reverting the edit (yet) as I'm sure you have a good reason. Someone else might. Thank you. Wekn reven i susej ehtTalk•Follow 15:22, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Conservatism
Hi Peter! Thank you for your work on the portal. Just wanted to mention that far-ranging changes usually require discussion. Burke has been the logo of WPConservatism from it's inception and appears on almost 4000 pages. Blue flag waving was selected for the portal to differentiate it from the wikproject. Keeping the logos different reduces confusion. TTFN – Lionel(talk) 22:48, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Ah, I can see that it makes sense to have seperate logos... my apologies then! Peter (talk) 22:51, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
hideious banner
That banner went though many versions until one that everyone could live with was found. Abel (talk) 02:09, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Okay then. I won't revert then, but I do question if a banner is really necessary? If there have been many versions of it and a lot of discussion about whether it can be used, wouldn't the best option be to simply remove it? The text on the current banner isn't entirely clear right now - the banner is just taking up space. But, again, sorry for reverting it if a consensus was agreed on. -Peter (talk) 14:30, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
All the other political philosophy portals have a banner of the same size so it would look weird for this one political philosophy portal to lack a similar banner. Abel (talk) 01:21, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
The original banner for Portal:Libertarianism was based on Portal:Liberalism which is ironic since modern liberalism is a branch of classical liberalism which is modern libertarianism. You are right in that many other portals do not have banners. That is a huge disadvantage. Portal:Fascism with no banner looks far less attractive than Portal:Capitalism that does have a banner. You are more than welcome to whip up an alternative banner that people might go for. I'm no artist and it took me several tries to find something that everyone was happy with. Abel (talk) 14:30, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Portal:Bible
In this edit you changed one "CURRENTYEAR" to a hard-coded 2010. This looks odd to me. Are you intending that the portal should cycle through the 12 articles selected for 2010 from here on? If so, then you need to change the "CURRENTYEAR" in the previous line as well, so that the "Edit" link works. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:25, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Ah, thanks. It's only temporary until new articles for 2012 can be added. Peter (talk) 22:55, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
E Miliband
Hi - his mother will never have an article and that picture you added has been discussed and rejected previously - feel free to reopen a discussion on the talkpage - thanks Off2riorob (talk) 23:13, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. I quickly reconsidered adding his mother (after checking a couple of other politicians' articles and seeing their relations without articles were missing), I undid that edit pretty soon after. I will discuss adding the picture on the discussion page. Peter (talk) 23:15, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:26, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Ruckersville, Virginia article
Just because your opinion is that Christian W. Chandler is not notable does not make it a fact. Someone that has received multiple awards that merited being published in the newspaper is certainly notable, if you can manage to remain objective. ManInThePickleSuit (talk) 01:22, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Until he has a Wikipedia article he shouldn't be there. Peter (talk) 01:24, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Peter. For St Dewi's sake, please participate in the Talk page discussion on the name Howel(l)/Hywel to justify your recent changes before making more of the same. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 02:26, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
map2 in infobox country
Hi there, Peter. Is there a quick link you could provide to where it was decided that a "regular" (non-location) map shouldn't be in infobox country? I'm curious to see the rationale, because for many countries (except perhaps the large ones) the location maps fail to display a good overview of both the location and the shape of the country (if it's a globe map, the country may be barely visible; if it's a more local map, it might not be immediately obvious where the country is located in the globe – especially when there are islands that need to be displayed in insets on the map, etc.). Thanks, Waldirtalk 17:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Take it up on the talk page of the article. Instead of discussing whether it's acceptable not to have that map in the infobox, instead you should make a case for including that map ... which is generally not the standard The purpose of the info box is not, you see, to include a detailed map of a country (with all its major cities), but to include a quick location of that country in the world. Put your map in the geography section. Peter (talk) 17:22, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Peter. May I ask again, where was it decided that the purpose of the map parameter of the infobox is to locate the country in the world? (I'm not saying it shouldn't be, I agree that it makes sense, but I'm just curious about whether that was decided by the community or just became a standard out of usage.) And if a closer map of the country is not, in you opinion(?), warranted in the infobox, then what would you use the map2 parameter for? Mind you, these questions are not specific to the article, otherwise I would indeed discuss the topic on its talk page. I addressed you directly because you specifically mentioned in the edit summary that that use is incorrect (and you repeat it above), so I would like you to help me locate where the guidelines for that are located, if they exist. Thanks in advance, Waldirtalk 13:51, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
I believe it's become standardised - and its plain sense; the infobox's purpose it to provide a quick overview of a county, if the user wants to see a detailed map they should go to the geography section. I assume the 'map2' parameter is used for smaller countries (e.g. the Faroe Islands) where a world map really would be pointless and, in one instance that comes to mind, the France article where numerous oversea territories make up the Republic as well as metropolitan (European) France. Peter (talk) 13:58, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
That sounds reasonable. Still, I don't think a thumbnail of a map could be counted as a detailed map; only if readers opened the actual image page they'd be able to see the detail. In the small size permitted by the infobox, such a map would mostly provide a way to quickly recognize the country given its shape and immediate vicinity, which seems to me as useful for a general overview as knowing its location in the world. If this makes any sense to you, I can take the suggestion to the appropriate venue to see if others agree. What do you think? --Waldirtalk 22:18, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
I think if you can get approval there then you can go ahead and add an image. Peter (talk) 22:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
North Korea
I'm sorry if I'm coming across as too brusque. I'm trying to sort out the mess that are the North Korea articles. They seems to be claiming across the board that Kim Jong-un is General Secretary but this is seeming to be more and more unlikely. This is a bit unpleasant to do, as it involves multiple articles and talkpage. Maxim(talk) 18:06, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
I object to him being called the 'Supreme Leader'; this was a particular title given to Kim Jong-il (and defined in the constitution). The closest we have is a reference calling him the "Supreme leader of the armed forced" (which other English sources translate as "supreme commander"). Peter (talk) 23:09, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Hellenismos is more than just Greek mythology; it is philosophy, folklore, and practices, etc. Please do not redirect the Hellenismos portal without learning about and discussing this.--Dchmelik (talk) 01:33, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Well, the portal is a mess. The links all direct to disambiguation pages or straight back to a Greek mythology-related article. Other than the article you just pointed me to, there's nothing that really links specificially to Hellenismos. Would you direct me towards the WikiProject? I can't find it.... Peter (talk) 10:18, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
That is your opinion and an exaggeration. Of course some of the articles link to Greek mythology articles: that is part of the topic! Which 'Hellenismos?' There is no WikiProject yet.--Dchmelik (talk) 12:03, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
I go onto your portal and read the introduction. I want to find out more, so I click the link to "Hellenismos" and - oh - I'm taken to a disambiguation page. Okay... I look further down the page and I can see selected content on Greek mythology and Uranus (Greek mythology). This is an utterly pointless portal and I'll be nominating it for deletion. It's been up since 2009 and yet there's no accompanying WikiProject, which validates its pointlessness. This topic simply doesn't warrant a portal because it isn't a particular topic. Peter (talk) 15:52, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
The first sentence states the Greek definition of 'Hellenismos,' which you could have used to decide which disambiguated articles to read (and to see which are just English language terms.) Linking to only one would limit what people could find. You gave a couple examples of the 'all disambiguations and mythology articles,' but I only recall using one other disambiguation page, and you missed the links to all other aspects of the modern philosophy/religion, culture, etc. I do not see what you have against the Greek mythology and Uranus articles, but the portal's articles are random now--I thought you would see more than disambiguations and mythology that way. That there is no related WikiProject--true for many portals--in no way makes the portal pointless, but Wikipedia:WikiProject Neopaganism may be involved. Hellenic Polytheistic Reconstructionism (which I am surprised you did not read, since the portal is religious and that is the only religious link in the disambiguation) says that the name Greeks use for this religion is Hellenismos. Many religions are named in terms of ethnic groups or culture, such as Judaism, Kemetism, Slavianstvo, Celtism, probably Hinduism, probably hundreds, and you might find disambiguations or articles on different aspects for each, but that in no way makes them 'not topics.' Hellenismos is a vast topic: every school of ancient Greek philosophy, and each of the tens of separate historical religions of the Greek gods, any specific Greek cultural focus, and any combinations, are all types of Hellenismos.--Dchmelik (talk) 04:31, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
BTW, on any portals that have a 'show new selections' link above the box for selected articles, biographies, etc., you can select it, and it will load new ones.--Dchmelik (talk) 06:45, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
I hope you could add or suggest improvements instead of recommending it for deletion. I do not think it would be any more appropriate than deleting the other pagan (non-Abrahamism, so most of them) portals. Unlike the other neopagan ones, Hellenismos happens to have been used as a religion name for longer, so it cannot merely link to an article on the modern religion. However, I have shortened the introduction and am sometimes improving the portal, including deleting some stuff from the text lists.--Dchmelik (talk) 08:20, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
On second thoughts, the portal may be useful... my main suggestion would be providing a link at the bottom of relevent articles. At the moment is is orphaned from the main space articles. What picture would you use as a portal icon? Peter (talk) 12:02, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
:) When I linked to Portal:Hellenismos in Portal:Wicca, someone kindly added Zeus () as an icon. Symbols that have been discussed by adherents are the star/sun on the Greek parliament flag or a wreath such as , which I have been using, since it is used often. The only article I linked to the portal in is the modern Hellenismos religion article; I am unsure where else to link. Someone told me 'Hellenismos is not the name used on Wikipedia.' Well, it is used in the article on the modern religion, because it is used by Greek and English adherents, and there is not much of a simpler and less loaded English term besides the equivalent 'Hellenism,' which has too many other meanings, and at least five portals, many articles, have non-English names. If I start adding it to more articles, people might object to the term. Apparently there is even debate in Greece whether the term means religion or culture, but like similar historical terms, if it is used for both, it can be used for either. I am not necessarily against changing the portal name, but I do not think there is a commonly used alternative name. I started using Category:Hellenismos, but I think people deleted all my uses of it. I suppose using a category is different from just adding the portal to the page, which you are suggesting.--Dchmelik (talk) 12:28, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
>>
Well, this is why I had/have conerns about the portal, because it's a vague term and it seems to overlap with the Greek mythology portal... but I think it can serve a purpose as long as it sticks to a very narrow, specific topic (which I'm trying to find..). But in order to make the portal live I'll use the Image:Laurel_wreath_fa13.gif as an icon. I've added a few portal links to some articles... bur I agree that a category isn't needed ATM. Some editors are very picky about what topics warrant categories. Peter (talk) 12:33, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Many names of tens/hundreds of ethnic religions (Judaism, Hinduism, Slavianstvo, Celtism, etc.) have multiple meanings. I see the topic as traditional religious philosophy (of Greek gods, pantheism/panentheism, autotheism, or atheism, and any philosophy not of non-indigenous religions,) practices, & history, with rare other stuff--legendary figures like Alexander The Great and Leonidas are thought of like Britain's King Arthur and Richard The Lionheart. Most of Western civilization's sciences and arts greatly developed with Greek philosophy/religion, so IMO, portal links and in-context articles are ok. Thanks for editing/linking. Portal:Heathenism (Teutonic/Germanic/Scandinavian) could use development; I requested more European 'paganism' portals at WP:WikiProject Neopaganism; one can suggest at WP:WikiProject Mythology if interested.
You seem relatively new, but experienced; perhaps you can still learn much: after years on [Wikimedia wikis], I learned much about WP:tools (such as in one's 'preferences' are source code editors) and WP:noticeboards & Wiki chat lately. If you want help, message me.--dchmelik (t|c) 15:40, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Danish cuisine with a link to where we can find that note.
If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Danish cuisine saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.
Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Jezhotwells (talk) 23:19, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Copyright problem: Danish cuisine
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Danish cuisine, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://sattlers.net/Danish%20cuisine.pdf, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Danish cuisine with a link to where we can find that note.
If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Danish cuisine saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.
Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! As a result of these issues, I have failed the GA nomination. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:52, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Danish krone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scandinavian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Danish cuisine
Hello Peter. Thanks for your confidence in this article and your nomination for GA. Unfortunately I have been tied up for the past couple of weeks and could not participate in the discussion or in improvements to the article. In my opinion, though, the article needs a lot more work before it can achieve GA status. My own work on the article was concerned mainly with removing unjustified assertions and adding appropriate references. I would have gone much further if I had realized there was interest in making it a GA. The reviewer was quite right to point out that the lists should be rewritten as running prose. One solution would be to create a separate list (or lists) of Danish dishes and provide appropriate links, concentrating in the article on some of the more important components and methods of preparation. In regard to the history, I am not too sure how far it is worth going for the English-speaking community but it may be worthwhile to undertake some library-based research along the lines of the Danish article. Nillerdk seems to have done a pretty thorough job there. At the moment I am trying to put together a top-down article on Danish sculpture which will probably take up most of my time over the next couple of weeks. I might then have an opportunity to return to the cuisine article but I would really welcome the involvement of Danish editors who have some real background in the field. Maybe you have some contacts yourself? - Ipigott (talk) 11:42, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Danish realm
Hello my friend. I hope everything is going okay with the new setup...? Can you please comment at Talk:Rigsfællesskabet? There's a move request. Rennell435 (talk) 06:04, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi - everything seems fine, and the article is stable. I'll take a look at the request. Peter (Talk page) 15:22, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Portal:Denmark
I've reviewed your PR, cheers, ResMar 17:19, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Christianity Barnstar
Thanks for all your contributions to WikiProject:Christianity related articles! Keep up the good work! With regards, AnupamTalk 15:56, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, Hazhk. You have new messages at Jayjg's talk page. Message added 17:30, 31 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hi. When you recently edited Microsoft, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stability (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
User page redirect
Hi 000peter. I've been at work on categorizing redirects, and I found your page redirected to Category:Wikipedians. At least that's what the category's What links here page indicated. Sounds a little screwy, but I've seen it before. The way to fix it is to either get rid of the redirect on the User page, or softer-redirect it. Hope you don't mind as I also fixed the link to the image of the sheep at the bottom of the page. Best to you! – PIE ( CLIMAX ) 18:22, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for clearing up the edit Paine. I'm still unsure what to have on my page at the moment, but the (failed) redirect was certainly a mistake, and thanks for correcting that. It's rather blank at the moment - but that means no categories. --Peter (Talk page) 19:24, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
You're very welcome, Peter! If I may suggest, you did a lot of work on those User boxes, and they are meant for User pages. The option there is to either keep them on your User page, or you could create a sub page for them named something like User:000peter/Userboxes. Then you can put a link to them on your User page. Wait, I see you've already created the sub page! You're way ahead of me ;) Also, you can easily check out the User pages of other editors to get tips and ideas for your own User page. You'll find more useful info at CAT:IMPROVE, as well. Use your own innate creativity! Best of everything to you! – PIE ( CLIMAX ) 16:50, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Info regarding the difference between towns and settlements in Greenland
There's a distinct difference between a town and a settlement in Greenland, towns are these ones:
Nuuk, Sisimiut, Ilulissat, Qaqortoq, Aasiaat, Maniitsoq, Tasiilaq, Paamiut, Narsaq, Nanortalik, Uummannaq, Qasigiannguit, Upernavik, Qeqertarsuaq, Qaanaaq, Kangaatsiaq, Ittoqqortoormiit
The rest of the settled places are defined as settlements. There's no real populationdefinition to when a place is a town or a settlement, but settlements do recieve some special treatment from the administration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klauskleist (talk • contribs) 03:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Taking a look at this article it appears that Kangerlussuaq is only the fourth largest "settlement" (and, even if it was the largest, calling it the "largest settlement" on the Greenland article, without first explaining the distinction between a 'town' and 'settlement' is confusing; and that distinction appears to have blurred itself). When it comes down to it, I can see why telling them that Kangerlussuaq airport is the largest is useful., but do readers really need to know that Kangerlussuaq is the largest settlemt - bearing in mind that this is in the transport section? How is it relevant? Peter (Talk page) 10:42, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
More information needed about File:United States Navy Band - Der er et yndigt land.ogg
Add a description of where the image comes from (not what it is) and who the creator is. Please be specific, and include a link if you can.
Find the appropriate license from the list of free, non-free media, or public domain options. Copy the license template and paste it in the file's page, and save.
If you follow these steps, your image can help enhance Wikipedia. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the media copyright questions page.
Thank you for your contribution! --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:05, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Greenland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aappilattoq (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Transferred
Transferred your request from the illustration workshop to the photography workshop of the graphic lab--Gauravjuvekar (talk) 15:09, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Ah, thanks. I wasn't entirely sure in which category to place the image, because it's not strictly a photograph, but it probably makes sense to have it there rather than with all the vector/png images. --Peter (Talk page) 15:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Hazhk. A reply to your request at the Illustration workshop has been made. If you are satisfied, please copy/paste the following code and add it to your request: {{resolved|1=~~~~}} You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{GL Illustration reply}} template.
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes I can add a section to the History of socialism in Britain
Sure, I can add a sentence or two on ethical socialism to that article. It is an important variant of socialism that many people outside of Britain or outside the politics within the Labour Party, are unaware of.--R-41 (talk) 14:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I agree, Thanks! Peter (Talk page) 15:03, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I will improve the article on Tawney when time is available
I accept your request to add more material for Tawney. I will have to do more research on him though. When that is done and time is available I will add material to that article.--R-41 (talk) 23:01, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Taiwan#History
Hi, peter000. You can't paste in material from User:Jpech95/taiwan/Taiwan (island), as that loses the chain of attribution required by Wikipedia's licensing (and that chain can't run through userspace). That version is derived from an old version (last December) of the article now at Taiwan (island). In addition, the live article has been significantly improved since the copy was made. It might be good to join in the discussion on this section at Talk:Taiwan#History section. Kanguole 13:09, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Ah, my apologies! Thanks for letting me know. I got the versions mixed up, I meant to copy from the actual Taiwan (island article (I think that's where the image in the religion section comes from?). Shall I delete the history section or replace it with newer content? -- --PeterTalk page 13:34, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
No worries. I deleted the copy. By the way, the attribution requirement can be met just by saying something like "copied from Taiwan (island)" in the edit summary (as long as it's from a mainspace article, not userspace). Kanguole 13:45, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Taiwan
Actually, I think I'm right—see this page (linked from the front page of Taiwan Affairs Office), for example, which includes the following:
"After replacing the government of the Republic of China in 1949, the government of the PRC has become the sole legal government of China, enjoying and exercising sovereignty over the whole of China, including Taiwan."
Please consider reinstating my edit. Also, unless you also disagree with the second change, please don't just revert the entire edit in the future. :/ wctaiwan (talk) 17:47, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
As I understand it, although I admit I may be wrong, China claims sovereignty over Taiwan but doesn't currently exercise sovereignty, in practise (ROC does, de facto). Therefore it believes that Taiwan should be under Chinese sovereignty. See Political status of Taiwan. P.s. I realise that edit was marked as 'minor'. That was a mistake, so ignore that. -- PeterTalk page 18:38, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
I think "claims Taiwan to be under its sovereignty" = "claims sovereignty over Taiwan", but this is really becoming an argument of semantics. :P Either way, it looks like someone else has reverted you. I'm not going to fight to keep my version as it's rather trivial, and I only brought it up here because I thought you were not aware of the subtle points of PRC's stance. Feel free to bring it up with others if you still don't think the change is correct. Thanks. wctaiwan (talk) 01:09, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, if two people have disagreed with the edit and it's been reverted I was probably wrong. Sorry about that. -- PeterTalk page 11:42, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
This user was/is in the wrong, and I pointed out why here. You should remove his ridiculous warnings from your talk page. 216.119.153.205 (talk) 00:33, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I was a little annoyed at having two warnings placed on my talk page and being accused of disruptive behaviour over just two trivial edits. -- PeterTalk page 00:43, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
My pleasure. But of course he removed my statement about how ridiculous he was in issuing warnings to you,[2] but that's no surprise. It's also why I provided a diff above instead of just linking to the section, because I knew there was a likelihood that he'd remove the criticism. He seriously needs to stop this, handing out misguided warnings (just look at the section before yours on his talk page). It's nothing but an attempt at intimidation. You shouldn't let him or any editor intimidate you that way, especially when you know you're in the right. 216.119.153.205 (talk) 08:04, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
I would like it if you stopped referring to me as a "he" or "him". I am a female. Pass a Methodtalk 10:59, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
No, you aren't. You've been called a "he" for ages now (by me and a lot of others), and now you suddenly object? Not to mention, you act like a male (your editing history has showed this, such as your not knowing things about female anatomy that a woman would know; you'd have to be a young girl or a male who is undereducated on the matter to not know those things). 216.119.153.205 (talk) 17:45, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 13
Hi. When you recently edited Kyrgyzstan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Unitary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 20
Hi. When you recently edited Shiva, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deva (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Alright, three people changing things for different reasons and in different ways. In lists of countries, it is often necessary to note some dispute of political status if it exists, as part of neutrality. Even with those, many editors often come along and remove entries based on their personal/national POV as to what is and isn't a country. I started a discussion on the talkpage earlier, perhaps you can post your thoughts there? Cheers, CMD (talk) 18:02, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
History of Republic of China as main
You and I have edit warred a bit over whether History of Republic of China should be one of the main articles for the History section of the Taiwan article. The Talk:Taiwan page has a couple of discussions about the scope of the History section of the article. Please read the "Timeline" discussion and the "Scope of the history section & reorganisation" discussion. At present most of the editors are leaning toward making the History of Republic of China as much a part of the History section as the History of Taiwan. I'll hold off on making my edit again for a while. I want to give you a chance to be aware of the discussion and contribute to it so that when (if) I make the edit again you will understand the reason and will have had a chance to affect the decision. Readin (talk) 02:45, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Rollback
I have granted rollback rights to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. An optimist on the run! 16:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Why'd you remove your addition? The partial recognition is a very important fact about Taiwan. It is part of their complex relationship with China, which basically dominates their foreign policy. CMD (talk) 23:09, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
See my edit summary. I agree - in fact, I'm the one who initially added and supported that description - but there was a lengthy discussion about how exactly to describe Taiwan and "partially recognized" was overwhelmingly dismissed as a wikism and contrived description. I think the consensus was either for country (which has the advantage of being vague and probably as equally NPOV) or state, without an explicit mention of sovereignty. You'd have to check the talk page though. I'm not going to remove or add it again, I'll let someone else mess with it... -- PeterTalk page 23:23, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
::Oh. I've just re-read, and I'm not left wondering if I just went ahead and removed my own original addition? Or did another user re-add 'partially recognised', as I'm sure I remember it being changed to the plain 'state' with a good reason. -- PeterTalk page 23:32, 18 May 2012 (UTC) Yeah, it was added back in sometime over the past two weeks. I think it's best to leave it out. -- PeterTalk page 23:36, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Please look at what you reverted to. A copy-paste of another article, sans refs and into a footnote. --NeilNtalk to me 22:04, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
My apologies, I shouldn't have reverted that. I only saw a large section of information removed. -- PeterTalk page 22:07, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
No worries, I thought my edit summary sufficed but I should have been more specific. --NeilNtalk to me 22:12, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Dear Peter, please note that China is not in North America. There is a section on China. Please find it and add your information to that SO LONG AS you can provide a reference for it. Then we can all get on with more useful things in the time we spare for Wikipedia. Bmcln1 (talk) 22:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
I didn't add that information, I wrongly reverted an attempt to remove it. -- PeterTalk page 23:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
User Page
I am not sure if you are aware of this, but I cannot seem to access your userpage. It keeps re-directing me here. --Welshsocialist (talk) 21:11, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Changed this back. -- Peter Talk page 21:13, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
It still seems slightly broken.--Welshsocialist (talk) 21:39, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
I saw your recent edit
regarding the Gini index in the United States, and while I agree that it belongs there, should there not be more explanation in the box that this involves income distribution. I was not familiar with the Gini index, but it seems to me that it is just a statistical devise that could be used to measure a variety of things. Or is this a standard use of the index, that anyone who knows anything (which does not include me) will understand? However, I am NOT inclined to start making changes in something that I don't have at least a working grasp of . Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 15:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes, the Gini Index in this context is used to measure income quality - the USA ranks as "medium", which is why this category was probably not includes, yet the HDI was ranked as "very high". Gini (and its particular usage here to measure income equality), like the HDI ranking, requires some background information/understanding, because it's not always commonly-known method of measuring countries economies and HDI to measure development (yet most people understand the terms 'developing/developed country' or 'rich/poor country'.) The links to both Gini and also the rank linking to List of countries by income equality are both present, so there should be explanations available. Gini is an invaluable piece of information for those who know what it means, and it is present in all articles on countries AFIK. -- PeterTalk page 16:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I had a friend once point out that one could learn an awful lot when one starts out dumb enough. A small step for mankind, a giant step for Carptrash (talk) 16:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Fidel Castro
Hello there! As a regular and active contributor to the Fidel Castro page, I'd just like to say thanks for lending a hand and being constructive! Best (Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:29, 5 June 2012 (UTC))
Please use preview
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Copenhagen, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. In kind regards, Heb (talk) 10:16, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
I do use preview in most cases. The mistake from the 3rd of March couldn't have been avoided by preview - I intended to remove a heading, before realising the title was needed after a second read through the page. Thanks for the reminder though. ---- PeterTalk page 12:11, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
File:The Little Mermaid en.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:The Little Mermaid en.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files 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. Stefan2 (talk) 20:53, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:The Little Mermaid en.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:The Little Mermaid en.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:32, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 28
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:14, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 13
Hi. When you recently edited Juniperus bermudiana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cedar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
What's up with the Methodism work group?
Hi Peter, you seem to be one of the few listed members who is currently active on Wikipedia; John Carter is on a wikibreak. The Methodism work group talk page seems to have a lot of posts that, apparently, were never answered. Have you any idea who is active and who is not? I am prepared to help out, but would not like to tread upon anyone's toes. Regards, David_FLXD(Talk) 14:43, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi there. Sorry, I haven't been paying a lot of attention to that work group recently (and nobody else either apparently). I've responded to you on the talk page. I know Anupam is quite active, so he's worth contacting. As for the other users, I'm not sure who's active or not, because I haven't been keeping an eye on the work group. It's probably best checking the recent contributions of each user. -- PeterTalk page 15:34, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, Peter! Yeah, I checked a lot of them (not all) and many had not been seen for months, even years. Are you in Denmark? I ask because I was in Copenhagen in 2009 for a couple of days and really enjoyed it! David_FLXD(Talk) 15:39, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
No problem. I'm going to keep a closer eye on the talk page and try and help ( as best I can, since I'm still learning everything about Wikipedia myself). I don't live in Denmark but I love the country - I've visited a few times. I'm glad you enjoyed Copenhagen, I love the city too, especially the architecture and its atmosphere - much less hectic and more cosy than somewhere like London!:) -- PeterTalk page 15:48, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Per the above references are not needed in the lead. The lead is just to reflect the body of the text. Thus reinserted some of the text in question. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 20:55, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Peter.
I don't understand why you have removed my edit.
You write: Unfortunately, the style in which the content was presented (lists in main articles are discouraged) was unhelpful and unencyclopedic
But why did you not edit in the way that feel is more appropriate?
It is rude to just delete stuff that is true and a big part of our culture and which is documented with many links.
I did not know that other users would find lists unhelpful and unencyclopedic. I actually spend some time thinking about how this information was best represented in an easy to read yet short form.
But of cause I am open to suggestions on how to improve it. I hope that you are too and through dialog we can find a way to improve it to create optimal value for most people.
Please explain why you just deleted it? As a minimum you could have left it there and put a note that it needs editing...
I would like to put it back. But I don't want to get into a fight. What is the best way to edit it "off line" such that you can check it first and we can agree not to delete it again.
/Thomas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomasjam (talk • contribs) 14:17, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi. The issue with your additions was the way the information was presented - in list form. I may have been quick to remove the information, but if you put it back it needs to be written in prose. Lists may be acceptable in some articles, but these articles are usually titled "List of....". I also question whether the Denmark article needs a whole section on "innovation". Have you considered creating the innovation section in Culture of Denmark and perhaps adding a short paragraph to the Denmark article? -- PeterTalk page 16:15, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Peter.
Yes I understand. In the mean time I have also looked at many other countries and many of them have a section about Science and Technology where stuff that are similar are posted. The reason I choose culture, was because I believe that Denmark has a special culture for innovation. But OK, readers form other countries can't know this. So if they are used to look for section Science and Technology then it fit better there.
I will post an edit in 10 minutes where text is prose and then I will try to find an image later that matches it well and add that too, after you have "Approved" my next edit. (or should I rather post it here first... and have it pre-approved by you)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomasjam (talk • contribs) 16:42, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Ups... this takes much longer than I expected. I have to redo all the links and find proper formatting etc.... (will update little later)
Science and Technology
Although a small country, Denmark has a tradition for innovation that influences the global evolution. Throughout the resent 50 years Denmark or danes have been or still are world leading in several fields of Science and Technology. Some of the most notable in the steel industry are the design of the biggest and most energy efficient container ships in the world , design some of the worlds biggest and most energy efficient diesel and Denmark has been the world leader in wind power for several decades.
In the software and electronic industry Denmark was the world leader in design and manufacturing of NMT mobile phones and Denmark was the first contry in the world to develop GSM mobile phones.[141] Starting in the 90’s Danish researchers and companies had a leading role in systems for Optical Fiber communication. [142]
In 2003 Skype was started in Denmark and is now the worlds biggest phone company based on number of subscribers. In 2000 3Shape was started and is now the world leader in 3D scanning and CAD for these industries: Dental, orthodontics, hearing instruments, footwear and quality control.[140].
Danish software engineers have taken a leading roles in many of the worlds important programming languages: Anders Hejlsberg, Turbo Pascal,Delphi, C#; Rasmus Lerdorf, PHP; Bjarne Stroustrup, C++; David Heinemeier Hansson, Ruby on Rails; Lars Bak pioneer in virtual engines, V8, Java VM, Dart.
Danish engineers are world leading in providing diabetes care equipment and medication products from Novo Nordisk and since 2000 Danish engineers have been world leading in creating enzymes for converting waste to cellulosic ethanol. [139] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomasjam (talk • contribs) 17:11, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
That text looks good! It won't need any approving - I'd post it once you've finished formatting.
I should explain that the reason why two editors reverted your previous additions wasn't any attack on you, it was because several sections on the article had previously consisted of lists, and a big effort had been made to clear the article up. You can understand why the addition of a big list might be "alarming." ---- PeterTalk page 17:25, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Referencing on Libertarian Party
Hello 000peter,
I came here to request that you add a reference for the material you added to Libertarian Party (United States). If you don't, it could be deleted by another editor who is not as lenient as me. Thanks, Gold Standard 23:43, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for creating a new section, however, you cut the Masonic article back so much, that it became un-encyclopedic, we have therefore reinstated (and corrected my own spelling mistakes) it in the new section you very kindly created.
The citation for the Odd Fellows hall will be added as soon as I can locate the book again Vtr1781249 (talk) 17:09, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
I wish you wouldn't add it back. You have to understand that every article must be balanced; not just for neutrality but for relevance. Your information on the Masonic bodies is all well and good, but you're placing undue emphasis on it in that article, I would urge you to create a separate article, but I very much doubt it would be relevant or not. Please do not refer to my edits as vandalism - I take this is a personal attack. I can fully justify my edits and I believe my cutting back was necessary. I advise you to read WP:MOS and the policies and guidlines. I will not revert immediately, but I hope you reconsider and fine a way to, at the very least, get rid of the large list that dominates the article. --PeterTalk page 17:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Not all factual encyclopaedic material can be presented in a 'warm and fluffy way', sometimes lists are necessary to convey the info, however, I hear what your are saying and will look at a reformed format in a day or two, okay? We did not intend to make a personal attack on you, maybe the term"vandalism" was a bit strong, read the above as "unnecessary over editing". The section is relevant in term of local history and accurate detail concerning the town. Vtr1781249 (talk) 18:09, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
You're going into minute detail by listing every masonic body. --PeterTalk page 18:40, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
As the preamble states that 16 Masonic bodies meet there, I can foresee someone saying, name them then? Vtr1781249 (talk) 19:06, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Have created a new section for this subject, as you suggested it Vtr1781249 (talk) 19:09, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you
Thanks for my AfC barnstar! (It is my first award, so very special, and much appreciated.) Regards, David_FLXD(Talk) 06:41, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
2
What the hell is wrong with you ? The links of the graphics simply are no valid after 24h for a strange reason.
I will make the graphic a picture and post it .
The other link on the origin of migrants is perfectly valid.
Polarwolf69 (talk) 18:06, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
You are being dishonest by changing accounts. Please refrain from changing the article again. --PeterTalk page 18:08, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Also, you are using personal attacks again. I will be reporting this account for suspected sockpuppetry. --PeterTalk page 18:09, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Open a dispute now, bring some official people from wikipedia.
At least give me 20 min to put my new stuff in, then discuss it here ok?
Dont revert it again, this is simple attack on me.Polarwolf69 (talk) 18:13, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Now you can go and check it and make suggestions for it not to becontroversial.Polarwolf69 (talk) 18:21, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure what I'm meant to be checking. The link you posted is near identical to the now dead link. This graph you created will probably disappear tomorrow too. In which case, all of this unsourced information will need to be removed from the article. -- --PeterTalk page 18:23, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Please look at the corrections I have made to your addition. Yes, we will need a new image. And citations that are not dead links. But please do not add bare urls. Please do not revert. --PeterTalk page 19:02, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Ok thank you, I accept your edits. Is there anymore suggestions ?
I have another graphic by continent if you dont believe me :).
I am sorry to be over exited but you also should have censored less.
Regards,Polarwolf69 (talk) 19:01, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Please do not use the word "censor". That word has strong connotations. I have never censored anything. -- PeterTalk page 19:04, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
The only remaning issue is that I am afraid you will moderate anymore. I think now all is PERFECT.
Would you prefer a more detailed graphic on immigration by continents ?
Regards
Polarwolf69 (talk) 19:05, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
A more detailed graph would be helpful. Thanks. -- PeterTalk page 19:07, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
I have just posted it. I regret this over exited episode and our fight, everything is perfect now.
Thank you for your comprehension and suggestion.
Regards,Polarwolf69 (talk) 19:17, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Could you please erase all this thread, it makes me feel uncomfortable since I would have like things to have gone more smoothly.
It is only numbers and usage of data.
RegardsPolarwolf69 (talk) 19:18, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
The talk page will be archived automatically in a few days. --PeterTalk page 19:44, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
A confused user
You have no right to censor valid information. Almost all countries in the world have public statistics on various subject.
Most countries in Asia,Africa,Americas have them everywhere as a fundamental data to understand the situation of each country.
If the data was invalid I would accept this, but as it is entirely valid I don't accept your censorship.
If you want to hide something based on your personal ideas and ideology instead of the right of FREE information , I wont let you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anton88be (talk • contribs) 19:38, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I've moved this comment into a separate section. Also, it would help if you sign any comments. I am sorry that my edit summary was not clear enough, let me explain. I'm not attempting to 'censor' the information you added to the article - the data already present in the article! The reason I have removed it from the infobox is because, as agreed several months ago when the Denmark article merged with the Kingdom of Denmark article, some data specific to Denmark proper must be removed. The infobox covers the entire kingdom. We do not have any data showing the percentages of ethnic groups across the kingdom (Denmark, Greenland, the Faroes), and such data would be misleading. I'm not wholly opposed to you adding that data into the infobox, however we'd need to arrange for a footnote and/or a note in brackets, telling readers the data is for Denmark proper. Please feel free to make a case on the talk page, I won't stop you. Please ask for any clarification. I will not immeditely remove the data again if you wish to readd it, but I hope you will understand. P.S. apologies if this reply seems rushed. --PeterTalk page 19:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Edit: There are also grounds for removing your edit, since the source is actually a dead link. Please find the data in an alternative source and we can fix it. --PeterTalk page 19:51, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Firstly, do not accuse other editors of "censoring" information for "ideological reasons". I take this as an attack. Your recent contributions to other articles show you are editing very aggresively and accusing other users of "lying". You seem to be very hung up on adding ethnicity data. Secondly, the argument (not an argument really) is that the infobox covers Denmark, Greenland and the Faroe Island. I don't know quite what you're talking about when you speak of "islander ... Germanic Danes" (please clarify?) The data is awkward in the infobox and I feel it is best kept to the demographics section. Thirdly, thanks for looking for a live link, because I seem to recall that the data referred to "Danes" and "immigrants"; no references to ethnicity. Your addition to 'ethnic' is very telling. I would go so far as to say that you are editing Wikipedia to push your own views. I hope we can come to an agreement. P.S. use four tides (~). -- PeterTalk page 20:04, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Awkward ? Facts are facts, they maybe interpreted in positive or negative way but numbers are neutral.
The link is working. Go on Stats Denmark, population then search for people of Danish Origin.
People of danish origin is a sensitive way of talking about ethnic danes. Ethnic word seem to be controversial and has been deleted, I admit .
Anton88be
People have the right to know. There is nothing else to say and nothing bad in telling simple stats.
It is just information.
Non-Western Immigrants is a term used in all Europe to say non Europeans, Non Occidental of no European ancestry.
Why don't you censor ethnicities in Nigeria ....why Denmark ? I don't understand why Europeans must be silenced.
Thank you. Go moderate any African country's page, you will see ethnicity sections, even with the most doubtful sources.
Also we are talking about demographics, people have the right to know where immigration is coming from.
The ethnicity figure is based on Danish people and migrants. That is simple.
I am talking about Denmark clearly. If someone wants to talk about the danish crowns let it be.
I dont see any relation to my edit.
Sorry for this late reply. Again, I repeat that the information is not being censored! It has been present in the article all this time, in the section I linked to. Thanks for finding a live link - it had been dead for a while. We can leave it in the infobox, but I will have to add a footnote. You still seem confused; the data you have added is only relevent to Denmark and not the Faroe Island and Greenland. You're right in saying that the majority of people will want to read only about Denmark proper, this is what the rest of the article focuses on and this is why the ethnicity figures were present in the main prose. But I don't want to carry this conversation on any further. I'll add a note and we can leave it at that. Again, thanks for updating the citation. P.S. The data was previously included in the infobox and I believe that I was the person who added it originally! But it was removed back in January when the merge took place. -- PeterTalk page 22:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Please do not remove a whole section from my talk page. -- PeterTalk page 23:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Emblem or Coat of Arms
Peter, NAR (Nakhchivan A.R.) uses the same coat of arms as Azerbaijan, as you may see here in its official website. (The English of the page is even worse than mine; that is why they call it "emblem".) Please add it back. Thanks and all the best. --E4024 (talk) 12:11, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
I'll add it back, no problem. I just wasn't entirely clear if Nakchivan uses the emblem or coat of arms simply as a part of Azerbaijan, or whether it uses them in its own right as an autonomous republic, if you understand what I'm saying. The Azerbaijan article uses "emblem", as does Emblem of Azerbaijan. --PeterTalk page 12:16, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. I am a bit confused about the English terminology because of the Turkish equivalents. ("Amblem", "arma", "dolma", "sarma" confuse the most educated... :-) --E4024 (talk) 12:28, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Flag
Nakhchivan Autonomous SSR (just as its predecessors) had its own flag; but as the (second) independence of Azerbaijan was promulgated from Nakhchivan, it (NAR) also accepted the pre-Soviet Azeri flag for the whole of Azerbaijan and later the parliament of the Rep. of A. confirmed the flag. In other words, it was first Nakhchivan that introduced the actual "common" flag; this is why NAR does not have a different flag of "its own" now. (I know all this could be expressed better in English but I am in a hurry. :-) All the best. --E4024 (talk) 12:20, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Danish colonial empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page French Empire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:08, 5 September 2012 (UTC) --HazhkTalk page 12:15, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Chamberlain
Thanks for your help on Chamberlain. It has proven difficult to find an image of him that has a defensible copyright, and yet is a portrait from his later years, it being in my view pointless to illustrate him as a young man (he needs to look like Chamberlain, if you get my drift). There's a portrait online to which the copyright will expire in only five years ... sigh. I'm hoping to find one taken of him in Canada at the Ottawa Conference. That would most likely be PD. Or something UK Crown Copyright.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:24, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
The current image is okay, but I hope you find a good replacement (and I'll have a look for an image licensed under crown copyright). I should have checked the license of the other image, but I thought I'd better find a quick replacement after the other was deleted, sorry about that. -- PeterTalk to me 16:38, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for trying to reason with User:Anarg. I have so little patience for the Armenian-Azeri fight that I rarely try to get through to them, so I'm glad someone did. No, I haven't blocked yet, entirely because of your message to him. I'm hoping he considers it. --Golbez (talk) 20:02, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Replaceable fair use File:Marienborg.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Marienborg.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:34, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing this pair of articles. They are factual enough, I think, although maybe not wildly exciting. A query has been raised on the grammar of the hook. I can't see it at all. Maybe you can? Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 00:34, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Alphacourse.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
) as an icon. Symbols that have been discussed by adherents are the star/sun on the Greek parliament flag or a wreath such as 
, which I have been using, since it is used often. The only article I linked to the portal in is the modern Hellenismos religion article; I am unsure where else to link. Someone told me 'Hellenismos is not the name used on Wikipedia.' Well, it is used in the article on the modern religion, because it is used by Greek and English adherents, and there is not much of a simpler and less loaded English term besides the equivalent 'Hellenism,' which has too many other meanings, and at least five portals, many articles, have non-English names. If I start adding it to more articles, people might object to the term. Apparently there is even debate in Greece whether the term means religion or culture, but like similar historical terms, if it is used for both, it can be used for either. I am not necessarily against changing the portal name, but I do not think there is a commonly used alternative name. I started using Category:Hellenismos, but I think people deleted all my uses of it. I suppose using a category is different from just adding the portal to the page, which you are suggesting.--Dchmelik (talk) 12:28, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Copenhagen, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. In kind regards, Heb (talk) 10:16, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:The Little Mermaid en.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).
