User talk:Danutz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Romania

There should be some articles about Romania, that are not to find in the English Wikipedia. Please see Gutza's talk page on the Romanian Wikipedia --Danutz 9 Dec 2003 21:00 (UTC)

Yes, I've seen the list. I already took on the article on the Romanian Constitution & I just finished the one on Henri Coandă. I'll plow through the others later this month; I'm doing some work on some Seattle material next. -- Jmabel 08:16, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Unverified image

Thanks for uploading the image

  • Image:Ursus.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GFDL, or {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know where you got the image and I'll tag it for you. Thanks, Kbh3rd 03:47, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:BRD Cluj small.gif

Can you transcode your better copy to PNG format and then upload it to the commons? Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 03:25, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

I don´t have any program to do so, but so far I know jpeg is the best format for pictures (not graphics). The big version one can find at ro:Imagine:BRD_Cluj.gif (actually http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ro/c/c1/BRD_Cluj.gif ). --Danutz 11:54, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Danutz Danutz cel harnicut :)

Danutz cel harnicut, sa nu cedezi! esti foarte tare! --168.167.253.97 13:46, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] oops

Sorry about that IP business, you can ask a user such as Jayjg or someone else that has oversight capabilities to remove the edit if you want. La revedere. —Khoikhoi 22:29, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Answer

Perhaps I should create template "Hungarian speaking states" and list Transylvania in it? Yet, there are much more Hungarians in Transylvania than Romanians in Vojvodina. What you think about that? PANONIAN (talk) 23:48, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

"But Hungarian is not official in Romania at any level"

O, yes it is, it is quite official, see: Hungarian Autonomous Province. Quote: "The Romanian law enables the usage of the language of an ethnic minority which forms at least 20% of the population of a municipality in relation with the administration, and the state provides education and public signage in the language of the respective ethnic minority." You see that Hungarian is official in Transylvania on local level and you also can see that infoboxes of the cities of Transylvania with more than 20% Hungarians have also Hungarian names in it: Târgu-Mureş, Oradea, etc. So, I ask you again: should we create the template I proposed. There are two more problems: 1. Vojvodina have 6 official languages and you cannot post such template ONLY for Romanian language. It is nothing but POV pushing. If you create templates for ALL SIX languages of Vojvodina then we could at least start a seriuos discussion about this. 2. Romanian is not official in Moldova, so template is totally wrong. PANONIAN (talk) 12:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Danutz:

  • 1. You did not answered my argument about EQUALITY of official languages of Vojvodina. A simple question: why you insist that Romanian is MORE EQUAL than other? If you continue your POV pushing, you will force me to create same templates for other 5 official languages (Serbian speaking states, Hungarian speaking states, Slovak speaking states, etc).
  • 2. If I create these new templates, the Hungarian speaking states template will definitelly contain Transylvania. It is really not important whether Hungarian is official in Transylvania or not. There is no rule that such templates should contain only territories where language is official. They could contain territories where language is spoken too. See this as an example: Celtic nations. You see that Brittany and Cornwall and listed as Celtic nations, no matter that Celtic languages ARE NOT OFFICIAL there. If Brittany and Cornwall are listed as Celtic nations, then by all mean we could list Transylvania as Hungarian nation. There is no single difference here. PANONIAN (talk) 12:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I totaly agree that such templates should be created, but you should list Romania not Transilvanya as Transylvania only exists as a historical region. And you should say states with significant Hungarian minorities (because "Hungarian-speaking is missleading as you said"). Maybe the problem actualy was that the template said Romanian-speakins states, it should say states (teritories) that have Romanian as an official language. I think that should sound better. --Danutz

Well, then, since there is nothing implying that "territory" as a concept in your template relies on international recognition, then please clarify by turning it into "internationally-recognized territories" (as you have been kind enough to add such specifications to the template before). Of course, some specification is needed for "organizations" as well, but I'm sure you will add that as well in due time. Dahn 13:30, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, states are. Territories are not. And, if there is a single organization involved, the "organizations" part is a misnomer... The template serves no purpose. The template is vague. The template relies on what you had in mind when you created it. The template is minuscule. Frankly, the only way in which it may stand for something is if you rename it to "A template that includes Romania, Moldova, Vojvodina, and the Latin League" - of course, this just before it gets deleted. Dahn 13:41, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Actually a template that lists places where Romanian is official. --Danutz
No. Because it is not official in Moldova. Dahn 13:55, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Nu prea, prietene. Pentru că interpretarea unei legi nu este legea însăşi. Pe de altă parte, mi se pare elocvent că o persoană care adresează injurii "din glumă" a putut ajunge administrator pe wikipedia română. La revedere. Dahn 14:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Nu prietene, nimeni nu e prieten cu tine. Esti o minoritate ratata si izolata. Esti izolat. La revedere pentru tine. De altfel orice anti-roman va avea aceeasi soarta. Era cazul sa avem admini romani nu anti-romani ca tine. Sau numai cei ca tine pot fi buni? du-te si pupa-l in cur pe Coicoiul tau sau pe mikkalaievici. Tradator de neam si de tara, esti un ratat! --168.167.253.97 14:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Totuşi fără atacuri de genul acesta, sunt destul de urâte (minoritate ratata si izolata). Lăsând gluma şi injuriile la o parte toţi încercăm să facem din conţinutul Wikipediei unul mai bun şi ar trebui să existe un minim de respect între noi. Şi cam depăşim limita cu calificative din acestea. --Danutz
It's good that you lecture me on common efforts and collaboration after you have speculated about how I am "anti-Romanian" because somebody must have beaten me during childhood. It is a valuable lesson I am learning about the "the minimal respect" from you, after you have implied that I am "decayed", and that, by way of consequence, you "allow yourself these jokes with me". Did I allow them, or does this not fall within the scope of "minimal respect"? Yes, we are indeed crossing a line just now, after you, an administrator on ro:wiki, have allowed a cascade of personal attacks aimed at me and voiced on your talk page over there: Bonaparte crosses the line now that he tells me to kiss user:Khoikhoi's or user:Mikkalai's ass, but he sure did not cross it when he called me "stupid", "illiterate", "failure", "mutt", "coward", and "two-timer" on that very page.
I do not contribute to wikipedia in order to generate scandals, and I gather no pleasure from getting myself involved in disputes such as this one. I have been active in removing the Moldovenist POV on the Moldova page, as well as on the Moldovans one. You have heard a version of what I do here as rendered by a person who has dragged my name through mud on several pages; you have chosen to believe it, without checking the facts: that, I cannot ever respect. You back a template which is, IMO, both useless and POV; when I have argued my opinion, you have joined others in calling me "anti-Romanian", without having presented any semblance of proof for what is otherwise a very serious accusation (albeit one which has been thrown around so many times by now that it must carry no more meaning). Instead of asking other Romanian users why they erase your template from articles where you post it, you could ask them about my contributions and the compromise that was reached on several pages involved in this dispute.
Thank you for your time. That is indeed all. Dahn 15:03, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Logo_Latin_Union.gif)

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

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. MECU≈talk 02:09, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/a/n/User_talk%7EDanutz_6db4.html"