User talk:Lear 21/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 WikiProject Berlin 2 WP Munich 3 test 4 Hello 5 eu page 6 Creation of templates 7 education/demographics 8 European Union 9 Largest city template 10 I will stop 11 Changes to EU Article 12 EU page 13 Talk:European Union 14 EU 15 WP:3RR 16 Possible impersonation of Lear 21 17 More impersonation of Lear 21 18 EU languages 19 EU Article - WP:3RR 20 User talk:Countersubject - WP:CIVIL

[edit] WikiProject Berlin

Would you be interested in starting WikiProject Berlin? I know you've done a lot of edits in the Berlin articles and I thought you might be a prime candidate to lead a WikiProject for Berlin. You can get back to me asap about this. Kingjeff 03:20, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Probably the Germany project talk page is the best place to discuss an implementation of this proposal. There are definitely enough Wikipedians interested or living in Berlin around (including at least five admins) that such a project can get off the ground. Kusma (討論) 12:24, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, to both of you! I certainly think the Berlin-Issue has the potential for a standalone Wikiproject. But! Right now, I´m not that convinced of enough contributers to make it a fully rolling one. So, some combined forces of Germany project/portal seem more realistic to me. I´m very split about this decision. Personally, I´m rather aiming to reduce my input and concentrate more on maintenance in the future. all the best Lear 21 23:08, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP Munich

Kingjeff 16:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Kingjeff, thanks for invitation. For now it seems unlikely that I join soon, even for the Berlin article I will have less time in the future. all the best Lear 21 23:19, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] test

this is ....Lear 21 11:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

I was curious about why you remove {{European Capital of Culture}} from all sorts of places like you did in Thessaloniki. Is there a previous discussion re that template somewhere? NikoSilver 15:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I´m not sure I really understand what you mean. I introduced/ added a new template to the cities in a standard template format. all the best Lear 21 15:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Duh, nice work on your part and sorry. Why did I read it backwards (like Arabic?) I don't know.

Trying to compensate you for my error; it reminds me of a major marketing blooper when in order to advertize a pain-killer in an Arabic country, they copied a series of three pics; one sad, one taking the pill, and one happy. The audience perceived it backwards of course... :-) NikoSilver 15:57, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] eu page

Wie geht's? Es scheint, dass du fast alles in den letzen Tagen geschrieben hast, also schreibe ich dir - ich merke aber, dass die Struktur noch ein bisschen verwechselt ist. Kann ich vorschlagen, vielleicht koennte es wie die Indien oder Nepal Seiten sein? z.B. Religion sollte lieber unter Kultur diskutiert werden; und Militaer vielleicht passt besser mit Aussenpolitik zusammen? :) (Ick war ein Berliner) Wikidea 06:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

ich bemerkte gerade auch, dass die intergov. stoff wahrscheinlich von diesem "philosoph" (Thomas Ash) geschrieben war - die einzige Fussnote ist von seinem website! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wikidea (talk • contribs) 06:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

Hi, der Artikel ist immer noch in der Entwicklung. Deine Anregungen hatte ich auch schon im Sinn ( military/international relations). Die bisherigen Vorbilder waren UK,Canada,USA -Artikel. Allerdings denke ich, muss man die einzigartige Struktur der EU berücksichtigen und zeigen. Ein 100% country-like Artikel ist vielleicht nicht ganz möglich ... lets see ( Ick war ein Humboldtianer) all the best Lear 21 06:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Creation of templates

See Help:Template for info on creating templates. I haven't created one myself, so I can't help you past that. I hope you find what you need. --Sopoforic 22:09, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] education/demographics

In the US article, education is placed under demographics Ssolbergj 19:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] European Union

Hi,

I've noticed the new design for the en: European Union article too. The current article at the Chinese Wikipedia is a disgrace. I was planning to work on it whenever I can find free time, though this is turning out to be as abortive as many of my other Wikipedia-related resolutions. -__-

Thanks for your reminder, by the way. =)

-- ran (talk) 20:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Largest city template

The population numbers are official and trustworthy, but the density numbers are more questionable. (24,672 per km2 in paris and 1,985 per km2 in rome?)

An own template-list of cities in the infobox would be totally non-standard, and as I see it unnecessary as we allready have the topic in the article, which is common practice. Just delete the density-numbers if they are (as you said) results of edit wars, and you dont trust them at all. all the bestSsolbergj 16:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I will stop

but you're mistaken that I'm vandalising anything. You're the only one in the whole wp who adds this mad img to title bars. You're vandalising templates, not me. --132.73.80.97 15:33, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Changes to EU Article

Please don't revert changes that you haven't been willing to discuss (as you put it yourself, you'd rather edit than discuss). Countersubject 01:24, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I have explained my reasoning, at considerable length, both in terms of general principals and specific items. Unfortunately you've responded with points that, while interesting, don't address the those I and others raised. They also seem to be long on sentiment, and short on the specifics of particular graphics. You've then gone on to say - quite damningly - that you'd rather edit than discuss. You've also made comments to another user that look to be menacing (I hope this is just a problem of translation).

You clearly have a great interest in the subject matter of the article, and a belief in the potential of graphics for improving an article. So do I. Let's both take a deep breath and harness that interest and belief in a rational, focussed, NPOV discussion. Regards, Countersubject 15:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EU page

Which change did you object to? Did you need to change the whole lot back!! Wikidea 03:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:European Union

The page has disappeared (loads no content).Paul111 19:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Page deleted / no discussion / EU discussion page emerging super-discussion / why deletionist? Countersubject 22:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I´m not sure what is meant. I archived finished discussions in Archive 9. Lear 21 23:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EU

Please stop!!! LUCPOL 01:06, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3RR

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing. Gdo01 00:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually I only have two reverts[1][2]. You are on three[3][4][5]. I could warn you for using the wrong template to falsely accuse me. Gdo01 00:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible impersonation of Lear 21

Hi, someone claiming to be you left this message on my user page:

Create serious arguments! Make useful contributions! Stop babbling! Stop deleting content! This is the last personal suggestion of Lear 21 00:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

It's so extraordinary that I'm sure it's a joke, and can't possibly be from a responsible Wikipedian like yourself. Countersubject 01:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More impersonation of Lear 21

Dear Lear 21, whoever recently impersonated you has done so again. They've left an hysterical note on my discussion page, and claimed that it's from you:

You are an attention seeker, right? Stop it! Stop your constant provocation, you read that! Stick to the issues that are discussed in the EU article, instead of whining. This has an end now! You describe yourself as Eurosceptic, Europhob. Why do you FEEL competent about EU then? To be more precise; Why do you THINK you have the ability to judge? Have you lived in several countries? Are you an academic in one of the relevant topics? Have you read many city or country articles in different languages. Do you know the UN article? The current contributions of yours all indicate, NO! Instead, your edits signalise agitational underclass views. This has an end now! Please consider to contribute to Eurosceptic article, as you are an expert in this field. Or create Europhobia article, must be fun ! If you are unsure about the quality I´m aiming for the EU aricle, read the Berlin article. This has almost reached Featured Article Status, after 6 month work. Almost all references in Berlin are provided by myself, also the complete layout,images and written content in all sections. Was that clear ? Lear 21 21:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't for one second believe it can really be from you; you wouldn't stalk and harrass me in this intimidating way, just because you disagree with my edits.

By the way: did you ever find out who wrote that threatening note to Paul111 in your name, on the EU discussion page? It might be the same person.

Do you think it would help if I posted the above to the EU discussion page? One of our fellow editors may be able to help us identify the imposter.

Regards,

Countersubject 22:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EU languages

True, it has become a bit lengthy, disproportional with the length of the rest of the article. In fact, I do not know the intended length of the whole article. OK, I 'll do my best to summarise it a bit. The info on EU citizens language skills I used in the article are according to the Eurobarometer I mention there. The problem is that there is an inconsistency with the Languages in the European Union article, because someone had the brilliant idea to make his own -arbitrary- calculations to show Bulgaria and Romania as members of the EU though the survey was published before there accession. The result is a mess. Of course, he cared only for the tables. In the text there are the old numbers. The version with the original numbers is this. Please use this instead of the current version. The problem was that I took the subject to the talk page to avoid revert wars, but he was insisting at a time nobody else was paying attention to the article and his edits are still there. I believe it is better to have the latest authoritative data stating explicitly when they were published, than make "calculations" to "update" a survey on your own. I will mention this also in the talk page of the EU article.--Michkalas 14:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I am done with this section. See also the talk page of the article.

But I am leaving this message mostly to propose you something. You maybe know that there is already a WikiProject European Union. But it is frozen, inactive, though the -alleged- participants are many. The activation of this project is absolutely neccessary. Though there is a featured Portal:European Union and there are many informative articles, there are many problems in the EU-related articles. Gaps and inconsistencies are one. In fact, it is impossible to right a really good or FA level article without being supported with good quality special articles. The information and the sources are also, more or less, the same. Without a project, it is difficult to set priorities, to rate (correctly) articles, to make them consistent in structure and information. For instance, the article on José Manuel Durão Barroso is rated with an A! In fact, it is more something like B. Most of the articles on the EU Commissioners are in fact just a little better than stubs. So maybe we can take some initiative to reactive the WikiProject on EU.--Michkalas 16:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EU Article - WP:3RR

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing. Countersubject 18:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Countersubject - WP:CIVIL

Please help Wikipedia by not using personal attacks against editors as you did in your recent comments against Countersubject on his talk page. This is against the policy on civility. Thanks. MarkThomas 19:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)