User talk:Parmaestro
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] RfC work on EU/US Economy Size
I did some more work on the draft-RfC for the topic. I listed other articles where it applies. Please review the summary section and contribute your viewpoint. Do you think this will be ready for posting to RfC within a day or so? Feco 05:36, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I doubt it. I've done some more work as well and have written a draft that I prefer. I think that it may be totally unnecessary to submit an RfC and I would suggest perhaps leaving the articles as they are. Our viewpoints are probably not as different as they might appear. Parmaestro 06:30, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- If I read your message above correctly, you're done with your version for now. I'm going to merge those into a consensus version to see if you approve. I'll make some section label changes so we can easily see what's going on, but I will not delete any text from the page. I think an RfC is necessary, because the current presentation in the different articles is confusing (at least to me). An RfC will allow consensus to be built on how GDP info should be presented. Feco
- If I'm incorrect in assuming that you're done with edits to the text for now, post a message on my talk page and I'll stop immediately.Feco
- I had already begun work on a consolidated version of our two edits... it's here User:Feco/Temp/GDP if you'd like to take a look. I had intended to post it in the usual place (talk page), but moved it when you messaged w/"still working". Once you're done, I'll integrate your changes back into that. I do think an RfC is necessary. Feco
-
- Sorry about my 22 minute delay in posting a message to your talk page. I remain unconvinced about the necessity for an RfC. The integrated text is more neutral than our previous versions and I agree with some of your edits including specifically the dropping of "ever."
Where do you stand on the "Consolidated1" edit? Do you foresee being willing to post on RfC in the next few days? Feco 22:14, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC) (reposting to bring to your attention)
- I'm going to post everything to RfC in approx 24 hours. I'm assuming you're ok with your half of the RfC text since I haven't heard from you. Feco 05:09, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
-
- Sorry for the delay. I was busy reading the sixth Annual report of "The City’s Importance to
the EU Economy 2004;" It's a report to asses the impact of the city of London on the economy of the EU and on the EU's GDP. Apparently, the economists at the centre for economics and business research ltd have been operating under the illussion for six years that there's an EU economy and that it makes some sense to talk about an EU gdp. Parmaestro 05:54, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
-
- I'll try to wrap up my edits within 24 hours since you still want to proceed. Since our two positions have converged somewhat since we first started the discussion, I was hoping that we could work out a compromise. Parmaestro 05:54, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- check out the latest version of the article... apologies for the delay... it fell to the bottom of my list unintentionally. Feco 08:36, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
-
- just checking in... are you ready to post to RfC? Feco
[edit] Switzerland and EU
Thank you for your precisations: I checked and I was wrong. But I think we should clarify a little bit the position of Switzerland regarding the application to EU. As cleary explained here, Swizerland did applied th 26th may 1992, but because of the rejection of 6th december's (again 1992) referendum on a similar topic (the Economic European Space), the government has completely freezed any application, and in the current legislature (2003-2007) there is no plan to propose that to a very skeptic population. In fact politicians are talking about something in the distant future: 15 maybe 20 years. The article is formally correct but a little bit misleading right now. What do you think? Nova77 16:20, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] European GPDs
But the source at the bottom said "World Bank". I went to the given link, and the values given were for 2003. So the source given was wrong. —Cantus…☎ 22:52, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
The article's title only says "GDP", and this is generally assumed to be nominal GDP. Regardless of this, we could include two tables, one nominal, and another PPP, in this same article. —Cantus…☎ 23:31, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
Doing that for Continent articles is not a problem for me. However I don't think it's appropiate for the main articles. I like the separation. But this is not a final opinion. —Cantus…☎ 00:44, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] EU-Stub
Hi there,
Just to let you know, I created the EU-stub and it was created to be specifically about European Union operations such as EU procedures or programmes run by the EU like the Erasmus programme. Pretty much all the articles in the category are about operations and I will be recategorising articles that aren't. If the article is about buildings / stuctures or geography these articles have their own stubs. Please use Template:euro-struct-stub for European buildings / stuctures or the appropriate country geo stub or Template:euro-geo-stub for geographical articles. Hope this info helps! -- Lochaber 10:22, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] EU portal
I'm keen on helping out on the portal wherever I can :) -- Joolz 15:41, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Templates
Regarding the (Flag - Country) templates you created, is there a list somewhere of which countries have which template code? I'd like to include the templates in the UN member list, for instance, but don't want to have to try all of them until I find the correct ones... Thanks! Nightstallion 08:40, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
You should be able to find the flag templates by using IS0 3166-1 alpha-3 codes or the IOC country codes. Parmaestro 13:56, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Revert of case for UK euroscepticism
Whilst I strongly disagree with what the eurosceptic contributor had to say in Euro, I do think you ought to have managed his contribution into some kind of context, rather than simply delete it. That is the lazy way out and implies that there is no reasoned response to his view. --Red King 23:47, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
- I agree, it was a bit of a mess. If the contributor were registered, you could write to say that it needs more care. And to answer your other question, no, I couldn't have made it sensible either! if I'm honest, I'd applaud your action in any other topic...
[edit] WikiProject European Union
Hey, I thought you might be interested in the WikiProject European Union which I've just created, Cheers - Joolz 23:05, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] What ??
Hi, I received this message on my talk page : Thanks for restoring the paris link. Parmaestro 11:44, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC) I just don't know what you're talking about. Revas 13:34, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism in Template:Europe and other pages
Hi Parmaeastro,
When reverting vandalism in Template:Europe you asked "why does this keep getting edited" ([1]). I think, if you are not aware you may be interested in reading Regular disclaimer on vandal Rovoam. You may also find it interesting to look at my contribution log to visually see the range of his vandalism. Because of this vandal, my whole activity in Wikipedia was reduced to simply putting "regular disclaimers". He's literally terrorizing me and in my representation Wikipedia. You'll be facing his vandalisms quite often for quite some time.--Tabib 05:43, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Norway Templates
Why are you readding the tempaltes ot the NATO page? After much debate Wikipedia:Wikiproject countries has decided that international organization templates, like Template:NATO, do not belong on country pages. Norway is one of the last country pages to still have these templates. - SimonP 17:13, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Template:ISO
You expressed interest in an ISO flag template: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Flag_Template#ISO_template (SEWilco 06:19, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC))
[edit] "Vandalism"
Please don't call so many edits "vandalism". It's quite offensive for a person to be called a vandal when they have made good faith edits. violet/riga (t) 5 July 2005 21:15 (UTC)
Maybe there is a misunderstanding here. I only used the term vandal once. I was not referring to your edits. I was referring to a person who has repeatedly blanked out an entire article. I'm pretty sure that this would qualify as vandalism. Parmaestro 6 July 2005 08:28 (UTC)
[edit] EU project
Hi there! I am new to wikipedia and would like to contribute to the E.U. section. I've already contributed an article on the Open Method of Coordination. Comments would be welcome (no one has bother so far - don't know if that is a good sign or not). Also, the article does not appear if I tye open method in the search box - is that normal? Generally I could contribute something on EU research policy and information technology. Hope to hear from you, --Daniel Spichtinger 6 July 2005 15:22 (UTC)
[edit] Preferred form for title of Directives articles
I have opened a Request for Comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject European Union on consistent titling - your comments would be welcome. --Red King 08:57, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] 2012 Summer Olympics bids
Why have you been removing info about other bids that weren't submitted to the IOC? Please don't do this. Thanks.--Pharos 6 July 2005 15:25 (UTC)
[edit] New European Union collaboration
Hi Parmaestro, this is just a note telling you that I have created the European Union collaboration (the first collaboration is Eurobarometer). I'm looking forward to your contributions! Talrias (t | e | c) 12:11, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
