User talk:Aquarelle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Testing, one, two, three

fr-3 Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau avancé de français.
en-3 This user is able to contribute with an advanced level of English.
de-2 Dieser Benutzer hat fortgeschrittene Deutschkenntnisse.
This user supports the United Nations.
This user supports the European Union.
MS This user does not use Microsoft products.
Mac This user is contributing using a Macintosh computer.
Search user languages



[edit] Greetings from Paris

(looking up at "Psycho" comment) Hi, welcome to Wiki. Saw your Paris edits - thanks! Just think: if 12,800,000,000,000 peaple did do the Eiffel tower each year... wow, imagine the taxes. Chiraq could buy the US : )

Take care, happy editing,

THEPROMENADER 23:26, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help needed

Aquarelle, I must warn you against user ThePromenader, who has already messaged you I see. He messages every person editing the Paris article to try to win them to his side. Unfortunately, this user is motivated by POV, and has been trying to impose his POV on the Paris article over the last 4 months, a bit like user SignumPolis at the France article, whom you already know about I think. In a nutshell, ThePromenader is opposed to any mention of a metropolitan area of Paris. He insists French people do not know the concept of metropolitan area, he insists Paris is just the city within the Périphérique, period, anything else is just Ile de France, which he insists is very different from Paris. He tries to portray Paris as a small city of 2.1 million inhabitants, and he reverts any user who mentions that the metropolitan area of Paris is in fact one of the largest in the world with 11.6 million inhabitants.

I have been trying to reason him, I tried to explain to him that the concept of metropolitan area is as familiar to French people as it is to American people (région parisienne, région lyonnaise, etc.), but this guy doesn't listen to anything but to his own opinion. If you would like to reply to this guy on the Paris talk page, please do so. I have seen on the France talk page that you are knowledgeable about French things. However, ThePromenader is even more opinionated than SignumPolis, I must warn you, so it takes lots of time and efforts to answer all his numerous edits, and follow up every day on his incessant changes to the Paris article. I would appreciate if you could intervene as I am going nowhere with this guy. Thanks. Hardouin 00:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LordRevan

Just removing some of LordRevan's unsigned graffiti. --Aquarelle 13:02, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Yeah, didnt think I'd get any reasoning out of a moron like him. Always lovely to come across another one of God's warriors who hasnt got two brain cells to rub together! Ah well. Est-ce que vous etes francais?  :) Rusty2005

Hmmm. Lay off the personal attacks (WP:NPA). And I am not stupid, I have Fetal alcohol effects, which if you read it, you will better understand my impulsiveness. LordRevan 01:29, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Blllallaalahahahahha <---- That's me throwing up after reading LordRevan's statement and some of his other statements. BLlaand....Just threw up a little bit in my mouth. Alors, quel imbécile. MJCdetroit 14:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

LOL, I like this guy, don't you Aquarelle. Im back. LordRevan 01:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Guadeloupe

Bonjour Aquarelle,

Regarding your correction to my edit of the article. First, I can see your point for an article about a french territory having the metric units first. However, here is the reason it was edited 687 square miles (1,780 km²):

  • the Manual of Style section on measurements (WP:MOSNUM) states that the measurement in text should be spelled out and the converted value should be abbreviated, i.e. 62 miles (100 km) or vise versa. The reason that I prefer the English unit first and spelled out is because most of SI/metric units have universal abbreviations and the English units can vary slightly in abbreviations depending on where in the English speaking world you are. That's the why, but metric first is fine as long as it is spelled out.

Secondly, the figure for the total area that I changed was correct. The 1,702 sq km comes from the french land registry whichs does not include any water—land only. The term total area refers to land and water. In this case 1,780 square kilometres (687 sq. mi). See that you are fairly new to wikipedia, so check out the MOS and have fun editing. Bonne chance. MJCdetroit 14:08, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism charge

As you mentioned, I have replied on my talk page. Is this the correct ettiquette ? Let's talk there :-) --jrleighton 13:34, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I shall also consider responding in a balanced way to your additional accusations of me adding POV issues to other articles - but in a week or two after a cool off. Let's cool off first. I am reasonable, and not a vandal. Thank you for your understanding. --jrleighton 14:03, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

You have also made several personal attacks on me on the EU article talk page - asserting that I am "against the EU", amongst other things. I do not understand what warrants this vitrole. Have I offended you ? Perhaps we have differences of opinion on what constitutes NPOV and over adding content to Wikipedia; but as rational people, I am sure that those could be addressed. Please do - however - either explain to me in a rational way what it is that has led you to make several attacks on me. I do not understand. Forgive me, but I am making an assumption about you (based on your Wikipedia contributions) that you are French. Perhaps I can demonstrate to you my non-anti-French credentials: see Talk:Bastille Day (several of my contributions are unsigned before I figured out how to sign but you can see from the page history - IT figuring out takes longer for those of us not brought up with IT during our childhoods).

I do not like personal attacks and unfounded allegations. If I have offended you in some fashion, then apologies are offered in advance, but in return I ask for your explanations of your outbursts. Thank you, once again, for your understanding. --jrleighton 14:46, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I have replied on my user talk page to your latest comment. However, I wish to add a not here, on your page. That is to respectfully suggest that you remove the "joke" about your beliefs in the westwards expansion of the EU - that is, if you don't believe it. OK ?  :-) --jrleighton 01:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Ok, let me explain this one to you (and to whomever else might be wondering). First, it's called the European Union, implying that the Union is geographically European. However, I am in favour of increased Canadian trade with Europe in order to put a bit of space between their economy and that of the United States (doesn't hurt to be well rounded, especially for the francophone province of Québec). In any case, for the EU to accept Canada or Québec, it would probably have to go through massive negotiations, change it's name, blah blah blah. It's such a long story that I find the tag to be humorous, and so far, you have been the only one to be so nonplussed by it. Just let it go, it's my user page, it's my humour, and to the best of my knowledge, it's not offensive. –Aquarelle 06:43, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Paris Massacre of 1961

Hello, I removed your changes, and explained it on the article's talk page. -- 790 12:52, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] greetings

I'm new here so I thought I'd introduce myself to some of the people here--ChaplineRVine(talk ¦ ✉) 06:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Just me

I know you probably have been warned about trying to socialize with me on wiki, but I was just wondering what you, Rusty, and I share in common. The only thing I can think of is our commitment to our beliefs. And I live in Central Washington, in a stupid town called Ephrata. LordRevan 23:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] France 24

Can you help me out in trying to shut that universegenious guy up? I'll look after the page. Arbiteroftruth 07:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I've been trying all morning. He just keeps reverting edits. I think he works for CNN or something, because he insists that we list them before anything else. He also keeps deleting random parts of the article and calling his edit a « rewrite ». I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds him obnoxious. Actually, he reported me to the moderators about an hour ago for "Intervention against Vandals." --Aquarelle 07:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I saw from the talk dialogue. We might need to get an admin to just ban him for a few hours so he can learn some wikisense. I will try to revert his edits, but I am getting mighty close to the 3RR. Arbiteroftruth 07:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Me too, I don't want to get banned for making too many edits. He's obviously very new to wikipedia and thinks he can do whatever he wishes. I wonder what his motivation for these changes is, and why he doesn't like the trivia section. --Aquarelle 07:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

You know, if he insists on having CNN first, we can whip out the "alphabetical order" argument, which can shot him down permanently. He is new to this page, I believe. His contribs are very little. Arbiteroftruth 08:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

He just reverted another one of my edits...It's hard to remain calm when this guy is so blatently not helping wikipedia. --Aquarelle 08:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Find an admin. Also, find someone else to revert those goddamned edits. We are gonna get banned for 3RR in 5 seconds if this keeps up. Arbiteroftruth 08:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[[1]] Did you see this? God when will this stop? Arbiteroftruth 08:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

This user has exact the same edits as the other. This is an editwar , its not vandalism. If someone gets banned for that , all here could get banned. Plus you put wrong informations to the article, remove web links etc.--Universalgenius 08:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Can you just be quiet, you insufferable fool? Wikipedia has its limits, and engaging in unsubstantiated accusations is outside of all bounds. Wikipedia could do without you, universalgenius, so if you don't agree with what we are doing, get out. Arbiteroftruth 08:15, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:No personal attacks. --Universalgenius 08:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

No, Universalgenius, you clearly accused us of vandalism. You posted several vandalism warnings on my Talk Page, and you reported me to the moderators for intervention against vandalism. I didn't put any incorrect information on the article, and even if I did, it was a good-faith edit and there is nothing wrong with that. --Aquarelle 08:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Do not whip out the rulebooks on us, universalgenius, when you obviously haven't been following it. We are here to say that we have had enough, and we are very tired of seeing our good-faithed edits being maliciously targetted and wiped out by you. Please, if you don't like it, leave. Arbiteroftruth 08:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

You both should read: Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Same sentence is valid for me : "I didn't put any incorrect information on the article, and even if I did, it was a good-faith edit and there is nothing wrong with that." This is an edit-war. --Universalgenius 08:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Good faithed? My lord, malicious edits are good-faithed now? Arbiteroftruth 08:25, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

So then why did you delete half of the discussion page ? Was that also a good-faith edit ? And why do you mislable your edits ? I have repeatedly corrected your edits, and you revert my changes. That is not good-faith. I point out to you where you are erring and you ignore it. You don't even respond to my concerns. If you would just cite your sources, this would all be a lot easier. Lastly, CNN does not have a god-given right to come before BBC, and the pronounciation of the name of the channel is not a long-term goal of the French government. --Aquarelle 08:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

And for a quick refresh in elementary school grammar, "B" comes before "C" Arbiteroftruth 08:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

He removed my complaint against him again...(2nd time). --Aquarelle 08:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:No personal attacks, I hate CNN, however it has a larger distribution on tv. You deleted another user report. --Universalgenius 08:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I have made no personal attacks. Pleast stop accusing me of such. The next time you make an accusation, show proof. --Aquarelle 08:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Newsflash, Universalgenius, thousands edit Wikipedia, and if you don't want your edits changed mercilessly, get out. We don't save edits because you made them. Arbiteroftruth 08:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Confusing edit

Hello. On Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, did you intend to remove the listing I had added, or were you intending to remove the listing that had your signature attached? I think you might have mistakenly removed the wrong listing. SWAdair 08:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Please re-add the listing there, and make sure that NO LISTINGS are deleted. Thanks! Arbiteroftruth 08:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm terribly sorry ! I didn't notice you had added another, and I certainly did not intend to remove it. Please excuse my mistake. --Aquarelle 08:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Universalgenius

Thank you for your comment; it would appear that the editor in question has been banned. I did, however, try to be civil with them, for whatever that's worth. Hopefully, they will have learned from the experience. →DancingPenguin 12:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hey

Now that he is banned, if you want to give me your IM on my talkpage, you can certainly do so! Arbiteroftruth 14:34, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks like that sh**hole is attacking our page once again, I hope his IP gets banned. I really don't care now if half the US gets banned from Wikipedia because of him. Arbiteroftruth 22:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] France 24 and more

There is no doubt that any divergence in opinion does not imply personal hard feelings and does not diminish the pleasure of collaboration. My interest with satellite English language channels comes from my interest on language policy. Well, I myself am an example of someone in Greece who chose learning French as a foreign language (though as a second foreign language). But even in Greece times are changing. See Languages_of_the_European_Union#Language_skills_of_European_citizens. It is true that I read more the anglophone resources, but not only: I checked also AFP article on France 24 at French Yahoo. Anyway, something from the Associated Press: "About €86 million (US$110.5 million) in funding will come from the French government in 2007, the first full year of operation. France 24 hopes another €3 million ($3.9 million) will come from ads. (...) Though it is publicly funded, the channel is privately held by TF1 and France Televisions and is for-profit, though it not expected to make money in the short term." [2] This seems closer to your opinion on the subject.--Michkalas 00:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Indeed France 2 has a very comprehensive dossier. For the references, you found the way on your one. :) I will also try to find some more sources for the article searching with Google News -but tomorrow. --Michkalas 00:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I listed some articles at Talk:France 24. I can't really decide what will be most appropriate to add to the article itself. Take the initiative to add what you prefer the most. --Michkalas 13:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anglicisation

Hello - I'm contacting you because of your involvement with many French articles. A few have undertaken the task of "Anglicising" French terms in Wiki articles (eg/: "Région => Region"; "Département => Departement") - there doesn't seem to have been any discussion about this, so your point of view would be welcome. I think a good place for this discussion would be the WP:FR page. Thank you. THEPROMENADER 14:27, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Anglicisation of French administrative terms

I have initiated a Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Anglicisation of French administrative terms. Please leave your comments. -- NYArtsnWords 22:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 20 minutes

Why did you remove the redirect at 20 minutes to 20 Minuten. I reckon it's the same newspaper. --Ysangkok 09:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

It isn't the same newspaper. I guess it all started as "20 minuten", a German-language publication in Switzerland. Now there is a French version for Switzerland and France, and a Spanish version for Spain. I'm still doing research on it, but we need to develope articles for the French and Spanish versions, and possible another article containing all 3. --Aquarelle 11:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Renaming of French Open (tennis)

It's totally possible that Roland Garros (tennis) is the correct title for this article. But a move like that needs to be discussed first. I've temporarily reverted your move pending discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tennis#French_Open_page_moved.... Please join that thread, it would be good to get your take. --dantheox 18:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] France Monde

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article France Monde, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of France Monde. Vassyana (talk) 21:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello Vassyana. I agree that the France Monde article leaves room for much improvement, but the 2 sources cited from Le Monde seem to vindicate this article's existence. France Monde is of interest because, as mentioned in the article, it is likely to become a large regroupment of French exterior media (€400 projected annual revenue). There is nothing mentioned in the article that is not easily verifiable under the two sources cited. What else do you suggest ? --Aquarelle (talk) 23:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
It's a company that doesn't exist yet, it's just a proposal. Unless the proposal itself has received wide attention, it's not appropriate for a Wikipedia article. Please see WP:NOT. I hope that better explains my reasoning. Vassyana (talk) 23:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

From WP:NOT

Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation. All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred. It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, provided that discussion is properly referenced. It is not appropriate for an editor to insert their own opinions or analysis. Forward-looking articles about unreleased products (e.g., movies, games, etc.) require special care to make sure that they are not advertising. In particular: Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place.

The references given serve to verify the France Monde proposition. For any further questions about the projects viability, please read the articles cited. In doing so, you will see that the audio-visual reform shall be started within the next month. I believe this article does not fall under the "crystal ball" category. Moreover, this article is important because it affects hundreds of millions of people (literally) across 6 continents, especially Africa and Europe. The importance of AFP and RFI are indisputable. This reform directly affects them, especially the latter. --Aquarelle (talk) 23:21, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
It's a matter of disagreement over the interpretation of policy. I believe that "sufficient wide interest" is an indication of coverage, not an indication of public interest. However, I'll defer to your opinion in this matter. Vassyana (talk) 23:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)