User talk:Fdewaele

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello,
Welcome to my talk page.

Contents

[edit] Bill Nelson (politician)

Hi, a quick google (I didn't go past the first page) could not find anything to support your edit where you've inserted a passage that Bill Nelson is the most vulnerable Democratic senator. Would you please support this assertion with a link on the page? Thanks Flawiki 00:34, 2005 Jun 22 (UTC)

[edit] James Doohan

Please do not copy and paste content from news reports. AlistairMcMillan 17:30, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject Consulate and Empire

Hello Fdewaele,

first, let me introduce myself. My name is Frank Schulenburg, I come from Germany and have been contributing to the German Wikipedia since February 2005. My special field of interest is early modern history, especially economic and world history. You'll find more information on my german userpage.

I'm currently working on a project at the french wikipedia, which I've started a few days ago. You can find it at Wikipédia:Projet/Histoire du Consulat et de l'Empire. The main goal of this project is the collaboration between the different Wikipedias on the topic of the French Consulate and First French Empire (1799–1815).

I would like to invite you to contribute or just to take a look at it. If you want to take part in this project, please put your name in the list of participants.

Greetings from Goettingen to Ninove, --Frank Schulenburg 10:59, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Article removal

I had no way whatsoever of knowing that you were working on the article. It was in the main article space, it was a single sentence...criterion A1. Sorry about the inconvenience. Looks great now. - Lucky 6.9 18:37, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Warning taken.  :) Thanks for the chuckle. - Lucky 6.9 18:41, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hello Fred :) [ I'm assuming you are the person I think you are, given your name, your country, your qualifications - basically everything on your user page ;) ] --TheParanoidOne 21:30, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Small world, indeed. You made a comment on the talk page of a user who is on my watchlist. I was pretty confident that it was you, so I just thought I'd say Hi :) --TheParanoidOne 22:15, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

You mean Lucky 6.9? BTW does this mean I now am on your watch list as well? :D --fdewaele 23:20 24 November 2005 (CET)
Yes, and yes. ;) --TheParanoidOne 23:16, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion on José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero

Hello, you have posted the following recently in the talk page of Zapatero:

"You two guys are becoming EQUALLY ANNOYING. You two both made one fine mess out of this once great article. The blame goes to both sides. - fdewaele 25 November 2005, 15:30 CET"

I am interested in your honest opinion about when the article was great and why. (I promise I ask this out of curiosity not because I am going to use it with any purpose, sincerely) Zapatancas 09:36, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

The time before all the badgering between you and Squeak started. yes, it could be improved - which article couldn't? - but the discussion about what "English" to use was surreal and has now degraded to a vendetta between you two... fdewaele, 28 November 2005 11:55 CET

[edit] Edit summary

Hello. Please remember to always provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy editing. JoaoRicardotalk 14:39, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jan van Eyck

As his name indicates, van Eyck was probably originary from the medieval town of Eyck, i.e. Maaseik. So it is debatable whether he was "Flemish". Karl Stas 22:07, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

That certainly doesn't make him Dutch either. But in nowadays geographical and territorial descriptions, he would be a Fleming, as Fleming is used for all Dutch speaking inhabitants of Belgium. Couple this to the fact he spend most of his working time in the County of Flanders justifies calling him a Fleming. -- fdewaele 12:40 29 December 2005 (CET)

Not wholly unjustified, but still debatable. Current geographical designations are not very relevant for a painter who lived in the 15th century. "Netherlandish" seems a good compromise, also because art historians use the term "early Netherlandish painting" to describe the "Vlaamse Primitieven". - Karl Stas 18:40, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Brooke Burns

Please don't add copyvio content to this article, especially when I've just removed it. If you'd like to re-create this article with the information it used to have, please contact User:Andman8 as he told me that he intends to do precisely that and could probably use the help. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 02:28, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

completely rewording an article - as I did - is NOT a copyright violation. If you follow your logic, all newspapers, etc would be copyright violations because they cover the same content and facts. It's not because it partly has the same facts, that it's an infringement of copyright. I wonder what'd you do with history books (sarcasm) -- fdewaele.

[edit] VWN en WCN

Beste allemaal Al enige tijd is er een Nederlandstalig chapter in oprichting, te vinden op http://nl.wikimedia.org . Dit wordt de Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland (VWN). Je kunt je interesse om lid te worden van deze vereniging hier aangeven.

Deze vereniging gaat eind augustus/begin september een Wikimedia Conferentie in Nederland (WCN) houden, volgend op Wikimania in Boston, gedeeltelijk erop inspelend middels een aantal discussiegroepen. Om iets dergelijks te organiseren is imput erg gewenst. Dus als je wilt meehelpen, of als je interesse hebt om bij een dergelijk evenement aanwezig te zijn, geef dat dan aan op nl.wikimedia. Ik hoop daar snel je imput tegemoet te zien! Met vriendelijke groet, effeietsanders 13:46, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cool UserBox Template

Cool UserBox Template. One of your Userboxes have been deleted. I am pasting the Code back onto the page but yours is a little special--E-Bod 01:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

This user supports the use of green energy.

[edit] Yeah, Conrad Burns isn't Montgomery Burns...

He's much worse!--75.31.212.5 03:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] British Grand Fleet

Hello. I made some changes to the British Grand Fleet order of battle, but as I am not sure about them (only following logic there) and as you seem to have worked quite a bit on the article, could you please confirm ? Thanks, and best regards. Tovarich1917 01:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Elisabeth of Bavaria (1876-1965) - thanks!

Your explanation and the information you provided on my query are most useful. I'll rewrite the photo caption accordingly; hopefully we'll eventually identify the gentleman at her side in the archival photograph.

Meanwhile, I'm glad to have had the opportunity to learn of Queen Elisabeth. I'll be sure to mention her in my writing about Belgium under Nazi occupation, and at my first opportunity shall expand this article noting her intercession with Hitler (!) on behalf of Belgian Jewry. -- Thanks so much, Deborahjay 05:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Belgium

Hallo,

ik heb momenteel het initiatief genomen voor het nieuwe WikiProject Belgium, neem eens een kijkje en als je geïnteresseerd bent aarzel dan niet om je bij de deelnemers te zetten!

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 00:20, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Colorado gubernatorial election, 2006 -- vandalism?!

Regarding this edit, I'd appreciate it if you didn't refer to my edits as 'vandalism'. Massive, unexplained text removal by anonymous editors are usually either a mistake or a deliberate act of vandalism, and I reverted this one as such, albeit without digging any deeper into the actual contents. I clearly indicated my action in the edit summary, so your rude comment in your edit summary was uncalled for. If you disagree with my actions as an admin you are welcome to question them, but you will not gain much support here by referring to my actions as 'vandalism'. Owen× ☎ 18:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

adding such a large passage for a totally unknown write in candidate is either spamming or vandalism of the article. Plus it was added at a place in the article where adding it is very suspicious. I saw this large ad on to the article and suspected it to be as such, if I have offended you with this I'm sorry but you should have checked the content of what you added back... -- fdewaele, 1 November 2006, 23:00

[edit] The article on Quintus Tullius Cicero

Hello fdewaele! I have been working on the article on Q. Tullius Cicero. I am worried about the problem you mentioned on the discussion page 3.1.07: part of the article does not show. Would you kindly ask somebody to help us with this weird thing? I am just a novice in the "business", and would probably just get lost and confused going from one help page to another. By the way, thank you for rearranging the article to nice subcategories! It looks far better that way! Greetings from Finland!Tellervo 12:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Eylau or Battle of Preussich Eylau

Well yes this would be alright in my opinion, if english historiography use name Eylau (which is wrong). Try to see translation of the text on Deutsch Wikipedia (Schlacht bei Preußisch Eylau). It's not my personal idea I just want to help you a little bit becouse your text is translated in several languages (english is common language)and those translations don't have redirect: Battle of Preussisch Eylau (in italian for example). So... little mistake makes many huge mistakes on many wikipedias... Unfortunetly there is a second reason why your Article should be changed, try to see articles on english wiki 1. - Ilawa (Deutsch Eylau) and 2. - Bagrationowsk (Preussich Eylau). As I understand name Eylau is refering to both this towns? as well as your Battle of Eylau? If I were you (but I'm not) I would copy the article Battle of Eylau to Redirect Battle of Preussich Eylau and create redirect: Battle of Eylau. Belive me I have read a lot of books from many sources about this battles and one very big compendium 93 pages in polish called "Bitwa pod Pruską Iławą" (Bitwa pod Preussisch Eylau)writen by Tomasz Rogacki ISBN 83-11-09807-7, en: Battle of Preussich Eylau. It uses many Sources from all involved and not involved nations:

    • Bogdanovic M.J., Istoria carstvowanija Imperatora Aleksandra I i Rossiii w ego vremenji, S. Petersburg 1869.
    • Bourdeau E., Campagnes modernes, t. 2, Paris 1916.
    • Camon J., Napoleoński system prowadzenia wojny, Warszawa 1926.
    • Campagne des armes francaises en Prusie, en Saxe, en Polotne sous commendament de S.M. l’Empereur et roi 1806 – 1807.
    • Coignet J.R., Von Marengo bis Waterloo, Stuttgart 1910.
    • Correspodance de Napoleon I.
    • Dumas M., Precis des evenements militaries ou essays historiques sur les campagne de 1799 a 1815, Paris 1826.
    • Foucart P., Campagne de Pologne. Novembre – decembre 1806. Janvier 1807, t. 2, Paris 1882.
    • Geschichte des Krieges von Preussen und Russlands gegen Frankreich in den Jahren 1806 und 1807, Berlin 1835
    • Goltz C., Von Jena bis Pr. Eylau, Berlin 1907.
    • Grenier P., Etude sur 1807, Paris 1907.
    • Herbst S., Potrzeba Historii – Manewr Olsztyn – Jonkowo, Warszawa 1978.
    • Hildebrandt, Die Schlacht bei Pr. Eylau am 7 und 8 Februar 1807.
    • Hopfner E., Der Krieg von 1806 und 1807, t. 3, Berlin 1855.
    • Jany C., Geschichte der Koniglich – Preussischen Arme bis zum Jahre 1807, t. 3, Berlin 1927.
    • Jomini H., Zarys sztuki wojennej, Warszawa 1966.
    • Kircheisen F., Napoleon. Die Memoiren seinen Lebens.
    • Kukiel M., Wojny napoleońskie, Warszawa1927.
    • Lettow – Vorbeck P., Der Krieg von 1806 und 1807, t. 3, Berlin 1896.
    • Marbot J.B., Memoires du gen. Bon de Marbot. Genes – Austerlitz – Eylau, t. I, Paris 1891.
    • Michajłowski – Danilevski, Opisanije wtoroj wojny Impieratora Aleksandra I s Napoleonom w 1806 i 1807 godu, S. Petersburg 1846.
    • Napoleon et l’Empire Empire. 1 – 2, Paris 1969.
    • Napoleon, Meine ersten Siege, b.r.w.
    • Operations du III – eme Corps 1806/1807.
    • Pelet, Memorial du depot generale de la guerre, t. 8.
    • Savary J.A.M., Memoiren des Herzogs von Rovigo.
    • Schachtmayer F., Schlacht bei Preussisch Eylau und Gefecht bei Waltersdorf, Berlin 1857.
    • Schalchtfelder in Ostpreussen, b.r.w.
    • Thiers L.A., Historia Konsulatu i Cesarstwa, t. 4, Warszawa 1850.
    • Tiry J., Eylau – Friedland – Tillsit, Paris 1967.

I can only mention that I have created the article Battle of Pruska Iława in Polish and i have used from your article one information that marshal Ney said after battle "What a masacre! And for no outcome." You can use my images to make your article better, they are in public domain and I have exported them on Commons server (copy names of images on polish wiki and find them on commons). You should find more informations about this battle. It is one of very big importance. After this battle both armies were almost destroyed and soldiers faith in victory on both sides have disapired... This was the only reason why Napoleon was seeking on spring final victory to persuade Russia to peace table. After this Battle Napoleons soldiers were screaming Viva le Paix(Long live the Peace) instead of Viva l'Emperour(Long Live Imperor) as they usuall were doing. You must understand that every commander tried to find safe quaters for winter. In the time of Napoleonic Wars to lead an army in the middle of winter in -15 Degress was like Suicide that's why Benigsen has made huge strategical mistake trying to engage Napoleon in this time. If he would wait till spring when he was joined by reinforcments he would have some chances to win Battle of Friedland instead of this he has lost half of his men at Preussich Eylau. Yours Greatfully Azglahal 18:43, 3 February 2007 (UTC) CYA.

[edit] Sulla - Edit conflict

Hi you very sensibly suggested mediation on the Sulla article, which I requested a couple of days ago from an arbitrator. Vfp15 continues to edit despite your suggestions, any help or advice would be appreciated 207.172.223.214 15:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Sulla16 2-27-07

[edit] Mimoyecques

Thanks for tracking down those sources, this is a very interesting subject and needs expansion. Homefill 13:51, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Ninove church 2.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Ninove church 2.JPG. The copy called Image:Ninove church 2.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 18:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jalashwa/Jalashva?

Greetings! I noticed you change the link on USS Nashville (LPD-13), and realised there seems to be far more sources calling it INS Jalashwa (1920 G-hits) than INS Jalashva (741 G-hits). Sure, Google isn't the end-all for stats, but this seems odd. Where is the "official word" coming from regarding its proper name? -- Huntster T • @ • C 17:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Awarded for your reverts on the Steven Spielberg article in the battle against vandals who would destroy the wikipedia. LordHarris (talk) 21:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nobility of the First French Empire

I reverted one of the changes you made to the article Nobility of the First French Empire.

Louis-Alexandre Berthier is credited by the given source as being Prince de Neuchâtel as a sovereign title and I think also as victory title given to him for the battle of Wagram.However I can see that the source is not clear and could be causing confusion between us. But please see his sovereign title above and the last line of the paragraph on his victory prince title "Gules a on pale or three chevrons sable, and a chief of prince of the Empire (Neufchâtel)." Please drop me a line on my talk page if you still think my analysis is wrong and we can take it to the talk page of the article for a longer discussion. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 20:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I knew you had been using that source because of some of the other edits you had made. But I now agree with you analysis, because I checked some other online sources one of which was this one. Unfortunately the Princes of Wagram article does not carry a valid source. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 09:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, the article Prince de Wagram is even incorrect as it states that the title was created in 1808. Somehow, Napoleon new a year in advance that he'd fight at Wagram and that Berthier should be awarded that title... incorrect of course as the title was created in 1809. -- fdewaele, 11:51, 7 December 2007.


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Vlaanderenkiest.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Vlaanderenkiest.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Catulus Caesar

Hiya. I'm the guy who was reverting references to "Catulus Caesar" on the "Catulus" (cos. 102) site. I read your note. Is there any way you could change the European wiki headings, as all references to him bearing the cognomen Caesar are incorrect (see my entry on the "Catulus" discussion page)? Many thanks! 82.44.82.167 (talk) 10:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)Catiline63

[edit] The Prague offensive undo

Hi, Sometimes the IPs are actually correct! Please see my undo note, but it is true that any German or Hungarian troops which were not killed did indeed surrender or were taken prisoner.--mrg3105 (comms) If you're not taking any flak, you're not over the target. 10:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

"All killed and captured" is far too vague and simplistic. You need to specify in how much killed, wounded and captured. Besides some troops might have escaped indivually and then just went home. Some were captured by the Americans, others by the Czech, others by the Soviets. Exact figures are what is needed. -- fdewaele, 22 february 2008,11:46, CET.
Yes, I appreciate your passion for precision, but if any did escape, the number was not significant for the purpose of an encyclopaedia. Prague was way too far from the Western Allied lines for this number to have been significant, and it was completely surrounded. Czechs were not patting any Germans and Hungarians on the head either. I doubt that the Red Army was taking numbers down, in any case, I have never seen any, the numbers provided varying by hundreds of thousands since some sources include all operations in Czechoslovakia. I will be working on the Eastern Front articles, so I will keep a lookout for the sources, and will update when these become available.--mrg3105 (comms) If you're not taking any flak, you're not over the target. 11:01, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:169.139.251.241

I have issued a vandalism warning to User:169.139.251.241 in response to his "massive deletion of information" from the Benjamin Pierce article which you later reverted. --TommyBoy (talk) 16:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Belgium_great_coat.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Belgium_great_coat.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 21:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wiki_Belgium

I would be very interested in becoming involved with any and all improvements to pages related to Belgium. I have requested info about Project Belgium from MANY sources and editors. To date, I have not received any replys. I am having a wonderful time at WIkipedia. But...I need a project to provide focus. Bedankdt --Buster7 (talk) 23:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)