User talk:Giandrea

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello Giandrea, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 22:12, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] List of territories by population revert war

If the revert war continues I will protect the article from editing so that the issue has to be sorted out on the talk page. --Nick Boalch ?!? 11:48, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Giandrea, please explaine why you "think" the EU is relevent for population statistics and other organizations are not.--Tombombadil 11:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My path

Cool. Thanks for letting me know. Since the idea comes from User:Cool Cat originally it might be nice to notify him (and give credit to him - and me maybe - somewhere on the Template:Life path, just to keep it in line with the GFDL). Thanks for coming up with the idea. Guettarda 18:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Nope, no useful suggestions. I'm not a coder by nature, and I certainly am not the person to get things to look pretty. I just steal and modify (and sometimes in so doing, learn a little wiki-markup). Guettarda 18:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anti-Euro

I am anti Euro because I believe that the UK needs the flexibility of having its own currency given its vastly different economy from the rest of Europe. Hope that suffices!! Astrotrain 21:42, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Well said

I'd just like to tell you that your comment left on Erdemsenol's page was very well said. I wish all the Muslims could understand this. We're not anti-Islam at all.. we just don't want them to impose their fundamentalist values upon us. Thanks :) EuroSong 16:34, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:List of countries by area

Oh sure no problem. I am agreeable to the avoidance of the word "Country" since it is so contentious, and once it us used, I am perfectly fine with any kind of territory listed. ;)--Huaiwei 04:30, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] EU

I see you are a Mac OS X user, as am I. Can't fault you there! Anyway, the EU is neither a territory, nor is it a country. Look up the definition of country or territory, it doesn't work. I only changed the name of the article because I thought it more accurately reflected it's contents. I have editted out all territories before but the concensus was against it, and people ended up putting them back in. If it were up to me, only places accepted as sovereign states would be listed. Now that you have pointed it out, I don't think the EU should be listed in Territories by Population either. I had just never editted this article before. But I'll keep my hands off it for now, because it wouldn't be right to go in and delete it just because you pointed it out. (By Malnova, 18 February 2006)

Hi again. You have left messages on the Countries by area article saying you think there should be an EU listing, and no one expressed their enthusiasm about it. And others besides me have deleted the EU many times. This would seem to me to be a concensus. You have to draw the line somewhere. You said yourself, the EU is a supranational entity. Why not make a supranational entity article and link it to this one? Malnova 13:03, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

ehm, you are the one that is trying to lay claim to some kind of "conscensus". It is pretty obvious from the comments in your User and the comments in Territories by Population that there is not a concensus at all. And how exactly have you come to the understanding that there "is a concensus on Wikipedia that EU type entities should be listed is such lists"? Your adding the EU without a concensus or any kind of confirmation is no different from my taking it off.

and to what revert war are you referring? If you are referring to the occasional reverts by someone called Cantus, it certainly has nothing to do with the EU and just about everyone who contributes to "by area" reverts Cantus when they see he has once again sent us back to his one man version of how things should be. But maybe that's not what you are referring to...

I have read the Consensus article as per your suggestion and the neutral POV point is telling. You have stated more than once that you and 450 million other EU citizens (as their duly appointed representative) would want the EU in the list. Is this a neutral point of view?

My heart rate has not changed thruout our furtive little exchange, I assure you. I can see your point, I just don't think it is a valid enough one, I am sorry you don't see mine. I really wouldn't mind the EU so much, and it having a parliment with clear powers is a point. But if we let it slip in there then all sorts of other entities start slipping in (as others have mentioned here) and then you have a list that is near meaningless. Malnova 13:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Hello,

I am an elementary school teacher and i rely on wikipedia for some information that I use in my classes. I am just particularly concerned that you have been the person who have insistently placed the European Union in many lists that refer to "countries".

I became concerned when i asked my students to look at the list of countries by population and they asked me the following day where the country "EU" is located. I really had a hard time explaining that the EU is not a country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.23.115.66 (talk • contribs) 00:09, 9 May 2007

I have to inform you that the EU is not a country, as it is stated very clearly in all this articles you mention. It is in the lists unranked for comparison only (you can see it is unranked because of the dash instead of the position number). People on Wikipedia decided by consensus to include the EU this way. May I suggest you not to use Wikipedia as a source of information, especially while dealing with children. Read what Wikipedia is not for further information, and perhaps use academic books when dealing with education. --giandrea 01:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I dont think people who created it will call it a FREE ENCYCLOPEDIA if it will contain things that are different from academic books and reality.

What consensus are you talking about? every other person argues its relevance.

By the way, there is no consensus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.1.104.85 (talk • contribs) 05:40, 9 May 2007

Please, sign your messages. Then read the talk pages to see that there is indeed a consensus, especially regarding List of countries and federations by military expenditures. --giandrea 12:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

You are truly a world class milk maid from switzerland. I have read all the supposed consensus you have been claiming and they are just a bunch of arguements with YOU ULTIMATELY DENYING THE FACT THAT YOU ARE A MILK MAID WHO COULDNT READ. these are lists for COUNTRIES. C O U N T R I E S. YOU KEPT DENYING THAT FACT AND INSISTING PUTTING IT ON THE LIST.

If one has a list of POTABLE LIQUIDS, will we place CRUDE OIL in that list too? with your arguements and eurohelicopter ryder's you will 100% say that:

"We must put it on the list of potable liquids because it is a liquid, potable? No, but its still a liquid and it is relevant info."

Everyones laughing at you milk maid and your lover eurohelicopter man, a country is a country. something close to it does not make it one.

DID YOU ATTEND HIGH SCHOOL?!?!

[edit] Mediation

Hi, I'm your friendly cabal mediator! :) I've asked Malnova to comment on the mediation page, then we can get started building consensus. - FrancisTyers 10:32, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Userbox solution

I'd just like to say thank, thank, thank, THANK YOU for your solution to the sudden Userbox alingment problem. I come onto Wiki today and BAM! All my boxes have piled up again. My coding skills aren't really that great, so about as much as I understand is copy+paste what somebody with a good page has and yours should follow example. Anyways, adding your fix has got my page back to what it was looking like before, so thanks very much for posting it on the Userbox page. Cybertooth85 16:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd also like to just say thanks for your solution. It fixed my problems, too. :) -- Christopher C. Parker t c 21:26, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of countries by population

Hi there, I notice that earlier you had a conversation with Malnova about including the EU in country lists. At the list of countries by population the same argument appears to be going on now, if you still have an opinion on the matter.. TastyCakes 02:41, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fuil libh is liom é

Hey. I've no problem trying to translate the above. Translating it literally it means 'blood with you(plural) and me with it', at an educated guess it could mean your blood is mine, either saying that the speaker and the person being spoken to share a blood bond, or else the speaker wants the person's blood, i.e. wants to kill him. Sorry I can't be of more help, if you go to the Irish wikipedia at ga.wikipedia.org and ask on the main page, there'll definitely be a few people who can translate it properly for you. And by the way, English isn't a Celtic language, it's Germanic. Good luck - Dalta 22:29, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Just saying hi and well met. --Tomtom9041 01:56, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] European Union

I understand that Romania and Bulgaria have joined the European Union. I fixed up the link - check it out. The population of the EU is about 492m or so including Romania & Bulgaria according to the EU Website - which lists populations for EU-25 and EU-27 in the table, for all the years up until 2006. I trust you'll be able to take care of it having seen the table. Cheers. jkm 19:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of countries

Can you point me to the consensus? Joelito (talk) 03:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism warning

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to List of countries by military expenditures, you will be blocked from editing. Daniel Chiswick 22:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC) (please stop)

The above comment is a result of an edit war from the party who appears to be on the losing end of consensus per the article's talk page. --Auto(talk / contribs) 02:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] list of countries by military expenditures

Please take care of the article until I get back from holiday. I may edit a little from the hotel, but im not sure. Don't let them remove the EU until the discussion is over. Best regards, Eurocopter tigre 10:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Giandrea, there is no consensus to put the EU in the countries table. I myself will not restart the revert war. I ask that you stop making unilateral edits with which several editors clearly and loudly disagree. Parsecboy 20:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
There is no consensus to include the EU in the countries table. Only Eurocopter and yourself have supported that argument. The two editors that have commented in the RfC said they think it should be listed on the page, not necessarily that it should be listed with the countries or with NATO. Until they clarify their positions, they cannot be assumed to support either argument. Parsecboy 21:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
OK, you are right, if you need more clarification, then it is better to have more clarification. For me it is already pretty clear, but we will further the RfC. --giandrea 21:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it's clear at all. The other two editors that have commented haven't said much to the real heart of the issue; no one is debating whether the EU should or should not be listed (other than daniel cheswick). The question is where it should be included, and what numbers should be used. None of the new editors have commented on that issue. Personally, I've stopped caring what number you use for the EU; do what you will in that regard. However, I still oppose listing it in the same table as the countries. I thought we had a good compromise (one that you initially supported, I might add) by listing it in a supranational organizations table, but that apparently isn't working. Parsecboy 21:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree with you. I initially supported the compromise, but as I have seen that most of the people want it in the main list, I agree that both the EU and the NATO figure should be in the main list, otherwise, it would be very difficult to compare them with other voices. --giandrea 21:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I still think it's a hung jury at the moment as to whether it should be in the countries list or in the lower table. I see your point that it isn't as easily compared, but I don't think it's too difficult to scroll down and look at the second table. I suppose if we could add a note with the EU, NATO, and AU (if we can find a budget for them, I have as of yet unable to do so) saying that they are supranational organizations in the table, I could support that. Lets find a way to end this, shall we? Parsecboy 21:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that we can put NATO in the main list now, as it is widely known that it is a supranational entity. Regarding the EU, there is a note before the list saying just that. --giandrea 22:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree that we should put the EU in the list because is a state union with multiple characteristics as a country, but I tottaly disagree the adding of NATO as it is only a military alliance. Best regards, Eurocopter tigre 22:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Please have a look on the "list of countries by mil..." and revert those annoying edits. I would do that, but I'm breaking the 3RR rule. Cheers, Eurocopter tigre 14:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I dont want the EU on the main list its just you and eurohelicopter boy who wants it to be there —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.23.115.66 (talk • contribs) 08:08, 9 May 2007

This is not true, read the talk page please. --giandrea 11:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Message

Scusa Giandrea non riesco ad inserire l'immagine della mediaset sulla wikipedia Tarantina... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.10.15.44 (talk • contribs) 00:45, 24 April 2007

[edit] User Category for Discussion

A category created by you or to which you have significantly contributed is being considered for deletion, rename, move or merge in accordance with Wikipedia's Categories for Discussion policies. This does not mean that any of the userpages in the category will be deleted. They may, however, be recategorized.
Please share your thoughts on the matter at this category's entry on the User categories for discussion page.
VegaDark 07:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images in signatures

Hi Giandrea. Could you please remove the EU flag from your signature, as per the Wikipedia:Signatures guideline (specifically the #Images section)? Thank you. Picaroon (Talk) 00:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Vandalism on my personal talk page

Your welcome :) You can try requesting it to be semi-protected at WP:RFPP, but only as a last resort since this is a talk page. If you do get it semi-protected, you should make a second talk page so anons or new users can contact you if they need to. Mystytopia (talk) 12:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of countries and outlying territories by total area

I didn't change the chart as an act of vandalism, I do mention my reason for cutting down the list as well. Therequiembellishere 19:56, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't you I was reverting indeed. --giandrea 20:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
It's not a problem and thank you! Therequiembellishere 20:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Giandrea, use of the rollback button should only be used for vandalism, not content disputes, as you have done here, here, and here. Stop mischaracterizing the edits of others. This revert war is getting us nowhere; please stop. Parsecboy 15:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think that Malnova is a vandal and is vandalizing repeatedly that page. I'm not the only one rolling his edits back, so why are you pointing this out only to me? --giandrea 00:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re : Island maps

Hello Giandrea !
Thank you very much for the compliments ! I'm happy to see that you liked some of my maps. About the time needed to create them, it would be difficult for me to tell at this time because I'm still improving the technique to draw them. In fact, I would say it doesn't take more time than a traditional drawing (like Image:Easter_Island_map-fr.svg), probably less, and it's much easier to create. The longest is to put the additional information (rivers, populated places, roads, etc.) which take really a lot of time.

As it is a new technique to create topographic maps (but this applies also to the CIA WFB type maps) in a very easy way (no special knowledge or ability required, even if there are several steps to achieve a map), I would qualify this as « revolutionary » for WP because I think they are perfect for our use.
Because of this, I'm writing several tutorials for the French speaking Atelier graphique to explain everything for others be able to create their own maps. I hope being able to put them online in two or three weeks. I see you know French, so I will tell you when they will be ready… and any help to translate them in English will be welcome ! I see also that you are a Mac user : unfortunately, many of the software I use only work under Windows (but there are other ones running with Mac, it will just need an adaptation…).
Bye ! Sting-fr 02:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Giandrea.
For the data, I use the public domain DEM from the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission, which I edit with the simple GIS free software 3DEM. The best resolution of the SRTM is one arc second (31 meters at the equator) for the US, so it’s really made to display a terrain, not cities. For those, you will need a free source to be copied, which is the most difficult to find.
Bye. Sting-fr 18:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your EU page

Hi, I just loved your EU-portal! So much better than the original portal.

I can see you are a pro-EU person (Gosh, what gave it away? ;-)), as am I. You are, amongst others, who feel passionate about including the EU in several lists. I already met several people on Wikipedia, who feel the same way. Would it be an idea to 'unite'? At this moment, I'm in a discussion with some pro-US people on the talkpages of Superpower, I saw your name at the talk page of Countries by population, and there are many other pages that have some heated discussions about including or excluding the EU on/ from pages. I don't realy have a thought-out idea, but I also can't stand the fact, that Wikipedia sometimes seems very pro-US, and that there hardly is an opening for discussion about the EU. --Robster1983 16:27, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Thnx for your message on my talkpage. I ones saw that there was a Wikiproject about the EU, but I wasn't a member of Wikipedia then, so I forgot about it. Untill now. I immediately signed up for it. So thnx for reminding me. Perhaps it is not that very active, as you said, but at least it's something. I recently became a Wikipedian, so I'm still figuring out how everything works, but on several topics, many (mostly pro-US Wikipedians) don't even bother to look for sources, that could be pro-EU/ anti-US. So at least I can try to find as much sources as possible :-)
In respond of what you told about the EU put on several lists: I agree that the EU should not be ranked. Although many EU-citizens would disagree, we still aren't a country, therefor can't be ranked on a list that's ranking the countries by population/ GDP/ etc. However, at the same time, no other entity in the world can be compared with the EU; we are no country, but no 'organisation' either, we are in the middle of those two, and more moving towards being a country, than being an organisation, and therefor we should be on those several lists. So I totally agree with you. --Robster1983 18:05, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Being "very similar" to a country does not mean it is a country... why are europeans uneducated? do you live in a milk farm in poland? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.1.104.35 (talk) 19:21, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Europe admin levels

Hey Giandrea... send me an email offline and let me know the countries you need, and I will arrange something with you for the 0-level (countries) and 1-level vectors. Rarelibra 01:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Review

Hi, how's it going? I was wondering if you could do me a favour and have a look at the European Parliament page? It's been a while since it got knocked off as a GA and a lot of work has been done since then. Recently I've been doing a bit and have put it back up as a candidate for GA, after that I hope it can be pushed up to featured. I was hoping you could do a quick peer review for me and/or help out on improvements. Would be of great help, thanks. - J Logan t/c: 15:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much for doing the whole review! I didn't say before but I thought your work on the portal was fantastic, good job getting it to featured. Any idea how the EP article can be brought up to FA status? Just a general point on something that may have been lacking. Thanks - J Logan t/c: 09:20, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Project European Union

Hello Giandrea, you are member of the project European Union. I try to create a new project page for the project. You can see it at here Because this should be the project page for all it´s members, please tell me, what you think about it. Please leave your comments on the talkpage of the project.--Thw1309 11:20, 24 June 2007 (UTC)