User talk:Imperium Europeum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Imperium Europeum, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Arnoutf 23:40, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi and welcome again. I noticed you changed the status of Brussels to administrative centre in the infobox on the EU page. However there is currently consensus that the correct term is "commission seat". If you disagree, go to the talk page of the EU page and argue why your idea is better. Please do not change it again; as this is at the moment the object of discussion, and one of the wiki rules is not to change existing parts of an article where consensus exists without a fair effort to change the existing consensus. Arnoutf 23:40, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Welcome to WikiProject European Union!

Hello, Imperium Europeum, and welcome to WikiProject European Union! Thank you for your generous offer to help contribute. I'm sure your input will be much appreciated. I hope you enjoy contributing here and being a European Union Project Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to discuss anything on the project talk page, or to leave a message on my own talk page. Please remember to sign all your comments, and be bold with your edits. Again, welcome, and happy editing!

- J Logan t: 08:40, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UK great power claim

You support this with citations, but please could you provide transcriptions of the relevant passages. Thanks. Viewfinder 05:54, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UK

Surely you made a mistake reverting, the same edit by two editors, 4 times in 4 hours? Abtract 00:40, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I have reported you [1] and am telling you as a courtesy. Perhaps you would like to cooperate in future to improve the article UK? Abtract 01:13, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding reversions[2] made on September 22, 2007 to United Kingdom

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Nishkid64 (talk) 20:04, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Largest cities of the European Union

Check the list once more, Stockholm is not included. all the best Lear 21 13:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Oops! You're right. I missed it. Stockholm is now included. Imperium Europeum 22:10, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

The template must be spread to every listed city. It would be incomplete otherwise. Lear 21 12:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I do intend to do so. It does take time though. Imperium Europeum 16:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I really don't see the usefulness of this template, and am nominating it for deletion. I suggest it would be more useful to add to each city's page a "See also" link to Largest cities of the European Union by population within city limits. I raised my doubts on the template's talk page a fortnight ago, and the only other person to comment suggested deletion. The page at wp:TFD says "It is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the template that you are nominating the template.", so here you are! PamD 20:28, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

you need to defend this (Template:Largest_cities_of_the_European_Union) ASAP. I've done all I could as a disinterested observer, and will attempt to get the date reset per the tagging anomaly. But you and your helpers need to get into the Tfd to defend it. Cheers // FrankB 15:31, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editing London

Hi, If you change the main picture for such a high-profile article, you really can't expect anything other than to be reverted unless you provide clear reasoning in the edit summary or on the talk page. I apologise for having to take this action, but I would anticipate that that edit would be likely to be regarded as a controversial one. No more bongos 04:58, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reach, Foreign Relations and Defence

On how to delete, I think you need to put it up for AfD, but that is work so I just redirect them and hope someone who like bureaucracy does it for me, you know, those people who scout Wikipedia for things to delete and enjoy running for admin and making councils. Anyhoo, on merging the FR and Defence templates, why? I understand the topics are similar but combining the two would either make a horribly long nav box or cut several articles out of the loop, at present there are only a few overlaps. If you have an idea, sandbox it and we can see how well it works but right now I don't see much cause, it is the articles themselves that need attention in this field. - J Logan t: 14:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Do you want to comment here again to refresh the arguments for the EU entries in lists? : [3], [4], [5] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lear 21 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Speedy deletion of External Action Service of the European Union

A tag has been placed on External Action Service of the European Union requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Regua (talk) 15:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EU interventions.png

Hi. I've deleted the image, but under CSD G6: General housekeeping instead. The NowCommons template is for images that have been transferred to Commons, rather than images made obsolete by new ones. If this sort of move comes up again, I'd suggest moving an image to the new title, then uploading the new image. IceKarmaॐ 07:18, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I forgot you can't move images. IceKarmaॐ 08:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

In the "Humanitarian Intervention" article, there is a map in which european union member states and their dependencies and overseas territories are highlighted in blue. Shouldn't Greenland also be highlighted as an overseas territory of Denmark?

No, because Greenland is explicitly not part of the EU. Imperium Europeum (talk) 21:16, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kosovo is Serbia

Western powers are not the World you know there is Asia, Africa and South America? and Easter Europe... these countries will never accept independent Kosovo so it is still part of Serbia.

And Northern Kosovska Mitrovica and north from that city is all Serbs and governed by Serbia, So Kosovo is Serbia!

and UN haven't recognized Kosovo neither did EU...

You can change the Serbia's map from USA, UK, France and Germany's prospective... but do not do it in Serbia's... thats our part of wiki, and we don't recognize Kosovo so Kosovo stays in our map! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srdjan Su (talk • contribs) 00:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


Where do you get the nerves to call me nationalist, if anyone is nationalist it is you... where do you get the idea that only western powers matter? Russia is a permanent member of UN so is China, they are to humans and they too have a country that is strong as USA is... why do say that they are inferior to you? I see a little Hitler in you... if you are to edit my country's page you'd better know its history, and how we fought against Milosevic and gained Democracy... and now your putting him on our back? thats just like you, always finding an excuse... and can you give me a evidence of any genocide in Kosovo? and there is no such thing as Kosovars, there are only Albanians from Kosovo and Serbians from Kosovo.

Outbursts like these are most certainly not welcome on my discussion page!! Imperium Europeum (talk) 01:18, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Minor country? excuse me for fighting wars with allies... don't forget the in both WW Serbs were on allies side, when Albanians, Croats, Bosniaks, Bulgarians, Hungarians etc. were on Axis powers side, thus confirming our alegance! and we would stayed with you if you haven't supported our communist resitance instead of our Chetniks movement (please note that these are WWII Chetniks not modern ones)(it's the same thing to me beacause they REMOVED serbs from krajina just as they did in ww II And you said you don't really care, if you don't care stop altering it... northern Cyprus declared independence why don't you alter its map eh? Aphasia and south Osetia declared independence go alter them... don't do it to little old serbia ;)

And don;t forget Spain is a western power too, and she didn't recognize Kosovos independance.

And let me say something to you Nazi Germany was a power... Power isn't everything! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srdjan Su (talk • contribs) 01:28, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Chris said that he will make a map with Serbia as one color and Kosovo a bit darker thus satisfying all sides :) peace out!--Kosovo was, is and will be Serbia (talk) 03:41, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Serbia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. // Chris (complaints)•(contribs) 01:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

In addition to the above, let me inform you that the only reason you have not been blocked is that somebody protected the page instead. However, under the rules of WP:ARBMAC, I am putting you on notice that you will be topic-banned from all pages relating to the Kosovo issue if you are found edit warring again on any page related to that topic. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
In response to your question, yes, consensus is possible. No, everyone will not be happy. But it is possible to come to some sort of agreement (I mentioned the possibility of a map showing Kosovo as a disputed territory, rather than altogether independent). Die-hard Serbian and Albanian nationalists will continue to edit war, but they will be blocked in short order. Instead of joining them, try to work out some sort of compromise on the talk page, and let the admins block the egregious edit-warriors. If you haven't already, take a look at Wikipedia's dispute resolution strategies. If that doesn't work, there are informal and formal mediation steps that can be taken. I mentioned to the other editor the possibility of filing a request for comment, which will attract the opinions of outside editors. The thing to remember is that this is an ongoing issue still very much in flux. Lots of debate is occurring on the Kosovo talk page, and any resolution they get will likely spill over to Serbia as well. In the meantime, work for compromise and try not to sweat the worst of the nationalists; more than likely they will end up getting blocked anyway. Hope this helps, and let me know if there's anything else I can help with. // Chris (complaints)•(contribs) 05:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)