User talk:Kevlar67/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Happy New Year!

З Новим Роком! --Yakudza 16:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy New Year! (Ukrainian: З Новим Роком!, Russian: С Новым Годом!). I wish you in 2007 to be spared of the real life troubles so that you will continue to care about Wikipedia. We will all make it a better encyclopedia! I also wish things here run smoothly enough to have our involvement in Wikipedia space at minimum, so that we can spend more time at Main. --Irpen

A note about Infobox Former Country

Hi! I've just disambiguated the language links in three instances of Template:Infobox Former Country that you had added to articles. The problem is that if you just use "English" as the language, this automatically gets converted to a link to English, but that page is a disambiguation page, and I then have to fix the link to look like this: [[English language|English]]. If you would be good enough to go ahead and put that disambiguated link into any Future Country infoboxes you add in the future (where the language is English, although you should also do this for most other languages), it would really help me out. Thanks, and Happy New Year! --Tkynerd 17:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, and thanks for the response. I'm sorry I ended up making more work for you, but I didn't realize you wanted Canadian English for those links. Best regards, --Tkynerd 19:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I have just managed to fix the languages field so that if you enter simply "English", it will automatically say [[English language|English]]. This only works if you enter one language - for multiple languages, you will need to enter the full code for each language.
Following the request that you made on my talk page, there is already an additional field for governors or local representatives of the head of state. This field is called "representative" and follows the same format as the "leader" and "deputy" fields (i had forgotten to include that on the Instructions page, thanks for reminding me). I have modified the Province of Canada entry to now display this, plus a few minor tweaks. - 52 Pickup 08:11, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Since you have already placed the Sovereign Council in the legislature field, I would probably just list the governor. The introduction of the third name (representative) is a relavtively new thing and I don't really want to add a 4th one at this time (for fear of making things a bit too complicated).
I just noticed that you have proposed various infoboxes to cover the various French states over time. This is something that I have been putting off for a while: many of the different states seemed too similar to warrant separate infoboxes (in comparison with the evolution of Germany, starting from the Confederation of the Rhine). Perhaps this is just my poor knowledge of French history, but I was worried about repetition of information - but maybe I'm wrong. Whatever you do, you should not keep the infoboxes on the articles' talk pages for too long: the infoboxes are responsible for the categories currently displayed at the bottom of the talk pages, and that makes the categories themselves rather messy.
And finally, welcome to WP Former Countries! - 52 Pickup 20:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Just one more thing about stating leaders. It is common to list either 4 names (if there are no more than 4 that covers the period) plus the years, or just the first and last name (if more than 4) plus the years. If there was only one person that covered the whole period (eg. Queen Victoria in the case of the Province of Canada), no date is needed. The links to lists of leaders are generally accessed via clicking on the title (as on the "Queen" text in the same article). For examples, see the various German entries, from the Confederation of the Rhine through to East and West Germany.
Another thing, if you create an article that links to non-existant "(dis)establishments" categories (as is the case for Canada, New France), please initialise the new categories. If you do not know the exact year, you can also say the century (eg. "16th century") or the decade (eg. "1350s") - there are also categories for these.
If you have any more problems or suggestions, just ask: either on the WPFC talk pae, or me directly, and keep an eye on the template instructions page - 52 Pickup 21:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Ice Hockey in list of sport governing bodies

Hi Kevlar In the List of basic sports topics, there's not room to list every single sports governing body - as the article name suggests it's not a dedicated list on that specific topic. As such, I sourced a list of the world's most popular sports, (which doesn't include ice hockey) for their governing bodies only to appear there. Please could you revert the ice hockey inclusion? --Dweller 10:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much. --Dweller 10:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Westlock article

Hi Kevin. Just wanted your further opinion on the Westlock article. You pointed out that the first settlers were of Irish/American dissent, but not European. Perhaps my change was misread in that I was inferring these new settlers were direct from Europe. My change from "white" to "European" was meant to describe to these people's continental background opposed to only describing them by skin colour. This isn't trying to be politically correct or anything, but more fairly descriptive and I feel it would lend greater credence to the article. Thoughts?

Luke (a friend of Westlock) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The Toque (talk • contribs) 04:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC).

Your suggestion about the post to the forum re. Euro roots sounds great Kev. Thanks for the dialogue. Luke

Ukrainian history

Please, review following : Talk:Non-German_cooperation_with_Nazis_during_World_War_II#Yarillstremenog_issue.

Thanks in advance for your opinion, it will be valuable for us. --Galkovsky 09:00, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Category:Immigrants to America and Category:Immigrants to the United States

I agree with your sentiment with merging these two categories. However, you used the incorrect merge template for starting a merge discussion. See WP:CFD. Also, a merger was discussed recently but reached a messy conclusion, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 4. I suggest withholding any discussion for now.

I am currently in the process of cleaning up these categories anyway. Please wait another week or two. Dr. Submillimeter 15:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Second French Empire

No problem I was actually going to do it myself but you beat me to it so I thought I would may as well update the infoboxes thanks --Barry^talk 22:29, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Canada History template

Don't know if you want to link or not but Nova Scotia, PEI and Yukon do have history categories but not articles. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

History of Ukraine

I am afraid you don't know what you are talking about. There is no "national variety" for korenisation (try google if you dont believe me), and I was not going to invent it (since, as you may guess I am not a native english speaker). But there is korenization. Please keep in mind that not all admins are stubborn nitpicking bureaucrats, and it often makes sense to ask a person first. By the way I myself normally revert such changes, but only in conformance with Wikipedia:Manual of Style (national varieties of English). BTW, in the future, before hitting a revert button you better check whether the offending word is part of a linked phrase or of the name of an image. Sometimes you may be surprized. Rgds, `'mikka 05:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

World Energy

Thank you for the edits you made to the solar section of the World Energy article. Your work improved the article and your help is appreciated. Frank van Mierlo 18:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

First Nations: Culture Areas

Great expansion.. I was hoping someone would do that, but I was way too lazy. - TheMightyQuill 04:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Alberta actors

Thanks for the message. I have been slowly realizing that I should take these categories (Alberta actors, British Columbia actors, etc.) to Cfd, but haven't had a chance to. To some extent, I misunderstood someone's advice. If it helps, you should know that Category:Alberta actors was fairly recently created (end of January) and I got the blessing of its creator to de-populate it. Thanks again for bringing your concern to my attention.--Vbd (talk) 20:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

colonies template

Er, even being a supposed descendant of Snorre, the Norse child born in Vinland, I'm uncomfortable with listing it as a "colony". It was a settlement, and not an extension of the kingdoms of Norway or Denmark; a cultural colony, perhaps, but not a colony in the sense the others are; Helluland and Markland were not inhabited, even temporarily (it should also be mentioned, somewhere, that around the turn of the 20th Century the incipiently independent Norwegian kingdom debated asserting claims to Baffin and Ellesmere and even northern Ungava, based on both modern Norwegian exploration/"discovery" and also "prior occupation" from the 900 years before. There was a Bishopric of Vinland, and at another time of Greenland and Vinland, but I don't think a bishop ever saw the shores of the New World, and it was more of a paper office at the Vatican, or an honorific for some uppity noble in Denmark or Norway or England; but never an extension of European state power of any kind; don't forget Iceland was a refuge from state power, and these guys were in exile from them.

On another tack, if the Scottish claims to Nova Scotia and Cape Breton - or New France's to "Terre Neuve" (like owning all of Labrador, a particularly quebecois conceit...) - then certainly Spain's and Russia's out this way should be; the Spanish claim to British Columbia was not fully abrogated until 1811 or so, when they sold off their remaining rights to the US (who promptly claimed exclusivity, without realizing Spain had signed that away at Nootka), and the Russian claim sorted out variously with the British and the Americans; by the 1820s Russian America was no longer asserted to include the British territories, although RAC colonization continued in California (in defiance, one supposes, of the newborn Mexican Republic). So there should be at least

• Russia: Russian America (which redirects btw to Russian colonization of the Americas)
• Spain: Nuca (Nootka Sound). The presidio was named Fort San Miguel and definitely Spain considered the coast in this region to be its own, hence the fracas of the Meares fiasco and the ensuing Nootka Crisis; they relinquished Nootka Sound - or rather agreed to remove themselves from it and drop claims of exclusivity, while retaining the right to return should they so wish - by the Third Nootka Convention of 1796 (or dang, I'm fuzzy, was it 1794?); what rights/claims they had after that are what they sold to the US in c.1811, which formed the basis of the Oregon Country, [[Oregon boundary dispute, Oregon Treaty, Pig War quagmire. It's tempting to note that the US claims to the Oregon Country, as being up to mid-New Caledonia, are somewhat similar in their vacuousness to the "Viking" (not an appropriate term, either...) "colonies"; claimed to be owned, but not. Ditto with France's and Austria's putative claims to the Pacific Northwest - Austria's mostly because of Barkley/Barclay's voyage - and if anyone had a prior claim it might have been the Portuguese because of Juan de Fuca; but similarly Nova Albion maybe should be listed as well, then....And the North-West Territory is a Canadian fiction; it's Rupert's Land, Athabasca District, MacKenzie Ditstrict, Keewatin District (I mean the fur co. ones, not the subdivisions of the old-org NWT, incl. e.g. Franklin) and whatever else, and out here of course New Caledonia (Canada), and Columbia District, which were certainly more British territories than Vinland was a Norse one.Skookum1 01:27, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The Portuguese sailors may have had their own name for the Gulf of St. Lawrence; it may come up in discussions of the St. Lawrence pidgin somewhere, I'm not sure. But like the Norse situation, the Kingdom of Portugal never asserted political claims in the region; which is far to the west of the line established by the papal bull anyway, i.e. not legally claimable by Portugal.Skookum1 01:27, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

New France template

Thank you for letting me know about your new {{New France}} template. I'll have a look at it as soon as I have a chance. -- Mathieugp 02:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Category:Ice hockey people from Alberta, etc.

I just noticed that you created this "new (and awesome) cat" just a few months ago. I am sorry that it has been brought to Cfd without its nominator having the courtesy to let you know first. The problem you are running into with this (and the curling category, as well) is that they encompass "people from XXX," which often isn't a useful categorization. Just because someone is from somewhere doesn't mean much. See "Intersection by location." Changing the category to "personnel from Alberta" won't get around this. Organizing the categories by "teams in Alberta" or something would be different. I hope this explanation helps.--Vbd (talk) 01:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

George Fox in Music of Alberta

According to the bio on his home page (georgefox.com), he grew up in Cochrane, Alberta although he lives in southern Ontario today. While there is not yet a Wikipedia article on him, there probably should be since he has had 19 "top 10" country songs in Canada and was Country Male vocalist of the year 3 times in Canada. Although he's not big in the US I thought his discography compared favorably to many of the artists currently listed (ie Maren Ord!?!). Now of course my degree of concern for George does not go so far as to write a new article myself given my limited editing expertise but I thought his inclusion is justified in the context of the list and might stimulate someone more skilled.Cszmurlo 02:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

List of French forts in North America

Nice work on the list. Note that Fort St. Charles, (the reconstruction) lies in present day Minnesota. Its one of those boundary things! --Stormbay 02:17, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Discussion?

I thought you might be interested in the discussion I started at Wikipedia Talk:Overcategorization#Categorising by national descent, origin, nationality, etc.. --Vbd (talk) 14:14, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Exhaustivity of the New France Template

In translating Template:New France to fr:Modèle:Nouvelle-France I came to realize how exhaustive it had become after you let me temper with it. I think we should make a smaller one to be inserted in all New France-related articles and work on translating the fr:Portail:Nouvelle-France to replace the bigger one. What do you think? -- Mathieugp 19:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Right. Thanks for making a lot of sense. :-) Then, maybe we should move what's currently in New France into History of New France. Unless you have any objection, I'll start working on an article containing infos on government, law, subdivisions, economy, society, geography etc. It will be very sketchy, but it will solve the immediate problem of the bloated template. -- Mathieugp 23:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Edmonton Neighborhoods

Hi Kevin,

Found your nice note of 27 March 2007 on my talk page. It's always nice to know when someone appreciates your work. Right now, I'm focusing most of my attention of building a collection of pages that describe parts of Edmonton, and the more work I do here, the more I realize how little I know about the city I grew up in. It's quite the learning experience. I've taken your suggestion of limiting categories on the pages to the more specific Edmonton Neighborhoods category (unless the page really would be more appropriate in another category), and when I do tweaks to my existing pages I'm usually taking out the generic Edmonton catgory.

Johntwrl 05:48, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

List of Canadian provincial and territorial symbols

I removeD the link to the list of US symbols. Not as an anti-American edit but if we list one countries symbols then why not list more of the countries that are in Category:National symbols by nation? Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 03:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

So then working from the definition of statoid it would be ok to link Category:National symbols of the United Kingdom because it contains the symbols of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. What is needed is a page called something like List of symbols of statoids (or "List of symbols of sub-national regions") to link to rather than each one. By the way I put the US link back. Though I wish I could have found a list for Mexico, France or Denmark. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:07, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

First and third persoen interpretation

Thanks for the pat on the back - I needed one today. I know about interpretation, because as a former teacher, I used it a lot. I was a first-preson interpreter for my students as they moved from a pathetic little farm in Ukraine to Canada. I acted as all manner of police, officials, and various contacts as they moved through the experience. It was one of the most fun things I ever did. Keep adding to the articles, and thanks for your contributions. Denni^talk 19:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Québécois

Hello, I am contacting all non-anonymous editors who participated in the debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Québécois. It has been very difficult achieving consensus on the appropriate scope of the article, and the use of the word Québécois in a series of articles proposed by one editor. I am requesting input at Talk:Québécois. Joeldl 23:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Ice Hockey Project discussion of hockey player notability and project scope

Please come join the WikiProject Ice Hockey Notability standards for hockey players discussion. I'd like to see input from all our project members who have an opinion. Thanks! ColtsScore 00:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Origins of the Fourth World War

Hi Kevlar, I have proposed the deletion of this article as this 1998 book appears to be out of print. 217.134.228.61 23:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Your contribution to National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy‎

Hi Kevlar, why do you think that it is relevant to put information about profitable English courses at the encyclopedia entry of a university. NaUKMA has too many international cooperations to mention all of them in this article. Why is your particular entry so important that it should stay there? Silin2005 19:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:AlbertaCoatofArms.png

Hello, Kevlar67. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:AlbertaCoatofArms.png) was found at the following location: User:Kevlar67/sandbox. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 02:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Ice Hockey August 2007 Newsletter

Names of the colonial wars

I see that you've noted in the discussion pages for King William's War, Queen Anne's War and King George's War that those names are primarily used in the United States, and that the British/Canadians/French use other names. Could you add those names to the text? I'd do it, but I don't know what they are. (You could put them in boldface in the opening sentence, as in the following: "King William's War, also known as Name1 and Name2 was..." Funnyhat 05:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Ice Hockey newsletter

Note: You have received this because your name is on Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Newsletter/List. If you no longer wish to receive this message, remove your name. --Animum Delivery Bot 01:58, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Alberta Investment Management

A tag has been placed on Alberta Investment Management, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD G11.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Voxpuppet (talk • contribs) 04:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Lieutenant Governors

It's not that there's an active rule against it, per se — it's that the articles don't need to contain two separate templates that impart exactly the same information as each other. We have to start thinking a bit more consciously about how to minimize template overload. Bearcat 18:30, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, {{Infobox Politician}} needs to be added to the articles eventually — and it also contains entry fields for a person's predecessor and successor in a position, so the succession boxes will duplicate that too. Bearcat 18:37, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Eventually, the head infobox should be standard on all articles about Canadian politicians. It has the option to add up to eight different offices to the box (which is done by repeating the office fields, with each individual position numbered from 1 to 8.) It's okay for that to offer the same information as an SKLG or BCPremiers template, since it's a top-of-article summary of the person, and the office template is a bottom-of-article summary of the position. What we don't really need is succession boxes and office templates that duplicate each other being placed right next to each other in the same place in the article. Bearcat 18:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd go with the alternate, personally. Ideally, all Canadian politicians should eventually have a consistent article presentation, though it's obviously going to take a hell of a lot of work to get there. Bearcat 18:52, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Award

		For Merit - 3rd degree
		You are hereby awarded this Ukrainian National Award "For Merit", in recognition of your extensive contributions to Ukrainian Canadian, Ukrainian Cultural Heritage Village, and for constant categorization of Wikipedia entries. Congrats!--Riurik(discuss) 04:39, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Id swp.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Id swp.gif. 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 08:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 7 November 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Canada-Ukraine relations, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—Wknight94 (talk) 12:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

It's fantastic to see that someone's developing articles on international relations like this. Great stuff! -- Zanimum 15:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Sovereigntist/Souverainism merger

I have made a suggestion over at Talk:Sovereigntist regarding this merger proposal. There has been no discussion of this matter, so something should be done, or the merge templates should be removed. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 18:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Questions about parties in infoboxes for politicians

Hi Kevlar. I'm asking you this question because you added the infobox to Laurence Decore, and I'm hoping you can help me. Is there any convention for what part(y/ies) to include in infoboxes for politicians who have served at multiple levels of government? For politicians who have served at only one level of government but who have changed parties, I gather we're supposed to include all parties as well as the dates during which they belonged to these parties (I'm concluding this based on the infobox in the Belinda Stronach article), but what about for politicians who have served with different parties at different levels of government? At present, the infoboxes for Robert Stanfield and Jean Charest don't reflect at all their affiliations with the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada, even though both led it; is this because, as provincial premiers, their provincial involvement is considered to be more significant than their federal involvement? Also, has there been any discussion about making "party" a category linked to each position (like predecessor, successor, etc.) rather than one that can appear only once per infobox?

Unrelatedly, if a person who was notable for some other reason ran, but was not elected, under a party's banner, should that party be included in the infobox? Thanks in advance for any light you can shine on these questions. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 23:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. What about the question of which parties to include in the infobox? Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. A propos nothing, I see you're a MacEwan studentt; I chair the students' council there (though I'm not a MacEwan student myself). So we're, like, related, or something. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Prince Edward Island

As you have shown an interest in creating/editing articles about Prince Edward Island, you are cordially invited to join WikiProject Prince Edward Island which has newly been created. SriMesh | talk 04:28, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Canadian foreign relations

The lines are fine, but several of those names link to articles which should probably be deleted. The Latin American relations comes to mind above the others. Latin America is not an internationally recognized state. If we have articles on all of the states with continents we open Wikipedia up to a huge amount of articles with at best vague-subject matter. If you really dont like the new layout, revert me. I'll understand :). Jose João (talk) 11:20, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I see your argument, but I still oppose State-to-regional relations pages. I've nominated the Latin American one for AfD. Jose João (talk) 11:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)