User talk:Markussep

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User talk
Archive
Archives


Contents

[edit] Newsletter for WikiProject French communes
The French Communes WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 2 • April 5, 2008 • About the Project • Written by: Basketball110 and Editorofthewiki
News

Project and team news:
Features

Featured French commune articles of the week:
Collaboration of the Month
  • The push for cantons has begun! See Canton of Champagne-en-Valromey for an example of what the canton articles are to look like. We want to get articles on all of them by the end of the month.
Archives • Newsroom

If you would not like to recieve this newsletter, please add your name here.


Delivered by: Basketball110  Talk 

[edit] Soissonais

I'm glad to hear that you are going to create pages for the cantons, etc. Is there any reason we have to refer to them as communes instead of municipalities? Ksnow (talk) 17:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Ksnow

Oh, I misunderstood. No, I don't think we need pages for cantons, etc., with the possible exception of metropolitan areas (CAGs in French) which could link back to the city. That's why I thought Soisson would be more informative to the English-speaking reader than Soissonais.
As for commune, I don't have any problem with the term itself, but I think our audience doesn't have a clue what it means. Certainly, it needs to be in italics, so they don't think of the English term, which means something completely different.
Yes, I'm sorry I missed the s, but I do think its clearer to the English speaker than an unfamiliar adjective. Ksnow (talk) 21:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Ksnow
I know that it is a noun, but the form is adjetival (or actually genitive "of Soissons"). Ksnow (talk) 21:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Ksnow

[edit] Edits about Hungarian counties

I already asked them what to do at Talk:Sáros county. Could you continue there (if you want to)? Squash Racket (talk) 04:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

This discussion rather belongs to Talk:Comitatus (Kingdom of Hungary) or on the talk page of a county than there. Squash Racket (talk) 16:22, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Removed it from there per WP:TALK "Keep on topic: Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject (much less other subjects). Keep discussions on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal." moved it to Komárom county Hobartimus (talk) 16:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Markussep, I still think it was a pretty bad idea to move the discussion to that talk page. I waste my energy on dealing with disturbing comments. I would gladly discuss the issue with you though. Squash Racket (talk) 14:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Email

Please send me an email we should discuss a few things so there are no misunderstandings. You can even make personal attacks against me there is no policy against it in email. :) Hobartimus (talk) 11:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi I, understand if you change your mind you know where to find the send email link. Hobartimus (talk) 16:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Let's revisit the case in a few months then I don't have time for this now. Hobartimus (talk) 19:28, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
I have a few(not that big) concerns relating to you your not willing to discuss them fine I don't want to discuss them publicly bacause I don't want conflict with you. I will step away from the articles for a time unless major disruption or POV pushing happens and will return to editing them when things calmed down. Hobartimus (talk) 19:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
It's not a big deal, don't let your imagination run wild. You never use email as a matter of policy or something? Hobartimus (talk) 20:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Adminship

Hello Mark. Would you be okay if I nominate you for adminship? Editorofthewiki 19:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Citing wikipedia in debates about improving wikipedia

I don't think it's good practice like for example here [1], I didn't want to mention it the first few times you did it but you continue to do it while telling a user earlier that you "can't take them seriously" [2]. I see that you started implementing the "good compromise" you talked about by inserting dozens(hundreds?) of Slovak alternative names into articles while introducing exactly zero number of Hungarian alternative names, I hope it's not the final tally of your activity or it's not much of a "compromise". Hobartimus (talk) 18:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The second link you gave contains a sentence "Originally an early 13th-century Slavic trading settlement", so that's an intresting point, probably should be settled on the talk page of the relevant article. I'm also concerned that you started quote/diff mining a user outside of your "county area" while you previously refused to even look at edits of a certain user which were made outside the "county articles" even while you made comments about his contribs in general. Also the debate of wheter to use Slavic/Slovak also seems to be not county related, any specific reason for going outside the "county scope"? Hobartimus (talk) 20:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
"Both are probably correct, and "Slovak" more precise. But correct me if I'm wrong." My feeling is that there is a difference similar to how we don't usually refer to Gauls or the population of "Gallia Aquitania" as French even though there is a connection. The present day Slovak government as you might know includes the "Slovak National Party" or SNS for which I think "far-right extremist" would be a fair description and this gives an "official voice" through which to spread some intresting rhetoric. Part of this rhetoric is trying to redifine ancient Slavic population of the region as (ősszlovák)(lit. ancient Slovak could be old Slovak etc) an effort resisted by moderate Slovak historians even. At least that's what I've read in sources(one such historians being Dusan Kovac). So anyway the debate might even have some political elements to it not an easy question. The small text refers to a bit earlier where you said "What I see, but I've only looked at the county articles" [3]. Hobartimus (talk) 22:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes the scan is not worth that much but how about the name Privilegium pro Slavis, I don't think the word Slavis could be translated into a whole different word. Anyway since you commented on a few issues can I ask you to comment on this [4]? I'm intrested your opinion on editing pattern(number of reverts which users it's reverting) edit summary usage using words like "bullshit" etc, could it be a sock puppet of another user? Hobartimus (talk) 13:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Replied on talk of article. Hobartimus (talk) 16:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

My editings were not disruptive. You do not know the Central European history in detail only.Believe me that I know the local history well than you but I know very little about history of Netherland. Nmate(talk) —Preceding comment was added at 11:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I never have been to Netherland. I know about Netherland that it is possible to legal somke joint in Amsterdam, and Netherland nation is not exist.But Flemish and Walloon nations are exist so I do not deal with Netherlands.We could be discussion partners if you know this area' history better.For example the strong Magyarization statement in the Trnava article is very injurious for Hungary.Because the Slovak nation was increased in over the past centuries (at the strong Magyarization time) but the Hungarian population was decreased from 1072000 to 520000 in Slovakia. The Slovaks are the best in the ethnic cleansing. If I would write it into Nove Zamky history that now it is the strong Slovakization time it would be wiped immediately.I wrote In my summary in Slovak language that I removed the obnoxious chauvinist edition by Tankred because He called me an obnoxious chauvinist in his farewell text. Nmate(talk)

Sorry for interrupting, but isn't the sentence "The Slovaks are the best in the ethnic cleansing." rather inappropriate? --Ruziklan (talk) 13:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Magyarization reported school closures simply, but very much Slovak was illiterate in that time.Slovak nation was increased in over the past centuries (at the strong Magyarization time).But the Hungarian population was decreaced from 565000 to 520000 from 1991 to 2001 in Slovakia.

This is not result of the Benes decrees.The Slovakization is not history, it is currently.Nmate(talk) —Preceding comment was added at 14:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Specific issues could be better discussed at the article talk page, I posted there. Hobartimus (talk) 14:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I'll try to look into it for you

Couldn't find the article on it yet but it was not that long ago. Anyway it was in the news all over what's more recent is general attacks against Freedom of Press in Slovakia, this time all newspapers demonstrated with white front pages against some law or some such. Hobartimus (talk) 14:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

You mean this? Yes, it is general press law for. --Ruziklan (talk) 14:22, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Markussep,

The language law is exists, but its contravention is not sanctioned simply (at the moment). Have you heard about that Slovakia confirmed the Benes decrees again? Did not mention it that Slovakia is a EU member at all. They comfirmed it again.Your imagines from central-Europe is very idealistic.Nmate (talk • contribs)

For the topic of mutual love, please, find attached one map from the SK goverment party, recently removed but there from November last year: [5], that newspaper is not righ wing, but rather viewed from that direction "Jewish-Liberal-anti-nationalistic" etc. Not only BE is debating --Vargatamas (talk) 20:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Cantons

Yes, I'm slowly getting aroung to creating the cantons, but I simply don't have time to fix the links. I will make the redirects after I'm done all the 4,000 some cantons. Would you mind helping me? Editorofthewiki 19:42, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Altitude in French commune infoboxes

Why does the average altitude from the French infobox not show up in the English translation? A lot of the boxes only have the average, not the minimum and maximum (which do show up). Ksnow (talk) 22:37, 23 April 2008 (UTC)Ksnow

[edit] Sauze

That's the name of the band, the other article, which is a commune, can stay with the name Sauze, Alpes-Maritimes, there's no need to specify (band) next to Sauze, leave it the way it was before, not a disambiguation page. Thanks --Rockk3r (talk) 18:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Names

Hi Markussep, could you please modify the proposed change B (Change "Between 1000 and 1918" to "Before 1918", and "Before 1000 and after 1918" to "After 1918") in a way that it would also include something like "The names in minority languages should be used only for the periods starting by the year when the name was first recorded in written sources"? We have discussed this issue and you seemed to agree with this criterion. I think this flexible starting date should replace 1000 in the proposal. I know it looks silly, but people here sometimes tend to look for gaps in rules. I will be happy to vote after this issue is addressed. Tankred (talk) 21:14, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Just to give a heads up I would oppose this, as it does not make any sense to me. I think we struggle enough as it is without self-admitted "silly" proposals. Hobartimus (talk) 21:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
I do not understand. Why would you oppose a rule against anachronistic names (such as Pozsony in 907 - well before the name existed)? What exactly does not make sense to you here? Tankred (talk) 22:52, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Written documentation is rare in the Middle Ages, and usually not in the native language(s), I wouldn't make that a rule. Furthermore, I think there are very few instances where the name could actually be a problem, maybe Nitra. I suggest we leave this issue to common sense. Markussep Talk 06:40, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Is there a compromise? --Elonka 12:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Attempt to move?

Please read this "attempt to move". To me it rather seems like some questions about the proper name of the article. Squash Racket (talk) 03:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 06:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Poll

Thank You that You informed about this event yesterday.Nmate (talk) 13:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] hi

I was just wondering how well do you speak/understand Slovak? Hobartimus (talk) 20:30, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Please delete your latest post it's unhelpful to list everyone's observations in this manner. It would get long and messy if everyone made their own list this way. Hobartimus (talk) 18:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
OK should I modify the points then to get a single list? There were already votes on a few things so those with a result should go to the consensus section with the points of the text that were never debated. Hobartimus (talk) 18:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Some points were voted down to a degree that there is consensus that they can NOT be incorporated into the text in any form. However if you didn't go by the votes you then just wrote up your own observations as consensus? We then get back to the point that different lists are needed if nothing is used as "basis". Hobartimus (talk) 19:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Also some points of the text were never questioned so these could be also added. Hobartimus (talk) 19:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Started tweaking the section based on the previous votes and discussions it's a work in progress though. Hobartimus (talk) 19:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dabbing

Hi there. As you know we are preparing for the new Fritzpoll Bot which will aim to add over 1.4 million articles to wikipedia over the next few months. The missing lists have begun being drawn up by bot but could you give a hand in dabbing names or helping sort out appropriate titles for multiple places within the same district. I'm uncertain as to how I would find which place is which are the distance to nearest settlements. What you consider coordinates in brackets in the titles acceptable? Could you help this worthy cause?

The entirety of the lists will be generated gradually ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 10:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Places/ now gives a full list as they are created and some instructions Fritzpoll (talk) 14:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm talking about place names within the same district. E.g Bago in Sonoma District of Guinea. (this is just an example) Imagine there are 5 settlements with the name Bago in this district and there is no other way to distinguish the difference between them. Obviously you cant have 5 articles with the same name Bago, Sonoma. So what would you do. Would you have e,g Bago, Sonoma (36 N 4 15 23 E) or what? ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 14:18, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Markus we need to find a solution to the problem at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Places/Problematic naming. We need to distinguish them somehow. 19:59, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Yuck. Most of the places names in Cambodia have several settlements with the same name. Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Places/cambodia/page7 etc. I don't know how we are gonna sort those links out ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 20:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


Whatever you can do ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 17:41, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Eibenstock edit

What do you mean by removing the image code and saying that the image is "unavailable"? A quick look at the article now will show that it is very available indeed. Rather than do such destructive things, why don't you try to improve things? Find the image and upload it to the Commons. While I was translating the articles about places in Aue-Schwarzenberg, I was forced to use a proxy, which will not accommodate huge files like that one. It would be nice if somebody understood this and helped instead of harming.

I don't know whether you've done any other such editing here, but if you have, please go back and consider undoing it and uploading the images to the Commons. Thanks. Kelisi (talk) 14:16, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

And you can still see here my nice little request for someone to enhance – not butcher – that article. Now, the job of inserting the images will be harder. Yes, destructive is the word. Kelisi (talk) 03:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Move of River Thouet to Thouet over redirect: no disamb necessary

Hi. I note that you moved the article I recently created on the River Thouet to Thouet, with the comment 'no disamb necessary'. This raises an interesting question because I didn't put 'River' in the name as a disambiguator, but because I saw it as part of the English language name for that river.

Certainly when talking about rivers whose native name is English, it seems to be the norm to include River as part of that name. There is an apparant difference between UK English speakers, who tend to name rivers in the form 'River xyz' (eg. River Thames) whilst US English speakers tend to use 'xyz River' (eg. Hudson River). But both definately include the 'River', and most WP:en articles on UK and US rivers therefore include the 'River' in the article title even where there is no ambiguity.

However here we are talking about a river in France. Looking at WP:fr, it does seem as if there is no equivalent of this convention in French. On the other hand this is WP:en, and policy is to use English names where they exist. But I'm not sure how this applies here. What do you think?. -- Chris j wood (talk) 10:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Luxembourg map

Yes, it's easy for me to modify it, or even make a whole new one capable of showing more detail. This may take a while as I am unwilling to attempt this with my laptop, which is what I use overseas. It has no mouse. I suppose I could try using a desktop at work, though. We'll see. Kelisi (talk) 23:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bratislava

Hi there!

  • 1st, Bratislava name didn't use the Slovak nation before 1918. The widespread Slovak name was Presporok in that time. I know the local history more better as You.
  • 2nd, My contributions were more as the location names corrections in the article! I added some important Hungarian related events to the historical chapter but Schcambo reverted all contributions immediately!
  • 3rd, You reverted me at Juraj Jánosik so it would be just that You would make a revert

at my non location name's contributions on this historical chapter because I am under restriction no revert control.

Nmate (talk) 18:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I've had this conversation on my talk page as well, but just thought I'd clarify here: have a look at WP:COMMONNAME. It doesn't matter what the local name is if there is a far more popular name in use in English. For example, Mount Everest isn't called that by people in Nepal or Tibet. Similarly, it doesn't matter what people in Bratislava call Bratislava Castle; it is known as that in English so that's how it stays. --Schcamboaon scéal? 19:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Dear Markussep!

If You watch my last edition at Bratislava's infobox What will be removed - You Can find the (Slovak) Presporok as historical location name there.Nmate (talk) 02:49, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spiš Castle

Hi! (again)

I do not remember so kind of comproise at the Slovak-Hungarian experiment that Hungarian nobleman's surname should be use in Slovakized form: Zápolya (Zápoľský). The Spišský hrad as an native name in the infobox is very strange also because the really native name is the Hungarian variant.Nmate (talk) 19:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)