User talk:Alektor89

Disambiguation link notification for March 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Holger Börner
 * added a link pointing to Bundesrat


 * Walter Wallmann
 * added a link pointing to Bundesrat

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:05, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

FWIW
Always remember to sign your posts ;) GoodDay (talk) 20:54, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I've taken the 'German presidents' topic to WP:WikiProject Politics, for a broader consensus. You can invite members of WP:GERMANY to participate, if you'd like. GoodDay (talk) 02:26, 17 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Done on project talk - thank you for initiating this constructive discussion. GermanJoe (talk) 16:55, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Richard von Weizsäcker
Hello Alektor89, thank you for your helpful edit summary - I have now added my opinion to the mentioned talkpage. While it's not a big deal (no need to revert), it is usually preferrable to keep an article in it's previous long-standing status while a discussion for changes is still ongoing. Just a quick note, in case you come across other discussed edits in the future.

I'd also like to invite you to join WikiProject Germany if you are interested in such collaborations. Despite a recent decrease in project activity, it is still a good ressource for all Germany-related aspects on en-Wiki, and for the occasional advice and help from fellow editors with an interest in such content. Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 16:47, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited President of Germany, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carlo Schmid ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/President_of_Germany check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/President_of_Germany?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Federal Constitutional Court, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bundesrat ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Federal_Constitutional_Court check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Federal_Constitutional_Court?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bundesrat of Germany, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christian Democratic Union ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Bundesrat_of_Germany check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Bundesrat_of_Germany?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Christian Democratic Union of Germany leadership election, 2018, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Borken ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Christian_Democratic_Union_of_Germany_leadership_election%2C_2018 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Christian_Democratic_Union_of_Germany_leadership_election%2C_2018?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 15
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Federal Constitutional Court, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Federal Administrative Court ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Federal_Constitutional_Court check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Federal_Constitutional_Court?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Re: Bundestag
Dear Alektor, I think you're confused about something. The function of the arch diagram is not to show how the members are seated, the function of the arch diagram is to show the spectrum position, otherwise there's no sense on having an actual arch. What you want is a diagram that shows the seating, for example the one in the Cortes Generales or the Croatian Parliament, as it's currently is the Bundestag diagram would cause confusion. I suggest you to work in a diagram like those I mentioned above. Besides, be sure that sooner or later someone is going to overwrite on the one you're using or someone from the FDP is going to complain. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 13:24, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I doubt this. Or why do we use a different model for parliamtents in Westminster Systems, where parliament members of government and opposition sit in front of each other? Because the diagrams show - at least to some reasonable extent - the actual seating. But this is only secondary. More importantly, I think the question of "spectrum position" is very arbitrary: Why are the Greens more "centrist" than the SPD? (As a german citizen, I would question that) Is the FDP really more "centrist" than the CDU/CSU? (I think this really depends on the field of policy) Is the left-centre-right-scheme still up to date with early 21st century politics? One could discuss these questions at length without reaching a definite conclusion. These are very difficult questions and as Wikipedia-articles should not represent "theories" or arbitrary opinions, we shoud use a more evident principle: The actual seating in the BT, which is beyond reasonable doubt. As "your" diagram is wrong anyway (there are three independent former AfD-members), I have again reverted your edit. If you disagree, please start a discussion on the article's talk page before editing.Alektor89 (talk) 21:36, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not the author of the diagram so is not mine. The Westmister system is not an arch, and its design is to show the government vs opposition which is part of the Westmister system, but does not necesary corespond with the actual seating, you can see it yourself; this is how they actually seat in the UK House of Common, and this is the diagram use for Wikipedia, as you can see, they dont seat as the diagram shows. In fact is quite the opposite, the government is "up" and the opposition is "down".
 * Now regarding the other aspect, it is true that the sprectrum position is subjective, the current order is, let's sat, traditional or customary and all diagrams of all previous Bundestag follow that custom, you can questioned if you want, that is valid, but even if you change this diagram in particular you would left dozens of diagrams of all the previous Bundestags and elections used in several dozens of Wikipedia pages which would cause confusion among the readers. My suggestion is that you discuss the issue, and try to reach a consensus and thus the change can be made in all diagrams at once and not just in one. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 12:44, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * PD: In any case the best you can do and it will be the easiest and fastest way to have the result you want, is as I suggested before to make a diagram that actually represents the Bundestag's shape, like the ones I show you from Spain and Croatia, or you the one use in the Legislative Assembly of Costa Rica or this one from Mexico. No one is going to question the seating, there will be no need to have long discussions about what party is more right or left wing and the independents can be located where they are literally seated without the problem of see where in the spectrum actually are. Seriously, is by far the best option and the easiest and fastest way, trust me. Give it a try. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 12:59, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * User talk:Dereck Camacho: I have put your in "..." to show that I do not mean this literally ("your" in the sense that you prefer it). Would you be OK if I would change the diagrams of all past Bundestags so that the FDP sits right of the Union (which it always has done and which can be proven with sources easily)? I would take a few hours an do this, if this settles our argument. [I will also post this on the article's talk page, where this discussion should continue] Alektor89 (talk) 14:50, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Alektor89 It will be helpful, yes, but I can't unilaterally decide for all the people involved. If you manage to obtain a majority of people and the authors of the diagrams for the change, I'll be happy to do it. One of the authors is actually a close collaborator in Spanish so I can help you reach him. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 14:54, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Dereck Camacho: As far as I can see, only the 1st and the 2nd Bundestag have own WIKI-articles (in english) [and use a completely different diagram]:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_German_Bundestag
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_German_Bundestag
 * So this should be no big thing, or do you know articles which I did not find? Alektor89 (talk) 15:01, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

All the German elections have diagrams, at least in Spanish, and also the state ones. And also there are diagrams in every state parliament, at least in Spanish. Also in the federal elections the CSU is represented, so be careful to remember that. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 15:23, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * User talk:Dereck Camacho But diagrams in election-articles are in some ways different from diagrams in parliament-articles. Diagrams in election-articles only represent the seat distribution after as part of the election-results and before the new parliament actually starts to sit (and seat order / group-structure are established). Let me give you an example, why this may cause differences: While I think, CDU and CSU must be treated as one group in the article "Bundestag" (which they are and have been in all past Bundestags), they should not be treated that way in the election articles. -> In the election they are two different parties, in the parliament they are one group. So I think that it is correct that they are shown seperatly in the diagram in German federal election 2017 while we should show them as an entitiy in the articel Bundestag. And as the actual seating is decided after the election in the parliamentary process, I have also not a problem, if the FDP is in the middle or on the far left or on the far right in an election-article. Alektor89 (talk) 15:56, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh man, you're still confuse about diagrams. You have a real problem about it. How many timnes do I have to prove you that the diagrams have absolutely nothing to do with how the parliament is seated? Please man, we will never get over this until you accept that fact.
 * So, it doesn't matter if the seating is different after the election, the seating has nothing to do. The diagram show whether the number from major to minor or the spectrum position. If you want to place FDP at the right of CDU you have to do that in all other diagrams because is a spectrum position nor where it is seated. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 19:24, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Germany, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bundesrat ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Germany check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Germany?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Bundesrat diagram
Hello! I noticed that you changed the diagram for Bundestag to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundesrat_of_Germany#/media/File:Bundesrat6910(3).svg back in October. Would you consider making clear that votes must be cast en banc, and cannot be split? Egroeg5 (talk) 05:07, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Hey Egroeg5! This is stated multiple times in the article (e.g. section 4), I think. You are right that it is important to make clear that the BR is no normal parliament, but a delegation-assembly. The diagram only shows the strength of pro-government, neutral and opposition delegations which is the most reasonable thing to to (party membership is really not that important in the Bundesrat). Do you have an idea, how the diagram could be improved? Alektor89 (talk) 21:09, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cabinet of Germany, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bellevue Palace ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Cabinet_of_Germany check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Cabinet_of_Germany?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Non-Inscrits or independents?
Hi Alektor,

I am the main author of the Parliament Diagram tool and I like to watch what is being created with it. I noticed that you've been creating a few German diagrams and that you've used the term "non-inscrits" to refer to "Fraktionslose". That's not really correct, because "non-inscrit" is specifically a term used in the EU parliament. Generally we use the term "independent" for parliament members who don't belong to a party. Just thought you'd like to know :-] --Slashme (talk) 08:36, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Slashme, the Diagram tool is really a nice thing! The thing is that in my opinion in Germany we have to differentiate between indepentents and non-inscrits, too. An independent is a parliament member who is no member of any party. A non-inscrit is a parliament member, who is no member of a recognized party ("Fraktion") in a given parliament. In Germany, a party needs a certain number or percentage of seats in a parliament, to be a "Fraktion" (in the Bundestag 5%, in the state parliaments this differs, sometimes 5%, sometimes 3,4 or 5 seats...). An independen politician can join a "Fraktion" (for example Frank Richter, an independent politician, who is member of the Saxony state parliament and sits in the SPD-fraktion) and a non-inscrit can be member of a party (for example Anna Treuenfels-Frowein, who is member of the FDP but sits in the Hamburg state parliament as a non-inscrit, as she is the only FDP candidate, who was elected in the last election and one seat is not enough in Hamburg, in order to be a recognized "Fraktion"). So I think the difference between non-inscrit and independent makes much sense in Germany, too. Alektor89 (talk) 10:02, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, OK, that makes sense! --Slashme (talk) 11:02, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bundesrat of Germany, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Left.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:41, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chancellor of Germany, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Egon Franke.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link to Wolfgang Mischnick in Fourth and Fifth Adenauer cabinet
Why did you do that?!?!?!? Rundstef (talk) 07:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Yesterday I had to undo a number of changes made by the user Qäsee (who is doing quite a lot of vandalism in articles on German politics at the moment) concerning, among other things, the completely justified unification of the articles Cabinet Adenauer IV and V (there never was a Cabinet Adenauer V, what happenend in the fall of 1962 was in fact only a major cabinet reshuffle), which he had taken apart again. In doing so, I also had to undo changes made by other users so that no edit conflicts would arise, even though these may have been justified on their own. I don't remember now exactly what you did: If you have an improvement for the Fourth Adenauer cabinet article, feel free to reincorporate it there(!). Best regards and no hard feelings, Alektor89 (talk) 08:46, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

2027 German presidential election moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, 2027 German presidential election, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Edit warning
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Peter Altmaier. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Concern regarding Draft:2027 German presidential election
Hello, Alektor89. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2027 German presidential election, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:04, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:2027 German presidential election


Hello, Alektor89. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2027 German presidential election".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 21:39, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

"Minister president"
First of all, "consensus" or "precedent" doesn't have to be debated until there is a dispute. You are the one who is disputing and changing, repeatedly, so you have to take your proposal to the talk page. Except you don't even engage in debate.

"Minister-President", the correct plural being "Minister-Presidents" not "Ministers-President" (this is not like "Attorneys General"; these are terms that originally come from the French), is the correct spelling via dictionaries (https://de.pons.com/%C3%BCbersetzung/deutsch-englisch/Ministerpr%C3%A4sident and others) and basically all official state chancellery sites, such as:


 * Bavaria (https://www.bayern.de/staatsregierung/ministerpraesident/minister-president/)
 * Baden-Württemberg (https://www.baden-wuerttemberg.de/en/government/minister-president/)
 * Saxony (https://www.ministerpraesident.sachsen.de/en/minister-president-biography-3407.html)
 * Saxony-Anhalt (https://www.sachsen-anhalt.de/lang/english/politics/minister-president/)
 * Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (https://www.government-mv.de/The-Cabinet/)

Aside from my observation that "Minister president" just looks visually unappealing. Maxwhollymoralground (talk) 16:26, 17 November 2022 (UTC)


 * It would have been better to discuss this on the article's talk page in order for other users to engage in the debate, but let's leave this apart. Pons (german school dictionary) and german websites don't take us that far in my opinion, as english wikipedia reflects the convention in the english speaking world. The Oxford Dictionary of English (2nd ed. 2005) doesn't know the term minister(-)president, but it has for example "minister general" (p. 1118) without "-". That qould be a possible analogon, in my opinion. Alektor89 (talk) 19:58, 17 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I have moved the discussion to the article's talk-page, where the discussion should continue.Alektor89 (talk) 20:00, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Ways to improve Alexander Schweitzer (politician)
Hello, Alektor89,

Thank you for creating Alexander Schweitzer (politician).

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

"Good start. Consider expanding by translating the article in German. I've assessed the article as Stub."

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with. Remember to sign your reply with. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

  [[User:CanonNi ]]  (talk • contribs) 12:01, 20 June 2024 (UTC)