User talk:Arnoutf/Archive2007 2

Violating WP:Point
Your removal of the cross image is a violation of WP:Point. Please stop. --evrik (talk) 17:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No it is not, your reinstatement of the false cross is bordering on vandalism. Stop that. Arnoutf 17:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


 * False cross? hardly. Take it to mediation if you disagree, but stop edit warring. The fact is that the image can be broadly defined. You're just upset because you're image isn't the one being used. --evrik (talk) 17:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That is the first time that a single revert, and an edit to a few articles is called edit warring. Anyway you are the one being upset that your image is being replaced. Arnoutf 17:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Jews who converted
I didn't know that. I was just searching for cats and couldn't find any. I don't see any problems with it, "who is a Jew" is not the issue otherwise we could have no Jewish cats. And I don't think that the subject is so obscure as to not deserve a cat, there are already 50 candidates to go straight in from the list. I think it would be a good idea if when a cat - or page - was deleted, a link to the AfD discussion was left on the talkpage.David Spart ( talk · contribs · [ logs] · block user · [ block log] ) 17:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Talk:List of tallest structures in the world
Please see my response to your comment on Talk:List of tallest structures in the world--Jorfer 22:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:StJamesCross.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:StJamesCross.gif, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Selket Talk 20:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIV (April 2007)
The April 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 13:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Cross censorship
Please do not remove information from articles. Wikipedia is not censored, and content is not removed even if some believe it to be contentious. —Psychonaut 23:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * To be honest that is a nonsense argument; If you would not have liked the image to be removed you should have put up the cross instead of a fascist flag, as the article is NOT about flags but about crosses. Anyway, I now replaced the flag with the cross. Arnoutf 17:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome
Welcome to the Commons, ! --Evrik 17:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:StJames Cross.png

 * No problem as it has been superseeded with the superior SVG format. Arnoutf 21:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:ArrowCross.png
No tag message/lang Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Siebrand
 * Hope I corrected it adequately. Arnoutf 21:01, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Belgium FAR
A lot of work has occurred on Belgium but I'm not sure if it's up to FA standard yet. Do you mind taking a look and leaving a last comment at its FAR? Cheers, Marskell 07:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Salmiaki
Patience. If you go back and read the notes, you'll see that Holland can technically be counted amongst the Nordic countries. Please do not add it back into the introduction, it only serves to clutter. The fuller list is given in the next section. Also, loathed is most definitely not "too big of a word." --Belg4mit 13:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Loathing is a very big word; without a reference it is TOO big a word. Holland is only a province of the Netherlands and is no more a Nordic country than Belgium or France (I cannot find any notes anywhere that say differently). If you disagree, again you need to provide a reference. (fairly agressive to put derogatory phrases in you edit summary where you are reverting to abovementioned non-referenced statements) Arnoutf 13:42, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * In English Holland (not Holand) is a synonym for The Netherlands. I'd also say it's fairly agressive to automatically revert edits of a native speaker concerning language nuances without first discussing them. --Belg4mit 14:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Read the Netherlands article and you will see that this is not strictly the case. Also I neither called my revert minor (as you did with your unfounded inclusion of the Netherlands in the Nordic countries) nor did it automatically. And of course being a native speaker (who does not know the Netherlands in English is spelled with a lower case "t" in "the") tells me nothing about your content (or even liguistic) knowledge on any specific topic; I could as easily say that you as a person not being native to any of the countries where salty liquoirce is appreciated should not change my edits. Arnoutf 14:13, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Again, you need to learn good faith and the intricacies of the language (your logic regarding region being described is flawed) if you're going to pick fights. Some history might not hurt either. Many words in English have a plurality of meanings. In the case of nordic, several of them happen to overlap and allow for the inclusion/non-explicit listing of The Netherlands for a few sentences. --Belg4mit 14:30, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]: Holland n : a constitutional monarchy in western Europe on the North Sea; achieved independence from Spain in 1579; half the country lies below sea level [syn: {Netherlands}, {The Netherlands}, {Kingdom of The Netherlands}]


 * Ah now I am being accused of violating WP:GF and that after having my edit being reversed as "wish-washy"; who can hardly be called assuming good faith. Also thanks that you assume that the composition of Northern Europe can be interpreted in the terms of the Bronze Age (i.e. BC - pre Roman - perhaps you should read some history). Also your inclusion of modern Germans in the Nordic peoples has only been supported by Nazi propaganda (as Wordnet nicely reports). The Holland-Netherlands issue is not of importance; so I wont go into that here Arnoutf 14:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, for repeatedly reverting things, without (initially) asking for citations and allowing time for them to be provided. I certainly think that qualifies as bad faith. As I just told User:Han-Kwang "mealy mouthed and loquacious" might have been a better choice. I was in a rush, having had my edits summarily discarded whilst in the process of working on them. The point was that your edits unnecessarily watered down the text. No, not *only* Nazi propaganda (there were two citations, and many more are available). Indeed, you've even misread the Wordnet entry, "Hitler wanted Nordic people to rule Europe," is simply a convenient example of the usage. I explicitly did not given Aryan as a synonym in the "tall, fair, blond, blue-eyed" definition of nordic. Also note that I've removed the capitalization that seems to have been contributing to your misinterpretation of the intention of my edit; simplification and reasonable accuracy. Compare the Commonwealth edit done at the same time. More than the UK edits spent yeast, and not even the entire CE, or only the CE. Yet giving that is a suitably terse and reasonably accurate phrase. I'm going to step AFK now, HAND. --Belg4mit 15:02, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Asking for citations is not necessary, every editors is allowed to tune down bold, unreferenced claims (WP:REF). The second citation explicitly quotes Wordnet (which makes it basically 1 citation). If "Hitler" is no nazi context, I would not know what is. I never debated the Nordic characteristics, so I don't see your point in mentioning that. Also I have niether reverted nor critisised your enlarging of the Marmite thing to Commonwealth (basically I agree that is a good idea); and indeed my weakening of loathing was meant to allown non-CE eaters of marmite their liking. My main problem with both is that while simplification is a good aim, I think going to Nordic (excluding the Netherlands); and stating that everyone outside commonwealth loathes Marmite is on oversimplification. Reasonably accurate is just not good enough.Arnoutf 15:19, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Re: Nazis: Ah, I hadn't noticed that (citing earlier WN) However again, the Hitler lines is an example, not the definition. I didn't say you did debate "Aryan" characteristics, the point was that it was part of my basis for lumping in Nederlands. I know you didn't complain about the CE, it was an example of the context in which I was making the edits. --Belg4mit 15:44, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the main issue is that we put differnt weights on brevity (which seems your focuss) versus comprehensiveness (where I seem to favour a higher minimum level). I hope we will be able to figure out a brief and concise version. See for further discussion on talk:Salty liquorice. Arnoutf 15:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XV (May 2007)
The May 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:20, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

"Assess" v. "Asses"
I hope you realize those are two completely different words. Uh, regards, Tuxide 21:25, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * oops sorry, original typo, and then used the remember-itself-option in the summary screen. Sorry about that meant assess of course. Arnoutf 21:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Belgium
Hi, Thanks for your comments concerning Belgium. Could you please participate to the discussion page of this article. Some independent editor should give his opinion to the current dispute. Thanks a lot. Vb 07:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello and regarding locator maps
Thanks for your praise and comments. First, I did not include the Canary Islands in the main map because, while they are a part of Spain, are closest to mainland Africa -- I consciously decided to give the map a European focus, not necessarily an EU one, and this would have meant enlarging the scope of the map too much (I think). It may be difficult to discern, but the Canary Islands are coloured in the world map in the top left. Second, thanks for the heads-up: I am becoming aware of this issue but, surprisingly (and across more than a dozen articles), only one editor has yet raised negative response. Criticisms can be dealt with as they arise.

Anyhow, if you have any other suggestions or questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thanks! Quizimodo 17:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello! Another editor has commented on the maps here, but I am somewhat distressed by their reaction to revert all of the maps with little cause.  I would appreciate your feedback.  Thanks.  Quizimodo 18:01, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * By the way, I have since added an inset of the Canary Islands for Spain, and another editor pointed out that the maps I created were missing the Serbia/Montenegro border (which I am correcting). Thanks!  Quizimodo 19:24, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the advice. Do you have any suggestions for overall technical improvements to the maps?  I want to discuss, but I don't necessarily want to (spend valuable time) debating the issue for not what.  I wonder whether or not I should drop this effort to improve the locator maps, and or move on to other projects -- there's an oceanography project that may be calling out to me. ;) Quizimodo 00:09, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

EU footnotes
I realised why you reverted my adding of a border to the footnotes on the EU page. On Firefox, the footnotes were not all visible at once, and when you scrolled down, the text at the top disappeared into the white space, which looked kinda weird, so I added a border. Now on IE, it looked completely different, so my edit didn't make sense. So thanks for reverting anyway. =) Rossenglish 16:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

How to respond to nominations for article improvement WP:NL
Hi, what are your ideas about responses to AII nomination within WP:NL-AII? I can see the nominations but what about responses? ErickAgain 00:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You can type a line below with support or with an alternative nomination; but keep in mind that the initiative is new and unproven so the procedure may evolve while we go; I should not be the only one deciding there. Arnoutf 09:17, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. ErickAgain 17:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)
The June 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 13:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

William the Silent
William the Silent has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Rex
You can come here to discuss. Kingjeff 17:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Leave me out of your petty feuds. Arnoutf 18:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Kerken in Amsterdam
Hoi Arnout, er is momenteel een discussie gaande of de pagina's over de Westerkerk, Oosterkerk, Noorderkerk en Zuiderkerk de Nederlandse namen moeten hebben of Engelstalige equivalenten (North Church etc). Dat laaste vind ik persoonlijk een gruwel. Je kunt eventueel je mening toevoegen (voor of tegen, moet je natuurlijk helemaal zelf weten) op Talk:Noorderkerk. Groetjes, Jvhertum 15:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

European Union edits
There goes the stability. Any ideas on how to deal with this? -  J Logan t: 12:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It's a pain. All edits today where in this edit war. I reverted massively to the version of this morning, with a motivation on the talk page. If Lear continues this I will more openly suggest mediation, and if that does not work I will push this to arbcom because IMHO what he did todat was very close to 3RR/vandalism and was general disruptive. Arnoutf 17:02, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I was hoping mediation etc wouldn't be needed, but I see this morning he is back at it. It has to be done or we'll get no where, sad reality. -  J Logan t: 12:17, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem with mediation, although I doubt this will help as it requires all parties to accept the outcome (ie that they may be wrong). Somehow I doubt whether Lear 21 is willing to enter a mediation process with the agreement he will accept the outcome, even if he is proven wrong. Anyway, I am off for holiday this afternoon, so I hope it will be ok. Arnoutf 12:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

EU in lists
Hi! DSuser is on a crusade to eliminate the European Union from all lists of countries, namely:

List of countries and outlying territories by total area, Template:AreaChartOver1.5m, List of countries by population, Template:PopulationChartOver500m, Template:PopulationChart50m-500m, List of countries and federations by military expenditures, List of countries by GDP (nominal), List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita, List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita, List of countries by population density, List of countries by English-speaking population, List of countries by exports, List of countries by rail transport network size

It would be of help if you could join the discussion. Thanks! — Nightstallion 14:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

There's a central discussion at Talk:European Union/inclusion in lists of countries now. Please state your opinion; thanks! — Nightstallion 09:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator selection
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kirill 02:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

EU figures
Hey, glad to see you back btw. On those edits to the EU's GDP figures. Your point on rankings is of course obvious, however what about the actual GDP figure given? That doesn't change when removing the other member states so does the editor not have a point on that one? -  J Logan t: 18:46, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, did not catch that first go. My last change was only the ranking, not the number; I apologised to the new editor on his/her talk page for the overly blunt reversion. Arnoutf 18:57, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No prob them. I've checked the figures against out 2007 IMF figures used in the prose and the GDP matches so it's okay. I added a link in the infobox. However the IMF on there does not give per capita figures. Do you know where we got those from? -  J Logan t: 19:11, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * They come through the relevant wiki articles (e.g. List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita), kind a weak source but ok. Arnoutf 19:15, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

EUYO
No, I don't anything much about them. It was just that they are on the TV (BBC2 Proms) at that moment :-)

Triwbe 20:10, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Still more than me ;-) Arnoutf 20:12, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

EU article: Olympics
I agree, however you do realise that it is the best people who won. Hence a combined team would in theory be made up of the best - hence the same people would enter and win. That is of course in theory, and long winded - hence why it would be a bit much to include. -  J Logan t: 16:52, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

EU
All right, I understand.I thought that some pictures with beautiful scenery shall be included in the article to show the natural beauty of the EU. --Gligan 09:23, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem; I have to admit, it is a beautiful image. Arnoutf 09:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Wandalstouring 08:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Yamashina Mido
Hello. You recently assessed the Yamashina Mido article as a Stub, commenting that there was too little context for it to be considered a Start-class article. Any suggestions you'd like to offer towards improving the article would be most appreciated. Thank you. LordAmeth 14:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It is a borderline case I would say between stub and start. I placed a number of issues on which the article scores weak for start on the talk page of the article. I hope that helps. Arnoutf 14:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Salty Liquorice
The current form is more "weasely" than the previous revision. --Belg4mit 04:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I tend to disagree, "many" the weaselword is a non-quantified entity-and therefore can never be checked. Somewhat acquired tasted is also vague and speculative (and unsourced) but can in principle be supported by a reference.
 * I disagree fully that that reference is essential though. Arnoutf 09:17, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

EU edit
Agreed, but try to accomodate. If we are to get stability we need to resolve the conflict, not prolounge it. If we can get his agreement to something that is as close to the discussion as possible then it's win win. I don't want to have to try to take formal action against him again and he doesn't listen to mediation. If we pop to the talk page now and then to update each other on our positions, as I don't want to give ground you're not prepared to give so to speak - against what we are trying to fight for.

On reversions, if we get into an edit war we should try to take it in turns to revert, to avoid getting a 3RR. Hopefuly we won't though. We just have to find the key, he wants a picture and we think it s a rubbish picture - well we find a better one. He just wants a picture. He won't try to resolve this, so we have to work twice as hard to get an agreement. Thanks for everything btw, not long now... -  J Logan t: 12:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * We're getting somewhere I think! I reckon turning the table into a prose on global cities could improve the article and be a good agreement compromise between what we want. Are you okay with that idea? If we get that sorted, and a ref for the image so I can back it up, I'm prepared to give way on demo being at the bottom and to put religion back. Are you okay with that also? Or do you have an idea on how we can deal with the religion section? -  J Logan t: 14:33, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm happy converting table into prose; that gives more flexibility. I don't completely know what ref for what image you mean?
 * Demo at the bottom does n't matter to me. Religion can be in for me but it should be EU-ised possibly by referring it to the EU constitution - add ref to Juda-Christian roots of EU - or something like that. Just a bare summary of the religions would not work for me. Arnoutf 15:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The economy image, hosting the companies. I can't find a direct ref for that anywhere.
 * With religion, there was the church and state data but that was moved out to its own page because it wasn't demographic information - hence wouldn't fit under demographics as Lear wanted it to. I suppose as it is talking about secularisation, we could reintroduce a small note on it reflecting the EU or something? Not sure. -  J Logan t: 15:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Answer to your question
here. Cheers, --TheFE ARgod  (Ч) 14:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, fair response. Arnoutf 14:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

EU discussion
Oh I so wish we don't have to go down that road. For a start I'm supposed to be taking a course in conflict resolution! I really don't know, if we reach a compromise on this he may well bring up another point which will take years to solve. Problem I've been dealing with myself is trying to take an objective view of myself. I know sometimes I've been pushing hard on things that don't matter (or could be wrong) simply because of his attitude where as I should have been concentrating on what is best for the article. Yet he does it so often with no regard or idea of compromise. He'd fit very well into the Polish government right now!

Anyway, I think we should take one last shot. He has stated that everything else is flexible, I might be able to get the images down and there being 10 cities isn't too bad? (is it?) There is some movement, however it may yet again be a red herring. What other issues are outstanding do you think? Religion still a problem? If you could build a case in advance please, we'll make warnings and if heads no where then we take action and don't stop till we get a result. Again, thanks for everything. -  J Logan t: 07:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I understand how you feel, we seem to be sliding very rapidly while he maintains his old position. However I think he has from time to time moved a bit. We just can't force him to. The only way someone like Lear changes his position is if he thinks it is his idea. We have a problem though, without proper engagement from others our position isn't very strong. Better than his but it will be drawn out. We need to get more voices in, problem is they very understandable don't want to get involved or get tired of us lot writing long bashing replies at each other. -  J Logan t: 09:38, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * On the other hand, if we just resign on the table issue he will take that as a victory and enter any other discussion in an unconstructive mood. Its depressing but we have long since entered the power-play arena where minor points are, under the surface, major conflicts. I suggest we try to reach some agreement on the table even if we are sliding, and forget about the other problems for now. From his statement I reckon we could easily use the proposed table, expand it to ten and don't push too hard on images. I reckon I could handle that if you just drop the odd comment here and there. Meanwhile if you start on the copyedit work. If it is a simple rewrite of data I don't think he'd mind. He isn't a text person. We would only have a problem if you remove a chunk or reorder headings. If that is the case, do everything first and that last with a note on the talk page if challenged. -  J Logan t: 09:52, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * If you (with Rossenglish?) concentrate on the copyedit then, that is more your area than mine (I can never see the mistakes, especily when I wrote it). Meanwhile I'll see if I can get a result on the table but won't push too hard (and keep taking long walks to calm myself down). -  J Logan t: 10:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Good idea, a wikibreak is good to restore once sence of reality! (apparently, never found out what reality was like. muhahah!) -  J Logan t: 10:23, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

It is surprising, yet of course logical :). No.4 was only for Lear's benefit after all. Should be some more comments coming soon. As you so eloquently summarised it as 4 choices, I thought it would be the best time to do some leafleting of our active members. I may have missed some but I think we should have enough soon. - J Logan t: 15:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Golden Film
Thank you for your review of the Golden Film article. I responded to your comments. – Ilse@ 22:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/Coordinators
Hello Arnoutf. Thanks for your support at the Military history taskforce elections. I am now a coordinator. Please feel free to approach me if you need any help. - FayssalF  - Wiki me up®  01:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC)