User talk:C mon/archive2

Christian Democracy
Hello! As an editor of the article on Christian Democracy, I'd like to see you comment on Talk:Christian Democracy. Thank you. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 20:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Netherlands
Op WikiProject Council/Proposals loopt nu een voorstel voor het oprichten van een WikiProject Netherlands. Gezien de artikelen die je tot nu toe hebt geschreven zou dit misschien ook iets voor jou kunnen zijn: WikiProject Council/Proposals. A ecis  Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984. 18:44, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Tweede Kamermembers-templates
Yes, that was what I intended. According to Notability (people), the criteria are "Political figures holding or who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislature." I think that all members of the Tweede Kamer fall under these criteria. What are the concerns you have exactly? Cheers, JACO  PLANE  • 2006-12-28 18:56
 * Yes, I assumed that the primary criteria wouldn't be a problem. I would only advocate creating an article once there are reliable sources, but there are always sites like parlement.com and the Dutch media should cover most of them I imagine. I'll do some digging to see if any newspapers have exhaustive coverage. Only found for the moment. To address your concerns:
 * Well whether readers are interested in or searching for this is a rather subjective question that I can't answer. I would imagine that since the Netherlands is part of the E.U. our politicians come into contact with people outside of the Netherlands and those people might like to have some background information regarding who these people are. Also, todays members of parliament are tomorrow's ministers and state-secretaries, so having stubs on them can't hurt when they need to be improved.
 * I definitely don't think we should have a major push to get these articles created quickly. You are right, the current articles are in general not very good, and we should focus on ministers and cabinets. That does not mean that we can't eventually do both however.
 * Perhaps we should get some input from others and see what the consensus is. How about we move this discussion to Wikipedia talk:Notice board for Dutch wikipedians? JACO  PLANE  &bull; 2006-12-28 19:30
 * For the moment I'll remove the red links from the templates, see for example: VVD Tweede Kamer members. JACO  PLANE  &bull; 2006-12-28 20:07

Politics Template
Repaired the politics template. --Lmbstl 16:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Political parties established in yyyy
Hi C mon. I've seen you too are creating categories for political parties' foundation years. A couple of things have occurred to me: Presumably, if we did do anything along the above lines, we'd need to raise it on the discussion page for Categories for discussion first. To be honest, I wish I'd stopped to think about the scale of the thing before I started on this! Anyway...any views?--A bit iffy 12:03, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) It seems to me a lot of this recategorisation could be automated with a bot. Political parties should all ultimately come under the Category:Political parties, and ones that are categorised as "yyyy establishments" can then be recategorised accordingly.
 * 2) Also, I wonder whether my naming convention "Political parties established in yyyy" is the best one. It occurred to me last night that maybe "Political parties founded in yyyy" might be better, as "founded" feels a better word to use in the context of political parties. And now I see you have created Category:Political parties founded in 1968 (not sure whether that was intended or unconscious). A bot could easily be done to rename existing categories.
 * Just to let you know: I've requested a bot to do the legwork - see Bot requests.--A bit iffy 13:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

communism template
Well, still, one can be father of more than one child :-) I do not see any other common reference in movements enumerated in the template than Marx's writings (also critical reference of course). I do not insist on this image, but I think one should be conscious of historical context of h&s symbol: it is not very competent to play a unifying role as a head of a template. ziel &amp; 20:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Political Parties labeled as "Far Right", "Extreme Right", “Nationalist” or “Right-wing”
I have added a "" template to the article Political Parties labeled as "Far Right", "Extreme Right", “Nationalist” or “Right-wing”, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Argyriou (talk) 18:22, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Please explain your reversion of United States presidential election, 2004
Please explain your reversion of United States presidential election, 2004 on Talk:United States presidential election, 2004. I have ample discussion of why the change was made there. -- RobLa 04:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:902-1.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:902-1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 01:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes
Hi there. I've finally gotten around to starting up WikiProject Infoboxes. The project page itself is still pretty bare, but at least we now have a central discussion point for this sort of work. Please join! - 52 Pickup 13:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Politics of the Netherlands (terminology) and transwiki
Transwiki just means that the article (with its history) has been copied to the Wiktionary. It doesn't mean the article should have any particular disposition here. Most short definitions are deleted; but other articles are merged, expanded, or simply kept. Robert Ullmann 13:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Regeringshoofd
Over Prime Minister of the Netherlands, zie onder meer nl:Politiek en overheid in Nederland: "Staatshoofd en hoofd van de regering: Koningin Beatrix." Zie verder Parlement.com: "Als hoofd van de regering leest de Koningin op Prinsjesdag de troonrede voor." De Regering bestaat uit de Koning(in) en het Kabinet en staat onder leiding van de Koning(in). Het kabinet, bestaande uit ministers en staatssecretarissen, staat onder leiding van de minister-president. A ecis Brievenbus 13:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:GZalm.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:GZalm.jpg, 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. Sherool (talk) 19:59, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing the over-inclusion to our attention
I've asked the bot owner to roll back the Prince of Asturias award winners. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. Espana Viva  17:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Koning c mon
Het is werkelijk geweldig zoals je vandaag de artikelen over Nederlandse politici hebt geupdate. Ik heb zelf niet zo veel tijd op het moment om veel aan WP te werken, maar het is goed te zien dat je er zo mee bezig bent. Voor mij is het erg belangrijk dat de complexe Haagse situatie iets duidelijker wordt in Europa en Washington, en ik ben er van overtuigd dat de vertaling van het haagse gedoe die wij doen op Wikipedia veel betekenen voor het aanzien van Nederland in Europa en aan de andere kant van de Atlantische ocean... JACO PLANE  • 2007-02-22 23:31
 * Hehe, ik ben ook een zeer overtuigd republikein.. maar toch heb ik onze Bea op de voorpagina van Wikipedia geplaatst... Leve de revolutie!!! JACO  PLANE  &bull; 2007-02-22 23:44

List of Prime Ministers of the Netherlands
I commend your work on the page, and you obviously know a lot more about the subject than me. However, none of the information I added was wrong per se, just largely unspecific. I was planning to research the information that I did not know. None of what I wrote was guesswork (apart from my assuming that everyone in the RKSP was Catholic). However, I will take heed of your advise and try and make better contributions in the future. As for the page itself, you listed Julius van Zuylen van Nijevelt's religion as "Dutch Reformed/Free Mason", but this is incorrect in that Freemasonry is not a religion (despite its having many of the characteristics of a religion). In light of this I have made the small edit of changing "Dutch Reformed/Free Mason" to "Dutch Reformed (also a Freemason)". Static Sleepstorm 17:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem, I should have researched more before editing, and will do so in the future.
 * I was thinking that, for the PMs whose religion you have listed as "[religion]/none", as that sounds a bit contradictory, it would be better to put "[religion] (non-practising)" or similar. However, I have extremely limited knowledge of the Dutch language, and this may be a misinterpretation of the source, which says "geen godsdienst", which I would take to mean, in this context, "non-practising" or "non-worshipping". However you as a native Dutch speaker would know what it means, of course. Static Sleepstorm 17:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedians by Politics
C Mon, I am very impressed with your findings! I responded to your post in The Village Pump.

With your permission, I would love to publish your findings on my blog. I would credit you with a link to C mon, the village pump, or any other weblink you prefer.

I already published my methodology and initial findings here. But I think it would be interesting for readers to hear your follow up, as it presents a different point of view. The blog has received 3,000 unique visitors this week, so it would be an opportunity for your hard work to be appreciated by a wider audience.

Please let me know if I can republish your findings. All the best, Jonathan Stokes 00:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks C Mon. I'll blog tomorrow.  Will keep you posted.  All the best, Jonathan Stokes 05:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Published!  http://blog.valuewiki.com/2007/03/02/wikipedia-statistics-suggest-strong-liberal-bias/    Thank you, C Mon. Jonathan Stokes 20:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Stub
Het WikiProject Biography heeft een andere beoordeling van artikelen: om een Start rating te krijgen moet een artikel minimaal een aantal bronnen hebben; zie hier. Alle drie de genoemde artikelen zijn zonder bronvermelding; daarom de Stub-rating. Er rab ee 11:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Template:Political parties in Italy
Probably I exposed my opinion unclearly, but I ensure you that even I think that Wikipedia is no crystal ball. Anyway, we need your final opinion in Template talk:Political parties in Italy. --Checco 15:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Heh, interesting.
Just read through your description of your political views and whom you'd vote for -- you know, that could have been written by me just as likely. ;) &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) 00:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

religious democracy
Hi. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Democracy#religious_democracy Farhoudk 10:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Fijian political parties
Hi there! Please take a little more care with adding cats to Fijian political parties. I have had to revert several such edits, as not one of the political parties you categorized as "Protestant" is, in fact, a Protestant party.


 * The now-defunct Christian Democratic Alliance, although initially chaired by an Assemblies of God pastor, had no formal links to Protestantism. By far its most prominent parliamentary member was Adi Koila Nailatikau, who is a devout Roman Catholic.  So much for your assertions of "Protestantism".


 * The Fijian Political Party was/is non-sectarian. A large number of Methodist clergy did endorse it in the 1992 and 1994 elections, but refused to do so in 1999. This was one factor in its electoral defeat that year.


 * The Party of the Truth is a fringe party. It claims to be inspired by Christianity, but does not claim to follow any particular tradition, Protestant or otherwise.

Categorizing articles should be done more carefully. Thank you. David Cannon 11:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, I know you have a source. I don't think anybody in Fiji would agree with it, frankly speaking.  You could also check with User:Xorkl000 - a Fijian who's very knowledgeably about the political affairs of his country. David Cannon 13:00, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Aggressive?
Dear my friend C mon, I didn't turn aggressive, simply I didn't agree with your edits which came after an hard work to find the current compromise. Sorry if I was hasty with it. --Checco 08:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Template:Theocracy
Hello, I saw your edits here. I myself don't like the removal of those two articles. However, unless reliable sources are provided that those articles relate to "theocracy", we can't have them on list. There has been controversy regarding other articles (eg. Jeiwsh state) and it's not fair to demand reliable sources for some entries and not for others.Bless sins 01:46, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Userpage
ik zie dat je vind dat Nederland erg openstaat voor de rest van de wereld. Ik weet niet of je in de stad woont ofzo, maar heel veel mensen tegenwoordig vinden dat (zonder reden) "alle buitenlanders naar hun eigen land moeten gaan". Zelfs als je je hele leven al in Nederland woont, waar moet je heen als je dit land als je eigen land beschouwt? Je moet trouwens deze muziek eens beluisteren: Ochi Chyornklye. Dat is Roemeense muziek, misschien zeg ik dat omdat je voor dingen openstaat en van muziek houdt. Mallerd 12:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Green articles
I'd welcome your comment on my changes to Green politics, Green movement, and Worldwide green parties. Fishal 22:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Hee
Jij bent een een vieze Communist.. 80.114.20.12 11:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Zijn naam is Jan Maorijnissen, kijk maar op GeenStijl.. 80.114.20.12 11:50, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Feyenoord Rotterdam
Why did you remove the whole Feyenoord Infobox on the Feyenoord Rotterdam page?! User:Ultras GE 10:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding "Exploratory Committees"
You're invited to comment at Template talk:United States presidential election%2C 2008 navigation, on this proposal:
 * Proposed Deletion of category "Exploratory" and "Declared" for individuals filing with FEC.

And please note this argument on the same talk page. Exploratory equals Candidate.
 * Best regards, -- Yellowdesk 07:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Conservative liberalism
In Talk:Conservative liberalism, some users are contesting the idea that there is a conservative liberalism separated from social liberalism, within the liberal movement. I think that we need you and your opinions. See you. --Checco 07:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Dear C mon, can you add to the article some of the information that you explained very interestingly here? --Checco 08:18, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Our dear page is suddenly under attack now. I can't understand why it has happened. Until some days ago it was all so quiet... What can we do about it? --Checco 17:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Can we ask an opinion to Nightstallion? --Checco 17:34, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

marxists
i've some doubt that christian communsim is marxist--87.3.34.249 14:15, 23 April 2007 (UTC) oh i not remember log in --Francomemoria 14:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:D66_logo.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:D66_logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Bigr Tex  19:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Theocracy
Template:Theocracy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Majoreditor 00:13, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:European Union elections
Hi C mon,
 * (full reversion)

Any particular reason/s...? Thanks, David Kernow (talk) 01:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Original Research
The reason that I delete so much of your material is that you write essays. Essays are ineligible to be in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. You brought my attention to the policy quoted below.

''Discussion, rather than unilateral action, is the preferred means of changing policies, and the preferred mechanism for demonstrating the problem with policies or the way they are implemented. This means that an individual who opposes the state of a current rule or policy should not attempt to create proof that the rule does not work in Wikipedia itself.''

What do you wish to discuss? I have left a number of notes for you, and you don't respond. Do you want me to leave your original reserch unchallenged? Raggz 19:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * While I agree with your reverts on Human rights and the United States, it appears you (and Raggz) have violated the Three-revert rule: "If an editor violates the three-revert rule, they may be blocked from editing for up to 24 hours." Wait for more input from others or resolve your dispute the proper way instead of engaging in edit wars. Thanks. —Christopher Mann McKayuser talk 20:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

In the collective rights section I like your addition of the right of revolution, (how American of you). This raises inter-cultural issues to discuss briefly. The right to bear arms is undeniablly an American civil right for the purpose of conducting armed revolution. The only legal debate is the collective vs individual right, is one armed revolutionary a revolution or a criminal? What about three or three thousand? The accepted answer is that comunities may rebel violently, but not individuals. This all hinges upon the word "militia", a word that I call "community army".

Since among Europeans the right to bear arms is not a civil right, do Europeans have any right to revolution? May Europeans form the necessary armed militias? The Swiss may, but generally hasn't this right been lost in Europe and shouldn't we say this (with supporting references)? Well, the fall of the Berlin wall suggests two things, not completely lost, but so reduced that a revolution need be accepted by the government? Is there (1) any right of revolution in Europe and (2) is it ever an individual right? Raggz 16:18, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ARP-1971.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ARP-1971.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ilse@ 09:21, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Logo CDA.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Logo CDA.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ilse@ 09:40, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for providing the fair use rationale. I added a rationale for the other logos of Dutch political parties. – Ilse@ 09:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:1984-GPA.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1984-GPA.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ilse@ 09:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:TofikDibi.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:TofikDibi.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ilse@ 18:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Please note example number 8 on Non-free content that says: "An image of a living person that merely shows what s/he looks like. The rationale is that this is potentially replaceable with a freshly produced free photograph." – Ilse@ 20:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Similar images

 * Image:WijnandDuyvendak.gif – Ilse@ 18:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Image:InekeVanGent.jpg – Ilse@ 18:17, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Image:MarikoPeters.jpg – Ilse@ 18:17, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ARP-1959.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ARP-1959.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ilse@ 18:39, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your help in providing the rationales for all these images. – Ilse@ 18:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Sect
The defination

1.	a body of persons adhering to a particular religious faith; a religious denomination. 2.	a group regarded as heretical or as deviating from a generally accepted religious tradition. 3.	(in the sociology of religion) a Christian denomination characterized by insistence on strict qualifications for membership, as distinguished from the more inclusive groups called churches. 4.	any group, party, or faction united by a specific doctrine or under a doctrinal leader.

American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source sect      (sěkt)  Pronunciation Key n.

1. A group of people forming a distinct unit within a larger group by virtue of certain refinements or distinctions of belief or practice. 2. A religious body, especially one that has separated from a larger denomination.   3. A faction united by common interests or beliefs. sect

noun 1. 	a subdivision of a larger religious group 2. 	a dissenting clique [syn: faction] --CmrdMariategui 19:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tweede Kamer1.jpg
Hi. When you uploaded Image:Tweede Kamer1.jpg, you did not specify complete source and copyright information. Another user subsequently tagged it with GFDL-presumed and, for some time, it has existed on Wikipedia under the assumption that you created the image and you agreed to license it under the GFDL. This assumption, however well-meaning, is not legally sufficient and the tag is being phased out. Images using it are being deleted.

This image has been tagged for deletion and will be deleted in one week if adequate copyright information is not provided.

If you, personally, are the author of this content, meaning that you took the photograph yourself or you created the chart yourself (and it does not use any clipart that you did not create), please retag the image with a free image copyright tag that correctly describes your licensing intentions, usually GFDL-self or PD-self. Please also make sure if you have not already done so that you write a good description of what the image depicts, when you took the photo, and other important details. This will allow Wikipedia to continue using the image.

If you did not create the image or if it is derived from the copyrighted works of others, please keep in mind that most images on the internet are copyrighted and are not suitable for use on Wikipedia. Wikipedia respects the copyrights of others and does not use images unless we know that they have been freely licensed. Any creative work is automatically copyrighted, even if it lacks a copyright notice. Unless the copyright holder has specifically disclaimed their rights to the image and released it under the GFDL or another compatible license, we cannot use it. If you did not create the image, and cannot make the image compliant with Non-free content, simply do nothing and it will be deleted in a week. All other non-free images must follow these rules.

Please feel free to contact me on my talk page or leave a message at Media copyright questions with any questions you may have. Thank you. Aksibot 09:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Election posters
Hi, I noticed that you have added numerous Dutch posters and I've uploaded one from your source. As a rather new user I am not sure, whether the information suffices (hopefully I don't have to pay 'tarief reproductie affiches DNPP';-)) . What do you think - is the CHU image OK as it ? E.J. 10:58, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Vlaams belang logo.gif
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Vlaams belang logo.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ilse@ 17:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:GreenLeft-2006.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:GreenLeft-2006.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ilse@ 10:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for providing the fair use rationales. I think it is a little strange to claim all these images are used to "identify this political party". I think the purpose of these images in the article is related to the election campaigns. – Ilse@ 12:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Similar images

 * Image:GreenLeft-2002.jpeg – Ilse@ 10:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Image:GreenLeft-1994.jpg – Ilse@ 10:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Image:GreenLeft-1989.jpg – Ilse@ 10:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Asking for a comment?
Could you please give your comment at the discussion at Talk:List of political parties by country. Electionworld Talk?  18:52, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

A new task force that could use your help and expertise!
Hi C Mon -- please take a look!Benzocane 19:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

re Provinicial elections & political parties
I don't think its valuable to include all elections, that looks like information overkill to me (although subpages can always be created). The GreenLeft example look goods. Intangible2.0 19:52, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:1974_ppr_ov-1.jpg
I have tagged Image:1974_ppr_ov-1.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Bigr Tex  17:11, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Belgian political parties
Thanks for your reaction. I waited for 2 days (29-june / 1 july) to do the layout change. BTW, I was searching for a separate structure of PRL. The PRL entry says it is a defunct party and I know that the membership of PRL in international organizations was continued by MR. Electionworld Talk?  11:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:PSP-1971.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:PSP-1971.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Mr. Lefty (talk) 21:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:PPR1.jpg
I have tagged Image:PPR1.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Bigr Tex  19:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:PPR3.jpg
I have tagged Image:PPR3.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Bigr Tex  19:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:BP-1972.jpg
I have tagged Image:BP-1972.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Rlest 12:00, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:1977_cpn_tk-3a.jpg
I have tagged Image:1977_cpn_tk-3a.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Rlest 12:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:1963_psp_tk-1.jpeg
I have tagged Image:1963_psp_tk-1.jpeg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Rlest 12:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Eco-socialism
Hi C Mon,

I thought I'd message you as someone who took an interest when I first joined Wikipedia!

I'm trying to get Eco-socialism assessed and put on the Socialism Template. But I'm not sure how to do either. Well, I know how to put it on the template, but wanted to discuss it first at the template discussion page - but no one is replying! I've also posted in other places about getting the politics/sociology portals to assess it, but nothing has happened.

So how can I get it assessed and get support for it to be on the template? Can you help,partiularly in the assessment? Aled Dilwyn Fisher 08:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Jan Pronk
I think you did a good job on the Jan Pronk article. – Ilse@ 09:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I nominated Jan Pronk at the Article Improvement Initiative of the WikiProject Netherlands. – Ilse@ 18:33, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Religion in the Netherlands
I have added on the discussion page of Religion in the Netherlands article my ongoing objection to the text on catholic plurality. My main objection is that you do not provide recent data to back up your comments. Where recent data is available (CBS, Radboud university of Nijmegen, WRR report "Geloven in het publieke domein", and indirectly KASKI as this official Dutch Roman Catholic statistics organization is a major contributor the the WRR report. ), this data does contradict the text in the article on regional catholic plurality (granted with exception of Zeeuws Vlaanderen). Looking forward to your response Ruud64 20:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC) So my request is that you either remove the text as not supported by facts or provide recent data to support your text.

137.159.145.74 & 137.159.37.89
Hey, kun je alsjeblieft deze gebruikers er op wijzen dat er tegen vandalisme ook maatregelen getroffen worden? Dankje, ik weet niet hoe je dat formeel moet doen. Mallerd 14:25, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Gerda Verburg
Thanks for finding the ref for Gerda Verburg! I searched all over the web and couldn't find anything. Happy Editing! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 22:25, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Notice
Conservative liberalism was proposed for deletion. --Checco 23:35, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Lorwyn
Yo, I agree with you on the Lorwyn edit. So I'm not going to throw the 3rr template at you like I did to, but I just wanted to let you know to watch the 3rr. I'm keeping an eye on the article as well. Cheers, --DBishop1984 15:33, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem, just giving a heads up. --DBishop1984 15:39, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Law and Justice
Is Law and Justice conservative or national-conservative? Please, state your opinion in Talk:Law and Justice. Thank you. --Checco 03:04, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

National liberalism
...and what do you think about starting an article about national liberalism. It is not a very oft-used concept, but it is a little bit interesting (see for instance this): do you think that it deserves an article? I personally do. So does Nightstallion. We have also a source. --Checco 00:53, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Cite error
There is a "cite error" in conservative liberalism article about references. Can you fix it? Thanky you. --Checco 15:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Template:Dominionism
As you participated in the prior TfD, I thought you would be interested that it has been proposed for deletion once again. You can find the discussion here. SkierRMH 02:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Buitenweg2.jpg
I have tagged Image:Buitenweg2.jpg as replaceable fair use. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Rettetast 22:35, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Buitenweg2.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Buitenweg2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Long Live Dutch (Netherlands) Republic!
Hello! Say me please, how to write on Dutch Long Live (Dutch/Netherlands) Republic! Beforehand Thank You! Long Live Dutch (Netherlands) Republic!CrazyRepublican (talk) 22:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD
Hi! Considering your interesting in elections and/or the EU, you may be interested in the ongoing deletion debate on Danish European Union opt-outs referendum -- if so, could you please voice your opinion in the AfD debate? Thanks! — Nightstallion 15:44, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Politics of the Netherlands?
Van iedereen op Wikipedia heb jij waarschijnlijk het meeste geschreven over de Nederlandse politiek. Hoe sta jij tegenover het opzetten een WikiProject Politics of the Netherlands of een Taskforce Dutch politics binnen WikiProject Netherlands, of iets van dien aard? A ecis Brievenbus 15:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Ik weet niet of je liever in het Nederlands of in het Engels praat; als je wil dat ik liever in het Engels praat, zeg het gerust. Het opzetten van een dergelijk WikiProject zou natuurlijk doorgesproken moeten worden met WikiProject Netherlands, WikiProject Politics en WikiProject Council/Proposals, maar ik zie geen grote bezwaren, zeker niet omdat er ook al een WikiProject Australian politics en een WikiProject Taiwanese politics bestaan. De 9 punten/werkvelden die je noemde lijken me prima. Ik zou er alleen nog twee punten aan willen toevoegen: verkiezingen en politieke geschiedenis (van verzuiling tot de Nacht van Schmelzer tot de Pacificatie van 1917, om maar twee voorbeelden te noemen). A  ecis Brievenbus 17:16, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I will, and I have proposed the creation of the WikiProject: WikiProject Council/Proposals. A  ecis Brievenbus 20:16, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Dutch confessional parties
Category:Dutch confessional parties, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –

CfD nomination of Category:Dutch socialist parties
Category:Dutch socialist parties, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –

CfD nomination of Category:Dutch social democratic parties
Category:Dutch social democratic parties, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –

CfD nomination of Category:Dutch green parties
Category:Dutch green parties, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –

Western Europe
May I kindly suggest that before reverting and claiming that there has been no discussion about it, it might a good idea to actually read the talk page? I'm not saying my version is the final truth, far from it, and I'll be glad to hear your opinions on the talk page. I've posted mine there long ago. Cheers JdeJ 14:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify my position here: I really think this is a matter that would benefit from discussion between those who are interested in the article and I hope you will take part in it. The old version of the article was rather bad, and I think we all can agree on that, but I certainly don't intend to push my own version as the only alternative. I've removed the old introduction for reasons outlined in the talkpage (original research, unverified claims, contradictory, not encyclopedic) but I hope that there will ultimataly be a new introduction that everybody can agree on. I'm looking forward to your input! Cheers JdeJ 21:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Nordic Green Left
Category:Nordic Green Left, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –

National liberalism
I finally started an article on national liberalism. If you there is something to add or to correct (especially about the Netherlands and Belgium), feel free to do it and, if you are interested, help me in improving the whole article. --Checco (talk) 19:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Belgian government
I don't know if you are an expert of Belgian politics, but let me ask you a question. Do you know why the Flemish Socialist Party is not part of the government coalition (composed of the two christian-democratic parties, the two liberal ones and the Walloon Socialist Party)? I think it is the first time ever that a party is not in government while its sister party is. Why did that happen? --Checco (talk) 00:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your meticolous answer. I have other questions for you. Can we continue in my talk page? --Checco (talk) 14:55, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I posted some questions for you there. --Checco (talk) 15:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:E01-217.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:E01-217.jpg. 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 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 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 (talk) 07:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

2007 Belgian government formation
Another user and I clashed over the use of "Flemish" or "Dutch-speaking" on 2007 Belgian government formation. This user explained me his opinion at User talk:Checco. I would like to ask you what do you think about it. --Checco (talk) 23:33, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I moved the discussion to Talk:2007 Belgian government formation. --Checco (talk) 14:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SDAP-2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SDAP-2.jpg. 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 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 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 (talk) 04:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ARP-1925.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ARP-1925.jpg. 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 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 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 (talk) 04:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ARP-1946.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ARP-1946.jpg. 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 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 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 (talk) 04:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Front National de Belgique.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Front National de Belgique.jpg. 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 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 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 (talk) 20:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Logo PS belgium.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Logo PS belgium.jpg. 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 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 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 (talk) 00:55, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

template
thanx! --Soman (talk) 16:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Template in German liberal and social democratic partys
You had reverted two times my template to the chronological order of German liberal and socialdemocratic partys. I find it very useful and I had to study a lot of books in order to construct these "timeline" (please see the articles named in the templates and not reverted, the "timeline" is now interrupted). Instead of this template you created another template with all - liberal, christian, socialist, socialdemocratic, national etc. parties before 1945 in one template which is in my view not useful and very chaotic (by the way is there an order in it? chronologically? ideologically?). Because you had changed my template at first I plead you to say why it is so bad and I plead you to let it in the articles. I let as compromise your chaotic template. Okay? Greetings Alopex (talk) 17:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC) I answered at my user page. greetings Alopex (talk) 15:57, 6 March 2008 (UTC) I answered at my user page. greetings Alopex (talk) 17:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * hope you have time to contact me. greetingsAlopex (talk) 11:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Liberal thinkers
What was important for me was the format of the template. What about the thinkers? I think that we should discuss carefully on who put there. I'm not excited about the idea of having the thinkers in the template, but I can live with it. --Checco (talk) 19:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

All these show/hides
To be honest with you, I think all these shows/hides you've been adding to templates are much more annoying than useful. Yes, they look snazzy, and yes they decrease the amount of page space the templates take up, but they significantly increase (more than double) the file sizes, which is a bigger problem for people on slow computers than page size, and I think from a practical point of view the shows/hides are more of a hindrance than a help. Care for a rethink? - rst20xx (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Logo CSP Belgium.gif
Thank you for uploading Image:Logo CSP Belgium.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 12:56, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:NVV-1.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:NVV-1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:37, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Templates
Great great work. Let's start! --Checco (talk) 08:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Where was this compromise reached? Fine, anyway... I'm not very practical with templates, but I hope to be useful in some way... --Checco (talk) 23:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Leterme?
I know that you are not from Belgium, but as you live in the nearby Netherlands I know that you are always informed about your neighbouring country. I have heard that Leterme will finally form his government and that he will be installed tomorrow. Do you know anything about the parties forming the the governing coalition (are they the same parties which were part of the last Verhofstadt's cabinet?)? If yes, will Leterme's government be something like a government of national unity? What are the main (constitutional) reforms on which the parties found an agreement? You can answer to these questions here or in my talk page: where you do prefer! --Checco (talk) 08:53, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your explanation. I agree with you that it is not a government of national unity, but it has certainly a large majority. I continue to find difficult to understand why PS is part of it and SPA no, but this is something you already explained me in January. --Checco (talk) 14:53, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Colonies: USSR
Why u removed USSR from the template, so called soviet republics can be considered as colonies, and there is an article in Wikipedia about Soviet empire so whats ur argumets against? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thorbins (talk • contribs) 11:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Navigation templates styles
Hi, I changed some Irish Political History Series Navigation Templates to the style used by most Politics of [country]. Not everyone likes it. It you'd like to comment, there is a discussion here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ireland. Tx, Snappy56 (talk) 13:09, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:Italian political parties
Take a look at my second proposal at Template talk:Italian political parties. --Checco (talk) 11:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Dear C mon, that user is making a lot of changes using talk pages only to insult me. Thank for your intervention. As talk page is an evidence, I am the first to prefer to discuss things in talk page... Thank you again. --Checco (talk) 20:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)