User talk:Cruzian

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Jkelly 19:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Official languages
Hi. It would probably be a good idea for you to discuss things at the Talk page of the various articles that you are changing. Your edits are being reverted, and seem to be largely inaccurate. Jkelly 19:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Good edit. Jkelly 20:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

See also Official Languages Act (Canada), which clearly states that the law recognizes English and French as the official languages of Canada. Circeus 20:34, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I was wrong.--Cruzian 20:36, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, I found out that CIA Factbook is a good source on this matter. As far as I have checked, it has been consistent with other sources.--Cruzian 20:42, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I have reverted your edit to Denmark. It is plain incorrect, and it is not the first time the CIA makes errors in its reports on Denmark. E.g. in 1995 they claimed that Denmark became independent in 1849 Well, they were only 1100 years off. If I remember correctly this error continued until around 2000. It seems the CIA does not understand that some countries prefer to specify these things in detailed legislation, rather than constitution. This is the case in Denmark. A number of official acts refer exclusively to the use of Danish, this makes it official. A few years ago the Radikale Venstre suggested giving Denmark two official languages: Danish and English. They were completely ridiculed and politicians from all sides in parliament agreed that "one official language is enough". Regards. Valentinian (talk) 21:19, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for providing expertise. Is the information about "co-official" languages correct?--Cruzian 21:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, in the case of Faroese and Greenlandic, it is part of the home-rule agreements Danes have with the Kingdom's two smaller nationalities. Faroese was given official status in 1948, Greenlandic in 1979. In the case of German, I'm 99% sure it is part of the Copenhagen-Bonn Agreements of 1955, two identical unilaterial declarations. The German one gives wide cultural rights to our minority in Southern Schleswig (Germany), while the Danish one gives the same rights to the German minority in South Jutland / North Schleswig (Denmark). Btw, it has been suggested to add paragraphs specifying the flag, language, and coat of arms to the Constitution, but it is so incredibly difficult to change the Constitution that politicians have ruled this option out. 40% of all eligible voters must vote yes, so if 20-25% stay at home on the couch, you need a very big "yes" majority of the ballots cast. This is why Denmark uses the more indirect approach. Valentinian (talk) 23:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm curious why you chose to make so many change to country articles about official languages without having the data or information to back up your assertions? I don't really mean that in a mean way; I'm just kind of curious why you suddenly changed a whole series of articles with incorrect information? Moncrief 03:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)