User talk:Lexicon/Archive delta

US/Metric on asteroid escape velocities
The Ceres value was taken to four places. We just don't know it that well. The same applies to the other US values that were added, and to the metric values, in fact. I removed the other US values, which were taken to three places. The usage of US units as opposed to metric is another matter. Michaelbusch 18:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I won't revert for now, but I don't think it was necessary to remove all of the US units, as you did at Ceres (dwarf planet). My point (in agreeing with Michael's removal of the escape velocity converison) was that it doesn't make sense to have one conversion at Ceres, while the other "major" bodies (planets and dwarf planets) do not have the same conversion. If someone wants to do all of them at once, that would be a different matter. As it is right now, the removal of the US units from Ceres compunds the problem in that Ceres is now even more out of sync with the other infoboxes. --Ckatz chat spy  18:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Case in point - the addition of that material by User:Toddles29 recently. It was done across all of the bodies at the same time for consistency. --Ckatz chat spy  18:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Permission to use Image:Flag of Ash Sharqiyah.svg
Hi Osgoodelawyer,

Would you mind giving your permission to release Image:Flag of Ash Sharqiyah.svg under the GPL? I would like to use it in the open source game Freeciv that is released under this license. Thanks in advance! --Himasaram 23:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:FotGFotter.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:FotGFotter.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 23:16, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Pork pie hat
Sorry, yes, it would have made sense to contact you - I tend to assume that people who have made significant contributions to an article will have it on their watchlist so it would be as good to leave a note there.

The hat just doesn't look, to me (or to the anonymous IP who left an earlier talk page note on the subject), like the pork pie hats in images on the web (like the one linked to from the page). The article says "it is similar to a trilby or a fedora, but with a flat top". It could just be a misleading angle, but the hat pictured appears to have a rounded top, like a bowler, not a flat top. Is this the case? If not, perhaps another image could be taken which made this clearer, as it seems I'm not the only person confused. TSP 23:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

HanzoHattori
This discussion on WP:AN/I appears to have been the catalyst for the block. I disagree with not telling him specifically what the violations were (especially since some of them in the discussion were a few weeks ago). There may be better recent examples, but I haven't looked through his contribs. Leebo 86 18:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have laid out the details on this users page, I agree it is important to explain your reasoning to the blocked user. High InBC (Need help? Ask me) 18:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I left a comment on AN/I about it. . As I mentioned there, I completely forgot that you were involved in mentoring/mediating with Hanzo, if I had remembered, I'd have definitely gotten with you first beforehand. As for the lack of information to hanzo, I did mention it was personal attacks, and I was under the impression he was aware of the AN/I thread. &rArr;  SWAT  Jester    On Belay!  21:35, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * You seemed to be unofficially looking after him last time I ran across the two of you. Mentoring/tutoring/mediating, call it whatever you want. &rArr;   SWAT  Jester    On Belay!  21:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Cascadia
Hi Lexicon,

I believe you've made an error with your recent edit to Cascadia: (remove again. it's a name with "cascadia" in it, and would never be searched for through "cascadia" (the reason for disambiguation pages))

Let me explain. If a user quickly types "cascadia" into the search box at left (expecting to find the subduction zone, among other things) and hits return, then they go to the dab page and (now) find no reference to what they were looking for. Even if they click "search" instead of hitting return, the search results have the dab page first and strangely, Cascadia subduction zone is nowhere to be found.

"Cascadia subduction zone" is one of the most common uses of the term "Cascadia". I thought the purpose of dab pages is to help users find the info they're looking for. Your recent edit undermines that purpose and complicates a user's search for the desired info.

By the way, if you look in Talk:Cascadia, one of the major reason for creating this dab page was to disambiguate terms including "Cascadia subduction zone".

I know you're an admin, but I hope you'll agree that my reasoning is sound and please revert your change. Thanks. --Seattle Skier 22:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You said in your reply, "If someone wants to find an article on the Cascadian subduction zone, it is very unlikely that they will use "Cascadia" as a search term". First of all, it's the Cascadia subduction zone, not Cascadian.  And second of all, my example of searching was a real one!  I know of at least one WP user who did actually use that term and end up on the Cascadia page, then added what he thought was an appropriate link to the subduction zone (which you deleted).  The #1, primary usage of "Cascadia" is in reference to the subduction zone, so it really has to be listed there.  You mentioned America, Patagonia, etc.  Let's visit the page America, and you'll see that the second entry is "United States of America".  By the reasoning you are applying to Cascadia, we should also delete USA from the America page, because anyone wanting to find the USA article would always type in "USA" or "United States" or even all four words in the full name.  But clearly, it would be foolish to delete that entry.


 * I have no desire to fight an edit war. I think it is very clear that the encyclopedia is better served by having "Cascadia subduction zone" listed on the "Cascadia" page, just as it is better with "United States of America" listed on the "America" page.  That is the only reason that matters.  If WP is improved and easier to use, that's a good thing.


 * Your adminship is automatically a factor in this (even if you think it shouldn't be), because if I revert your change, it is more likely that the next editor to look at the page history (especially an admin on RC patrol) will redelete my change. They are more likely to think that you must know better than me, and that I must be repeating my newbie "error" twice (even if I explain myself well in the edit summary, as I always do).  That's why I mentioned adminship and that's why I asked you to revert the deletion instead of doing it myself.  Thanks.  --Seattle Skier 05:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, I see that I have other supporters in this . . . someone has put back several geology terms. Lexicon, after seeing the earlier mess that you cleaned up, I do have more appreciation for your position.  However, we clearly travel in different spheres.  You think that the Cascadia (independence movement) is an important use of the term, while I dismiss it as a loony fringe movement (I've heard of it, for sure, but paid no heed).  It's just like the State of Jefferson folks or people who want to split WA or OR down the middle, not to be taken too seriously and preferably ignored.  In contrast, important geological terms like the CSZ have appeared in thousands of published scientific papers, along with scores of books.  They certainly merit inclusion on a dab page which lists important uses of the term "Cascadia".
 * You also deleted the book Cascadia: the Geologic Evolution of the Pacific Northwest and questioned its notability. In response, this book was published in 1972, the year of my birth, and never released in a newer edition.  Yet I checked it out several times from the university library about 5 years ago, after seeing it referenced in so many other things I was reading.  That's a highly influential and notable book, a geology book which is still accurate and worth reading 3 decades after publication.  OCLC WorldCat shows that the book is still found in 490 library systems throughout the world, further strong evidence of notability and staying power (i.e. it hasn't been disposed of in ex-lib book sales).  The book is probably notable enough to deserve a WP article of its own, if anyone cared to write one.  --Seattle Skier 18:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Anishinaabemowin language Userbox
Aaniin, with great effort from User:Miskwito, we now have the oj series of Anishinaabemowin language userboxes. On the WP:IPNA/Nish page, we have a matrix of the possible categories for the oj series and the major dialect groupings. You can now add to your Userpage one of the oj userboxes that are available or you can help create a userbox for the dialect of your interest. Please see Wikipedia_talk:Babel for the full discussion. Miigwech. CJLippert 23:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Shoppers World Brampton
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shoppers_World%2C_Brampton&diff=99391249&oldid=99384761

Don't delete information. If indeed it only said "Shoppers World was built on a field", then it would be okay to delete it. But the former owner of the land and how it was created to sell houses is critical to its early history. -- Zanimum 17:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

chandra
Like I say, I love it when people call me a liar. It allows me to hate humans all the more.

Since the whole thing is irrelevant to the purpose of the page, i.e., whether Badali is an asshole and deserves to be banned, I left out material irrelevant to the issue being discussed, such as her statement that she has a previous request earlier that day. But as you can see, what I posted is purely what she said, and the meaning is unchanged. I altered nary a word:

From : 	Kathy Lestition  Sent : 	Tuesday, March 20, 2007 3:04 PM To : 	fayekanegallery@hotmail.com CC : 	kathy@head.cfa.harvard.edu

Dear Faye Kane,

We have so far been unable to come up with the perfect wording for a somewhat complex situation. I think it's probably time to take another crack at it.

Our ability to grant permissions extends only to images taken with telescopes or satellites funded by NASA, or images, illustrations or animations funded by a NASA program. Unfortunately, since these can come from a number of sources which do not necessarily follow the same protocol for credits, and with whom people seeking these permissions are not necessarily familiar, it is not always clear to requesters which images are considered in this public domain. We also have been granted permission by non-NASA funded programs and organizations to use their material for comparative purposes. We do not have authority to grant permission for re-use of these images, we are granted our own informational use only.

Again, even with the clearest of credits ( I just dealt with someone who insists that we own an image that is clearly credited to another organization), people are often confused. And it's not always that simple. A composite image of an object may consist of a Chandra image (public domain) overlayed with an image from ESA or a ground-based telescope (not public domain).

So, we have come up with a request form that requires the url or name of the image. That way, we can look at the actual image being requested and either confirm the permission, or tell the requester to which organization they have to go to get permission. It seemed simpler that way, rather than trading several e-mails trying to explain. People and organizations have been gracious in granting us permission to post materials that we do not own, so we try to be very scrupulous in sending requests for permission back to those same organizations.

I agree with you that our instructions could be worded more clearly. I have lost track of the number of revisions, but I'll try again. Meanwhile, please do fill in the form so we can clarify your permission request.

Sincerely, Kathleen Lestition Outreach Coordinator Chandra X-ray Center

=
================================================== Kathleen Lestition Education & Outreach Coordinator Chandra X-Ray Center Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory 60 Garden Street, MS 6 Cambridge, MA 02138  USA kathy@head.cfa.harvard.edu Phone: 617.495.7399 Fax: 617.495.7356

 OKAY???

WILL YOU STOP DELETING NASA IMAGES NOW?? TechnoFaye 23:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Chandra images
Abu badali, I have confirmed that Chandra images, if not tagged on the site as including information from ground-based telescopes which are not under the control of NASA, are, in fact, completely public domain for all purposes, including commercial, so long as NASA-endorsement is not implied through their use (which is actually a completely different issue from use). If you have listed Chandra images for deletion, could you let me know what they were, so I might look up and find out if they truly are fair use? Thanks. Lexicon (talk) 23:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I have never even seen a "Chandra image". On March 16, a user on dropped a kind message on my talk pages asking my opinion on either the images on a given link where usable on Wikipedia. I followed the link, scrolled the page down looking for a "terms of use" or "copyright notice" link on the page, and found one called Image use. The link, as you know by know, says the images from the site are available under permission for non-commercial use, which are two no-nos for Wikipedia. Then, I replied the user explaining him that unfortunately those images couldn't be used, and giving my reasons to believe so. The user kindly replied with a thanks, and that was the end of my part as an active character in this story.
 * After that, elsewhere, some personal attacks were fired and WP:AGF was apparently ignored.


 * It's good news that we now have a new source for PD images. Please, don't forget to take the good news to User:Scheibenzahl.
 * Let me know whenever I can be of any help. Best regards, --Abu badali (talk) 00:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Lexicon: I take my hat off to you sir.
 * "Abu badali, I have confirmed that Chandra images, if not tagged on the site as including information from ground-based telescopes which are not under the control of NASA, are, in fact, completely public domain for all purposes. Lexicon".

It has been so long since I've seen anyone change his mind when presented with evidence that I had forgotten it was possible. Shane, you have my respect. TechnoFaye 02:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi! Since this talk seems to revolve around Chandra, I will post the mail that I received from them:

Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 14:40:24 -0400 From: Kathy Lestition  Subject: Request to use image of Chandrasekar

Dear xxx,

I am reply to your message, included below, regarding the use of the images of Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar posted on the Chandra X-ray Center public web site. If you return to the page you cite below and look at the credit under each of the three images, you will see that the copyright is in fact NOT held by us. Two of the images are credited to the AIP, the last to the University of Chicago. When we were constructing this site some 9 years ago, after our satellite was named after Prof. Chandrasekhar, we found to our surprise that none of the images of him were in the public domain. We were able to obtain permission from the AIP and the University of Chicago to display these three images on our our web site for informational purposes, but we do not own the images and do not have authority to give permission for re-use. Thus, you will have to send your request to the AIP and to the University of Chicago, the organizations which own the images.

Sincerely, Kathleen Lestition Outreach Coordinator Chandra X-ray Center After this message, I am trying to contact University of Chicago with no success. They don't list any way to contact them on there web page except phone number. Since I am in Germany, it is almost impossible for me to call them. Any one here to help?--Scheibenzahl 05:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC) PS: And thanks for User:Lexicon and User:Abu badali for noticing me :)--Scheibenzahl 05:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

British Isles Terminology
Where does one position within your Diagram Euler the following: Donegal; North of the Island of Ireland; Six Counties of Ulster; Ulster posesses nine Counties, Northern Ireland:

Therefore Northern Ireland however the term may be ligitimate, it remains a False friend (Faux-amis) as does Ulster.

Northern Ireland may be ok for EIRE, Scots, Welsh, English but it is not at all clear to many others, who attempt to UNDERSTAND with limited patience.

For non Anglophones, Europeans, Asiatics, Latin Apmericans, one suggests that you clarify Geographically, and Politically, and any other ....lly in order to ease comprahension. Everyone attempts to read english... so try and aid those mal-informed, mis-informed, and don't knows.

This diagram cannot yet be considered pragmatically neutral and informative.

best regards,

Joan of Arc

My user page
Thanks for cleaning up. Michaelbusch 15:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Countrybox Template
It's only France so far. Some countires have been changing regimes so often that the template needs to be extended. Lord Vader 02:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

David Hicks
Are you sure bold is innapropriate there? It could be said that wikipedia is pushing spin if we do not stress the fact that the things stated are in the opinion of the US government. What do you think? --I&#39;m so special 16:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * agreed, but in the wider picture there actually is suspiscion on the view of the US government don't you agree? --I&#39;m so special 20:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed again, I'll shut up now L.O.L --I&#39;m so special 09:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

RE: Canada
Not according to Geography of Canada, the link you provided appears to provide approximate areas, whereas the figures in the geo article above are apparently from Statistics Canada: all hinge on substantial amounts of inland water. Anyhow, my point is that this must be qualified, and I believe this was discussed long ago (in Talk:Canada archives). Corticopia 16:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

List of Canada's busiest airports
Why just that one? What about all the others shown at World's busiest airport? Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 17:05, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, not being clear. I was just wondering why move only that one from "Canada's busiest airport" to "List of Canada's busiest airports" but not the others. World's busiest airports by international passenger traffic, World's busiest airports by passenger traffic, World's busiest airports by traffic movements and World's busiest airports by cargo traffic are all lists as well. I'm not bothered where they are but I was just curious. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 17:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * OK. No problems. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 17:23, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Coat of Arms
There are many country articles that have a mismash of different styles; the manual of style on Wikipedia, for the most part, is a guideline, and so each country could have different styles with the preferences of the editors who edit on those articles. (For example look at WikiProject_Countries where it states "This structure is advisory only, and should not be enforced against the wishes of those actually working on the article in question." So even the COA gets broad consensus for/against among many countries, each country could be somewhat different.  The important thing is that Canada is a featured article, and it should portray a higher level of adherence.  Regards, -- Jeff3000 18:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I quoted the structure, but the same spirit could be applied to any style within that page. And in my mind too many levels of rules is not constructive.  The infoboxes are standardizied, but there is a great amount of flexibility in it's use, and the fields that are used in each page.  In the context of the COA, we had a discussion, the consensus was not to include it within the Canadian page. Regars, -- Jeff3000 18:18, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

User Lord Vader and the country infoboxes
I see you were curious why User:Lord Vader added no less than 13 entries in the country formation at the Template:Infobox Country. Please have a look at Talk:France where this issue is discussed. Not only Lord Vader bloated the French infobox, but he did the same for some other European countries such as Italy or Germany. Godefroy 18:45, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Tha Transnistria artile
Tha people contacted me because that tha version was not good. All changes have been made in accordance to tha talk page. See discussionss. Kanuni Sultan Suleyman 19:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

That tha page was befoere tha scene of manny socks of Mauco, see that tha page was protectaed agfainst him. --Kanuni Sultan Suleyman 19:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Sock version of tha that article is not good. Realize it. Tha page is now in accordance with tha mahority of tha peoble. --Kanuni Sultan Suleyman 19:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem. He's a sockpuppet of the banned user Bonaparte. I can smell him from a mile away. ;-) Khoikhoi 19:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

RE: Message on Quebec
How? Brylcreem2 I hope you succeed in becoming an triumphant solicitor
 * Oh right...I did not think of that!..Thanks for pointing it out

Canada's Independence
Can't you see he's just being a venomous d*ck? He's smarter than he passes himself off to be, and as such his logic is deliberately flawed. Don't you think we're being counterproductive by responding to this person, which achieves absolutely nothing else other than portraying us Canadians in poor light when the entire Canadian Wikipidia community feels compelled to assert their independence from the UK everytime a mischievous individual comes along to challenge it... especially when this individual's goal was to do exactly that; to disturb the bees' nest. I mean, notice how conveniently this discussion was initiated directly below the "Canada still being a UK territory" discussion? — Dorvaq (talk) 12:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Re:User:Secrecy
I arent sure if proper procedures are being followed by the insertion of that template, but I happen to suspect the same thing.--Huaiwei 15:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You are most welcome to launch a full investigation on this if you wish, for I, too, would love to know who he is. That dosent mean suspicions over User:Privacy are invalidated and worthy for deletion.--Huaiwei 16:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * An "established user" who appears at strategic moments (such as now, when the other "established user" is being slapped with a one-month block") and wikiwars on the other user's behalf dosent make him less of a suspect case. While I agree it is strange that we are having a suspect sockpuppet accusing another of the same thing, outright removing his nomination, as well as page protecting that page prevents others from making the same nomination, or helping to contribute information in support of it.--Huaiwei 16:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I am considering all possible courses of action, including the one you just cited. Looking at the fallout occuring immediately after User:Instantnood's return, I suppose the urgency has just upped a mighty notch.--Huaiwei 15:48, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Banks
Re - This is the result of the unique set up of the People's Republic of China. Although the PRC assumed sovereignty over Hong Kong and Macao, respectively, in 1997 and 1999, the two territories are not governed placed under the state apparatus (i.e. ministries or equivalence) except for diplomatic affairs and military. They remains separate legal jurisdictions, customs territories, etc., with their own governments dealing with most matters. Banks from Hong Kong and Macao are therefore considered foreign in mainland China. In PRC's own constitutional view, Hong Kong and Macao are part of the People's Republic of China (unlike UK relations to its overseas territories, for instance), and the term mainland China is used to refer to itself where Hong Kong and Macao are not included and relevant. &mdash; Instantnood 19:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * There are two primary issues to consider here, one over the domestic political/administrative setup of the People's Republic of China, and the appropriate use of the term "Mainland China" itself. The core of the disputes has largely to do with users attempting to enforce an interpretation of the later to enforce views of the former. Hence, you have User:Instantnood expending enormous energy in advancing his views that Mainland China is an official and appriopriate terminology. The underlying motive to this, is his long-term exercise in promoting the autonomous status of Hong Kong vis-a-vis the Central government in Beijing. By liberal use of the term Mainland China, he effectively highlights this autonomous status by repeatedly reminding viewers of their distinction from the "Mainland".


 * Both primary issues are not without contention. Administrative autonomy may be "guaranteed" in official papers, but as is so typical in many things Chinese, reality may actually reflect something far more complex. This is evident in many aspects, be it in the evolution of democracy in Hong Kong, the investment flows between HK to the rest of China, the conduct of the HK govenment in the international arena, the education policies in HK and so on. Should the Hk government be interpreted as distinct from the Chinese government, one would find the former extremely benevolent in allowing such interference by the later! As for the term "Mainland China" itself, that it can be used in a myriad of forms (including a noted preference for the phrase "Mainland of China" in HK-linked publications) is a major indication of its less-than-formal status compared to the official names of countries and their constituent parts. That the term "Mainland China" appears in several official publications does not vindicate it as a valid phrase for widespread use, particularly when it is rarely used even in contexts which are obviously relevant only to the Chinese Mainland itself.


 * It is for the above reasons and more, that the official country names continue to be prefered over less formal geopolitical terms, particularly in article titles and category names, and this reflects common usage as well. User:Instantnood, along with his suspected symphatisers, continue to oppose this despite the status quo being heavily tilted against his favour in his single-minded quest for "political correctness"...according to his personal interpretation that is.--Huaiwei 16:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Quebec
If you are against that method because you think it is made up, you should erase the 918.000 figure, because that is how that figure is arrived at. The 557,000 figure was very straightforward. Both references gave those specific numbers. I was just explaining how the 918,000 figure was arrived at. The information I included was correct, and was not original research. Here is an explanation from.
 * The official language minority is English in Quebec and French in all other provinces and territories. The size of the official language minority is determined by the sum of the minority population and half of the population having English and French as first official language spoken. For example, in Ontario, the official language minority is the sum of the population having French as first official language spoken and half of the population having English and French as first official language spoken.

Joeldl 22:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Pilsener
I removed back changes by Matthead. Bürger-Brauerei is a common phrase meaning Burgess Brewery. Franz Andreas Paupie is a nonsense and it doesn't exist, his name was František Ondřej Poupě, just try google. I am fed up with Matthead's attempts to germanize what does not belong to Germany. If I find japanesse source about Canada then I am not going to change article about Canada to reach japanesse spelling and use hiragana all over the wikipedia.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 19:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also I tried to talk about changes, but Matthead refused with personal attack and I am not going to discuss with him about anything anymore, I tried that, see this .  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 19:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No, german sources are welcomed. But Matthead's edits try to make Pilsener a German, but Pilsen was and is part of Bohemia. He went so far that he added a german category (Category:German loanwords) and removed czech category (Category:Czech cuisine). He refused talking about that and he insists on his disruptive edits. Btw. he is currently blocked for disruptive behavior on History_of_philosophy_in_Poland.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 19:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't insist on czech names, what I removed were german names.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 20:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * a.s. means that company emitted stocks and is owned by a group of owners each having amount of stocks of the company. I am not sure if it has translation into english.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 20:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Sri Lanka reconciliation project
I added you as a member per your request. Thanks for the interestRaveenS 21:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't mind
No, I don't mind at all that you changed the flag from .png to .svg. I'm kind of curious as to what the difference is, though. Also, I hope you don't mind that I totally copied your travel section on my user page. :) Coemgenus 13:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Template:Turkic-speaking regions
Hi Lexicon,
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ATurkic-speaking_regions&diff=122528503&oldid=122482193
 * ''(moving turkey to keep the "alphabetical to column end" scheme working (i'd prefer alphabetical by row, actually, since that would allow the last row to be filled))

Just spotted your amendment above – thanks also for tweaking "Tuva" – and know what you mean; unfortunately, though, I'd say the nature of the "[flag] placename" format steers the alignment toward the vertical, as placenames can be (very) variable in length. I'm not necessarily in favor of retaining the flags in this or other templates using them, but while they're there I felt they may as well be tidy. Yours, David Kernow (talk) 22:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * ''You could still order them to be alphabetical by row while retaining the column-based layout, it would just require some rearranging of the items. Lexicon (talk) 22:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * True; and it occurred to me that the membership of the template is unlikely to change (at least for some time!) so I've just gone to try the new the format and seen you've already done so – nice! Best wishes, David (talk) 23:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Bot for image replacement
Hi, Lexicon! By the time I got your message, someone already replaced the uses of the image. &mdash;Signed, your friendly neighborhood MessedRocker. 22:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Lévis,_Quebec_Location.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Lévis,_Quebec_Location.png. 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 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. MECU ≈ talk 22:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

images in Freemasonry
Hey, I saw that you'd made the image requests at WikiProject Freemasonry/ToDo. I don't know what your interest was &/or is, but I've been doing some image cat: work at Commons on Freemasonry-related images... Grye 09:02, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Hilaly
Do not de-bold non-English writing of names in the introduction. KazakhPol 03:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The particular type of Arabic text is bad - it goes right to left as though you were actually writing it so it is hard to do formatting. I do not know how that effects bolding... I would prefer though, if it was kept bold. I will not revert if you change it back though. KazakhPol 03:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Alaexis edit warrior
You blocked this user, then you unblocked him and then he lounched himself again in an edit war tirade. Please see only today 2 reverts:. Do something. --86.107.212.10 06:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Your input
An SLR article TamilNet is getting peer reviewed your input as an SLR member would be welcome to make it eventually into a featured article. Thanks RaveenS 12:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The S&C article is a general problem....
I don't know where any of that stuff comes from - it could be OR for all I know, and the only useful and universally accepted thing I can think of to say is that it is an combination of two architectural tools, mostly associated with Masonry, and found on Masonic buildings and other places, which is a dicdef not worthy of an article. I don't know everything there is to know, but you would think that published research on a basic symbol like that would cover symbolism if it was available. I'm thinking OR, so if it can't be sourced, it should probably be tossed. MSJapan 01:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Serial Hoax tag problem
We have a potential serial misuse of WP:HOAX tag issue on Sri Lanka related articles. I have open a request for conflict resolution page on SLR. As a SLR member and as admin your input will be greately appreciated to to decide as to what to do next see here. Thanks RaveenS 12:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I reverted back some of the re addition of WP:HOAX tags also on the talk page, I also agree with your suggested title for the coinage article. Thanks for your help in trying to clear this mess. If this problem persists even after all the intervention and conflict resolution process we need to take it to the next logical step.RaveenS 16:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Re:Jaffna Coinage...
Agreed, much better. Thanks for that. I'm not too good with coins, but I'll see if there are any articles on that online.

But the other artilces are and still highly dubious, and I will re-add the hoax tags though. The Lion myth article is simply fake as there is no such "myth" and it is an attempt to deceive readers, and similarly, the Jaffna Kindom article is fake as there has never been a "Jaffna Kingdom" in the past, as claimed in the article. --snowolf</b><b style="color:#0A0096; font-family:tahoma;">D4</b>( <b style="color:#339966; font-family:Constantia;">talk</b> / <b style="color:#CC0099; font-family:Constantia;">@</b> ) 17:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * If you are so sure that Jaffna Kingdom did not exist why don’t you take it to WP:AFD and see what reasonable, neutral Wikipedians think about it rather than to potentially maliciously tagging article as suggested by Lexicon. If intereted in improving the article see Talk:Jaffna_KingdomRaveenS 17:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

About hoax tagging
Lexicon, I have added that tag to couple of blatantly false articles which were carrying heavily misleading information.Please specify the articles you think where I have mis-used the hoax tag ,then i can explain to you why i did that..thanks Iwazaki  会話. 討論 05:46, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Email
Hi! I would like to contact you through email. Please reply on my talk page. It is kind of urgent.--Scheibenzahl 09:51, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Jaffna kingdom
Time well wasted:)), looks like a there are number of books new and old and articles that we can use. I will try to locate the books in the library in GTA also. Justto let you know, I will take it upas my next project after I am done with the current to improve this one. Some new articles Old manuscript  Search under old title Kingdom of Jaffnapatão RaveenS 18:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * see rewrite project here if you find any, please post it there. thanks RaveenS 00:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Oakwood, Montgomery County, Ohio
I was wondering if you would be willing to lend me a hand on the aforementioned article. People (or a person) claiming to be from Oakwood keep removing the pie chart depicting the demographic breakup of the town for no good reason. I am not the creator of the chart, but I don't see why it should be removed either. Thanks. — Dorvaq (talk) 19:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your prompt assistance, and I will keep you informed. — Dorvaq (talk) 20:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

This chart IS being removed by MANY people from the city. I have made an offer to speak with Dorvaq, but he has chosen not to contact me. This chart is found by many in the community to be offensive, and is seen as a personal attack on the community itself. Why are NO other communities in the surrounding area subjected to having a chart with their ethnic make-up put in? Why is this chart so big? (find another one - you can't). YOU (neither) live in this area - nor understand the political dynamics of the area. I do not ask that the information contained in the text be removed - it is factual - only that the chart that singles out OUR community be removed. If Wikipedia is a consensus, then the wishes of ONE who want a chart should not trump the MANY who do not. Where was the 'outrage' when there were personal attacks on teachers (accusing of selling drugs) or anti-Jewish statements in previous articles were posted? This is getting out of hand over a chart. It should go - it serves NO purpose, other than to 'dig'. I welcome being contacted at my WORK email in reference to this bebris@oakwood.oh.us, or you may search on the internet for the Public Safety Department to verify I AM the DIRECTOR and contact me at 937.298-2122.

Hi Lexicon, I added the part about anti-semitism at Oakwood public schools, especially the middle school and high school. This has apparently been removed. I personally experienced it, my two younger brothers experienced it, and the few other Jews at the school that I knew also experienced it. Most of these students would transfer out of the free public school, which does have a good local reputation, and would have to pay to attend a private school miles from their homes. I'm not quite sure how I would footnote mine, my brothers and others experiences at Oakwood. Do I need an affidavit written by each of them recounting their experiences filed with Wikipedia? Of course this is a sarcastic comment, but how else can I add these experiences to the article? Njg123 16:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Dear Njg: Perhaps it is you and your brothers that are the problem. Our family specifically moved to Oakwood because the community is so open and welcoming. I find it hard to believe that you would attemt to paint the entire city with your bad experiences with a few uneducated and bigoted people. Yes, they do exist everywhere, even in Oakwood, but they are far from the majority. You do not mention the Chabad on Far Hills and how it has florished and has been warmly welcomed by its neighbors. You fail to mention that there has never been any vandalism or attack upon the property. There is also the fact that there is a new synagogue that will be being built in the community. With land so expensive in Oakwood, why was this site chosen? I am sure it could have been built less expensively somewhere else. Oakwaood was chosen because the land itself is beautiful - and the type off community that it is. I do not know if you had specific issues with anyone in the school, but I can say that your experience is not the experience of most Jews in the city - please refrain from trying to speak for all of us. Jason

Dear Jason, I guarantee that it was not myself or my brothers that were the problem. The demographics may have changed in the greater Dayton area but when I attended Oakwood Middle School & High School, in the early 1980's, I was the only Jew in my grade besides one other. I have heard about the Chabad through a good friend of mine who still lives in the South Dayton area, but I haven't heard anything about a synagogue being built in Oakwood. However, regarding the Chabad I am glad to hear that there has "never been any vandalism or attack upon the property." Njg123 15:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Dear Lexicon, I apologize for using your Talk page to deal with this issue, but I was unable to determine how to respond directly to Jason using his Talk page. Sincere regrets. Njg123 15:45, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Ridiculous TfD
Hi Lexicon,
 * ''Are you serious? You actually added all those?  That's a ridiculous TfD that I just closed, now all those deletion templates have to come off. Lexicon (talk) 18:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Certainly did seem faintly ridiculous! I'll stop adding further templates now and will happily remove the tags if a bot isn't or won't soon be available. Thanks, David (talk) 18:09, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I left a note on the nominator's talk page informing him of the inappropriateness of TfD for such a discussion. It would be a major change to Wikipedia and therefore would require months-long discussion in a proper forum to come to some sort of consensus, not some silly TfD for, well, basically all templates in general''.


 * "Amen!" I've begun stripping the tags from the extra templates – my ulterior motive was to generate my own list of them! – and should have most if not all removed soon. Yours, David (talk) 18:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Flags
Sorry, but I uploaded a new image for the Cascadian flag, so the one on your page is no longer the flag you created. Much thanks for your numerous contributions to vexillology, as I am interested and hope I can become as great a contributor as you.

Transportation in the People's Republic of China
I moved Transport in the People's Republic of China to Transportation in the People's Republic of China, unaware that you had previously moved it. I moved it because there was a naming convention issue, and all other transport offshoot articles relating to places were transportation, not transport. If you would like to discuss this further, I'd be happy to receive a response at my talk page. Thank you, and good luck editing! <font color="#000FFF">Cool <font color="#000FFF"> Blue <font color="#800000">Light my Fire! 01:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for pointing that out for me. I'll undo my edit, and maybe move some of those pages, due to the naming convention. <font color="#000FFF">Cool <font color="#000FFF"> Blue <font color="#800000">Light my Fire! 01:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

School Board 56
School Board 56 is actually Conseil scolaire de district du Nord-est as per http://www.osstf.on.ca/Default.aspx?DN=47253154-6432-4bfe-ac42-baefd828ae34

It is already listed on the page. Actually, this page has a few shortcomings that I will look at when I have a bit more time on my hands. --Renrenren 17:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem.. my summary probably didn`t give enough details. Have a great day.--Renrenren 17:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nowikibreak.png listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Nowikibreak.png, 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. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 11:25, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Re Template:Infobox Province or territory of Canada
Hi again Lexicon,
 * ''Template talk:Infobox Country/Archive 5

Was the above implemented...? If not, shall I add it to my to-do-soon list...? Yours. David (talk) 21:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Mahabone comment question
Hey there. Saw your comment and I was wondering... is there a Muslim freemason group? They beleive in one god. I tried looking it up and I only found how some Anti Masonic Muslims equate freemasonry with Zionism. Seems like there should be a Muslim freemason group or something about freemasonry in the muslim world. Let me know?--Dr who1975 00:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Haven't heard from you .... let me clarify. Surely there are sub organizations that exist for Freemasons of certain faiths... for instance... the scottish Rite has references to Noah. Even if not by beleif... there are still groups that are organized by regions. So what is the binding force for Freemasonry in the Muslim world?--Dr who1975 02:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

RE: Recognised vs Recognized

 * Greetings. Thank you for showing me the proper way of submitting an edit summary. I also want to remind that English is not my native language (as my top userbox hints). That is why it is hard for me to see the difference between the British and American dialects of this great language. I know that "candy" is the American version of the word "sweets", but the -ise/-ize endings are a harder case. Well, thanks for the message. Good luck.Dimts 06:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

York Rite
Requirements differ, I believe, depending on jurisdiction. In the US, only Knights Templar requires a belief in Christianity - Chapter and Council do not. How liberal a Commandery is is dependent on where you go, and has a lot to do with the individual ideas of the members. MSJapan 03:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

New conflict resolution action items on SLR
see here Thanks Taprobanus 15:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Freemasonry and Independence movements
Below is a copy of your message to me. It does not capture my point, which is more subtle.

1 The main article uses the masonic pledge to support lawful governments and not foment rebellion, to make the point that political (governmental) opposition to Freemasonary is misplaced.

2 At least during the late 18th and early 19th Century period almost every successful independence movement in the Americas was lead by freemasons - despite the pledge. Those movements in several instances used language which reflected a common heritage with masons - ie the heritage of the enlightenment - "fraternity" "liberty" "ëquality" etc.

3 Those leaders continued to be in good standing and indeed to be celebrated by Freemasons after the revolution. Eg Washington buried with masonic rites. Additionally, in the case of the Boston Tea party, there is some evidence the lodge was at least aware of the act of "rebellion"in advance, even if it was not organised there, ie the minute book.

Paras 1, 2, and 3 are facts - not moral judgements. The reason for noting 2 and 3 in the context of the article, is so that readers can draw their own conclusion as to whether at least in the 19th century, government opposition to freemasonary - by despotic regimes - was predictable, and perhaps understandable, rather than misplaced.

Again I am not proposing the article make any moral judgment, merely put the relevant facts together. Personally, and not for the article, I think there was some thing very interesting going on at the time, members of the lodge were acting contrary to their pledge openly and for extended periods, but not being reprimanded or disciplined by the lodge. I cannot imagine that happening in relation to other pledges ie not to be licencious. Probably the explanation was that they interpreted the pledge in away that it did not apply in despotic regimes because they said the government was not lawful (revolutionaries normally do). It very understandable that in countries where freedom of thought and expression were restricted that the lodge being at least in that period an association of Enlightment oriented thinkers should attract exactly the same people as members as those who would want to challenge the regime. (Good thing too).

Now turning to your false analogy. I think murder is entirely different to rebellion, the difference is that one persons rebellion is anothers fight of independence. Using something that is so obviously and completely wrong as murder makes it an unsuitable analogy. But out of courtesy but I will address it.

Imagine:

1 A church - I am no more an expert on Catholism than Freemasonary so lets stay with A church - says that a particular activity, lets say murder, is a sin; and

2 Known members of the church over a continuous period, openly and in several different countries are engaged in leading illegal death squads - in fact the death squads thoughout the Americas are led by members of the church; and

3 The church makes no criticism of the members, and indeed continues to allow them to remain in good standing, while the death squads were operating and afterwards; and

4 An article in Wiki refers to the commandment against murder to indicate that public opposition to the church was misplaced, but made no reference to the operation of the death squads;

Then, yes, I hope we would agree that the operation of the death squads should be added to the article to allow readers to assess better whether the opposition was indeed misplaced.

To be clear, I am not equating the founding fathers to death squads - the analogy with murderers was yours. They were patriots, and were basing their actions (often reluctant actions) on a belief that they were necessary. But the fact remains that they were in breach of their pledge not to rebel, and they knew it. Thats why they had to justify the Declaration of Independence as follows:

""When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.""

A nice argument, but not one that would be accepted in any US Court today to justify succeeding fom the Union. Have to go do something productive now. Nzattitude 14:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Just for the record - what you said was:

Your argument:

Freemasonry (it's organizational structure, its tenets) says that a fundamental aspect of Freemasonry is following the laws of the country in which a Freemason lives. There have been serious cases of Freemasons doing exactly the opposite (and even in groups, oh my)! Ergo, Freemasonry really doesn't believe that a Freemason must follow the laws of the country he lives in. My argument:

That's equivalent to saying:

Catholicism (its organizational structure, the Pope, whatever) says not killing people is a fundamental aspect of Catholicism. Many Catholics kill people (and probably even in groups, oh my)! Ergo, Catholicism doesn't really believe that killing people is against the beliefs of Catholicism.

I do not agree with either your characterisation of my argument or your analogy.

14:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

It's easy to find contradictions when looking at just about any major organization historically. To stereotype the whole due to the acts of some is wrong. For instance, Bill CLinton and George Bush lieing... does not equal all Democrats and Republicans lie (even though they probably do since they;re politicians)... since both parties cite integrity as one of their main virtues... does that invalidate the whole organisation (people still vote for them). Here's a good question... do we have wny cases of people being removed from the Freemasons after they broke the laws of the country they lived in?--Dr who1975 14:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Coat of arms of Saint-Pierre and Miquelon.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Coat of arms of Saint-Pierre and Miquelon.png. 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. BetacommandBot 04:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Lovely (micronation) cleaning
Thanks for doing some work on that. You may want to liase with who expressed some interest in doing improvements too. I suggested to him that inline citations from reliable sources would be the best use of his time. --kingboyk 14:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Chemmani mass graves
A user who has been going aginst consensus and third party opion on the talk page has unilaterally removed a category that you were kind enough to participate in to discuss see diff here. Can you take care of this situation please. Thanks Taprobanus 16:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * As yiu can see I think, it is attempt to censor wikipedia, so I will take him to mediation next Taprobanus 16:22, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Abu badali
Hello,

An Arbitration case involving Abu badali has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Abu badali. You have expressed an interest in this before, so please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Abu badali/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Abu badali/Workshop.

Thanks, - Jord 16:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Notability Tag
Manticore55 17:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)Thanks for the info!

Bravo

 * Thank you very much, Niko. Admitting my mistakes and apologizing is an incredibly difficult thing for me to do, I assure you.  But clearly I was in the wrong.  I was going to give a more substantial apology than "My apologies" but then I thought a simpler apology would be more elegant, and if I went on I might have started to qualify my apology, which just wouldn't do.  I'd hit you with a return barnstar for being so gracious about it, but then that'd look like a barnstar trade.  I'll be keeping an eye out on you for the opportunity. Lexicon (talk) 13:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Nobility is always a difficult task; that's what makes it special. Graciousness for already displayed nobility is a fairly easier one. Don't keep an eye on me please; you may spot opportunities for the contrary! :-) NikoSilver 14:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Begging the question
Yeah, the flawed argument in the Begging the question article is much clearer now. Thanks for the rewrite. Gandoman 13:14, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

SLR question
Procedural question based on your vote, when you have time here, also your thoughts on this Thanks Taprobanus 15:54, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

RFM Chemmani
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Requests for mediation/Allegations_of_mass_graves_at_Chemmani, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

Happy Victoria Day
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks"> Hello Lexicon, Lexicon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy Victoria Day from a fellow proud Canuck(BTW, I am going to work on that term next, it needs some help)Taprobanus 13:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Happy Victoria Day... Greetings from a follow Yorkie (Yep tis true). Watchdogb 22:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Newfoundland
in fact it was you who first changed the redirection, newfoundland had always redirected to the page on the island, until you changed it i had never edited any redirection in my entire time on wikipedia, as far as i can recall. it is not 'undoubtable' that people are referring to the province when they type in newfoundland. most people who say they are 'from newfoundland' refer to the island, not the 50-something year old province. the island page has a link at the very top to the page on the province so that people can click to go ahead to the province if that is what they were looking for. please stop changing it, it was correct the way it was before you changed it. if you type in 'labrador', it doesn't take you to the entry on 'newfoundland and labrador', so if you type in 'newfoundland', it shouldn't take you to the page on 'newfoundland and labrador' either. again, please stop changing it, it was you who came along and changed it in the first place, i'm just reverting it back to the way it's been for quite some time before you came along and decided it should change.

Mícheál 17:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, many people support the redirect, but many people supported leaving it to Newfoundland as well. While you are not the only one who supports it redirecting it to the entry on the province, I am not the only one who supports leaving it as it was, where it went to the entry on the island. Again, it was this way before you came along and changed it, I am merely reverting it back to the way it was before your change. I can assure you that when people say Newfoundland, most times they do mean the island of Newfoundland. If people only meant the province when they said Newfoundland, then people would only be referring to Newfoundland for the past 50-some years. This is, of course, nonsense. When my parents and grandparents, born before there was a province of Newfoundland, say that they were born in Newfoundland, they are obviously referring to the island, as is the case for most Newfoundlanders when they say they are from Newfoundland. The fact that people might be searching for the entry on the province when they type in 'Newfoundland' does not warrant a redirect. It does, most definitely, warrant the link to the province article at the top of the island article, which should be adequate for people searching for the province article. Just because people who type in Labrador are most likely not searching for the entry on the province, doesn't mean that there should be different rules for each of the two parts of the province. Labrador takes you to the article on Labrador, Newfoundland should take you to the article on Newfoundland. Putting a huge link on top of the island article is the solution to making sure people who want to go to the article on the province can get there with just one click. Otherwise people should, and DO know that if they want the province, they type in the province's actual name.

Also, I did discuss the change before reverting. I posted replies to your comments on the discussion page for the N.L. article and they are still there without replies, as they were when i reverted your changes.

Mícheál 18:06, 21 May 2007 (UTC)


 * When people say "Newfoundland" they very often mean the political entity that has gone by that name. As I said, prior to the province, there was a Dominion, and before that a Colony.  You also are acting as though only Newfoundlanders will be searching for "Newfoundland" which is a ridiculous notion.  I'm sure a great many non-Newfoundlanders are looking the term up, and their intentions are as important as any Newfoundlander's.  A great many of those are not aware that the province is officially called "Newfoundland and Labrador" (it hasn't officially been called that for long, actually), and even those who might, might simply type in the "short form". This is a worldwide encyclopedia, so we have to cater to a worldwide audience.  As for your argument that we shouldn't treat searches for "Newfoundland" and "Labrador" differently based on, I guess, some sort of "things should be consistent" idea, yes, we damn well should treat them differently.  "Labrador" has never been the name of a colony, Dominion, or province.  "Newfoundland" has.  Nobody is going to search for "Labrador" to find "Newfoundland and Labrador", while a very significant number of people who search for "Newfoundland" will intend exactly that. We work on what people expect, not what we might like people to expect. Lexicon (talk) 18:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I've added a section heading for this discussion on the Newfoundland (island) discussion page. Vulcan&#39;s Forge 18:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks Lexicon - I just pointed the Newfoundland discussion at the Newfoundland and Labrador one. Oops.  (Lousy timing.) ;) Vulcan&#39;s Forge 18:33, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

From Alaexis
Hi! Could you check the "new" users who edit revert the list of sovereign states? It's hard to believe all of them are really newbies. Regards. Alæxis¿question? 20:00, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

<<unblock|It is certainly common courtesy to ask an administrator to stop doing something that's a violation of rules before blocking him or her (did you not think to communicate with me first?). In addition, I plead "ignorance", in that after seeing someone else add that template, I thought (without properly reading it, I confess) that it would be sufficient as a fair use rationale for logos--and, honestly, it pretty much is.>>

(from blocking admin) It's one hour. You were on a mass-copyright-violation spree, i.e. directly damaging the encyclopedia. You can wait that long surely. In the meantime, please read and understand WP:NONFREE and that this is a serious matter - David Gerard 17:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * David, I've been discussing this matter extensively at WP:AN/I, and I understand the "seriousness" of the matter (actually, fair use logos are incredibly non-serious, unlike other fair use images). Your comment about it being one hour makes it seem as if it's some sort of short but punitive block.  Perhaps you should see WP:BP.  If you could have achieved the same result by asking me to stop (and I assure you that you could), then you have failed to apply blocking policy correctly. Lexicon (talk) 17:54, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I've unblocked Lexicon because I see no clear request on this talk page asking Lexicon to "cease and desist". Blocking a fellow administrator over this is in my honest opinion a convoluted point-making exercise that fails the "preventative, not punitive" test. --  Netsnipe  ►  17:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I would have presumed an admin to have a clue about non-free content policy and not act like there's such a thing as fair use under the "I wanna" clause of US copyright law. If it was punitive it would have been a lot longer than an hour. I'm not concerned as long as it stops and the user in question (admin or no) doesn't do it or equivalent again - David Gerard 18:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * There is no '"I wanna" clause"' being invoked here, David. As I already noted in my unblock request, I mistakenly (big mistake, but unfortunately I sometimes glance over things) thought that the three criteria in the template which I added to the image pages was enough of a justification for logos (which, in case you hadn't noticed, we had for a very long time not really required fair use rationales for, since the rationales for logos are generic and obvious).  I will do the "equivalent" again, that is, I will work on a semi-generic "fair use in" template that can be included on logo image pages, as, like I said, logos are in 99.9% of uses, fair use for the same reason that they exist in the first place: they're important visual representations of the organizations they stand for.  Lexicon (talk) 18:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Fine, whatever - just don't act in a manner indistinguishable from a clueless "I wanna" fair abuser reverting like a clear and present danger - David Gerard 18:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation
This message delivered: 16:18, 23 May 2007 (UTC).

List of countries
Thank you very much for your observations. I am sorry, I did not mean to change something in a non-appropriate way, I was only trying to make it more clear. I hope you understand.

IMHO, I think that the name of the country with which is the dispute should be mentioned in the main text. I think footnotes in the text on top (as is), and brackets only in the letter-by- letter text would be a solution (repeating the same footnotes several times through the article is also somewhat strange, imo). Obviously, I agree with you, not both :-)

I don't think a precedent for one from the list of 9 should have any influence outside that group. Cote d'Ivoire is in my oppinion a completely different situation: the name Cote d'Ivoire is used in the English originating sourses, while Pridenestroie is in this sense obscure (no denigration meant; no English-language-originating sourse ever uses it). Also Transnistria and Pridnestrovie are both official local names (not my the central government of Moldova, but by the separatist one!) - Transnistria is in one of the official languages, Pridnestrovie is in another ("official" according to the separatist authorities, not to me, my oppinion doesn't count here). As I can see it, this case is pritty isolated - I do not see anyone in the list of 9 that would change anything b/c of this.

"This issue has also been discussed (initiated by me, actually), but no action was taken, and another discussion should be undertaken before such changes are made." I am sorry I did not know about that, I would have talked with you first. Would you care, please, to initaite another discussion about these issues in the talk page. Thank you very much.:Dc76 20:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

1) Well, unlike Cote d'Ivoire, noone uses Pridnestrovie in English-originating text, the minority is 0%, not 1/3 or 1/4. Most importantly, Transnistria is just as official locally as Pridnestrovie (according to Tiraspol, not to Chisinau)

2) E.g. Aruba is also a country in the sense of the article, and bracketing was prefered to footnote. It seems odd that one discriminates for the entries in a list - to comment in text or in the footnotes. That creates an indication of "right oppinion to have" upon the reader. If for all in the alphabetic list there would be only the name and footnotes - that would be more even. You say "to explain the situation without attempting to hit the reader over the head with the information, or attempting to push one point of view over the other about the legitimacy of the countries in question." IMO, once the reader sees Transnistria listed just like Germany, and differently from say Kosovo, one would think - first two are countries, second - not. By introducing the information about the country of dispute for ones and not for others would be indeed to push the point of view upon the reader. Of course, I am not saying the other extreme - to screem out and loud "ilegitimate regime" (which although de facto is, according to the definition of "country" in this article - isn't).

3) agree with you on the rest:Dc76 20:36, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Pls-logo.gif
Thanks for your help. I am afraid this I have trouble deciphering just what the hell is required by some of the demands from some moderators. I have now given up adding new information. Regards Oldfarm 03:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Freshfields logo.gif
Haha. I liked your comments at Image:Freshfields logo.gif. --Strangerer (Talk) 17:39, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

#wikipedia-en-admins
Hello. I've given you level 5 access in Wikipedia, as you requested on IRC channels/wikipedia-en-admins. One 20:02, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:Wikipedia-en-admins
The invite is for '@wikipedia/Lexikon'. As far as I know, this is what you asked for. One 20:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

IRC cloak request
I am Lexikon on freenode and I would like the cloak wikipedia/Lexikon. Lexicon (talk) 20:56, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Transnistria
Refering to this. (I agree with the other edit of yours on the same page.) This article is not just about the breakaway entity, but also about the geographical region that is 95% coincident with the political entity. In the introduction, and in the Geography section we explain this relation - we believe is 100% clear there. Some users, including me, have asked to have two articles - one for the geographical/historical region Transnistria, the other for the political/breakaway entity, whose abreviation is Transnistria, but it was decided againt this b/c it was considered it would be a POV fork - two articles with only small differences in the begining. The result was to write Transnistria, Pridnestrovie (as the names of the geogr/hist region), followed by RMN, PMR, TMR as the names of the entity. I'm not saying what was is the best solution, but if you simply erase "Transnistria / Pridnestrovie", then you've created a different problem, where is the geogr/hist region? Perhaps you have alternative ideas how to solve all this? :Dc76 16:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Moving the article to "Transnistrian Moldovan Republic (or any variation thereon)" is NOT something I'd do, b/c that creates more problems. It could have been done if there were two governments of the region (one subordinated to Chisinau, and one breakaway), but that's not the case. (Moldova decided not to create a "pupet" government that would control only 10 villages, but simply transfered the administration of those to another district.) Creating Transnistria (geographic region) was exactly what I supported before. It would include most of the Geography and History sections from the article. But it was decided instead to simply elaborate more in the Geographic section, and to add Transnistria/Pridnestrovie in the infobox. In view of your last changes, I'd aske for a reconsideration of Transnistria (geographic region). :Dc76 11:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

BTW, I think in a couple days-a week you can close (Q2) and (Q3) in Dc76 11:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BASF logo.svg
Thanks for uploading Image:BASF logo.svg. 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. 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.BetacommandBot 01:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Galician Footbal Federation.gif
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Galician Footbal Federation.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. 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.BetacommandBot 10:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the support
But I'm not sure how to go about reporting abuse like that. I really could use some education in that regard. Oh, and I hope you don't mind that I flew off the handle a bit on his talkpage. I think we can both agree there were extenuating circumstances. Serendipodous 15:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Canada
Just in case you didn't notice, I had undone my own edit, which you reverted to. I wasn't trying to initiate an edit war. — Dorvaq (talk) 19:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Espanola
Straight anglicized n, no tilde. Bearcat 21:30, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Requests for mediation/AMG Chemmani
Hello Lexicon,

Firstly, my apologies for the delay in progress on this case, as explained at Requests for mediation/AMG Chemmani.

I am writing to you because, as a party to this case, your input is required before mediation can begin, to do with an offer by an experienced non-Committee member to mediate. Please see the Parties' agreement to Tariqabjotu's offer section and provide your input, so that this case can progress. Voting will remain open for seven days, and further elaboration is provided at that link.


 * For the Mediation Committee,  Daniel  04:06, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Australian anthems
Looking at the edit history for Australia, I note that you have made an edit regarding the royal anthem, but have not yet participated in the ongoing consensus-gauging as to whether this information should be displayed in the infobox. --Pete 17:24, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikiwoo again
Hello Lexicon. You seem to have experience dealing with this character. I'm pretty sure he's showing his face again at Talk:Conseil_scolaire_de_district_du_Centre-Sud-Ouest. I'm a novice at wikipedia and I know you've dealt with him in the past. I don`t know where I should report this. Could you please deal with it somehow? --Renrenren 15:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * He's bound to blow his lid once again. Thanks for your help.--Renrenren 00:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Revert
Sorry if I messed up that revert... I saw that someone vandalised your userpage and figured I'd clean it up but I must have reverted to the wrong version. --Renrenren 14:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * My first thought was also Wikiwoo, but you're right.. not the same style.--Renrenren 16:30, 14 June 2007 (UTC)