User talk:Newironshapes

Montreal streets
The Paris article is not the Style Guide for Canadian streets and place names, it is WP:CANSTYLE. I see you're new here. If you really believe all Montreal street names should be French, I suggest you take it up on the Talk Page at WP:CANSTYLE. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:28, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I really do recommend that you read WP:CANSTYLE. We typically do not always use the official name here on Wikipedia, but rather the most common name in English.  Furthermore, changes of the nature that you propose are best made through consensus here on Wikipedia, and guided by the project's naming conventions and guidelines.  Please raise the issue on the relevant talk pages -- do not engage in silly edit wars.  If you keep reverting the attempts by other editors to adhere to the relevant naming convention, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.  Skeezix1000 (talk) 18:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

French toponyms typically don't have different names in English. Nobody ever refers to the Champs-Élysées as "Elysian Fields Avenue", for instance — its name in English is Champs-Élysée. The difference in Montreal is that whether you consider it reasonable or not, some street names and parks and institutions are referred to differently in English than they are in French; when that occurs, Wikipedia policy explicitly states at WP:ENGLISH that the common English name is required as the title. It has nothing to do with linguistic politics, as we do use the French title in many cases where there isn't an English name. We don't translate titles at random; we use the title that is already established as the English name of the topic by sources outside of Wikipedia. Bearcat (talk) 19:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Philistines of the world, unite!

Of course this has to do with linguistic politics. It's not "Elysian Fields Avenue" because of particular conventions that have arisen over the years. Wikipedia is particpating in the construction of new social conventions, in this case it is acting, presently, for whatever reason, in support of a whitewashing or bifurcation of French culture in North America (one translated, holdout version for us, another version for them). The relevant toponymic authorities (in Quebec and in Montreal -- the city charter) point to the conclusion that French names prevail. I don't see what the problem is in undoing a work of fiction in which there is a street called, for example, "Park Avenue" in Montreal. A cursory examination of street signs reveals this to not be the case. People wanting to know about Montreal will not find such a street should they come here. If Wikipedia wants to serve as a description of empirical reality then my edits are clearly more representative. If Wikipedia wants to serve as a tool of crypto-imperialists then it should at least be consistent and enforce a policy of the translation of all foreign words (What does "Mao Zedong" mean? Shouldn't that be translated into English too?)

Newironshapes (talk) 23:43, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Please. You will find other editors will take you a lot more seriously if you refrain from calling them phillistines and crypto-imperialists and get off your soapbox.  Perhaps you also need to read Assume good faith, Civility and Etiquette.  18:38, 15 June 2008 (UTC)Skeezix1000 (talk)


 * So here are the radio-canada (french language) search results for the term "bay street" : http://chercher.radio-canada.ca/search?site=RadioCanada-Nouvelles&client=RadioCanada&proxystylesheet=RadioCanada&output=xml_no_dtd&numgm=5&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&q=bay+street&btnG=Chercher Apparently inventing fictitious English versions of Montreal street names (or resurrecting archaic ones) and imposing them on Wikipedia is ok (because some arbitrary "style guide" said so), but Francophones need to use the English names for English city toponyms in French documents. Note that there was no actual substantive response to my epistemological claims above (or to the claims of linguistic imperialism -- a serious issue), just a sort of ad hominem style argument and several links to dubiously relevant wikipedia documents. Newironshapes (talk) 18:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You have been warned not to revert the template. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked.  As for your claims, you will find that people will take you more seriously if you calm down the rhetoric and show some degree of willingness to work cooperatively with other editors.  So far you've done neither  -- you simply been disruptive, dismissive and, to be honest, arrogant.  Again, I recommend that you read Assume good faith, Civility and Etiquette, and Consensus while you are at it.  Thanks.  Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

June
Please refrain from repeatedly undoing other people's edits. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The three-revert rule (3RR) prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, please discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:25, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Marois candidate.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Marois candidate.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like PD-self (to release all rights), (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Marois_candidate.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Marois_candidate.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media 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 this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 21:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)