User talk:Oreo Priest/Archive 4

Despite of my critical views
I am thinking you make a very interesting job (or work ?) on Wallonia. Thank you, José Fontaine (talk) 22:11, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I am unable to contribute now, because of much work in my school. But I follow the building of the pages as I am able to do it. José Fontaine (talk) 21:29, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Brussels naming conventions
I see that you refer to the "Brussels naming conventions". Where are these to be found? TY -- Dampinograaf (talk) 10:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm wondering the same thing, actually (I even looked through the archives). Pevernagie (talk) 17:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I try to put template:Brusselsname on the talk page of pages where I use that as the rationale in an edit. It links to the actual conventions. Cheers,  Oreo Priest  talk 22:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Your message (s)
I appreciate what you said about my too long contributions and the way you said it, which is also very important. I think you are right. It is possible I was excited by Vb who was demanding citations of scholars. I recognize that I work with passion (and the worst are full of passionate intensity), about Wallonia (but also about other topics as for instance René Girard). The difficulty is that when you are interested in a topic, it is often because you are strongly concerned by it but also consequently there is a chance you have a good knowledge about it. I appreciate also your proposal to collaborate. For me, you may delete somethings I wrote on the condition (if it is possible) that you don't delete the core of the informations I wrote. That depends on the topic. For instance, do you think that the paragraph about the Walloon cinema is too long? Or about the Sequence of Saint Eulalia? I am in favour of a specific page about the Walloon cinema. What do you think? An other interest I have to collaborate with you, is my bad English but also the good informations many English-speaking scholars wrote about Wallonia, more than all the literature coming from France (of course I don't speak about the literature coming from Wallonia or Flanders) about it which simply doesn't exist  or almost doesn't exist. I am teatcher in high education and I am in front of Flemings, French, Walloons, Luxembourgeois... It is the reason why I find this sentence as the best view about the conflict in Belgium. Thank you. I don't know if you like to write to me by email (perhaps in French). But I propose you did it if I we have difficulties to collaborate. I hope we will not have these difficulties. Thank you, very sincerely, for your spirit of collaboration and your courtesy, José Fontaine (talk) 13:09, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Very good, OK (for the Sequence) but about the Walloon cinema I don't agree even if it is possible to have a page on the Belgian Cinema. But i propose : Wait an see! Sincerely, José Fontaine (talk) 21:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I am afraid I put always the citations in italics. is it not between inverted comas as for instance: Vive la République!? I begg your pardon but if you explain to me the good way that would become easier for me, dear Ambassador and, I may say, dear friend... Sincereley. What I don't understand is how distinguish the sentences of a citation from the ordinary sentences, excepted with the great blue inverted comas José Fontaine (talk) 17:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * OK. I think I understood you, 'Je vous ai compris' (a famous citation, incidentally), José Fontaine (talk) 20:23, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Visiting
Hi, thanks for your email, I answered today. I'll take a look at FoB as soon as I get the chance. Looking forward to hearing from you, --Hooiwind (talk) 16:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

re: Laeken
Hi, Oreo Priest. Sorry for taking so long to get back to you, but I've been busy in real life :) I'm afraid I can't really help you with that move request though. Apart from a 2-year old comment by one editor, there hasn't really been any discussion on the talk page about the title, so one can't really say there's consensus for either title. You'd be best served by filing a move request through WP:RM, since this would seem to be a controversial naming issue. I hope that helps. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 20:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Frenchification of Brussels
I think the introduction is fine. It is a succinct summary of the article, which is what it should be. Zeus1234 (talk) 02:07, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

A Map
Dear, Oreo, I think this map you removed on 6 october   (Calestienne, Condroz etc.), is an interesting map. You can see it on every books on Belgium and as far as Wallonia is concernend, it is also interesting because one of the charasteristic of Wallonia is the great variety of its geographical regions (including a little piece  of Flanders as geographical region), but Condroz (for instance)- it is not the same as Ardennes. I want to have your agreement but I think my reasons are good and neutral. You have not this maps on other WP (excepted perhaps Wallooon Wikipedia but it is not the reason why I think this map interesting). Sincerely, José Fontaine (talk) 19:24, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Nobel Prize
Hey! I noticed that you were the reviewer for the Nobel Prize article a looong time ago. Under the last weeks I have been editing and (hopefully) improving the article and now I want to put it up for GA nomination again. My question is if you could look on the article and see if there is something that needs improving or editing? I would be very happy if you could help! --Esuzu 16:42, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Really nice of you :) Looking forward to see what needs changing. --Esuzu 14:21, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Map of the Meuse
Is it possible to have a discussion with you (and Zazaban) about the map of the Basin area of Meuse which I find very relevant? Sincerely! José Fontaine (talk) 17:01, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily the mainstream way? But I said to you that there is this TV program (a cultural program), with many scholars as Marc Suttor I citated and this TV program was based also on a long historical tradition which began with Félix Rousseau. You say that I am going into too much detail but you want to have many sources. It is clear that, if we want to show the Walloon heritage (and that means also geography and history, economy ...), you are forced to do that as the TV Program did it. Incidentally, I don't know what is the mainstream way for presenting Wallonia... It is not an angry remark but it is difficult to present an official geography of Wallonia and that is the reason why I think it is important to adopt the logic of this TV program, a cultural program which simply popularize many historian and geographic studies. You find that the map and its comments is an original work but i am absolutely unable to write about Wallonia otherwise. I don't know the mainstream way, sincerely. If a so great (and very successful) TV program is possible, that is this program which is the mainstream way. I am sure it is impossible to find scholars who would be against this presentation. The RTBF is a public televisionand it is obliged to mahe its programs as ... we are making Wp!Thank you for your friendly remarks. Sincerely! José Fontaine (talk) 17:58, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Image request
If Brussels Airport is convenient to your location, would you mind photographing the Brussels Airlines head office (b.house, Airport Building 26)? The Brussels Airline article needs a pic of its corporate headquarters. Thank you WhisperToMe (talk) 18:45, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Small ring
Hello Oreo Priest! I've been editing the article Small ring (Brussels) and I've seen your comment about my edit. I've been thinking that maybe we could remove the information on streets crossing the small ring from the infobox, so that this info is no more redundant in the article, and we can keep the sections I've added, which contains more information on the topic I think. This way, the infobox would be a little smaller which would be quite nice since I've always thought infoboxes should be smaller than article self (I've read that somewhere a time ago ;-)). What do you think?

Thank you anyway for your contribution! I enjoy your articles on Brussels. Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manneken Pis (talk • contribs) 10:53, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Also: check out the discussion page Talk:Small ring (Brussels) to see how I'd like to edit the infobox. You might also be interested in reading my new article Greater ring (Brussels) and to contribute. Thanks! Manneken Pis (talk) 11:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Unofficial referee
Would it be possible you would have a glance at the page History of the Walloon Movement: I regret a participant remove verifiable informations of great Walloon scholars. I think it very impossible following the rules of Wp. But I feel that I am not able to avoid a war-edition. So I answer only that I am not happy with that. Sorry and sincerely, José Fontaine (talk) 20:40, 13 February 2010 (UTC) and other things. I am forced to give a citation in order to remove the worgd "occupation" that C.Woeste used for he Frenc period in the History of Belgium. The word "occupation" is not used for this period and my citation proves t...

Laeken
I'm afraid I am not an administrator, so I cannot move the page any better than you can. Sorry. Hope you agree with the Place Flagey move. It's a bit anecdotal, but I've just never heard anyone ever call it Flagey Square. Peregrine981 (talk) 13:24, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Biscuit
I've added a published book to the sources that describes the game. Also I believe the iPhone application adds to demonstrating the games notoriety. I'll keep looking for additional verifiable web sources. I'm surprised that you haven't heard of the game in Belgium :). My French friends are all about it. Longwood420 (talk) 17:11, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

History of Catholic University of Louvain
Good morning, you write that it is a majority against the modifications of the historicals errors of this article! But history is not a lottery and the the historical facts are not dependant of elections! We are not here in the Great Sovietical Encyclopedy! You have to read the French, Dutch and Latin articles and you wil see that this version of the english Wikipedia is an "historical hoax". You make a confusion between the three Universities who have had her seat at Louvain. The public hat the right to now the true history of the three differents Universities of Louvain. It is also absurd to see the names of old students of the State University of Louvain with names of students of the Catholic University.--Bruxellensis (talk) 07:01, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

History of the State University of Louvain.
Cher Oreo Priest, je regrette de vous signaler que j'ai corrigé les affabulations historiques concernant l'Université d'État de Louvain.
 * 1) Jamais l'Université d'État de Louvain n'a prétendu être la continuation de l'ancienne université, votre phrase "though it is occasionally identified as such" est donc fausse.


 * 2)L'Université Catholique de Malines dans l'acte de fondation au Moniteur Belge n'a jamais prétendu être une "refondation" de l'ancienne université. Le terme refondation a été employé la première fois en 1909 lors des fêtes du 70ème anniversaire de la "refondation".

Je vous rappelle aussi le jugement de la Cour de Cassation que vous semblez vouloir oublier.

Je vois avec plaisir que vous vous intéressez à l'Histoire de Belgique et je vous encourage à lire des livres sérieux comme "Leuven University", Louvain, University Press (en anglais) où vous verrez les références que je cite. Bien cordialement.--Bruxellensis (talk) 15:13, 25 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Was not also in Louvain a ’’ State’’ College (or something so) for (all) the future catholic priests? Or a Dutch project to make that? So under the control of the Dutch King more or less? One of the cause of the Belgian revolution? I remember something about that... José Fontaine (talk) 14:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC) Mais ce n'est qu'une idée pour améliorer le texte éventuellement (But it is only an idea...) José Fontaine (talk) 14:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Vous faites allusion au "College Philosophique" qui ne faisait pas partie de l'Université d'État, son but était la formation du clergé, ce collège en effet fut un des "griefs" contre Guillaume Ier. Un article le concernant serait intéressant.--Bruxellensis (talk) 12:37, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are right. It was simoly in Louvain and I remember I saw it when I was student at the UCL. But I have forgotten where it was... José Fontaine (talk) 19:19, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Simply Thank you...
... for your help in many domains and topics. José Fontaine (talk) 14:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

... and your advices. I begg my pardon I do it too late. I din't write Walloon Jacquerie of 1886 on fr.Wp because I am blocked on this Wp. Sincerely! José Fontaine (talk) 12:05, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

French help
Could you help me with an image at fr:wp? File:Saintpolroux.jpg is marked as being derived from the nonexistent fr:Fichier:Saintpolroux.jpg. I wonder if perhaps the image has been deleted or renamed, but I don't speak French, so I don't know how to investigate the situation. Could you take just a little time and try to find this image? Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 14:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I didn't know where to begin to look (I haven't a clue what to click to find the file log, or where to get "what links here"), so I couldn't by myself find a page on which to use the Google Translate.  Just a minute ago, someone else left a note on my talk about this image; it seems that the image will soon be at WP:FFD.  Nyttend (talk) 15:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Hoser
I removed the information because it was unsourced, and beginning it with "perhaps" connotated OR. If you think that the information is relevant, please add a relevant source. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:43, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Censor
Thank you four your precisions, indeed English is a very subtil and nuanced linguage, but as you now it is not my native linguage and I don't have the occasion to use it. Also in French the word "incarnation" can not be used here, as in English, but words as "Premier épisode" our "Première matérialisation" our "Première étape"... our "Premier acte" (as in theatre) But it is important that the public can have a clear vision of those "épisodes". --Bruxellensis (talk) 10:01, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

The ""Butte du Lion" instead of the Battle itselff
I think it would be better to have the present-day battle field of Waterloo (butte du lion) in the page Wallonia, than the image of the battle which is not very clear. And I think also that it would be more interesting to have an other image than Spa (even if Spa is very interesting, I agree wiht that), but there is certainly a very important touristic place which would be Wallonia's Major Heritage... I am thinking of that for several days but I don't find the good one. I 'll make a proposal. Sincerely, José Fontaine (talk) 14:28, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Laken
Hi Oreo, what's new? Saw you finally managed to get the Laken/Laeken issue sorted - oof! Westermarck is not the kind of image we Flemish editors need (or can afford); I'm keeping an eye on him. Hope all is well, kind regards from still the same place on the globe (I liked it so much I decided to stay for summer). If you happen to be in town ;) --Hooiwind (talk) 17:36, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, I know by now that most Flemings are in fact reasonable and productive editors. And I'll soon be on the move again too. More details to follow.  Oreo Priest  talk 04:05, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Buffalo Entry Editing
Hi there Oreo Priest,

Concerning our contributions on the Buffalo Drinking Game page: I appreciate your desire to keep Wikipedia clean and sourced. This is a goal I share with you. However, another goal of mine is that of Wikipedia's: to collect and quantify the sum of human knowledge. Many pieces of information which are useful to others are current, uncommon, or even presently unsourced.

What I've done (granted, a very small contribution) is help add to this database. And now, I have a found the source (or what appears to be a mirror of the original site) from which the players originally got the rules and were subsequently taught to me. Wikipedia is not well known and respected for deleting information which is both useful and sourced. The edits you've been employing (though well-intentioned, I do believe) have been simply destructive. Who are you to decide whether a source is credible or not? Without going into too much detail, what determines a credible source? As far as I know, Wikipedia does not place a restriction on allowable sources, and subjective judgment is simply frowned upon in an encyclopedic environment. Is it only reliable if it is reported in the mainstream news? Certainly not.

Lastly, should you still wish to employ this type of behavior on Wikipedia, I will suggest you remove all the data on the following pages (same category), as they are not sourced, or their sources are not reliable, as you've determined mine is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_(drinking_game)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Never_have_I_ever

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseball_(drinking_game)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandeliers_(game)

The problem is that all of the above are well known games in college society. Ask any college student, and they will possess this knowledge. Removing the content would be to ignore this aspect of human knowledge. An acceptable compromise is to suggest that the article require cleaning or additional evidence, as many of these pages do. Would the site be better off with all of these pages gone?

Thank you! I do appreciate your time and effort. Flipperbw (talk) 16:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Government of the Brussels-Capital Region
Hi, I created the template Template:Governments of Belgium and I saw you moved "Government of the Brussels-Capital Region" to "Politics and Government of the Brussels-Capital Region". I moved it back, so it same has the name like all other government articles. If you have a reason why it wouldn't be a good name, please tell me :-) Thanks, SPQRobin (talk) 21:16, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * And if we remove the section "Parliament" from the article and just make a reference to the article Parliament of the Brussels-Capital Region (because now it is just duplication)? SPQRobin (talk) 07:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * But it also makes sense to have the same structure like the other pages.. Did you take a look at the navigation box below, "Governments of Belgium"? Then you'll see what I mean. Regards, SPQRobin (talk) 07:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I took a further look at the history, and there's already been a bit of an edit war to include or exclude info about the Parliament. Why do you absolutely want it to be included? I really don't understand. There's a Parliament (Parliament of the Brussels-Capital Region) and there's a government (Government of the Brussels-Capital Region) just like all other pages (Flemish Parliament & Flemish government, Walloon Parliament & Walloon government, ...) and just like other language Wikipedias (nl:Brusselse Hoofdstedelijke Regering, fr:Gouvernement de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale, ...). This one article you made is an exception. Why don't you agree with removing the info about the parliament *on the page of the government* and move the page back to "Government of the Brussels-Capital Region"? You said "it makes sense to have everything in one place", but then we would have to delete all Parliament and government articles and add the information to one general "politics" page. SPQRobin (talk) 13:45, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I see the difference. In Dutch we have "overheid" (the more general sense of "government") and "regering" (the specific executive body sense of "government"). The template contains 2x the term government, the title "government of Belgium" refers to the first sense and this is split into "parliaments" and "governments" (2nd sense). The articles about the government use the second sense as well, so should the article "Government of Brussels-Capital Region". English Wiktionary says btw, "Applied to many countries in continental Europe (when using English), the British usage is common." I don't want to start a "move war", so I'm not gonna move the page, but I just want this inconsistency of that one article fixed... SPQRobin (talk) 18:33, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, we could move the regering articles to "executive" or maybe "cabinet", like Cabinet of Germany (btw, German Bundesregierung = Dutch bondsregering), Cabinet of the United Kingdom, etc... I edited the template to make the distinction between overheid (title, "Government of Belgium") and regering ("Cabinet (executive)"). SPQRobin (talk) 11:33, 25 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Good.. However, someone said on Talk:Flemish Cabinet that "government" is the official translation. For example on http://www.belgium.be/en/ and flanders.be the word "Government" is used. Maybe we should have checked that before moving all pages... SPQRobin (talk) 19:48, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Wallonia
Of course, it is self-source (your last change in this page), but when a company is speaking about its own works, I think it is fiable and, in this case, that brings many informations through the Google-Map. What do you think? There is a more important issue about History of Wallonia. I think this English is correct because it is only the English of an historical Journal and absolutely not other else. There is likely an error, but about the author. Sincerely, José Fontaine (talk) 20:55, 26 June 2010 (UTC) [I read the discussion about the word "government", an interesting disscussion about the differences between countries and also between langages).
 * I understand. I think I made an effort for my last change on the p. of Liège. I will continue in other circunstances. Simply thank you for the rewording. It is better tan I am doing, José Fontaine (talk) 19:23, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Frenchification of Brussels
Hi Oreo - there we go again. I do not agree on the IP's conclusion that it represent the Flemish POV - but there is a problem with the essential weaknesses in the referencing and that some sentences are definitely biased (and, especially in the English translation, simply incorrect). I therefore went through the entire bibliography of the French version (which is in all respects the most up-to-date) and copied the ones that are worth keeping (whilst checking and correcting the links and data) to User:Hooiwind/Frenchification. I think we should use a new format that permits mentioning the page (like I did recently on Afrikaans). Just to give you a heads-up... --Hooiwind (talk) 20:11, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Famous Noses
Hey, I opened up a discussion at Talk:Human nose regarding the "Famous Noses" section. C1k3 (talk) 22:02, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Catholic university of Leuven
Good afternoon, I can not understand why you will always speak of the Old University and of the State University, in an article concerning only the new Catholic University? You create a confusion in the mind of your readers. In all the other Belgian wikipedia French and Flemish it is a distinction. Also in the list of alumni, the students of the State University and of the Old University have nothing to do in the list of Alumni of the old University. I have the impression that as a Canadian you cannot undestand the nuances of the Belgian history. For me your article is a deformation of history. It is a great difference of institution between the old university and the catholic university. It should be better that you make a translation of the flemish our of the french article into english. Your version remains historicaly not right. Your other articles councerning the history of Belgium are interessant but I can not understand why you persist to deform the history of the Universities of Louvain.--Bruxellensis (talk) 16:10, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Good morning, I think that in history it isnt a "minor or major point of vue" it is only the true description of the facts that is important. I give you an exemple in your list of alumni of the "Catholic" University you take names of students of the "State" University, a liberal university! You don'nt give references from historical books but only from the "commercial" sites of the Catholic University. But if you read those texts you can not find the demonstration that the catholic university is the continuator of the old etc... I think that as a priest you accept all what your "superiors" say, but "amicus Plato sed magis amica veritas". I hope that you will read good books about the history of the three different Universities in the town Louvain. Your other articles are very interessant and I cannot understand why you desire to deform the reality councerning the Universities of Louvain. I recommend you to speak about this problem with a scholar who can give you util conseils. I hope that I dont perturb you to much in your convictions and I wish you a good day.--Bruxellensis (talk) 10:22, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Thought you might like this
Hi there. I saw this and thought of you:. The most interesting part to me is the language: "reborn", "revived", "resurrect". I'm not suggesting this is at all like the Leuven situation, in fact this one seems completely far-fetched to me. Cheers,  Oreo Priest  talk 03:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you this kind information. But this new-University of Nalanda is founded in the year 2010 without any material or juridical links with the old University! It is a new modern University and the Spirit and the tradition of the Old University is for ever death. You can also dream of the reborn of the Republic of Venice or of the Kingdom of Scotland or the Empire of the Inca but those States are for ever evanished. The new University of Nalanda is a modern University and also the library of Alexandria is not the Old library! The human things are also mortal: "res humanae fragiles caducaeque sunt" (Cicero). Thank you very mutch for this interessant information.--Bruxellensis (talk) 15:56, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Jeanneken Pis
Hello, about your rollback in the Jeanneken Pis article I agree with the IP that the artist murder has nothing to do with the statue, so there's no reason at all to keep the information in the article. I didn't rollback to avoid an edit war, but if you agree I'd cut the few words about the autor's murder. --Wiki Kiwi (askme) 22:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok that's fine! ;) I'll tidy up when I have some time --Wiki Kiwi (askme) 00:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Seen it, but the reference still isn't the best one might hope for... I'll look after it :) --Wiki Kiwi (askme) 00:36, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

No, it doesn't?
I can not understand why you will prentend that the Catholic University is the Oldest Catholic University founded in 1425, because it is totally false, the catholic University is founded in 1834 in Mechlin. You give illusions to the readers.--Bruxellensis (talk) 13:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You have also to read the new version in Wikipedia German: "Geschichte der Universitäten zu Löwen" and not more "Geschite der Universität von Löwen". You can read there : "Dieses Selbstverständnis steht jedoch im Widerspruch zu der Tatsache, dass einerseits die Gründung noch vor der Reformation und damit zu einer Zeit erfolgte, in der es in Europa ausschließlich katholische Universitäten gab, und andererseits eine ganze Reihe von Universitäten wie Bologna (spätestens 1219), Cambridge (spätestens 1284), Heidelberg (1386), Köln (1388), Krakau (1364), Montpellier (1289), Neapel (1224), Oxford (spätestens 1214), Paris (1200), Prag (1348), Salamanca (1218) deutlich weiter zurückreichen. Allenfalls kann daher die Katholieke Universiteit Leuven zusammen mit der Université catholique de Louvain als älteste sich heute als katholisch bezeichnende bzw. in Trägerschaft der katholischen Kirche stehende Universität der Welt bezeichnet werden, obwohl ihre gemeinsame Vorgängerin als solche erst im Jahre 1834 gegründet worden ist, während weder die Alte Universität noch die Reichsuniversität katholische Universitäten im engeren Sinne dieser Definition waren. Zu der aufgrund des Sprachenstreits und religiöser bzw. konfessioneller und weltanschaulicher Befangenheiten teilweise mit Ressentiments belasteten Diskussion um die Kontinuitätsfrage siehe unten: Kontroverse.".

Also in the German Wikipedia the point of vew is changing. But I cannot onderstand Why you are so attached to defend the selfcreated history of the Catholic University? Averybody nows in Belgium that it is a false history and and mendacious advertising. I encourage you to speake about that with historians of the both Universities of Leuven/Louvain. Nobody defends your theories.--Bruxellensis (talk) 14:02, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Revert on Brussels article
Thank you for the explanation. I didn't know there had been a discussion about this. Gold Renet  the café  14:23, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
 Nole  lover  14:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Brussels Cemetery
Good morning, at Evere they are three Cemeteries, it is ther:
 * 1) The great cemetery of Brussels (you can read the book "La nécropole bruxelloise" by Vandevelde), it is an historical cemetery with in the rotond the tombes of burgmasters of the town.... The official name is "Cimetière de Bruxelles"
 * 2) The Cemetery of Schaerbeek, wher the ihhabitant of the commune of Schaerbeek are burried.
 * 3) The Cemetery of...Evere.

I dont now if you now the city of Brussels but I recommand you to go there to sea with your own eyes. You can take the bus Cemetery of Brussels.--Bruxellensis (talk) 11:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Found another map: here. Where is Schaerbeek Cemetery then?  Oreo Priest  talk 12:57, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


 * RECTIFICATION/ this map here, IS TOTALY FALSE. You can see at the left of this map the Cemetery of Brussels (Begraafplaats van de stad Brussel), and at the right where it is whright "cemetery of Evere and cemetery of Woluwe (begraafplaats van Woluwe)" you have in reality the Cemetery of Schaerbeek (Nouveau cimetière de Schaerbeek" where Magritte, Mariën etc.. are burried!! It is there also the "Nieuw cemetery of Evere" in the left part of this cemetery. The entry is avenue Bordet. (my source: map, Bruxelles et périphérie, Géocart). I now very good those two cemeteries but I had forged the name of the streats.--Bruxellensis (talk) 14:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * on this image you can see very good at the left the Brussels Cemetery and at the right the Cemetery of Schaerbeek.--Bruxellensis (talk) 14:33, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Evere cemetery
There are two Evere cemetery.
 * The old cemetery of Evere (now not more in use): situated avenue champ du Repos at Evere.
 * The New cemetery of Evere, is a part of the cemetery of Schaerbeek, but separated with a walk. There are two entries at the left for the cemetery of Schaerbeek and at the right for the cemetery of Evere.--Bruxellensis (talk) 15:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Schaerbeek Cemetery
O. K. I think that now the information is correct for the public. In a little think as the situation of this cemetery you see how the reality is difficult to find and describe and that they are also false maps on internet! But not so difficult that what coucern the University of Louvain. If necessary I help you always with pleasure (if you can understand my bad english!).--Bruxellensis (talk) 10:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Belgium
Thanks for your assistance re:images of van Eyck and Mercator. They are worthy of inclusion.Buster7 (talk) 19:14, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Belgium FAR listing
nominated Belgium for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:30, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

belgium tennis event not notable?
hello,

I think that it is notable enough to add there. And I also think, that there is much more sport events in Brussel, or am I wrong? Thank you.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 11:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Marollen to Uccle
Hi. You added that the residents of Marollen who had their houses demolished were compensated with property in Uccle. Do you have a source for this? I don't doubt you, I'd just like to read a bit more. Cheers,  Oreo Priest  talk 15:07, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * An expropriation is not a confiscation (you have to read the Code Napoléon) and in Belgium so as in London our in the Paris of Haussman, the State gives a pecunarian compensation to the expropriate owners and also tennants. In the case of the construction of the Palais de Justice, that was built in the Parc de Merode this family received a great compensation, and also the owneers of the ouses situated in a little part of the Marolles. The landlords of this part of the Marollen ware not poor people but members of the nobility and of the Lignages of Brussels!!The tennants receiveid beutifull little houses with gardens constructed by Poelaert in Uccle, this quarter is still existing and now mutcht sought.
 * I will give you the sources of books, I give you this exemple:"J'ai rencontré madame Demin un samedi dans les potagers, elle passait par là. Nous avons bavardé agréablement de part et d'autre de la barrière qui entoure la zone potagère. Madame Demin connaît les potagers depuis son enfance. Elle m'a expliqué que le quartier avait été construit pour les expulsées des Marolles lors de la construction du palais de justice. Il était donc peuplé d'ouvriers."--[[User:Bruxellensis|Bruxellensis] (talk) 10:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)


 * You have to read: Louis Quiévreux, Bruxelles, notre capitale: histoire, folklore, archéologie, Bruxelles, 1951, p. 257: "Ceux qui lui donnèrent ce sobriquet, ce furent les expulsés de la «partie» des Marolles démolie afin que puisse être érigé le colosse de la place Louise. La rue des Sabots, celle de l’artifice et d’autres encore étant condamnées, on transplanta leurs habitants dans un quartier riant et campagnard; celui du Chat, à Uccle, à la limite de Forest.--Bruxellensis (talk) 13:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Little part of the Marolles
Only the BACK part of the Justice Palais is constructed in the Marolles the other part is in the Parc de Mérode. That made 1/50 of the all Marolles still existing. I will copy for you a plan of the preparatorian works. In a public conference given for two days in the Palais de Justice, the autor of a new book saiys "een klein deel van de Marollen".--Bruxellensis (talk) 13:18, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Cartels in politics
Hi Oreo Priest. Sorry for again overthrowing your edit, but your wording would misleadingly have been interpreted as if two parties had contested the result of the election, perhaps a more often occuring or talked about possibility than forming a cartel before the elections, especially for readers from countries where such cartel never occurred in politics. That does not mean that the term 'cartel' is wrong in another context than the more common commercial cartel. I think that the Belgians and others may have been creating this political extension of 'cartel' not only in French and Dutch, but it is also dripping into the English language texts distributed e.g. in Britain. The context in the article 'Flanders' certainly does not allow the term to become misinterpreted, it can only make readers aware of the extended usage; and the nature of the before the elections publicly announced cartel (officially presenting both otherwise still autonomous parties together as a single election list and with a common programme, to act together in full agreement as if one party after the elections according to the preset agreement defending/fighting specific topics together be it in government or in opposition), constitutes a cartel, there is no short way to give that meaning accurately. See also e.g.: While in 2004 a cartel was formed by CD&V-NVA, there already existed the cartel SP.a-Spirit (2003 federal election). The term was new in a political context then, also in Dutch and I assume in French. Though it might have been intentionally derogatory at first, it appears that the in both languages identical term for this rather recent political development, quickly became neutral and meanwhile established and has been taken into the English language, which like French and Dutch used to know that term limited to the economical meaning only. Previously, there used to be many rumours about 'secret' pre-election agreements (demanding the other party to be also included in a coalition government before joining that coalition if one got the better negotiation handle, and consequently in one of Belgium's many parliaments voting along the same lines for specific themes); some of those unofficialized agreements had been rather confirmed afterwards; very rarely the existence (but not the precise contents) of such agreement had even been made public before an election. For municipal elections, cartel lists had been created much earlier and often by a new list name, rather a local party formed by local candidates belonging to two or more different national or regional political parties, as far as I know not as top-level party decisions. These generally drew much less public attention, and probably enjoyed extremely little international exposure - though were not completely unnoticed, e.g.: The term 'cartel' only showed up in the larger political arena, for the formal and by election law presented single list with candidates from two entire parties that formed a (temporary) specifically limited union only for a particular election and the government period that was to follow (though such cartel might have continued for later elections). During the cartels, each party held on to its own separate party structure and party meetings. It has the side-effect of not knowing how many voters backed each cartel party, making comparisons between consecutive elections of which some had the 'normal' separate lists a mere conjecture. Hm, with a bit more decent fact verification and proper referencing, most of the above might become an article 'Cartel (politics)' with a link from Cartel (disambiguation) and from the term 'cartel' in article 'Flemish'. Unfortunately however, the political term 'cartel party' already has another established meaning: This text and also the one by Blomme and Verstraete mention Katz and Mair’s (1995) theory of the "cartel party" that as I understand refers basically or simplistically to financing all parties with enough influence not to be overlooked, by state resources - a rather perverse self-sustaining trend or tendency with negative aspects similar to commercial cartels. There is no risk of anyone assuming this kind of cartel to be intended in the current context of the term in the article 'Flanders'. Kind regards,&#8203; ▲ SomeHuman 2011-02-02 13:18 - corrected, added, revised until 20:27 (UTC)
 * on http://www2.lse.ac.uk/researchAndExpertise paper by Dirk_Rochtus (pdf) ('cartel')
 * on http://www.sussex.ac.uk RIIA/OERN ELECTION BRIEFING NO 13 by Martine Van Assche ('cartel')
 * on http://www.essex.ac.uk/ecpr paper by Wouter Blomme and Tom Verstraete (pdf) ('cartelized')
 * on http://www.psa.ac.uk by authors at University of Ghent for the 2008 conference at Swansea University
 * on http://www.strath.ac.uk, document by Wolfgang Rüdig (Department of Government, University of Strathclyde), 2007 prepared to be published by University of Minnesota Press
 * I'm fine with your having copied the above to the article's talk page, and with your argumentation there - to which I responded. In short: I suggest Cartel (formal pre-election agreement) and until that article exists, I replaced your still dangerously ambiguous phrase to "(who had subjected themselves to the voters on a shared election list)", which I assume to be more informative and not possibly misleading.&#8203; ▲ SomeHuman 2011-02-03 06:28 (UTC)

List of Canadian provinces and territories by gross domestic product edit
you reverted an edit I made saying that Canada's economy is 9th biggest in the world and gave the reason as "not supported by the source". How is it not supported by the source? the source (and another source I have from the end of the year provided by the IMF) shows Canada in 9th place for 2010 (which is not really an estimate anymore). It is impossible (according to all source CIA and IMF) for Canada to not be ranked 9th for 2010 which is last year so it doesn't have to be considered an estimate. At the Economy of China article it calls China the 2nd biggest economy in the world even though it was 3rd in 2009. They use 2010 data and the Canadian article should as well.Grmike (talk) 02:32, 4 February 2011 (UTC)grmike
 * Thanks for the response, I wasn't sure what the problem was but now I know, the current references are better and up to date (though I understand your concern since the imf made that list about 2 months before 2010 ended) but cnn supports it as an end of year reference.Grmike (talk) 15:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)grmike

Poelaert in Marolles


Good morning, thank you four you interess four Brussels. Poelaert had his privy house rue des Minimes, next his bureaux and huge ateliers, and his house was communicating with a passage to him. Poelaert et son temps, Bruxelles, (catalogue exposition), 1980, p. 166: "Il habitait une maison rue des Minimes, voisine de ses bureaux et qui communiquait avec ceux-ci". In his youth he was residing rue de Laeken. His daughter and son in law Maurice Pauwels were residing Boulevard de Waterloo. Pierre Loze, Eduardo Colombo, Paul Vercheval, Le Palais de justice de Bruxelles: monument XIXe, 1983: Il habitait une maison rue des Minimes, voisine des bureaux et qui communiquait avec ceux-ci.--Bruxellensis (talk) 11:38, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I will see in the old Almanach of Brussels. I think he was still there when he as construct the colonne of congress. For a while!! If he is go there only four the Justice Palace he is remain a minimum 19 years from 1860 to 1879, because that was his unical work! You can also read in Poelaert et son temps insomniaque il se levait la nuit pour continuer son travail, dans sa maison voisine des ses bureaux ... Indeed he was realy residing there. But indeed the historians dont speak about important details as to now where was the huge atelier of Poelaert! You can see in the Almanachs and in the Annuaire du Commerce  et de l'industrie (Google books) only the name of his father (rue de Laeken) is reliable. Also in this time you dont must forged that in the Marolles ware not only living poor people (risiding in the Impasses) but also (rue Haute and other streats rich citizens. The historian Paul Looze, use the word habitait in French that will say that it is his normal domiciliation-Bruxellensis (talk) 16:02, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * to read:: 1.

Pierre Loze, Eduardo Colombo, Paul Vercheval, Le Palais de justice de Bruxelles: monument XIXe, 1983: ''Poelaert insomniaque se levait la nuit pour retravailler ses plans. Il habitait une maison rue des Minimes, voisine des bureaux et qui communiquait avec ceux-ci''"--Bruxellensis (talk) 16:35, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes I understand, but I cannot answer a this moment, my source is the book of Pierre Loze who is the only historian spreaking about the adress of Poelaert! I have send today a letter to the Archives of Brussel about this question. When I receive other elements I will modifie what I have written. You must also not forgotten that Poelaert had given work during 30 years to the workingpeople of the Marolles. I have read an other book (of Jo Gérard) in which I have read that Poelaert was apprecieted by the workmen and that he was calling any with his own name. I hope to can give a better answer.--Bruxellensis (talk) 11:53, 27 February 2011 (UTC)