User talk:RJFF/Archive

Yongyuth Wichaidit
Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Yongyuth Wichaidit. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Trairong Suwankiri


The article Trairong Suwankiri has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners or ask at Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:26, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sanan Kachornprasart


The article Sanan Kachornprasart has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners or ask at Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:02, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

MPLA
Hello RJFF: I have ben studying the MPLA since about 1970, and seen its ideological changes over time. In the 1950s/1960s, it started off with a nationalist ideology that was not very precise. Part of its leadership then absorbed "leftist" ideas (and/or rethoric) which in the 1960s/early 1970s were used as instruments for obtaining international support. The need for international support increased sharply during the decolonization conflict of 1974/75, and the discourse became more and more marxist. At the 1977 party congress marxism-leninism was adopted as the official doctrine - with the understanding, that Angola should try to evolve in the direction of what this doctrine defined as the "socialist" model; the "communist" model was explicitly refused. During the first post-colonial period, the MPLA established a regime inspired by the East European ones, but the attempts at implementing the "socialist" model were less than convincing and often frankly halfhearted. In 1990/91 the MPLA abandoned marxism-leninism at yet another party congress. Its joining the Socialist International symbolically expressed its rejection of marxist-leninist utopias - but did not (repeat: not) imply any option for a non-marxist model of socialism, certainly not for any brand of "African socialism". During the 1990s/2000s, the party's discourse and practice have been a mixture of "social democracy" and "neo-liberalism" (not to be confounded neither with the British nor with the US-American common understanding of "liberal"). If you told people in Angola today that the MPLA was socialist, the reaction would most probably be a grin or a shrug. Now, the info-box in the article has, of course, the reflect the contemporary situation, and do away with labels that may have been more or less appropriate in the past. Agreed? Aflis (talk) 22:49, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Your new article European Alliance for Freedom
Hi RJFF! I saw your article European Alliance for Freedom in the New Articles list. However, there's some holes that might need filling: The contents under the section "Criticisms" is confusing, I'm not sure I understand exactly what you're trying to say. It would be great if you could also help improve Alliance of European National Movements. As you know, there’s always room for more work to make articles even better.Kind regards and happy editing! Jipinghe (talk) 21:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Broken image due to use of Find Link
Hi. This edit happened to break the image link. You might want to be a bit more careful when using the tool, thanks. --Paul_012 (talk) 03:23, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

August 2011
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Freedom (German political party). Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. In particular, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 07:30, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Humala Cabinet


A tag has been placed on Template:Humala Cabinet, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

OR and unsourced

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Lihaas (talk) 21:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

RE: Tunisian Constituent Assembly election, 2011
ITS COnvention on election articles of which ive been editing for some more than a year now (most of them the primary editor). The editor didnt explain his edit as i said when undoing it. please see the talk page. for hwhich isaid and asked for consensus as oppsoed to the other editor who dint explain and wrote on the bottom of another talk section that couldnt gain consensusLihaas (talk) 17:47, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Kyrgyz election
Discuss on the talk page, like id did for your tunisia election bit, if you dont do it and get consensus theres not chance of posting it whithout it being vandalism and warring. (as per your last rvt you did not see the ta;lk page)Lihaas (talk) 07:41, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Hamadi Jebali
Hello. I have made an amendment to the edit of mine you cancelled regarding the above subject. Though rather than restoring my original, I added an extra note to state that Tunisia had been a part of France at the time. The reason I and many other editors do this is because we observe historical accuracy ESPECIALLY where sovereign nations are concerned. Of course, there is no requirement to always state country, and often England or Wales suffice, just as might the U.S. state of Florida. With countries however, we often encounter jingoist editors whose only wish is to rewrite history and state that a person born in the Armenian SSR in the Soviet Union was actually born in Armenia. I appreciate the extant link to the French protectorate though to the reader, this alone is not sufficient and may even cause head-scratching once the person clicks on the link expecting to open Tunisia. I am normally easy on this sort of thing and I don't insist upon one usage over another, but somehow and somewhere the points need to be established: you can say Bitola, Republic of Macedonia (then Bitolj, Kingdom of Yugoslavia) or the opposite, Bitolj, Kingdom of Yugoslavia (now Bitola, Macedonia) and the like. Examples here and again. If you believe the existing piece needs changing, let me know your thoughts. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 22:22, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * True about Tunisia always having existed in one form or another. Many thanks RJFF. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 11:05, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

UKIP article
Hi. I'm not editing the article because of the shade of Purple. I'm editing it because there are significant problems with the image rendering which have not been addressed. Please see what it looks like to me : --Xijky (talk) 21:32, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

3rr
Stop edit warring, The Party for freedom article already states it is anti-islam, therefore, no to repeat it. If you revert again, i will go to a notticeboard. Pass a Method  talk  15:07, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Grey Hood Talk  16:31, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Sock
Tehre are a lot of single IP edits with no history cropping up on articles you've edited. Very strange. I have a feeling you know who's doing this. Alexandre8 (talk) 17:29, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Let me rephrase this. If you see the ukip talk page you'll see a list of ips who have made single edits just to ukip. do you agree that this is probably xijky? Alexandre8 (talk) 17:38, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

2011 Parliamentary Elections in Egypt
Hello RJFF

This is concerning the Egyptian parliamentary election, 2011–2012 page.

Please note that the Freedom and Justice Party and the Nour party were running as block coalitions, the Democratic Alliance and the Alliance for Egypt, respectively. Each of these two parties represents around 80% of the coalition nominees, but still, the number of votes (and seats) doesn't reflect just these two parties, but rather the coalition.

Now a possible confusion may be that the cited source|publisher=jadaliyya.com, from "Jadaliyya", states "FJP" and "Nour", and not Democratic Alliance or FJP-led coalition. But Jadaliyya itself, on its results page, states explicitly :
 * Freedom and Justice list includes candidates from the parties of the "Democratic Alliance for Egypt"
 * Al-Nour's list includes candidates from the parties of the "Islamist Bloc"

Keeping the results in the table as FJP getting 3,565,092 votes (36.6%), which will soon be translated into seats, is misleading. Basically because other parties within the Democratic Alliance grabbed seats too. Currently they are lumped in with the FJP (Same story for al nour).

I noticed that other persons tried to address this issue before and after my attempt, and that you reverted all these attempts. Several references and explanations were added and then undone.

What do you suggest to be done to clarify this issue?

all the best

Hous21 (talk) 20:20, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing me to the ongoing discussion. I have an answer regarding the 34/35 seats of Egyptian Block. Hous21 (talk) 03:19, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

El-Ghad Party
Hello RJFF

I am fine with the footnotes. The fielded lists were definitely lists for the coalition, since I have seen multiple names of Alliance candidates on the FJP lists. Jadaliyya reported several. Now the lists MAY have been registered under FJP name, I am getting conflicted resource about that.

As for the El-Ghad party. There are two factions in the El-Ghad party, both of which claim the party title and insignia. There is current legal battles between them. One of these factions, headed by Ayman Nour, joined the FJP-led coalition and has gotten newly elected MPs under the Democratic Alliance umbrella.

The other faction, headed by Moussa Moustafa Moussa, ran in independent list. So when you saw "el-ghad" party list, it is the Moussa faction that is NOT running with the Democratic Alliance. The Nour-faction results are reported within the FJP figures.

Now the english El-Ghad wiki is misleading, because BOTH factions link to it. Hence the confusion. The arabic version is clearer, with two different wiki pages for the two factions of the El-Ghad

all the best

Hous21 (talk) 21:37, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hous21 (talk • contribs) 21:32, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In Graduate Institute of International Studies, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page HEI (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Janša's populism
Hey! It seems we have a slight disagreement, I suggest we try to solve it here. I've read C. Nation's article; unfortunately, I cannot access Rizman's (but I'm familiar with his arguments from his Slovenian texts). In his (rather short and not particularly analytical) article, Nation quotes Rizman in his assessment of Janša. Is it also the other way around, that Rizman quotes Nation? In this case, it's a strange case of cross-reference, because it doesn't seem to me that Nation's argument is based on independent research (he would probably need at least the linguistic expertise, don't you think?): it's a comparative & descriptive article, and in the section on Slovenia, his only analysis is based on Rizman's insight. Now, although I think it's very important to mention these assessments & critiques (in Rizman's case, it's more of a political critique than a neutral assessment due to his own civic engagement), I don't think we should use them at face value and use them as neutral qualifiers. I'm also not happy at all to see Rizman's assessment all over the article: I don't want in any way to downgrade his judgement, but we cannot have the opinion/assessment of one single critic quoted on all the issues linked to Janša's political career. One could ask then why not to do the same with Žižek's assessments or Frane Adam? This is not an article on Janša, not on Janša and whatever Rizman thinks of him. See where I'm going? On the other hand, I think his opinion is important enough to be quoted, but either in a separate paragraph in the text or we can open another section (Critiques of Janša or Assessments of Janša), where we insert his critic's views. Anyway, thanks for the contributions, they're very valuable. If you want to continue the discussion, I suggest you leave a msg on my talk page. Cheers, Viator slovenicus (talk) 19:05, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Now I've read Rizman's text in the part that it refers to Nation. It is indeed very tricky: Rizman quotes Nation, who in turn makes his analysis on the basis of another Rizman's text. It's a case of circular referencing: the source is always Rizman. Rizman's sources in the text are also rather dubious: unfortunately, I can't see the footnotes, but the references he quotes in the text (Miheljak, Trampuš, Sever) are almost all journalists & columnists. Some of the most "strong" statements lack any references altogether, and I don't see any original and thorough (primary source-based) discourse analysis. Anyway, the article is not on Rizman. I would just be careful of using it as source. (p.s. I didn't know his middle name was Martin :)). Viator slovenicus (talk) 19:47, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

ANI notice
Just a quick note to inform you that a user you have had recent contact with is currently under discussion at ANI here. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:13, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Andaman sea bordering Thailand
If you place the Andaman sea as bordering to the west of Thailand, and also to the southwest, is it then also not to northwest of Thailand seeing that it is also northwest of Southern Thailand? - Takeaway (talk) 18:50, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

UK Independence Party
Isn't your assertion that "every sources uses" "UK Independence Party" a bit odd given how the lead reads? --Nlu (talk) 06:02, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

The list
Eritrea may not be communist, but according to the CIA they do have a "command economy" - are they anti-capitalist?? --TIAYN (talk) 12:54, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * the CIA is not a unbiased entity...especially where states in opposition.sanction by the usa are cocnered.(Lihaas (talk) 17:56, 19 January 2012 (UTC)).
 * That may be true (but nothing can be truly unbiased); those Eritrea have a command economy or not??? --TIAYN (talk) 17:59, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

RE: ENGVAR
not sure how its not consistent, i think it is. ENGVAR doesnt call for 1 set across the board it explicitly notes that the variation is per the country of the article. European articles have more than once used the English spelling as that's the closest nom, and that as the UK are in the EU the covnention is to use that seplling where the USA is not concerned. (in Latam, hjowever, a case for the US spellign could be made). Ditto in India to use their variation (in this case with due wikilink to clarify)(Lihaas (talk) 17:55, 19 January 2012 (UTC)).
 * its not my own rule, so please dont jump to conclusions and NPA's that i make them up. Ive seen it before discussed on some talk page (which i cant tell because it must have ben a year or so, or more, ago).
 * I dint notice the "emphasize" tag but if i did i woulkd have changed that...i also dont have a preference because on USA articles i do mantain such spelling. perhaps it should be discussed on the Finland page. (btw=- theres not such special relationship with the usa either to automatically use that spelling, though the relation is clearly closER to the UK)(Lihaas (talk) 18:24, 19 January 2012 (UTC)).
 * I igress on the fact that there are no strong cultural ties within EU/European states, esp. vis a vis the other alrternative. Further seperate Finnish editors use seperate usages (as this demonstrates) and the fact that another editor who i previously worked with on finnish political articles uses the other alternative. Nevertheless, we can discuss on talk there.
 * The EU itself is a very strong cultural tie as the official language of the EU includes English on the premise of it being the language of the UL, not that of the USA. (and cyprus, i think)(Lihaas (talk) 18:37, 19 January 2012 (UTC)).
 * lets discuss on tal;k page. ENGVAR says (and consensus atWP) that discussion that garners consensus can change.(Lihaas (talk) 18:55, 19 January 2012 (UTC)).
 * Forgot to mention: take a look at Centre Party, that spelling pretty much explains where Finland stands on the spelling issue.Lihaas (talk) 19:11, 19 January 2012 (UTC)).

Colors for Egyptian Parties
Hello and thank you for correcting the changes I made to the colors of Egypt's parties. I initially intended to color them based on political affiliation, but I now understand that you're coloring them based on their logo color. I will try to give exact colors to each party based on their logos, and I would appreciate your help with keeping an eye on the changes I make and letting me know if you disagree with any of it, Thanks again, — Preceding unsigned comment added by B for Bandetta (talk • contribs) 17:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey, no problem, and thank you again for the advice. I created a page User:B for Bandetta/New and I will play a little bit there until I come up with something I think looks good, then I will post it on the discussion page and open it for discussion. Meanwhile, please keep the advice coming if you feel there is something I did wrong. Thanks again. --B for Bandetta (talk) 18:19, 24 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks, just added a ref to Reform and Development Party (Egypt). I will try to add refs from now on. --B for Bandetta (talk) 01:46, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

OK to mention a candidate's race – but not sexual orientation?
Hi! Yeah, I'm not indicating that Haavisto being gay would have any possible effect on his policies (at least in Finnish context), but could you please tell me why you don't delete from the 2008 US presidential election page the passage which says that Barack Obama is the first African American (or at least half African American) to have been elected a US president? -- Frous (talk) 21:09, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok. Hmmmm. Maybe the deleter just wanted to blank the whole paragraph. -- Frous (talk) 01:27, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Source of Egyptian election results
You need to state clearly whether the voting figures you have posted come from the Election Commission website or from the Jadaliyyah website, because there are substantial differences between them, notably for Cairo I and Sawhag I and II. Curiously, Jadaliyyha's figures seem more credible, but there's no indication of what source Jadaliyyah has used to get these figures. Perhaps you can clarify this, and also why no figures at all exist for the constituency voting. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 10:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 11:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for helping edit Next Israeli legislative election--Metallurgist (talk) 02:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Democratic Party
Hi first i must say to you its true what you said but there is little problem. Its true that this Democratic Party in Serbia was in fact not founded in 1989 it was only Renewal of work because one party system of SFRY banned all party form that system. How i see connection, first since it was banned by the communist regime she continue work illegal. 1989 after collapse of one party system 13 intellectuals with help of old members of that banned party they help renewal assembly in witch they said that they would continue work of former Democratic Party. In 1989. and even in 1990 Yugoslavia was still existed, so renewal of work was connected for Yugoslavia not for the Serbia. We all know that Yugoslavia collapsed in 1991. by that time Democratic Party was re-established again full work on political map of Yugoslavia. That's all the facts that prove that was connection with Democratic Party form Yugoslavia, party wasn't founded in 1989 but in 1919. You can see that this party is legal successor of Democratic Party form Kingdom of Yugoslavia. Its not there fault that they get banned in 1948, otherwise we wouldn't talk about this. I add news paper and write section that proves that this party roots are in 1919. This man Desimir Tošić is proof of this claim. He was member of Democratic Party of Yugoslavia, and he get involved in re-establish Democratic Party (SFR Yugoslavia) in 1989. Snake bgd 18:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I can tell you only one thing about this i know history of this party it has it roots in 1919, its not 2 parties its same party but in diffrent time of period was shut down as i mentioned before. Please dont remove text that you think is reliable. I know well of history and what they publish on diffrent web sites its comes not from pure facts but form they perspective of viewing history. I will repeat one more time party wasnt founded in 1989 it was only renewal of work and its not founded in Serbia it was founeded in Yugoslavia (Kingdom and renewal in Socialist). Someone write Serbia because today it only operate in Serbia but its same party form before only new people that reestablished work are not same people that lived before. If you dont trust me the most trusted text is on serbian wikipedia, since it was writen as it is form the correct point of view on article. I dont have books that was publish that proves that its same party from before but on internet you cant find that text since in Serbia its not yet text form books put on internet because this country get internet around country in 2000 but thats some other subject. Snake bgd 22:21, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I will initiate discussion of merging these 2 articles in one, thanks again. Snake bgd 11:38, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

There is a book thats write its called History of Democratic party 1919-2009. I cant find on internet. But its published. Snake bgd 12:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Here it is book in 4 parts. Snake bgd 12:29, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes that's it. About party but we can keep 2 articles, i only to mentioned that roots are in party in Kingdom of Yugoslavia. In the beginning of articles.Snake bgd 12:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Thaksin Shinawatra
Thanks for correcting my error, I was just doing some disambiguating on the link "Thai" and selected "people" as the most appropriate one without reading about his Chinese heritage. Apologies. d a n n o 00:41, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Civic Platform
Concerning this. Why then did you remove a referenced claim? Tymek (talk) 04:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Fact - General Gromoslaw Czempinski, one of the most famous officers in Poland, of whom you have heard, I presume, as you have gotten involved in the article, stated that the Civil Platform was his idea,
 * Fact - the General stated it in an interview published by a leading Polish daily. I am sure you know which daily, since you have gotten involved in the article,
 * Fact - Platform leaders did not sue the General, neither did they deny his claims, I am sure you are aware of it.
 * I feel like I am talking to a brick wall. Left a message, no response, but sneaky removal of referenced information. The information is based on two reliable sources, there will be more sources upon request. And I do not care if you trust General Czempinski or not, and what you think of Super Express. This is not relevant here. He stated it publicly, and it you keep on deleting referenced information, I will report you. Thanks. Tymek (talk) 23:26, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Korean parties
With all the changes in Korean political parties, could you maybe also update Parties in the South Korean National Assembly? Thanks! — Nightstallion 16:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Insurgency in the Azawad
Kindly discus this first. See Tuareg rebellions any of which could have the same name (and should do so)Lihaas (talk) 19:33, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Message by Spartacus Marat
RJFF. This controversy has happened with Jobbik in the past. The controversy ended without including the ideology "Fascism" in the ideology template. The reason was that the party itself doesn't recognize these allegations. And here we are that a party is self-proclaimed National Socialist and we can't accept this characterization. I don't think it's sound at all. It's not something complementary, that's what happens with all the parties, we include the ideologies they give themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spartacus Marat  (talk • contribs)

where?
Who are the "users" who disagreed and where did they disagree? --B for Bandetta (talk) 00:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * And a lot of the information in the table you insist on using is wrong; please see the references I added on top. --B for Bandetta (talk) 00:07, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * First of all, you and him/her are only 2 users, and you're the only people disagreeing. Second of all, I wrote this on February 4th and nobody said anything after it: "If I don't see any objections to the initial table in the next couple of days I'll add it to the article". Third of all, I did take some of your advice and removed some of what you call "many colourful graphs" to reach a compromise. Fourth of all, you cannot expect all the election templates to look identical because different countries have different systems - in Egypt for example you have parties running the elections against larger "tent parties", and this needs to be clear in the table. Finally, the information you insist on including is wrong; please refer to the references I put above the table to understand this. Please address those issues. Kind regards

Then you need to do this with every single party. Otherwise everyone is using the sources they prefer. they didn't gave themselves a complementary, so to be considered a POV. The National Socialism tag stays. Good day to youo you. --B for Bandetta (talk) 00:21, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The sources are right there on the top of the discussion section. Here there are again:

I talk of consesus when I see nobody objecting to what I say in the discussion section on the talk page. After all, you were the one who first told me to discuss things on the talk page when I first joined Wikipedia. Anyway, I will ask for the input of more users on this. --B for Bandetta (talk) 01:00, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Russian Presidential election
I have tried several times to delete the unrealistic so-called poll in the Russian presidential election 1/21-1/25 by the polling organization "superjob". This poll is so out of line with all other polls, it seems to me to be not in the category of information but political propaganda. Here is a reason for my deletions:

for instance try this poll :http://www.redorbit.com/news/entertainment/1112462129/poll_shows_putin_retains_support_of_majority_of_russian_voters/

or even the poll by the BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16750990

how did Prokhorov jump from 3% in BBC to 21% in the so-called poll? Answer this and I will consider your persistent rejection of my edits to be legitimate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwali6084 (talk • contribs) 22:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

In your post to my page you did not answer any of my concerns. Here are my concerns: (please answer them)

(1) For a scientific article to be valid, it must be peer-reviewed. Similarly, if a poll is wildly distorted compared to other polls, a valid conclusion is that this one poll is off, not all the other words. In other words, what evidence do you find that the BBC poll is invalid? Why do you not explain how this poll represents reality better than the articles that I cited? it is you who are under the obligation to prove that your judgment of the BBC poll being invalid and irrelevant is the correct one. It is likely that you do not speak Russian and are not an expert on Russian politics (neither am I, for that matter). So how dare you invalidate the BBC and The Russian Public Opinion Research Center? Please explain you are qualified to do this. (2) To resort to form critique is not helpful. Stick to the issue. The issue is your claim that the superjob polls invalidates and renders irrelevant polls by the BBC and the Russian Public Opinion Research Center. You cannot defend this claim, so you resort to name-calling, form critiques, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwali6084 (talk • contribs) 00:36, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

The principle difference between our positions is that I relate this unusual poll to other events and trends where as you do not; sure, if one poll is off compared to other polls, it is irrelevant and will be discarded by the unbiased observer, and thus is not a cause for concern; moreover, in most cases, unless a polling organization is specifically proven to engage in fraudulent conduct, it is reasonable to assume that there is nothing wrong with their methodology, even if it differs widely from other polls with more standard sources. I accept this position if the issue is only this one poll in this one article. But to view this poll in isolation "scientifically" is both impossible and inappropriate. The fact is that wikipedia is a respected and trusted source of information, more respected and trusted than the news media or then blogs or commentary, as well as it should be. So, because of this, in a time of campaign season, with promotions and claims and counterclaims and uses of fronts it is extremely naive or even conniving to treat such an unusual poll as "fact unless proven fraudulent." It is doubly more suspect when considers that the candidate in question whose poll numbers are 6 times more than normal is a billionaire running without support of any political party, with no formal organizational support. You ignore these facts and context in a pose of objectivity and dedication to the letter of wikipedia law. Rather, the appropriate standard to use is "reasonably credible." And it is not reasonable nor credible to suspect that a poll that differs so widely from its respected peers is legitimate, especially under the circumstances of a campaign season as detailed above, where indeed, perceptions do affect outcome, and wikipedia is treated as unbiased when compared to other sources of information. I think that your rejection of the context of the issue in considering reasonableness is unjustified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwali6084 (talk • contribs) 02:51, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I included some other VSCIOM polls - my conclusion is - my goodness Prokhorov was flying high for a substantial fraction of the day if that poll is equal to the other ones! Alas, the other wikipedia verified polls indicate otherwise. Thanks for the wikipedia tips and regards - I hope that I singed this right Mwali6084 (talk) 04:28, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Ministry of Development and Social Inclusion (Peru)
Do you have a source for [v http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ministry_of_Development_and_Social_Inclusion_(Peru)&diff=472791939&oldid=454493665 this]?Lihaas (talk) 06:15, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

FoE
Do you actually read what you revert? Just asking ... --78.53.37.183 (talk) 16:01, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning. I reckon the phrase is: Look before you leap! Kind regards, --78.53.37.183 (talk) 16:10, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Sure, remove the Mises institute material from the article Right-wing socialism
Sure, remove the Mises Institute material. Right-wing socialism has existed however with Metternich's "conservative socialism" and Spengler's "Prussian socialism" (Spengler was a leading member of the Conservative Revolutionary movement. It is known that Hitler in public and private despised capitalism because he viewed it as being run by a Jewish-led rentier class, and he personally favoured a mercantilist economy. At the same time he was Machiavellian, and knew he needed support of big industry to prepare Germany for war. Beyond this, for Hitler it is hard to say much about the authenticity of his views on socialism - it is well known in retrospect that the man was psychotic and had an irrational toss salad of beliefs - for instance he sought to accommodate social Darwinism and anti-Semitism with Christianity in what he called Positive Christianity.--R-41 (talk) 16:26, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps a "conservative socialism" article should be created - especially for Metternich's views
How about a Conservative socialism or Conservative socialism (Metternich) article for Klemens von Metternich's open support of a "conservative socialism".--R-41 (talk) 17:32, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Swabian Alps
There's an amendment to the RM proposal here. Comments are invited; what do you think? Moonraker12 (talk) 21:37, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Aubrey (singer)
hi, can you help me. I discovered that there had been a singer on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wxm8T72Y84E Aubrey, with a music video New Day. I'm not sure whether she / song is notable enough (like internet phenomenon / Child singer) an article, or if she is notable enough to be mentioned in the article about the name Aubrey. Thank you in advance. 109.232.72.49 (talk) 15:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

+autopatroller +rollback
Added permissions for you on request -- Samir 18:17, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Ashrf1979 (talk) 22:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)Where are you from
 * From Germany, and you? --RJFF (talk) 22:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit-warring
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. . Adel (talk) 23:21, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Examining RJFF's contributions over the last 3 days, I see nothing that fits the definition of an edit war. Could you please explain what this warning is about? Thanks --Fæ (talk) 03:25, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Bahrani people
Considering the lengthy back and forth discussion between just 2 people at Talk:Bahrani people, you might find the Dispute resolution process of Third opinion a helpful one to try if you feel this is failing to reach a conclusion. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 03:28, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your advice. --RJFF (talk) 09:12, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Thai name
Template:Thai name has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Mootros (talk) 07:56, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Thai name
Sure do need that template! "Ms. Shinawatra" is flat wrong and should never be used except when necessary to emphasize that it is a Thai no-no. "Yingluck" is acceptable in an English language article after full name has been stated, though Thai nearly always prefix an honorific of some kind anyway. "Ms. Yingluck" should be used when necessary to emphasize that the person so named is a she and not a Mr. By way of example, English "Dr." never indicates gender and most locutions with suffix "-ess" have been dropped, but not in Thai. Thai for "medical doctor" does not have a gender suffix, but the abbreviation always does. Thai does not have a polite second- or third-person pronoun for her, but she does have some particles with which to end a statement to signify that she is a woman grown; and, for politeness sake, others signifying junior or acknowledging senior status. --Pawyilee (talk) 14:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

K Party ideology
Hi, I noticed your edit to the K Party page urging NPOV, which is fair enough, but I think changing it to "conservatism" somewhat misses the point because what commentators have drawn out, and what the party's raison d'être largely is, is that it explicitly blends reformist conservatism and progressivism --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 18:53, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply. I've changed it to "liberal conservatism" but that term seems rather ambiguous (I mean specifically the "conservative with liberal positions on social issues" meaning) -- please do let me know if there's a better descriptor I can use --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 20:44, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It is less a matter of inventing a descriptor than of finding an appropriate translation of the Korean term gaehyeok-bosu (개혁보수) which is used by the party, commentators and (already) academics writing in Korean. This has been given the translation "reformative conservatism" but, in English, it has only cropped up in translations of what the party officials themselves have had, so I am a bit stuck. --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 20:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've done as you said, thanks for the help. --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 22:52, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Belizean general and local elections, 2012
We can try nom this for GA whenit settles down? Looks really good now. Up for it?Lihaas (talk) 06:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Weve got prose and all in the other bit. Though i guess analysis should come in the next few days/weekLihaas (talk) 14:14, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * once off ITN,think wed be ready to pursue GA. but should go to peer review first.Lihaas (talk) 18:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

ThaddeusB (talk) 23:25, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Salvadoran legislative and local elections, 2012
Can you keep an eye on it...50% more to come through then can mark ready on ITN. I may pop back in a couple of hours.Lihaas (talk) 10:59, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11
Hi. When you recently edited Nationalist Republican Party, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Estado Novo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Slovak_parliamentary_election,_2010_complete_results 85.237.227.40 (talk) 17:58, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Dude, It's friggin obvious what their political leaning is. Just look at their webpage: http://www.naseslovensko.org/ Notice that they stole their symbol from this party. And they are even led by Kotleba! 85.237.227.55 (talk) 20:09, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * That's not how Wikipedia works. Wikipedia has principles like Verifiability and no original research. Arguments that are usual in "real life" like "It's friggin obvious" or "just look at their webpage" are not valid on Wikipedia. Everything on here must be verified with independent, neutral, reliable sources. Interpreting logos or drawing conclusions from how you perceive politicians is considered "original research" and is deprecated here. I hope that you can understand and accept this. --RJFF (talk) 21:41, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * So... When the part 1.Uses Nationalist symbols, 2.Preaches Nationalist Ideology, 3.Fills it's homepage with Nationalist symbols, articles, slogans, It's not enough for you to conclude that they are Nationalists? 85.237.227.55 (talk) 23:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * P.S. WTF do you mean "Original research"?! I posted a link TO THEIR PARTY'S HOMEPAGE. What more proof do you need? 85.237.227.55 (talk) 23:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Enough for me. Not enough for Wikipedia. Please make yourself familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. What you do is called original research and contradicts Wikipedia's principle of verifiability. I am 100% convinced that it is a nationalist party, maybe even ultra-nationalistic, but you cannot write it on Wikipedia, unless you have a reliable source to verify it. Interpreting symbols, analysing ideologies, slogans, publications of the party is original research and does not substitute citing independent sources. Kind regards --RJFF (talk) 23:08, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Btw: The party's homepage is a first-party primary source, while Wikipedia relies on independent, secondary sources. --RJFF (talk) 23:11, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Funny, according to the link you posted, primary sources are allowed as long as we use them with care. Nobody whined back in 2010 when we described them as Nationalists. I think it's time for you to read this policy fundamental principle. 85.237.227.54 (talk) 07:40, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

mark tyrant
if you mean why i delete abhisit because i found in his birth certificates from toad face in parliament to discuss (attack mark from two nationality), he show mark's birth certificates don't have abhisit just mark vejjajiva only--โจ : แฟนท่าเรือ : เกรียนที่หน้าตาไม่ดีแห่งไร้สาระนุกรม : พูดคุยกับควายตัวนี้ได้ที่นี่ 01:57, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Swiss referenda, 2012
Nice work (got some good team work going here (are you following by contribs? ;))

Just a q. is there any issue on the gambling initiative like the others have/? i dont speak german so dont know.(Lihaas (talk) 07:19, 13 March 2012 (UTC)).
 * Can we add the unopposed part with a source to the issues section?
 * btw- el salvador is ready for itn...can ou mark it? We can also add a list of MPs later when known (42 each?). THen now we can get Belize/Salvador/Swiss for GA?(Lihaas (talk) 07:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)).
 * are you sure? the 09 election page says the other way(Lihaas (talk) 07:54, 13 March 2012 (UTC)).
 * Generally, yeah, but elections are really on there. it has to be complete, and if there isnt information then it cant be filled for the sake of it. Ive seen short ones before (Serbian Radical Party), no length requirement. Just needs to be complete and good qualit.(Lihaas (talk) 07:59, 13 March 2012 (UTC)).
 * No no m, i meant the other party names. (as in the ones youve superscripted) any source?
 * Should add to the party section f the article with the source ;)
 * TGo do tomorrow?
 * Im starting work on mayoral table..will take a few days to do
 * Kudos on the addition, but need some clarification.
 * Also if you read spanish...is this complete? it says 691/709, not sure what it is but it hasnt changed in over 24 hours.(Lihaas (talk) 07:07, 14 March 2012 (UTC)).


 * How do you collapse the municipal results table on the salvador page? any idea?Lihaas (talk) 08:11, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

bahrani people
when will you clean the bahrani people page from all that chaldean and pheonician origins nonsense ashrf1979 put (it even says the phoenicians are originally from tylos (bahrain), not the other way around) + (he claims that the baharna spoke chaldean in the 4th century but the source he put says its in SOUTH QATAR) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.148.1.216 (talk) 13:49, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Bahrani people
Ashrf1979 (talk) 22:06, 15 March 2012 (UTC)Do you read Arabic This historical study of Christianity in the historical region of Bahrain Your problem you are trying to limit the history of Bahrain and its people within the small state created by the British

Ashrf1979 (talk) 22:38, 15 March 2012 (UTC)Discuss patiently!!! You do not read Arabic and Can not read my sources And want to discuss the article with patience !!! Such as the blind man who gives his opinion on the paintings Picasso

the historical region of bahrain (qatar, bahrain, qatif, etc)

the source you gave says its in south qatar a place which is not and wasnt inhabited by the baharna

just because it was apart of the historical region of bahrain doesnt mean the inhabitants are bahrani — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.148.24.150 (talk) 04:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Ashrf1979 (talk) 09:59, 17 March 2012 (UTC) the name of Hasaitic Derived from the name of Al-ahsa Oasis Oasis in the southern region of Bahrain Some Arab geographers called this name on the entire coastal plains stretching between Qatar and Kuwait Even today there is a part of the Bahrani people called by that name al-Ahsá'í

ashrf1979
please remove all the nonsense he posted in the bahrani people article

the "sources" that he now posted say that the chaldeans are originally from east arabia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.255.157.78 (talk) 03:49, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

remove all the chaldean nonsense please — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.148.24.15 (talk) 13:15, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Joachim Gauck
I have restored my edits, and I insist that this is how the article (concerning those edits) must remain until you clarify exactly what the factual error was. I contend that I did not amend any content and that the article states exactly what it has done previously only without POV language. As you've only edited just over a year I need to explain a few things to you. First of all, when an editor makes several changes whether it be from a single edit or several, the custom is - as we cannot always be right all of the time - to go back and amend those "errors" and even so, explain it in the summary. By blanking the full raft of contributions over several edits, it instantly spells bad faith, and by simply declaring "errors" in the summary without explaining which, is even non-constructive.

Because there were many sections of text I edited, I cannot explain why I did what I did unless I go through each scenario one by one. Be aware also that my edits included copy-edits. I now await a reply from you. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 23:02, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for the reply and its content RJFF. Your words made sense so it's only fair I explain why I edited in the manner I did: you are 100% correct. As you'll guess, my knowledge of East Germany is basic, and whilst editing I did no immediate research and for some stupid reason, I confused the German communists with something different and incorrectly produced the year 1922. The article states 1918 though in fairness to User:Josh Gorand who declared the year as 1949 (closer), the body itself which would control East Germany was formed in 1946 by these existing Communists (pre-Moscow) and the then-farther left SDP who were aided into a new coalition, the SED. The point is simple, my facts were wrong. I only wanted to mention them because I didn't want to sell the impression to readers which many anti-Communist propaganda outlets have been doing down the years that Moscow "invented" the client authority. Even puppet governments have a history! The Communists as you know existed a long time and their members suffered persecution and worse during the post-1933 period but one way or another, they were there in a capacity; likewise they joined in the fight against the Nazis albeit still in the name of Germany. As for the "not returned" part, it is only because the word "disappeared" [sic] appeared in quotes. I wanted to clean it slightly. The rest of it was tackling the word "regime" and aiming to replace it with the more encyclopaedic terms government, structure, system, administration or whichever suited the text. That said, at the moment I am avoiding the article. I read it a lot because it is interesting and as such, I find things that I can edit - but too much tidying can lead to obvious content amendment even if not intended and to that end, I will only now make genuine clean-up edits (grammar and the like), even if editors restore "regime". Trying to change that word everywhere is an endless task and too often it appears on protected articles and I somehow doubt an admin will switch it just for my sake!!! Anyhow, thanks again. Best wishes. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 23:19, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Abkhazia
is there a source for this resulT? im trying to find Lihaas (talk) 17:30, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No probs...i asked before, but the table is of dubious verifiability.Lihaas (talk) 08:42, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I started a discussion in the Template article
Please dicuss before you revert...--Poarps (talk) 16:28, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There's still no answer coming from you. If there's no consensus, how about making one? What should be the threshold if 1 percent is "false"?--Poarps (talk) 12:03, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

bahrani people
could you please remove the sealanders section in the bahrani people article? for some reason it gives me an error when i try to edit it

strabo retracted his statement of gerrha being inhabited by chaldeans when he said "because of their trade, the gerrhans became the richest of the arabs"

also petroglyphs were found in greece that were found out to be sent by a man from gerrha called taym al lat, which is undoubtedly an arab name

+ that section is also WAY off topic. at first it talks about the sealanders then talks about the phoenicians

source: 1. Arabia and the Arabs: From the Bronze Age to the coming of Islam, Robert G. Hoyland p25 2. Strabon, Geography (strabos OWN book) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.148.53.8 (talk) 03:20, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Ashrf1979 (talk) 05:41, 29 March 2012 (UTC) 1-It makes sense to ask me about the sources of the Bahrani population in each country And their percentage of the total population of those States,But it is not logical that you delete the countries in which they live as long as you do not know their number,Especially if these countries were part of the historical region of Bahrain Such as Qatar and Kuwait Or part of the population is descended from Bahrani's ancestors Such as Iran, Iraq, Zanzibar.

2-Hasaitic language I did not say it is spoken in Germany or the Antarctic it was the first Arabic language Of the population of Eastern Arabia And i Had previously told you that so far there are more than a million Bahrani call themselves Hasaitic (People of the Al-Ahsa province)

3-It makes sense to most of the Semitic Semitic peoples Pre-Christian religion is Ancient Semitic religion,Do you have any idea about. Spartacus Marat  —Preceding undated comment added 23:25, 15 February 2012 (UTC).

t ​​the ancient Semitic religions.

4-Why Bahranis only required them to give proof about their links with the ethnic groups involved with them in the language, history and religion I did not write that Bahrainis have links with Inuit or Maasai people

Ashrf1979 (talk) 16:16, 29 March 2012 (UTC)What about this The Bahrani (plural Baharna, Arabic: بحراني ، بحارنة‎) are the indigenous Shi'a inhabitants of the archipelago of Bahrain and the oasis of Qatif on the Persian Gulf coast of Saudi Arabia (see historical region of Bahrain). The term is sometimes also extended to the Shi'a inhabitants of the al-Hasa oasis. They are all Arabic speaking, and some claim descent from Arab tribes.

and this

Rabi`ah

Rabi`ah (Arabic: ربيعة‎) purported patriarch of one of the two main branches of the so-called "North Arabian" (Adnanite) tribes, the other branch being known as Mudhar.

Like the rest of the Adnanite Arabs, legend has it that Rabi`ah's original homelands were in the Hejaz region of western Arabia, from which Rabi`ah migrated northwards and eastwards. Abdul Qays, Bakr ibn Wa'il, Taghlib ibn Wa'il were inhabitants of the region of Bahrain in eastern Arabia, including the modern-day islands of Bahrain, and were mostly sedentary.

Abdul Qays, Taghlib And Bakr ibn Wa'il were mostly Christian before Islam, with Taghlib remaining a Christian tribe for some time afterwards as well.
 * So what? I don't get your point. --RJFF (talk) 16:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

thai people
interesting, Thank you to claim Thai people only 75% but in my country thai also mean siamese (in central and southern-thai), western laos, lanna people.

i think you should open more article, spread central thai, lanna people and write thai-laotian into laotian article

so you mean uncle therd in my conutry they call offically uncle น้าเทิด because now he play at Chonburi F.C. --โจ : แฟนท่าเรือ : เกรียนที่หน้าตาไม่ดีแห่งไร้สาระนุกรม : พูดคุยกับควายตัวนี้ได้ที่นี่ 13:28, 29 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I have answered you at Talk:Thai people, so that other interested users can read and contribute, as well. --RJFF (talk) 14:38, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Stuff
could you chck Gmbia at the ITNC nominations? and also need your input on the election title. at Abkhazias election(Lihaas (talk) 15:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)).
 * Startign work on Mauritania election for toda. Can you help when youre on? Not happeningLihaas (talk) 01:22, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Per this WP: See also "As a general rule the "See also" section should not repeat links which appear in the article's body..." and possible Hatnote. Can we discuss it first on talk? Thats why it was hidden not removed.Lihaas (talk) 11:28, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * You changedyour mind on th emove request in less than a month after consensus was reached on the current move.? should get some time before opening a new discussionLihaas (talk) 13:43, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * There are discussions about the Jihad flag and the further reading on the Mlian insurgency page. Please partake in any or all issues that you feel you want/need toLihaas (talk) 12:39, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

The intro of the Fascism article is a necessary size
It has taken a very, very long time to achieve an NPOV intro on fascism, the current intro is well-sourced, detailed and very precise. Many arguments and debates over it have occurred, reducing the size will reduce the content - it will open a Pandora's Box because people will begin questioning what fascism means again. This intro took years to develop and it has been one of the most stable intros I've seen on Wikipedia, there are rarely any disputes about it now. The intro is a necessary size commensurate with the necessary information about the topic it is describing.--R-41 (talk) 16:08, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

What was wrong?
What was wrong with my edits on the talk page? They clearly stated my opinion on the vote, and I tried to help with closing and possibly making the title better. I don't see what was wrong. Jacob102699 (talk) 01:59, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok, so I figured out that it was my edit rearranged the page. but I don't know why. I have been having problems with when I type in something on Wikipedia, it messes up something else elswhere im the article, do you have any ideas why? Jacob102699 (talk) 01:59, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Your revert on Islamophobia
You say that the source uses the word "anxiety", but you know Wikipedia is not Wikisource or Wikiquote, and does not copy word by word. Social phobia is the same thing as social anxiety, so much so that social phobia links to a disambiguation page of social anxiety disorder, social anxiety, and specific social phobia, and specific social anxiety disorder redirects to specific social phobia. But saying "Islamophobia" connotes a social anxiety is confusing, because the article name is called Islamophobia, and "Islamophobia" connotes a social phobia would be much easier to understand. DontClickMeName talkcontributions 03:57, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * You have reverted me yet again, I'm not trying to complain about that, but if you put all your replies in your edit summary when you forget to respond to what a say in a talk page... well I make this accident too occasionally, and I know it often starts edit wars. Please explain, where did you get the definitions that the two terms have different meanings? The redirects I explained above seems to suggest Wikipedia's styles treats the two terms as equal, so you can help if you provide some sources stating differences. Everything we know is learned from somewhere, and all I'm asking is to know where you learned a difference between social anxiety and social phobia, that would make our discussion much less subjectively fuzzy and more absolute. DontClickMeName talkcontributions 02:25, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, you're right. You told me where to look, and seeing is believing: you proved your point. Thanks for being clear. DontClickMeName talkcontributions 20:04, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Azawagh/Iullemmeden Basin
Further complicating the naming situation, it appears that Iullemmeden Basin and Azawagh are synonymous terms; check out the maps at both articles and the reference here (p. 228). What I'd like to do is drop the proposed merge of Azawagh/Azawad now that the former has been moved from "Azaouad", and probably propose another merge, this time of Azawagh/Iullemmeden Basin. Thoughts? Thanks much for all your help with this. Khazar2 (talk) 19:27, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I got a pretty good answer to this one at Talk:Iullemmeden Basin. Essentially the argument is that one term describes the region geologically, and the other geographically. Khazar2 (talk) 20:05, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

bahrani people
hi for some reason ashrf1979 put the oddysey as a reference that strabo said the baharna are chaldean

the reference is bk xvi

please remove this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.148.53.235 (talk) 17:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It would be better if you could discuss on Talk:Bahrani people than always telling me what to do. --RJFF (talk) 17:31, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

my edit doesnt save for some reason

maybe because im using my iphone — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.148.53.235 (talk) 05:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, if I revert too often, I will get banned because of edit warring. --RJFF (talk) 08:52, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 5
Hi. When you recently edited Egyptian presidential election, 2012, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Freedom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Centre-right
"Right-wing means right-wing, not centre-right"
 * Well, yes, but centre-right means right-wing. According to the relevant article: "centre-right is a political term commonly used to describe or denote individuals, political parties, or organizations (such as think tanks) whose views stretch from the centre to the right on the left-right spectrum", therefore if a party is centre-right then "right-wing" is a tautology (since it exists in the centre and the right wing). Hence right-wing is informally used as a descriptor for any centre-right party (and typically only a very particular kind of political scientist will be technical about the use of the term "centre-right" anyway -- from the three sources given for the term, I can see two sociological studies and one newspaper article). I can guarantee that any party described as centre-right will also be described as right-wing in other sources, precisely because if it is centre-right then it is right-wing in comparison to other parties. Examples:
 * Progressive Conservative Party of Canada - Described as "centre-right" in its infobox, I can easily find at least three different sources that cite it as "right-wing".
 * Conservative Party (UK) - Described as "centre-right" in its infobox, here given as right-wing.
 * Liberal Party (Australia) - The same source gives it as right-wing, despite the "centre-right" descriptor on its infobox.
 * I don't think I need to go on a search for sources that describe the Republican Party (United States) as right-wing.
 * As far as my experience in political science can inform me, this division that you're drawing between right-wing and center-right (and have enforced elsewhere) seems quite artificial. If the centre-right article is to be followed, then the distinctive feature of a right-wing party should be that it has far-right tendencies (I don't buy the whole left-right style of analysis to begin with, but let's humour this definition) -- none of the given sources imply that that is the case for Saenuri. Hence I'm really not sure why Saenuri in particular merits having this tautology flaunted whereas every other centre-right party doesn't, unless you intend to apply the same standard to those parties? --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 17:55, 5 April 2012 (UTC)


 * It concerns you specifically because the matter is about your systematic questionable use of abstract descriptors and not about Saenuri. You made a similar misguided edit on the South Korean legislative election's page. --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 21:26, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

If you want to dispute whether Stalin was far-left then bring it to a dispute resolution board
That is very historically revisionist to say that Stalin and Mao were not associated with the far left in general. Communism and Marxism-Leninism are far-left ideologies. That whole stuff of "left deviationists" and "right deviationists" refers to the internal discourse in their communist movements where they accused each other of either being too conservative or too radical, it is a narcissism of small differences. I'm in the social democratic New Democratic Party - I know people who accused leadership candidates of being "right-wing" - when they darn well know that they didn't join a social democratic party to be right-wing, such claims are the result the opinion of the person evaluating from their own perspective. A similar case is here, Stalin and Mao associated with a far-left movement - Marxist-Leninist communism. I don't buy the argument that Stalin and Mao were not far left, I see no evidence for it.--R-41 (talk) 00:18, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Answer at Talk:Far-left politics --RJFF (talk) 00:35, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Synthesis on flags
A source on the AD fla. Further, in talk of synthesis how can we clain the MNLA flag as the cflag of the newly declared entity without a shred of source. Its as much synthesis here as the "flag of jihad" was removed for. And the source also indicated the MLNA has no writ left in most of the regionLihaas (talk) 10:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * In the same vein, the MLNA flag cant be cited as that of Azawad...expeciall when theire writ of the state is weak and they were the sole signatories to an independenct declaration. The whole state is more dubious now as its only 1 groups claim (who arguably are in the minority)Lihaas (talk) 12:49, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Your revet edit at te declaration page seems to clearly indicate the flag is synthesis and not th e national flag as it the flag of a political entity not the state and not recognised, not flying over the major towns of the city either.Lihaas (talk) 12:29, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I don't quite understand what you mean. Which of my edits? --RJFF (talk) 12:34, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Don't block me
Please, don't block me, right?--Danrolo (talk) 18:25, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

WikiThanks
You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.7.204 (talk) 00:35, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Democrat Party (Thailand)
Dear RJFF

My reasons of indicating Democrat Party as "conservative liberal" is that because it seems almost absurd putting "Liberalism" in one line and "Conservatism" in the next; they simply don't make sense unless you say they're the right wing faction of liberalism. This also fits perfectly with the fact that the party seems to be liberal but conservative at the same time. Most importantly, the source for "conservatism" cannot be accessed (only for Financial Times subscribers) so it doesn't really help. Therefore, I believe it should be "conservative liberalism" as original. Regards --125.24.37.243 (talk) 14:19, 12 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I hope you agree with me answering your message at Talk:Democrat Party (Thailand). Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 14:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

In The News/Recurring Items
I am posting here to ask for editors to look at In_the_news/Recurring_items and to comment at the talk page to discuss/vote on an amendment to the ITN/R list. I am posting this message on a number of editor's talk pages to encourage debate.

In connection to an ongoing debate on which items can appear on the front page under "In The News", "Recurring Items" are nominated events which require very little debate in the nomination process.

I propose the following amendment to the current ITN/R list. In addition I will put this on the talk page of as many editors as I can find who are contributors to ITN/C

At In_the_news/Recurring_items, I propose the following amendment to section 3:


 * At line 5, delete "and", and add after "territories" the words "and the world's twenty smallest nations".

Section 3, Line 5 would then read:


 * Disputed states, dependent territories and the world's twenty smallest nations should be discussed at WP:ITN/C and judged on their own merits.

I look forward to the debate doktorb wordsdeeds 07:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

National electoral calendar 2012
Yes, Puerto Rico isn't sovereign state but countries like Abkhasia are included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.112.114.181 (talk) 17:43, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Abkhazia is de facto sovereign. Puerto Rico is neither de facto nor de jure sovereign. --RJFF (talk) 18:13, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Abkazhia is de jure socvereign too...alakosovo. the barometreon the calendar seemsto be recognised by at least 1 UN state.Lihaas (talk) 09:40, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hungarian presidential election, 2012
No more election articles? I see youre not at East Timor. ANyhoo, you speak german so can you verify this persource?Lihaas (talk) 09:39, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

ITNR for elections
As someone who regularly contributes to election articles: Due to recurrent discussions that lead nowhere, an open-ended discussion and proposals are invited Wikipedia talk:In the news/Recurring items/Elections for ITN on the main page as to what should be recurrent without ITNC discussionsLihaas (talk) 07:24, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 20
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Bhumibol Adulyadej (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to His Majesty


 * Sirikit (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Her Majesty

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Why you revert?
Why did you revert and undo the pages that I do?

Why you revert?
Why did you revert and undo the pages that I do?--Danrolo (talk) 20:49, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Some curious diffs
My apologies for the disturbance, but I hope you won't mind taking a look at something interesting for me. This diff comes from a discussion I've been having. This diff comes from that article. I think I've spotted something important here and I was curious to know if you agreed. Dolescum (talk) 21:54, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Panagiotis Pikramenos
What still needs to be moved? I thought it was all there now. --82.35.251.109 (talk) 13:40, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

German presidents
I feel that it would be helpful to include acting presidents in their chronological place in the main table of the List of German presidents. Please see talk page. BartBassist (talk) 21:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

read the dang article
'' The Progress Party (Fremskrittspartiet, Framstegspartiet, FrP) is a political party in Norway which identifies as conservative liberal and libertarian. The media and academics have described it as right-wing populist   or conservative. It is currently the second-largest party in the Norwegian Parliament, with 41 seats. ''

Appears to cite claims for "libertarian", "right-wing populist", etc. thoroughly. As well as "conservative liberalism" etc. to boot. Please restore the infobox, as I regard this sort of "stuff" as being quite inane at this point. Wuld you really like all these sources repeated in the infobox? Cheers. Collect (talk) 13:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

unverifiable, unsufficiently cited and inaccessible source (or fake?)
Ashrf1979 (talk) 08:46, 24 May 2012 (UTC)The Ascetical Homilies of Mar Isaac of Nineveh

Isaac (Bishop of Nineveh), Paul Bedjan (St. Isaac of Nineveh, or, as he is sometimes known, St. Isaac the Syrian, was born in the region of modern Qatar and lived during the seventh century. Ordained as a bishop of Nineveh sometime between 661 and 681 CE, Isaac withdrew from his ecclesiastical office after only five months, retiring to live as monastic hermit in the mountains of southeastern Iraq. Translated from their original Syriac into a number of other languages, St. Isaac's spiritual writings have been read by Christian monastics for centuries.)

http://books.google.com.sa/books/about/The_Ascetical_Homilies_of_Mar_Isaac_of_N.html?id=lMOC0PjoTuAC&redir_esc=y

The Wisdom of Isaac of Nineveh, Sebastian p.Brock (St. Isaac of Nineveh, or, as he is sometimes known, St. Isaac the Syrian, was born in the region of modern Qatar and lived during the seventh century. Ordained as the bishop of Nineveh sometime between 661 and 681 CE, Isaac withdrew from his ecclesiastical office after only five months, retiring to live as a monastic hermit in the mountains of southeastern Iraq. Translated from their original Syriac into a number of other languages, St. Isaac’s spiritual writings have been read by Christian monastics for centuries.)

http://www.gorgiaspress.com/bookshop/showproduct.aspx?isbn=1-59333-335-8

The Sign of Peace, VOL 2.1, Kyle Smith

St. Isaac of Nineveh, a 7th century ascetic, was from the town of Bet Qatraye on the Persian Gulf. In 660 AD Isaac was ordained bishop of Nineveh, an ancient city on the Tigris River in present-day Iraq. But Isaac preferred the contemplative life of a hermit to the ecclesiastical life of a bishop, so he left his see “for a reason known to God” after only five months. From Nineveh, Isaac withdrew to the monastery of Rabban Shabur in Iran where he died at an old age.

http://www.catholicpeacefellowship.org/nextpage.asp?m=2188

Bet qatraye sometimes also called (the isles) was the ecclesiastical province Kuwait ,eastern Saudi Arabia ,Bahrain and Qatar several Christian settlements, both monasteries and churches ,and have now been found within the province ,including two in Kuwait ,two more in Saudi Arabia ,and at least one in Qatar

Source: Nestorian christanity in pre-islamic uae and southeast Arabia,peter hellyer,journal of social affairs,volume 18.number72.winter2011,p253,a refereed quarterly journal published by the sociological association of the uae and the American university of sharjah

http://www.adias-uae.com/publications/hellyer01b.pdf


 * And which of the sources says that he was Bahrani? None. It is your original WP:Synthesis. --RJFF (talk) 17:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Ashrf1979 (talk) 18:21, 29 May 2012 (UTC) Bahrani person from Bahrain historical region(Bet qatraye) I proved this fact you are you have to prove that it is not Bahrani Or that he was not born there


 * No offense, but you still don't seem to understand Wikipedia's principles. You need a reliable source that literally says that he was a Bahrani. Your own (original) thoughts, analysis and synthesis is not enough. --RJFF (talk) 13:50, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Ashrf1979 (talk) 15:37, 30 May 2012 (UTC)This is not my problem I did not write definition of Bahranis in Wikipedia I also did not write that Isaac of Nineveh was born in Bahrain historical region(Bet qatraye) This information are written By Other people Before I register my account on Wikipedia It is not my an original research I just put his name with the other persons Who belong to the historical region of Bahrain I think that this is not original research.
 * Yes, it is. And I am sorry that you fail to understand. I don't know how to explain it in order to make you understand it. Reading Synthesis might help you realising it. --RJFF (talk) 15:40, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Ashrf1979 (talk) 11:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)I think I need years to understand what you want from me But I think that this person Ilikecod Can be understood that the page is not about demographics in the Kingdom of Bahrain Tell him that

Socialist Party of Serbia
Hi, I would appreciate, if you would comment on the dispute. The related edits can be seen here. Estlandia (dialogue) 18:08, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

KKE
Look this, and please stop the propaganda. --Greek Transistor (talk) 21:21, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Justice and Development Party (Libya)
As you have previously commented on the title of this article, you may be interested in commenting on the requested move. Number  5  7  13:23, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Disruptive editors on Coalition of the Radical Left
You should check that page out. Some person put that on there. It stated that SYRIZA(Coalition of the Radical Left) is Communist, Marxist, Anti-Greek, Islamist which is not and he has no proof. The editor didn't have any username but I was able to find an ip address which is: 193.92.139.24 Thank You.

Nomination for deletion of Template:Buenos Aires elections, 2011
Template:Buenos Aires elections, 2011 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Robofish (talk) 22:43, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Disruptive editors on Golden Dawn (Greece)
Did you see it? Now User:Surlyduff50 is now questioning whether the nazi party should be classified as "far right" at all and is saying we don't have enough sources that document it as such. The guy is NOT acting in good faith. Also, I would be EXTREMELY wary of Greek Wikipedians; the Greek version of Wikipedia is infested with Golden Dawn sympathizers and tries to avoid displeasing nationalist and nazi factions. Moderatelyaverage (talk) 09:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I see various ppl try to add "disputed" to the "Nazism" bit in the infobox, altho the nazi idenntity of Golden Dawn is confirmed & verified through numerous sources. You might want to keepthis in check. And be wary of editors from Greece,cuz the internet in Greece is full of racists & hardline nationalists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.131.135.9 (talk) 12:54, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Third Way article move
Hi. I know you previously expressed support for a move of the Third Way (centrism) article to Third Way. I've started a discussion on the talk page and it would be good if you could support or weigh in on the proposal. Thanks. --Peter Talk to me 15:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Justice and Development Party (Turkey)
A pro-AKP-troll is removing content in this article and adding non-sourced information about the ideology. He has been doing it several times per day since a week. Could you watch and fix this problem, please?--84.57.23.79 (talk) 09:14, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The same for here: Template:Syrian political parties.--Chauahuasachca (talk) 12:02, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you help me to solve this problem please?--Chauahuasachca (talk) 13:43, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

please revert per AC/DS
AFAICT, the article on East Germany is subject to the ArbCom sanctions, and repeated revrts may result in any admin blocking the person doing such reverts. The language had been stable, and I ask you to avoid any ArbCom Enforcement possiblility as a matter of courtesy. Cheers. Collect (talk) 18:18, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

prime minister of thai
if you mean about prime minister of thai in thai people article

in term thai people looks like Spanish people with Castilian people Catalan people Andalusian people Aragonese people Asturian people Canarian people Cantabrian people Extremaduran people Galician people Leonese people Valencian people sub ethnic

in thai culture is not census to define because want to merge into all thai, except Plaek Phibunsongkhram's era census as thai or chinese only but in perform siamese quite mocking isan people without a Nasal bone

if you try to remove about prime minister with thai origin you should write new article to spread sub ethnic in thai (siamese) (isan laotian) and (lanna) people articles

in modern day Demographics of Thailand quite is hardly to definite their origin because country side move into town

so in thai people article i mean combine of siamese laotains and lanna, you see about thai origin i write quite definite who are siamese laotian lanna people

what do you think? --โจ : แฟนท่าเรือ : เกรียนที่หน้าตาไม่ดีแห่งไร้สาระนุกรม : พูดคุยกับควายตัวนี้ได้ที่นี่ 08:59, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I removed the list of Prime ministers, because it didn't cite any sources for the ethnicity of the listed politicians (WP:RS), and because Thai ethnicity (combined central, northern and Isan Thai) are the majority ethnicity (75%) in Thailand. So, a Prime Minister of Thai ethnicity is nothing special. Most Thai citizens are of Thai descent and so are most prime ministers, it's pretty standard. --RJFF (talk) 10:17, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * so you should written more about sub ethnic like spainish people--โจ : แฟนท่าเรือ : เกรียนที่หน้าตาไม่ดีแห่งไร้สาระนุกรม : พูดคุยกับควายตัวนี้ได้ที่นี่ 10:21, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikify
Hi, just to let you know that the Template:Wikify tag has now been deprecated. Please use Template:underlinked or Template:dead end from now on, cheers.  Del ♉ sion  23  (talk)  11:05, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

User:Begalangoram
Thanks for doing some of the cleanup there, though I suspect more will be necessary. WP gets these single-purpose accounts every so often that are dedicated to labeling both rich businessman/bankers and Communists as Jewish. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 19:09, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Research Outputs by Country
I noticed you have reverted some edits on the page. However the move is appreciated. It was a new and Infant article. If you please you may help me review the article with the new references and citations which I have provided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregorykarn (talk • contribs) 16:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Islamophobia
Apologies, I reverted some edits by you on Islamophobia page. Kindly review what I have posted here. The edits by Gregorykarn state the opinions of academic jonathan turley who is a famous person "Champion of Rule of Law" and editor for several magazines. Kindly see the article. I would advice you to make relevant edits so that controversial aspects may be rooted out and correct views come out. FYI : http://jonathanturley.org/2009/10/19/just-say-no-to-blasphemy-u-s-supports-eygpt-in-limiting-anti-religious-speech/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adityasaxena.corp (talk • contribs) 16:39, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Your 3RR report
You and JasonnF have both been at AN3 before about this very dispute. The article was fully protected for a week last time around, in lieu of blocking both of you. Please join the discussion at WP:AN3 and agree to wait for consensus before reverting again. The steps of WP:Dispute resolution are open to you. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 03:18, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * My mistake. Though the dispute was at AN3 before, you were not named in the last complaint. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 12:32, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Please see the closure at AN3. Though the warning was to JasonnF, if you continue to revert as well it will be harder for future admins to be sympathetic to you in case blocks are considered. It turns out that you have reverted about as much as he has at List of libertarian political parties since September 1. Opening an RfC is one option you might consider. Another is to just leave it alone and use the talk page, in hopes that others will take care of it if the trouble restarts. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 15:22, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Infoboxes of Búfalo Barreto situation
This is Búfalo Barreto talking. Thank you for your comments. I will try to adjust my edits to Wikipedia policies. I would like you, however, to please review my edits to Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori (for example) and explain to me why these edits, which make the page look much better, are held to be against Wikipedia policies. I work hard in my free time in order to improve these pages. As a Peruvian high school student, I take these pages about our presidents seriously. With my thanks and best regards, Búfalo Barreto — Preceding unsigned comment added by Búfalo Barreto (talk • contribs) 02:05, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Second message of Búfalo Barreto
Mr. RJFF, why does the peruvian presidents infoboxes have to be a summary?, the US Presidents have a lot of details. Why shouldn't these have details?. Best Regards, Búfalo Barreto

P.S.: I spend a lot of time in giving a better image to these pages by editing their infoboxes. Why do you keep it simple? Búfalo Barreto (talk


 * What do you mean? I cannot see any seal or insignia in Barack Obama's or George W. Bush's infobox. It just says "44th President of the United States", not "44th President of the United States of America", so it's as short and simple as possible. Or compare Ed Miliband: it just says "Leader of the Opposition", not "Leader of Her Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition in the United Kingdom" (which is the official title). See: we always use the short title, not the official title. Or Elizabeth II: she sure is a very honorable person and rules over many countries, but there is no coat of arms or other insignia in the infobox. And it just says "Queen of the Commonwealth realms", not "Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and of Her other Realms and Territories, Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith" or any other of her many titles. There is no difference between the infobox style for English-speaking rulers and the one of Peruvians. --RJFF (talk) 13:41, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Third Message of Búfalo Barreto
Thank You for understanding my point of view. Of course, I will delete the seals or insignias. Also, for example, in the biography of Alberto Fujimori, he isn't the 90th President of Peru. You see, I've reviewed all of the Peruvian Presidents, and there is a difference, the Constitutional Presidents and the Interim Presidents. The Interim ones are not counted with a number, only the Constitutional ones. For example:

42nd. Fernando Belaúnde Terry-(1963-1968): Constitutional President (Elected)

-. Juan Velasco Alvarado-(1968-1975): President of the Revolutionary Government-(He made a coup d'etat to Belaúnde's Government)

-. Francisco Morales Bermúdez-(1975-1980): President of the Revolutionary Government-(Velasco's successor)

43rd. Fernando Belaúnde Terry-(1980-1985): Constitutional President (Elected)

44th. Alan García Pérez-(1985-1990): Constitutional President (Elected)

45th. Alberto Fujimori-(1990-1992): Constitutional President (Elected for a 5 year term, but made a self-coup to his government in 1992, dissolving many public institutions, creating a new Constitution)

-. Alberto Fujimori-(1992-1995): President of the Emergency Government and National Reconstruction (During this short period, he signed a new constitution)

46th. Alberto Fujimori-(1995-2000): Constitutional President (Elected)

47th. Alberto Fujimori-(2000-2000): Constitutional President (Elected, but a few months later, Congress revealed videos in which his adviser gave money to the opposition (Corruption))

-. Valentín Paniagua-(2000-2001): Transitional President (After Fujimori resigned, the two VP's resigned also. In the line of succession there was the President of Congress Paniagua, who organized new elections for the next year)

48th. Alejandro Toledo-(2001-2006): Constitutional President (Elected)

49th. Alan García Pérez-(2006-2011): Constitutional President (Elected)

50th. Ollanta Humala-(2011-Present): Constitutional President (Elected)

You see, only the Constitutional ones have numbers, the others don't, because they were not elected. Since Peru became an independent country, there were Presidents who lasted 2 days, a week, a month, or even hours. I've counted the Constitutional ones, and in total there are 50. Of course, if you sum all of them there 94. That's the problem, in the United States there is more order than Peru.

The official counting is the one found in a documentary called "Historia de la República del Perú" in which lists the official an non official Presidents

Thank you for your Comprehension RJFF

P.S.: Also I don't know how to sign my messages in Wikipedia. You already told me, but I don't understand.

Best Regards, Búfalo Barreto (talk) 16:28, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Búfalo Barreto

Fourth message of Búfalo Barreto
I'm very sorry, I won't revert the pages again. I'm very very sorry for making you waste your time.

Best Regards

Búfalo Barreto

5th message
Hello RJFF, I completely understand. But view history of the page List of Presidents of Peru and in 2008, some of them weren't Constitutional ones. Also, please just don't write President of Peru, write President of the Republic of Peru. The name Republic of Peru is the official name of the country. Check the spanish version of those Presidents that I've mentioned.

Best Regards, Búfalo Barreto (talk) 16:29, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Búfalo Barreto

P.S.: Please don't call me Búfalo Barreto, my name is Víctor. The BB nickname was for a peruvian politician. I wish to become a politician in Peru

Hello again, please give me an answer about the APRA-NEC merger. I already added references. Best Regards Búfalo Barreto (talk) 23:03, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

True Finns
As you know, user Mocctur has recently been pushing the far-right label on pretty much all parties critical of the European Union. His action in the True Finns article isn't any more justifiable than in the EFD article or the UKIP article. In the True Finns article he has given two references on the far-right label: one of them is 9 years old and thus dated considering how much the party has grown in that time. The other reference is a treatise officially sanctioned by the EU. I checked that out and the primary label used of the party is populist (the term far-right is mentioned only in passing, whereas the term populist is repeated). Compared to this I have referenced six credible Finnish researchers who all say that the party's social views are conservative (you would agree with me that conservatism is centre-right) or explicitly say that the party is not right-wing. Tuomas Ylä-Anttila calls the party a "centre-left conservative party". Ville Pernaa says that the party's ideology is based on "moral conservatism". Laura Parkkinen says that the party is based on "traditional rural conservatism" and warns against simplistic comparisons with other countries. Juha Ahvio says that the party has profiled itself as a defender of social conservatism. Rauli Mickelsson calls the party socially conservative without calling it far-right in his book, which is referenced in the article. Erkka Railo says that the party is populist but not far-right, or at least that the far-right element is marginal. In addition Juho Rahkonen says that it is wrong to call the party right-wing populist, describing it instead as a centre-left party and says that of all Finnish parties it is closest to the political centre. From all this we can see that the consensus mainstream opinion of the Finnish political researchers is that the party's social views are conservative, not far-right. One or two foreign sources may call the party far-right, but according to the WP:UNDUE policy, the minority opinion should not usurp the mainstream consensus. --89.27.36.41 (talk) 15:17, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Urgent message from Búfalo Barreto
Hello again RJFF. I'm very concerned because I've been blocked in my spanish user by a uruguayan editor called Ganímedes, because I created the spanish version of the National Executive Committee of the Peruvian Aprista Party. Months ago, I created that page, and they told me that it was not encyclopedic. I sent a message to that user explaining. It's the same page that you proposed me to merge with another page. Please answer me. Best Regards Búfalo Barreto (talk) 01:57, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Recent addition to True Finns
Your edit summary: "no ref for "centre-right". What? Did you look at Talk:True_Finns? Please contribute to the talk page instead of removing sourced information; centre-left is what the Finnish political scientists are saying. Foreign media commentators are not scholars. --Pudeo' 13:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

ITN Lincoln Alexander
I've responded to your opposition to posting this as ITN on the candidacy page. It would be great if you could look over my comments. If it results in a change of heart, great; if not, no worries, no hard feelings. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:10, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Javier Alva Orlandini
Hello RJFF

Thank you for your message. In the case of the Javier Alva Orlandini page, I created that page months ago, and I installed the full titles, for example, Barack Obama in his infoboxes says

44th President of the United States

United States Senator From Illinois

Member of the Illinois Senate

You shortened the Javier Alva Orlandini titles, for example, I installed Senator of the Republic of Peru and you just wrote Senator. I've met this politician and I showed him his biography in spanish, but I realized that he didn't have a Biography in English so I created it. In the Spanish Wikipedia, It's the full title, you should check it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Búfalo Barreto (talk • contribs) 13:47, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Stop undoing!
Please, stop it --Danrolo 11:00, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Democratic Popular Party (Spain), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Union of the Democratic Centre (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:30, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion
The article you have previously commented has been nominated for deletion. To comment please visit: Articles for deletion/Indian Actors in Negative Roles -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  20:06, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

RM
I just wanted to inform you that an editor expressed concern that you have been canvassed into discussion. Fell free to comment, if you care about this questionable actions, at the end... If not, no problem, nothing will be different. All best, be well. -- WhiteWriterspeaks

Thailand
Hi! Thank you for your notifications. About Thailand intro section, I have just referred from internal wiki site, which is has already been cited.

Also, population, with recent figures rather more accurate.

Do I still have to link-linked those citations again? If it need to, I will. Please let me know again my talk page. Thank you! --okichan 06:00, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Azores regional election
Hello. Can you please indicate where it states that election results are only limited to the top two candidates? As the regional elections of the Azores were fought by the five incumbent parties, their vote and summary statistics are relevant. I will be manually reverting your blanking of the remaining content, unless you can provide a justification from the Infobox parameters or Wikiproject discussion. ruben jc ZEORYMER (talk) 07:32, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Ukrainian parliamentary election, 2012
Same case scenario. You indicated that infobox should contain major political parties, yet without specifying a number you left only two. That is a political speculation. Ukraine does not have well established major political parties. Currently there are five political parties in the Ukrainian parliament and seven parliamentary factions. There is a 5% threshold for any party to gain pass for the parliament, which will be possible at very least for four parties, while there could be up to six of them. The infobox was showing exactly the major players for the elections. So what is the reason behind your corrections. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 12:38, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Opinion polling for the Basque parliamentary election, 2012
Ok, since it is just a regional election and it doesn't have enough opinion polls to justify for having an entire article for itself, I agree to have it removed, since the election has been already held and there isn't enough data available to justify for an improvement of relevance (unlike other elections' opinion polls, which may have data for leaders' ratings and such). All data about opinion polls have been moved to the main page, so that it doesn't get lost in the article's deletion. Impru20 (talk) 15:40, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Malays
I believe that was not me who added the Malays into the content.

But such as theory is very interests. I found some recent scientific research where ethnic malays made up of some population in southern of thailand and malay peninsular. I am waiting to the book mailing on the way. Not until I have read and make sure if the research is reliable source, the present information base on CIA (getting out of date) although still ok. Do you know if I can cited or reference Japanese research into English page? Or if this had to be proved by Thai gov or something?? talk--okichan 17:01, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

I have raised an objection to your proposed deletion of the article "Italian Fascism and German Nazism"
My objection has been raised here: Talk:Italian Fascism and German Nazism--R-41 (talk) 01:30, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Arab Cold War
The coups led to the removal of first, an original pro-US govermnent by a radical and neutral leaderhsip. The 1966 coup brought to power a pro-Soviet and pro-communist leadership... The Syrian Ba'ath Party played a major role in the Cold War. This is the short explanation --TIAYN (talk) 14:33, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Cold war ... edit war ...
Hallo RJFF, I see you're doing the same as me (only more so), removing duff entries from the Cold War template. I am afraid that some of them are continually being added back. We ought really to discuss this with the perpetrators, and if need be get admin attention to the subject. Part of the problem is that there's no terribly obvious way to support entries with citations, so people see this as an easy list to cruft. Ideas? all the best Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:40, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi you both - good luck with your efforts in this regard - just FYI, I've returned the template to the article on the March 1949 Syrian coup d'état. I wasn't the one who added it originally, but the template is justified because the two major reasons for the coup, which include the Aramco TAPLINE project and the 1948-9 student demonstrations, were understood by American officials at the time within the context of what we now call the Cold War. There's a huge amount that must be done with this article - I'm sorry I've not done it yet - suffice to say for the moment that Douglas Little is your best source for all this. Cheers, -Darouet (talk) 14:47, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

ebook move request
Since you contested the move request E-book → ebook, I've started a full move discussion at Talk:E-book. --84.44.182.148 (talk) 01:23, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

error problem
you should see this article, it maybe understand. Thaification --โจ : แฟนท่าเรือ : เกรียนที่หน้าตาไม่ดีแห่งไร้สาระนุกรม : พูดคุยกับควายตัวนี้ได้ที่นี่ 16:04, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

A message from zictor23
Hi RJFF,

Thank you for the kind message. I understand what you're saying about maintaing a neutral point of view and using reliable third party sources on Wikipedia, but I thought that if the official party websites stated that the parties were social liberal (as with the cases of the Australian Democrats, the Brazilian Social Liberal Party, and the Liberal Party of Ukraine) then you could not argue with that, because that is how those parties see themselves. You do see what I mean, don't you, RJFF? I didn't think that had anything to do with breaking neutrality.

Also RJFF, some of those parties that were deleted, such as the Liberal Democrats of Germany and Peru Possible, had third party sources. Those sources were not taken from the official party websites. I'm not sure if you or others had seen that when the edits were made. zictor23 (talk) 20:25, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

NTV7
Thanks for supporting my move request for ATV Turkey. Now, can you do something on moving ntv7 to NTV7? My recent move request was not successful. JSH-alive/talk/cont/mail 17:57, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Stop it!
Don't undo again, right? --190.22.248.130 (talk) 18:08, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

My mistake
It is a bad habit of mine to put "pp." rather than "p." for single pages. My apologies to you.--R-41 (talk) 01:32, 24 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Worry not I guess I won't waste my time participate in any "war" here, since the influence of the anti-Soviet factions in en.wiki are too big, and anything which sympathize with the USSR are brutally delete by them. It seems to be that, many en.wiki user forget that wikipedia keeps its neutrality by accept a wide range of points of view, not by delete information. Deleting info does not keep the neutrality of en.wiki. On the contrary, it is CENSORSHIP. Михаил Александрович Шолохов (talk) 09:13, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

SNC
I'm sorry, I haven't noticed your edit summary, but insted I undo it without watching. Please accept my appology. -- Wüstenfuchs 11:59, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Stereotyping political criticism in Hungary
It is true that there is a great deal of left/right polarization in Hungary, hence often it is the left criticizing the right or the right criticizing the left. But there is also a lot of stereotyping, and this tends to be done more by the right than the left: The right often reflexively classifies any view it does not like (or that does not like it) as "left-liberal." Often this is true, but sometimes traits are called left-liberal that are not, and criticism is labelled as left-liberal that isn't. This is the case with worldwide criticism of some of the new laws that have been adopted by the Hungarian supermajority government, including press control laws and, more recently, the gerrymandering of electoral laws. The criticism is coming from democrats on the left and the right, and so Wikipedia editors should not be allowed to stereotype all criticism of government policy as "left-liberal" (as is done with impunity in Hungary). Wikipedia is international. Much better to face the substance of the criticism head-on rather than to dismiss it as simply being partisan carping by the usual suspects. See the controversy section, where an edit war is going on about the insertion and removal of this descriptor. Stevan Harnad 15:34, 9 December 2012 (UTC)harnad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harnad (talk • contribs)

Stop it!
Stop undoing or I shall report you! --Danrolo 19:43, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Ah
Or I shall block you! --Danrolo 19:45, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

RE: Italy
Ah ! that way. Deletion is for other reasons per CSD. Usually a RM is there to move it. ut i understnd it should be uncontroversiall. Perhaps ask an admin to move it. User:Number57 is involved in election articles and can do it quick(Lihaas (talk) 15:26, 10 December 2012 (UTC)).

ITN for Romanian legislative election, 2012
-- Spencer T♦ C 00:14, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

sweden democrats
I saw the message on the Swedish Democrats. The fact that a part of the Swedish press defines them as far-right, does not mean they are. I read their political program and I have not found too many elements to suggest that it would be a far-right party. There are parties in Europe more aggressive, with much more radical messages than those of the Swedish Democrats and are not classified as far-right parties. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.97.134.8 (talk) 00:37, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Italian general election, 2013
Hi, I do not understand why do you add Beppe Grillo at Italian Elections 2013, since he is not running at these elections as a candidate to deputy, nor to President of the goverment, nor is the leader of the 5 Star Movement. As the Movement statues say, he is not the leader but just a speaker of the movement.

Deletion on BJP article
I have noticed that you are unhappy with some reliably referenced info on the BJP article. It would be appreciated if you either posted your concerns on the articl's talk page or if you try to merge your edits ( most of which contributed positively to the article) with those of others

Jemappelleungarcon (talk) 19:36, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I was looking over your edit summary and would like to reiterate that first-person and second-person sources aren't always innacurate. In this case, the party knows its own ideology, if it didn't that would be odd! :)

Jemappelleungarcon (talk) 19:48, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Stop it!
That's enough! stop undoing and warring or I shall block you! --Danrolo 10:52, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Merge discussion for List of religious leaders in 2011
An article that you have been involved in editing, List of religious leaders in 2011, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. tahc chat 01:20, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Bahrani people
Ashrf1979 (talk) 18:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)This article is about the Bahrani people (ethnic group) in the historic region of Bahrain and the diaspora And not for the Kingdom of Bahrain and its citizens

TB
—  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  19:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

NFA's ideology
If leader of National Forces Alliance is saying that "Some channels started referring to the National Forces Alliance as liberals – that's not true," and that the NFA is a moderate Islamic movement that recognises the importance of Islam in political life and favours Sharia as the basis of the law and if NFA is eager to play down the "liberal" label then what is the problem ??? why it is not allowed to mention it as an "Moderate Islamist" party ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmed 313-326 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Danrolo
Hi, I've started a topic at WP:AN for help with range blocks in case you want to watch it or contribute to it.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:00, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Civic Choice Ideologies Removal
You should be proud of your original contribute on Wikipedia. Congratulations. Regards--Walter J. Rotelmayer (talk) 00:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Islamic democracy table
Hi, The table showing the indices of democracy in islamic countries (on the Islamic democracy page has been removed by Ahmed 313-326. I put it back with a request to discuss changes on the talk page, and he removed it again, and so I've put it back again. I'm not a very experienced wikipedia editor and dont want to get into an edit war, but I think it would be good to have some discussion and get some viewpoints about the table rather than just delete it. If the consensus is to delete it then that's fine, but I don't think one user should just remove so much material without discussion.

I know you've edited this page before and I thought you might have an opinion and possibly get some other non-partisan editors interested. thanks Halon8 (talk) 00:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Kindly refrain from deleting my contributions in their entirety without explanation. I have provided quotable sources. If you have objections to any specific modifications, please amend the specific part of the edit you consider to be incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anti.udbas (talk • contribs) 19:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Citations to reliable sources to all my edits have been provided. If you have any specific objections to my edits, please modify accordingly, likewise providing reliable sources for your edits. Please kindly refrain from removing my edits en bloc, and please kindly refrain making unwarranted accusations of libel, which I am not committing. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anti.udbas (talk • contribs) 19:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Gregor Virant
I have responded to your communication on this article's Talk page. I have provided reliable references for all my edits. Please refrain from further reverts of my edits until the issue has been resolved on the Talk page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anti.udbas (talk • contribs) 18:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

FJP
Hello, Can you please explain why do you think that the cited sources do not explicitly describe the FJP as "Islamic democratic" ? --Ahmed 313-326 (talk) 23:53, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Avoid Vandalism
In articles about Muslim world's politics, word "democracy" dose not necessarily mean "western democracy". democracy is a universal political value. if a party is not democrat by western standard, it dose not mean that party is not democratic by standards of it's own country. so please avoid vandalism and refrain from removing useful information without any strong reason. demanding citation or more reliable citation is better option then removing well established facts. --Ahmed 313-326 (talk) 17:49, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Help with sources
Hello RJFF, are you a native German-speaker, right? Could you help me to find more sources for "The Freedomites in Carinthia" (currently at Freedom Party in Carinthia) in order to move the article to The Freedomites in Carinthia? --Checco (talk) 13:38, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Thaification
File:100-Baht Banknote Series 14 Back.jpg is now orphaned. Was that intentional? --Pawyilee (talk) 14:29, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Can you help me?
In the page Italian general election, 2013 we don't know which images we can use for Pier Luigi Bersani. You are more expert than me in wikipedia so I want ask you if you can find a way to stop this edit warring between me and others users and User:EeuHP (talk... --Nick.mon (talk) 15:07, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Bersani again
Excuse me, but I think that the conflict is not resolved.

After five days, he suddenly said that my picture could stay. But hours later he suggested I replace it with another photo. I said that the new picture is, in my opinion, not good.

The next day he filed a third photo. I could not answer him, but Danish Expert said that it was a good picture, Nick.moon placed it in the article. It seems that the picture is not licensed. I removed the photo.

Now, he teaches me two new photos (in the last our, three photos). I think that this situation is a "war of attrition".

Besides, I suspect that he is using two sockpuppets. (similar names, newcomers, defending the same photo...).--EeuHP (talk) 18:49, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I do not understand the procedure. I can be wrong. My knowledge of English is quite limited (I only came to put a photo). Anyway I'll try, but you could correct the faults, please?--EeuHP (talk) 22:05, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sukhumbhand Paribatra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pembroke College (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:40, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Opinion polling in Denmark
You seem to have some misunderstanding as to wikipedia policy, as there is no rule requiring polls to not be uploaded until after the election (or on any specific time frame, for that matter.) Indeed, opinion polls were uploaded for years before the Italian election, which we edited together! You helped format the Italian polling table, which stretched back two years, so I'm confused as to what misapprehension you're operating under now. If you have concerns it's taking up too much space, I myself was thinking of moving it to a separate article (like the Italian page we worked on together.) However, regardless this is something you should have brought to Talk for general discussion.

Simply for the record, the election is also not "two years away" as Denmark does not have static elections; that's simply the latest possible date the election could be held.

(P.S. You also have a minor misunderstanding in relation to infoboxes, as the largest overall party goes on the left, not the largest government party.)

--4idaho (talk) 14:45, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Democratic Convergence of Catalonia
Nordsieck refers to the coalition as regionalist, I refer you to WP:NOR for your deletion of cited content. Feel free to bring counter-sources supporting your deletion of content to Talk, but otherwise it falls under the umbrella of OR.

I'm also confused as regionalism simply means functioning in the interest of a particular region, which the Catalonia-only CDC clearly is.

--4idaho (talk) 14:52, 20 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your reply. It was a mistake on my part to label the CDC christian democratic and I didn't realize I had. I'm aware Parties&Elections is a self-published source, and indeed I don't think I have attempted to use it except 1). when there's no other source 2). to confirm another source 3). or when it doesn't contradict a more 'reliable' sources (again, I didn't realize I had labeled the CDC as christian democratic.)


 * (P.S. I assume the Danish thing was some sort of mistake or misunderstanding, and I should have thought of that; sorry if I was snippish. I also appreciate your contributions to this wiki, which far outpace anything I've done.)


 * --4idaho (talk) 18:55, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Ongoing historic events in Hungary
Dear User:RJFF, As far as I can tell, you have no biasses one way or the other, based on your long editing history. So I just wanted to point out that there some extremely serious historic events transpiring (and in fact accelerating) in recent days and weeks in Hungary, chiefly in connection with the new constitution and its amendments, about which the EU and the international community are becoming increasingly concerned. I think it would be a great historic mistake to treat WP updates on these current goings-on as "recentism." This is an important unfolding current event, with very broad consequences. There are many other articles in WP in which it is an unfolding current event that is being updated. This is how the constitutional controversy (possibly heading toward crisis) should be viewed. Although I am pretty sure that that is not what is motivating your own suggestion that this may be "recentism," please do bear in mind that there are not-unbiassed partisans who would very much prefer that the mounting international criticism of the Hungarian constitution was not covered in WP but rather that it would simply subside and go away, and they have repeatedly invoked "recentism" and "soapboxing" as the justification for deleting my recent updates... --Stevan Harnad 17:49, 20 March 2013 (UTC) User:Harnad (talk)
 * Hi RJFF, there is a dispute resolution process going on about this. K &oelig;rte F a   { ταλκ }  17:24, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Oleh Tyahnybok‎
Hi, as we don't agree about this, as per wikipedia policy it will need to be resolved via discussion on the talk page, rather than edit war. Bensimo Bensimo (talk) 21:17, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to you let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You do not need to participate however, you are invited to help find a resolution. The thread is "Attack (political party), Democrats for a Strong Bulgaria". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot  operator /  talk  11:48, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

UPP
left-wing in s.korea, there are two forces a PD and NL. PD is a marxist and NL is a social nationalist. UPP was organized by NL. they are not claim a liberalism --Aua1422 (talk) 17:13, 4 April 2013 (UTC)aua1422

Good editing on the Capriles article
--Guiletheme (talk) 00:13, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes thanks for your watchfulness. I was just about flagging for and  this edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Henrique_Capriles_Radonski&oldid=551497002 Ledjazz (talk) 19:39, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Union of the Democratic Centre (Spain), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Popular Alliance (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:58, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Photo
Hi, I have just posted a photo of Bersani in the Talk page of 2013 election. Can you said to me if it is good to insert it in the main page...thank you for your time. -- Nick.mon (talk) 11:40, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Guasú Front, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Guarani (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:51, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Horacio Cartes
The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thanin Kraivichien, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thai (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:04, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

i do not understand your behavior
can you please explain to me why you reverted my edits inconsistently? why did you remove my mafia state edits while still agreeing it should be included in the most imprortant article Vladimir putin itself. if you make changes on putinism and mafia state and you should do it in vladimir putin article as well! 95.195.211.226 (talk) 15:36, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Citizens – Party of the Citizenry
An IP keeps removing the sourced ideology at Citizens - Party of the Citizenry and replacing it with the party's self-described ideology. I've reverted too many times to take it to WP:AN3, so I was hoping you could intervene. --4idaho (talk) 17:29, 23 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I left you a reply at my Talk. The gist of it is that whether or not I get blocked is trivial, the page should be at least semi-protected. --4idaho (talk) 18:06, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

HEY! dont forget to respond to my earlier thread
you seem to give no responce, please do! 95.195.219.124 (talk) 19:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

The history of anti-Semitism in Germany is at the very heart of the matter in the Nazism article's history of origins
The history of anti-Semitism in Germany and what influenced its rise, particularly from the 1870s onward, is crucial for people to understand why an anti-Semitic movement like Nazism rose in Germany the first place. What I added was from one source, Roots of Hate: Anti-Semitism in Europe Before the Holocaust by William Brustein, Professor of Sociology, Political Science, and History at The Ohio State University, and the book was published by Cambridge University Press; it is a valid academic source, and it is not a synthesis.--R-41 (talk) 21:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

In fact, in the preface of the book, the author precisely says that the purpose of his study of the roots of anti-Semitism in Europe is to investigate what caused anti-Semitism to become the significant phenomenon that the Nazis utilized.--R-41 (talk) 00:44, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Lega Nord
What are you talking about? I stopped to edit Lega Nord's ideology with "Righ-wing populism". I have just wrote "Padanian nationalism", and it is obviusly a Lega Nord ideology. Tell me what does not go well? -- Nick.mon (talk) 14:57, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't remember to have edit it with Padanian Nationalism, or least recently. Maybe I have done it months ago, I know the guidelines of Wikipedia, but if you can never edit articles (with this minor edits) without talking about it, you do not end more. Anyway, ok, I understand your reason, but I repeat, I don't remember to have edit recently LN's ideology with Padanian Nationalism. -- Nick.mon (talk) 15:13, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Puea Pandin Party, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Surin and People's Power Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:16, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

that's problem again
i think you just a troll, you are not mongoliod and you careless to read what i contribure. please don't waste my time.

i will reverse again.--โจ : แฟนท่าเรือ : เกรียนที่หน้าตาไม่ดีแห่งไร้สาระนุกรม : พูดคุยกับควายตัวนี้ได้ที่นี่ 03:35, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
Hi. If you continue to follow me around and revert sourced material, and generally display a confrontative edit pattern, I will take the matter to the incidence board. Best Gun Powder Ma (talk) 12:41, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


 * To resolve the matter here. I was relying on these bits in the sourced articles which you were apparently not aware of:


 * "PI ist nicht rechtsextremistisch", erklärt der Verfassungsschutz. Schließlich sei das Blog proisraelisch, proamerikanisch und bekenne sich nachdrücklich zum Grundgesetz. Although your qualifying additional "self-portrayal" also has something to say for it, the nuance here rather is that the Verfassungsschutz thinks that PI is having these outlooks and not that it just merely portrays itself this way.
 * My sentence "...which competes with the Freedom Party for the conservative vote in the state" is buttressed by For Bavaria’s ruling Christian Social Union (Christlich-Soziale Union or CSU) this might be “more a matter of fighting a political competition on the right than seriously proceeding against anti-Muslim prejudices.” The author then goes on to devote several paragraphs to demonstrate how the CSU and the Freedom Party actually share many views on (Muslim) immigration, thus explaining their political/ideological rivalry.
 * As for the lead in German Freedom Party, I concede that removing "liberal" and replacing it with something along the lines of mainstream or German media may be a better solution, but the self-description comes first as in any article on parties. I will remove it if we can agree on this. Best Gun Powder Ma (talk) 13:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


 * It seems that the differences are rather small, but I still find them important:
 * 1) "bekenne sich nachdrücklich zum Grundgesetz." means that they profess support for the constitution. The Verfassungsschutz neither confirmed nor refuted that PI in fact supports the values of the constitution. (Which is not the task of the Verfassungsschutz: no organisation in Germany is obliged to actively support the values of the constitution, as long as it does not fight against them). It merely assessed PI's own affirmation as an indicator.
 * 2) the source does not expressly say that "competition on the right" means the Freedom Party. There are many smaller right-wing parties which may be seen as competitors of the CSU and which represent positions critical of Islam. Therefore reading "political competition on the right" as equalling the Freedom Party is an undue interpretation of the source. We should render the source as strictly as possible. --RJFF (talk) 13:53, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree fully with #1, but I fail to see how your point relates to the WP article. Contrary to what you seem to believe, the relevant sentence in its current wording does not say that the Verfassungsschutz endorses or condemns PI in terms of its allegiance to the values of constitution. In fact, the text does deliberately without an interpretative verb at all, the key term being "Verfassungsschutz according to which".


 * Reread the source. The original TAZ source suspects that "for Bavaria’s ruling Christian Social Union (Christlich-Soziale Union or CSU) this might be “more a matter of fighting a political competition on the right" and the Frontpage Magazine author picks up this strand of thought and expounds it in the following two paragraphs. The WP text is as close to the cited source as possible short of quoting it directly. That there are - obviously - more political competitors from the right to the CSU than the Freedom Party alone does not contradict the cited view that the Freedom Party constitutes one of them, so there is no inconsistency. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 14:35, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


 * If the relevant source only speaks of "competition on the right", it is not the right of Wikipedia users to interpret it and highlight one right-wing party, because it is mentioned in another source. This is close to WP:SYNTHESIS. --RJFF (talk) 17:08, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=561252136 your edit] to Suraphol Nitikraipot may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:09, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * A military coup overthrew the elected government of Prime Minister [[Thaksin

Disambiguation link notification for June 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Newin Chidchob, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page People's Power Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

User:Alcastilloru
Hi, do you think that this user is a sock of User:Danrolo?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:30, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

WP:Obvious
Honestly, for some strange reason you think the Syrian coups had nothing to do with the Cold War, its peculiar... Why? Well, the Ba'ath Party took power in 1963, aligned itself with Soviet, and in 1966 a bunch of half communists took power... Who do you think they allied to??? Was it the USSR?? Yes.. Where do you think Syria got the weapons to fight Israel??? Was it the USSR??? Yes??? Why is this not included in those articles, because that doesn't explicitly have anything to do with the coup... But when you're on it, why don't you ask something to reference if the Portuguese Colonial War had anything to do with the Cold War, or the more obvious ones, the Peoples Power Revolution and the Argentine Revolution .... THis is an extremely strange request. --TIAYN (talk) 15:45, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm saying, since its so darn obvious, search it before you tag it.... You can't contribute to the wikipedia if you only tag things without trying to check.. so take a look at Google Books, and search Syria 1963 Cold War... You'll find it. --TIAYN (talk) 15:54, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Why do you even edit WP with that attitude?? here    this is just 1963 because i just didn't bother, but it should be enough. --TIAYN (talk) 16:05, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Democratic Convergence of Catalonia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Regionalist (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Compromís
Please, read Talk:Coalició Compromís--Coentor (talk) 19:09, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

German Democratic Party, source
Could you please help solve the open question regarding this source you added? Thanks. --bender235 (talk) 12:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Revolutions of 1989 online Wikipedia challenge
--Kippelboy (talk) 15:37, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Drassi copy/pasted from Drasi
Thanks for clarifying and sorry about hastily doing this. I see you have rolled my changes to Drasi back. I guess what is needed now is for Drassi to be deleted so Drasi can be moved to Drassi. If I understand correctly, it takes an administrator to do a deletion, right? So, what happens now? Best regards, Ageor (talk) 21:45, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Valdostan vs. Valdotainian
Hi, I saw you renamed all the articles with "Valdotainian" to "Valdostan". Would you provide me with some reference according to which "Valdostan" is a more proper version in English? --Simoncik84 (talk) 18:21, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Where did Valdotainian come out then? --Simoncik84 (talk) 17:30, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright, thank you. --Simoncik84 (talk) 17:39, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

related Between Baharna and others
Can you understand me what resources are needed to prove it Especially not I notice that this thing required Other articles>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_people

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germans

I also do not understand why readied the old one external links ,It is a link to the Old project stopped and the new link is the alternative project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Migmirage (talk • contribs) 08:49, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Die Freiheitlichen
Dear RJFF, could you please help me to move The Libertarians back to its real name? I was unable to do it. I strongly oppose the arbitrary transalation of proper nouns.--Sajoch (talk) 00:40, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Graphical summary
Hi RJFF, why can't we insert the graphic? Which issues? I have read the Talk page, but I haven't find any recent discussion about my graphic. -- Nick.mon (talk) 18:59, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The last post on Talk:Next Italian general election by User:Mxema. The user pointed out that the data is obviously inaccurate. Your graphic shows e.g. SEL at 6%, even though all opinion poll ratings are around 4%. Same with PD: how can the average be at 31% when the maximum rating among all opinion polls is at 30.5%? It would be great if you could check the data you used, detect the error and correct it. Then, we can re-introduce the graphic in the article. Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 19:08, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok you are right, I have not uploaded correct data, now I will do it exactly, bye! -- Nick.mon (talk) 14:02, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Brazilian Social Democracy Party
Hi, would you be interested in engaging in the discussion there regarding the party's ideology. My belief is that it's a neoliberal centre-right party named so only because of sinisitrisme, but others claim it's a genuine left-wing party (cf infobox) - sth I find unfounded. I'd be glad if you could offer some insight because my knowledge of Brazilian politics is limited. Regards, Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 11:49, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Cisleithanian legislative election, 1911
Thanks for adding the links to the article - I couldn't be certain from my source what parties they really were. How did you know? I'm just wondering if there's a more useful source out there.

Also, re the German-National Party, the original name I gave the article (German Nationals Party) was the one used for the party in the Dieter Nohlen book. I'm just wondering if you found an English source giving it an alternative title? "German National" is obviously the correct translation of "Deutschnationale", but I wonder whether this could have been a case of a party name becoming known abroad via a mistranslation. Cheers, Number   5  7  22:05, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I found the parties just by looking for them on English, German, Czech and Polish Wikipedias. I did not use an extra source. "German Nationals Party" is obviously a mistranslation. I do not think that this party became known as the "German Nationals Party" party abroad. I doubt that this translation is used anywhere but in Nohlen's book. As Nohlen himself is German, I can only explain this as a typographical or printing error. It may come from the custom at the time to drop the term "party" and simply use the name of the movement in plural ("Christian Socials" for "Christian Social Party", "Social Democrats" for "Social Democratic Party", "German Nationals" for "German National Party"; as e.g. in Davidson, The Making of Adolf Hitler (1997), p. 27). I used the hyphen to distinguish the party from the Deutsche Nationalpartei, which is also traslated as German National Party. Gary B. Cohen does the same in The Politics of Ethnic Survival (2nd ed, 2006), p. 152. In general, there are very few English-language sources about pre-1918 Austrian parties. --RJFF (talk) 16:50, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Space (Uruguay), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Broad Front (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

My edits
RJFF, sorry you are right. I just wanted to improve Wikipedia as you, but I forgot to insert the quotation which are necessary. Excuse me for my edits. -- Nick.mon (talk) 17:387, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Muttahida Qaumi Movement, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mohajirs (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Requested move for Buddha Loetla Nabhalai
I've opened a new requested move for the article. You may want to add to the discussion. Thanks. --Paul_012 (talk) 23:47, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

January 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=589509723 your edit] to People's United Party may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:05, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Democratic Convergence of Catalonia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Regionalism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Doubts
Hello. Excuse me, but I need to resolve a doubt. In a edit war, should prevail editing to pre-war until the users arrive to consensus? Is that a user is reversing this edition and threatens me with a lock.--EeuHP (talk) 18:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You may not edit featured articles? --EeuHP (talk) 19:22, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

RE: Offline sources
I never said it didnt. Buit in thios case, on some insatances the same outlet did have verifiability. In fact, I did the work for him and found it. Some didnt not have representation on the same outlet. Nevertheless, his "i dont know give a s***" for references certainly indicates some doubt further.

Please that is not vandalism by any stretch of the imaginagtuion. And dont come along with threats. I have gone out and found sources. Per BRD, the onus then is on the person adding the material to show it so. That is for any source. Im perfectly in my right to ask for this (there have been hoaxes on WP) and fuirther i have taken the initiative to look for them.(Lihaas (talk) 20:05, 4 February 2014 (UTC)).

Unrefering
Why you unrefer the ideologies of the Chilean parties? --201.239.203.53 (talk) 15:37, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

blanking
please explain this edit and why its okay to remove what svoboda says about the Regions, but include criticism of svoboda in a huge section is fine? Double standards? Or do you think Regions criticism should be removed from the other article too? --Львівське (говорити) 21:09, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 21 February
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:30, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * On the Party for Democracy page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=596544142 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F596544142%7CParty for Democracy%5D%5D Ask for help])

Right-wing populism
Hi RJFF, now I will revise it, anyway in Turkey there is the Nationalist Movement Party which is considered ultranationalist. -- Nick.mon (talk) 17:14 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I have done some improvements. -- Nick.mon (talk) 17:52 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Far-left politics
Stop such reckless reverts and argue your point at talk, first! The section I re-added is well-sourced to a reliable scholar. even if it takes lots of space at the moment, this is not an argument for removal, but rather developing the article further. It is the sad fact that some far-left affiliated users have been trying hard to get the article reduced to something like disambiguation page. I hope you don't belong to their ilk. Regards, Lokalkosmopolit (talk) 17:03, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Svoboda
We had a consensus over there, right? Concerning the lede. I mean, I remember you and I went back and forth on that till we eventually stopped fighting and it stayed that way for a while. That was what we found to be neutral and all encompassing, right? I ask because I just realized the lede had been completely transformed into a POV piece and wanted to know your thoughts before 'it' inedibly goes down again. --Львівське (говорити) 21:54, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Talk: List of candidates in the Indian general election, 2014
There is a merger discussion at the above page. Your input could help.Lihaas (talk) 20:03, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Question about the boxes in European Parliament election, 2014 (Austria)
You wrote "REKOS did not run in the last election. They only have an MEP by defection. But the same is true for Europe different (Ehrenhauser). It would be arbitrary to include REKOS and not BZÖ or EA; Unlike these NEOS is very likely to be a major force in this el"

Its correct that the NEOS play a major role, I just thought candidates are to be listed in the order they will appear on the ballots according to results from the 2009 election(ÖVP, SPÖ, MARTIN, FPÖ, Greens and REKOS (because Stadler was lead candidate of sixth placed BZÖ before). But you might be right that criteria for the boxes is the order the proposals are passed to the federal electoral authority.

I now removed Martin who |according to diepresse will not contest. And NEOS is now on 5th, REKOS on sixth position. I don't really think that Ehrenhauser or BZÖ would take away the sixth position on the ballot. Because both BZÖ and "Europa Anders"(didn't take advantes of M. Ehrenhausers MEP signature) are currently collecting signatures to contest. So its very unlikely that Stadler (who already brought in the REKOS canidates list) on 11th march) will be placed 7th, 8th or even 9th. Thanks for the Updates in the article "The Reform Conservatives" also. --Ukrainskij254 (talk) 04:27, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Hillary Rodham Clinton move request
Greetings! A proposal has been made at Talk:Hillary Rodham Clinton to change the title of the article, Hillary Rodham Clinton to Hillary Clinton. This notification is provided to you per Canvassing, because you have previously participated in a discussion on this subject. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:03, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Template:Costa Rican presidential election, 2014
Thanks for making the Template:Costa Rican presidential election, 2014. I filled it in with the percentages and number of votes. Great job!! Mvblair (talk) 18:08, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Sonny1998 = Mafia1960 ?
Hi, I guess we ran into the same person see Sockpuppet_investigations/Sonny1998. If you have anything to add that might have happened recently in relation to these users, please do not hesitate to add at SPI. Thanks. - DonCalo (talk) 16:17, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=608259544 your edit] to Yingluck Shinawatra may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:35, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

List of libertarian political parties
Can you explain why you removed Libertarian Movement (Costa Rica) from the List of libertarian political parties? The heading to the list says, Although these parties may describe themselves as "libertarian," their ideologies differ considerably and not all of them support all elements of the libertarian agenda. Thus, regardless of whether any particular person considers them to be libertarian, they ought to be listed if nothing else because their name says they are libertarian. Their specific political position can be described in the notes column to the table. In addition, the party is described as libertarian by such sources as Reason.com and the Independent Institute. If you have sources that say that Libertarian Movement (Costa Rica), you can cite those as well in the notes column of the table, but even so that doesn't mean that the party should be kept off the list entirely. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:24, 31 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I have answered you at Talk:List of libertarian political parties. Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 10:27, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

German pirates in EU parliament
Dear RJFF, thank you for your excellent contributions to listing correct results of the 2014 EU parliament elections. In a recent bulk edit, you moved the German pirate party to the Greens-EFA group column. Even though the Swedish pirates were sitting in that group since 2009, this bears no relevance to the German pirates, whose newly-elected MEP Julia Reda hasn't professed any affiliation yet. Besides, both Swedish pirate MEPs just lost their seats. I had pointed out this error earlier, and I still don't see any relevant announcement, so I moved Piraten back to the New parties column for Germany. If they ever announce a group affiliation, this fact should be sourced and noted in the Group reshuffling section. Hope this helps clear any misunderstanding. — JFG talk 05:53, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Number of local councillors for Spanish political parties
I'm going to restore the party strength in local government figure that you recently removed. While you're right that that is impossible to keep up to date, that's the type of valuable info that should be in an infobox to give people a quick overview. The better solution is to treat it exactly like party membership figures, by noting when the figure is relevant for. Valenciano (talk) 17:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Janusz Korwin Mikke
Hi, you typed "wikilinks that are not in line with text should be avoided) (undo)", and removed link to the intelligence. Could you explain what you mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JegoKrulewskaMosc (talk • contribs) 07:13, 21 June 2014 (UTC) --JegoKrulewskaMosc (talk) 15:06, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I have not removed a link to intelligence, but to intelligence quotient. Intelligence quotient is not mentioned in the text. The text says "women are generally less intelligent", not "Woman generally have a lower IQ."--RJFF (talk) 16:30, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

European parties and national legislatures
You wrote: "AECR is not represented in national parliaments. It only exists on a European level." The same could be said of PES and EPP, yet the infoboxes in those articles do include figures for representation in national legislatures. --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 15:15, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Then please delete them. --RJFF (talk) 16:28, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd rather keep them on all European party articles (not just some). --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 16:56, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * But the point of Europarties is that they only exist on a European level. It is original research (to say the least) to say that a certain Europarty had x seats in national parliaments. In fact they have no seats in national parliaments at all, their member parties have. I doubt that, say every PiS lawmaker in the Polish parliament would consider himself an AECR representative. (If they are not interested in European politics they may not even know that they are an indirect AECR member. Many people, even national-level politicians, are not familiar with Europarties.) --RJFF (talk) 17:03, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I think it's clear to readers that the representation in national legislatures means in this context that the member parties of the Europarty are represented with x seats. In any case, the practice should be consistent with all Europarties. --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 17:08, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. For Europarties the Template:infobox European political party is more appropriate anyway, which does not have parameters for nos. of seats at all. --RJFF (talk) 17:29, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Infobox improvement, "Leaders", Spitzenkandidaten & editing
First thing, if we are to develop an infobox for EP elections, I thought I might run some ideas by you first, perhaps hash out a rough consensus between the two of us. I was thinking that we could see: I hope that makes some sense to you. Anything you'd like to see? Do you want the main party line?
 * instead of the header being First Party, Second Party, etc. we replace with First Group, Second Group
 * the Party line be eliminated or renamed Main Party and dropped below Alliance (which should be changed to Parliamentary Group)
 * keep Seats won but use it for pre-existing EP group parties; i.e. won on election night, prior to realignments. Maybe rename something like Elected seats
 * add Realignment for net changes on realignment
 * add line Total seats for the number as of the beginning of the new Parliament.
 * So, the overall pattern would go: leader/parliamentary group/main party/last election/seats won/realignment/total seats/seat change/percentage/swing

Secondly, I'd like to make the case that the current infobox shouldn't attract deference. Firstly, I did state reasons prior to editing on the talk page, and edited it a day later, having received no adverse comment. The initial revert wasn't done according to consensus, as two others had indicated approval of the change at that time. Moreover, the infobox with the Spitzenkandidaten represents a major shift from past practice in EP parliament articles. If anything, that's the status quo that should require consensus to change. I'm not arguing that the infobox should be changed on that basis alone, but that I can't see why the current situation should attract deference or the protection of requiring consensus to change it.

Thirdly, I've been a little frustrated that while some editors have replied with an initial objection, none save yourself have interacted with the critiques Jaako and I have made of their rationales. It's difficult to build consensus around political topics in general, but it's pretty impossible if editors don't engage in a dialogue. Any suggestions?

Lastly, any chance you're coming around to preferring the change to the infobox yourself? I hope the changes to the infobox template I proposed above allay some of your concerns. I also think we ought to have a table to summarise the results by Europarty, so that would at least present that information within the article as a whole. Thanks, Gabrielthursday (talk) 07:26, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for answering late. I have replied at Talk:European Parliament election, 2014. I principally agree with your proposals. I am afraid that I won't find the time to realise the template myself. In my opinion, the box should not identify a "main party". G-EFA and EUL-NGLA are confederal groups - EGP resp. EL are not the "main parties". In EFDD there is not even a main (European) party. Neither of the major MEP contributors (UKIP and M5S) is in MELD (which will perhaps collapse anyway after LN, DF and Finns defected and other member parties are weakened). Kind regards --RJFF (talk) 13:03, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited European People's Party, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Centre for European Studies (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

July 2014
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at User talk:Antiklinala, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Talking about this . Vanjagenije (talk) 22:17, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Your opinion?
Hi! Your reasoning in Talk:Middle Italy (political party) was very interesting. I would to alert you this discussion to also have your opinion: Talk:Sgarbi Liberals. In this case the original name "Liberal Sgarbi" is translated into "Sgarbi Liberals", but I am not convinced that this translation is correct. In effect, for me, "Liberal Sgarbi" could be an italian word game. I am not really very interested to this little party, however, I think that the original name is preferable if there is a doubt about the correct translation. What do you think?--Maremmano (talk) 22:42, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * My opinion that if there is no English-language source using an English translation of the name of any organisation the original name in the local language should be used, applies to every article, and is based on the Naming conventions (use English) guideline and the core principles of Verifiability and No original research. However, I have never heard of and am not at all interested in this party. --RJFF (talk) 19:06, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * It is only a little italian party. I am not too interested in this page, but I think that the translation could be wrong and I can't move the page without consensus, also if the conventions are very clear...--Maremmano (talk) 19:52, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Copyediting complete
Thanks a lot! I had to make some contentual corrections (probably based on misunderstandings, e.g. only Dollfuss was assassinated, Schuschnigg wasn't.) Moreover, I have noticed that you did not just do copy-editing in a strict sense, but also added some contentual information. While I am convinced that the added material is both correct and suitable, it would be great if you could add corresponding references, as these pieces of information are not supported by the references in the original article. Thanks again, and kind regards. —RJFF (talk) 11:30, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'd be happy to do that. Some parts felt a bit bare, such as the "German-Austria" bit, so I thought I'd toss few extra details in. RGloucester  — ☎ 15:27, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Perfect! --RJFF (talk) 17:51, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

August 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=622918684 your edit] to National Republican Movement for Democracy and Development may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:42, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * from President Habyarimana's home region of Northern Rwanda. The party was founded in 1975 as the . The elite group of MRND party members who were known to have influence on the President and [[

Thank you
I just would like to say thank you for reverting unreasonable reverts of my edits. I am not an active wikipedian, so your help is greatly appreciated. Hethokrilliondata (talk) 14:00, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Labour Party ideology
Four of the five people who've commented are supportive of the change, and it's been open a week. I think the discussion has more or less run its course, and has been as productive as its going to be. I feel like it's beginning to go in circles. Do you think there's consensus for the change, or do think it should wait until more people have had the chance to comment? --4idaho (talk) 17:11, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I share your observation that we are arguing in a circle. I have thought about a request for comment (RfC) to get some input from so far uninvolved users. I would not yet say that there is consensus for the change, even if the opposition mainly comes from a single user who seems not to be convinced at all. I have always been against determining "consensus" by counting !votes. --RJFF (talk) 17:35, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok. I'd say go ahead and request for comment then. I don't think we're getting anywhere as it is. Thanks. --4idaho (talk) 17:39, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

ECR
While I agree that the ECR article is not the correct place for detailed analysis on the Finns Party or any other individual member party, sources related to that discussion do become relevant when another user (Jeppiz) seeks to use the party as an example of "far-right" elements within the ECR. --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 17:35, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * This is an inherent problem of a Wiki: Someone writes something, someone else disagrees, if he cannot convince the other to delete it, he writes something to counter and then the article becomes cluttered with unrelated or secondary details like "According to A, X is Y, however according to B, X is not Y but rather Z etc. etc." Like this, articles lose their focus and conciseness. This would not happen in an encyclopedia with a professional editorial board. The opinions and disagreements of Wikipedians should not become the centre of work on articles. The article should only reflect what sources say on this very subject (i.e. ECR), not collect and arrange statements from sources on subjects that may be somehow related to the article's subject (which would be WP:Synthesis). In my view, the whole conflict around the ECR article's lead is totally fruitless and a waste of time (therefore I have not participated). Perhaps everyone involved should take one step back, wait some time and then reflect if this disagreement still seems important. At least you (not you personally, but all involved users) should not make edits to the controversial section as long as the RfC is still going on. --RJFF (talk) 18:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Anyway, we do not need these references that are solely about "The Finns", as we have the Cas Mudde reference (footnote 17) that more generally speaks of borderline cases that are considered far-right by some scholars and not far-right by others. This is totally sufficient, don't you think? --RJFF (talk) 18:27, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Heimwehr, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tyrol. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Question about Kach etc.
Hello RJFF. I saw that you removed my part about Kach in the neo-fascism article, that's ok but I would like to know WHY it's NOT a fascist organization according to you. What aspects of the description of fascism in the article 'fascism' do not apply to Kach? According to Ehud Sprinzak Kach and Meir Kahane was in fact quasi-fascism: http://members.tripod.com/alabasters_archive/kach_and_kahane.html.

I recently read a newspaper article about an Israeli peace activist, he said that there are extremist right-wing Israelis wearing the same black t-shirts as neo-nazis and right-extremists in Europe reading: 'left side, good night'. I think this shows how there are facist elements in Israeli society with a significant influence on the politics of the country which is right-wing, I think that Kach is a very good representation of this. Bokareis (talk) 20:02, 29 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I do not know if it is fascist or not. But Wikipedia has the principle of WP:verifiability, meaning that every (non-trivial) piece of information has to be verifiable with reliable sources. It is not up to users to decide if a certain movement can be classified as fascist, because we think that it fits the definition of fascism (which is quite inconsistent and contentious, in fact there are many different definitions of fascism). We have to stick to what scholars who have done research about Kach say (WP:No original research). Do they describe it as a fascist movement or not? Not being an expert in this field, I cannot answer this. But according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, the onus to provide references of verification is on the users who wants to include a certain statement or piece of information. If they cannot provide it, the material will be removed. Please also consider that while the terms "right-wing extremism" and "fascism" may have a significant overlap, they are not totally synonymous. Not every right-wing extremist movement is necessarily fascist. Kind regards --RJFF (talk) 11:07, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Bolivian results
Hi RJFF. I've reverted your addition to the results table of the Bolivian elections - the figures you added were from an exit poll, and not actual results. Cheers, Number   5  7  20:17, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

TB
—  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  17:26, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Tunisian Constituent Assembly election, 2011
Hi RJFF. Could you tell me where there is a long-standing consensus regarding the number of parties in the infobox? I don't understand your reason for reverting. Thanks, Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 23:10, 27 October 2014 (UTC)


 * There was no express consensus as the result of a talk page discussion, but I would say there was "silent" consensus insofar that this version was kept for a long time without opposition. I think it is arbitrary to include these 9 parties just because the technical limit of the infobox template is nine parties. In my opinion it is much more reasonable to have the limit of inclusion after PDP, because there is a great difference between PDP which I would consider a major or medium party with 16 seats (7.4 % of all seats) and Almoudabara or PDM that are minor parties with 5 seats (2.3 % of all seats). There is not such a big difference between PCOT with 3 and MP or MDS with 2 seats each, so having the limit of inclusion there seems more arbitrary to me. No one forces us to include six or nine parties, just because the infobox template displays three parties in a row. In this case it seems more natural to me to include the five major and medium-sized parties that are many times bigger than all of the minor ones (e.g. PDP had three times as many seats as Moudabara or PDM, while PCOT had just one seat more than MP or MDS). Do you see my point? --RJFF (talk) 13:07, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Propose moving Call of Tunisia to Nidaa Tounes
see Talk:Call of Tunisia. --PanchoS (talk) 10:59, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Third Way article 1st reference
Hello! I have just examined the very first reference in the mentioned article. Firstly, it has only one author, the other is the translator into English. Secondly, the single author, Norberto Bobbio is a socialist, so one could ask if his work is objective? The definition of third way seems to be extremly narrow in the article, knowing that even Hitler used the term. However, i think we can handle it together with rightist third position, as a pair, so there might be no need for modification at all :/ Tamás http://cnqzu.com/library/Politics/Bobbio-Norberto-Left-and-Right-Significance-Political-Distinction.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.224.72.132 (talk) 12:02, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Finnish Political Parties
Excuse me, but there's NO WAY that The Swedish People's Party of Finland is a centrist party. It's at least centre-right or even right-wing, and as a Finn I know this. You deleted my edit where I claimed the party to be cente-rightist, because there were no sources, but there isn't neither sources in the article for the party to be centrist. And then The Finns Party-article, where the party's political position isn't announced. I edited the article by writing the party's position to be centre to centre-right, 'cause party leader Timo Soini says the party to be centrist, but there are also party members such as Simon Elo and Jussi Halla-aho who are clearly right-wing politicians. So I ask you, why would you delete the editions? --Tohtori Koira (talk) 10:23, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello
 * Wikipedia is based on the principle of WP:Verifiability. Arguments like "as a Finn I know this" are not accepted here. For every edit of content, you have to refer to a reliable, published source backing your change to allow other users to verify it. In this case this means that you would have to cite a book or scholarly article that describes this party as centre-right or right-wing. WP:Original research done by users is not accepted in this project, no matter how experienced or knowledgeable they may be. This is our policy which has been agreed upon by a broad consensus among users. This does not mean that I disagree with the content of your edit. You may be right, I can simply not assess this, as I – unlike you – am not a Finn and have only little knowledge of Finnish politics. But the onus is on you to make your edit verifiable for me and other users. You are invited to redo your edit if you can cite a published source (satisfying our standards of reliability), otherwise the status quo (which is based on ) will be maintained. Thanks for your understanding. Kind regards, --RJFF (talk) 16:01, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Emigrants to/expatriates in Thailand
I completely understand your point in changing these. The fact is that categories are a blunt instrument and the manner in which they are nested is not always meant to express 100% logical truth in all cases. There has been a consensus to categorize the "FOOian emigrants to BAR" and the "FOOian expatriates in BAR" categories as subcategories of "BARian people of FOOian descent" in all cases. This is not meant to communicate that all FOOians in this situation became or are BARians, it's simply a nesting for convenience and to recognize that emigrants to BAR and expatriates in BAR should be accessible through easy navigation of the "BARian people" category tree. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:35, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 22 December
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * On the Unified Progressive Party page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=639226420 your edit] caused a URL error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F639226420%7CUnified Progressive Party%5D%5D Ask for help])

Iraqi Accord Front
Hello colleague. Just to avoid misunderstandings: did your request 'citation needed' in this edit, May 2014, refer to IAF being Islamist — as I assumed yesterday, while editing it — or also to its being Sunni? --Corriebertus (talk) 06:58, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Pegida or PEGIDA?
I wasn't convinced that "Pegida" is more common than "PEGIDA". Therefore, it was moved back. You can request a move. --George Ho (talk) 00:25, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Thai cities
Maybe we can create a chart of how different authorities give the various cities and try again in a few weeks, without Buriram or Sisaket. The chart could have columns for DOPA, BGN, Bangkok Post, various atlases, and so forth. Several editors involved this time around seemed to be unreasonable just for the sake of being unreasonable. NotUnusual (talk) 08:26, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Good idea. --RJFF (talk) 20:42, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sip Song Chau Tai, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chief. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Sipsong Chou/Chu/Chao Thai
I noticed you needed a complete list of the cantons for your recent entry on the Sip Song Chao Tai- The names you list are in vietnamese but look like transcribed Lao/thai (since muong likely is muang). Here is an article from the Journal of Mon-Khmer studies which lists all twelve with the Lao/Thai and Vietnamese names (see the footnotes)http://sealang.net/sala/archives/pdf8/chamberlain1992black.pdf Also the French added a few cantons bringing the total up to 16 during the colonial period- Hope this helps StampyElephant (talk) 15:15, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Very helpful indeed. Thanks a lot! I will use it for further work on the article. --RJFF (talk) 11:13, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Sing-Akademie zu Berlin listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Sing-Akademie zu Berlin. Since you had some involvement with the Sing-Akademie zu Berlin redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 01:37, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for informing me. --RJFF (talk) 11:13, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Cavalier and Roundheads
Cavaliers "Wrong but Wromantic"; Roundheads "Right but Repulsive".

Thanks for the thanks. Is there any particular reason why those two edits pleased you? I ask because there are two templates which the same IP address edited: Template:Roundhead/meta/color and Template:Cavalier/meta/color. I think I know why the Roundhead colour was chosen (it was Earl of Essex's colour, warn by the parliamentarians at the Battle of Edgehill the first major battle of the Civil war) and has been as mistaken by some as a general Roundhead colour. Green would probably be better, as per Green Ribbon Club. I have no idea why purple has been chosen for the Royalists other than purple as a Roman senator and royal colour. Do yo have any ideas? -- PBS (talk) 14:22, 22 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I have thanked you because I was about to undo these edits and was pleased that someone else had already done it. The IP belongs to a banned editor who either uses socks or IP to continue his obsession with infoboxes and colour templates of every grouping, faction or movement that might be considered a political party in the broadest sense, usually filling in the fields by instinct or guesswork and never with reference to reliable sources. He edits articles of "parties" from all countries and eras despite not having expert knowledge on most of them. Neither do I, so I can't help you with your questions, I am just trying to undo the nonsense this user produces. --RJFF (talk) 18:41, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I see it is not the first time this has been created for these articles. I'll keep an eye out for any new creations and see what else the IP or new account has been up to. To start with I'll run AWB and remove the templates mentioned above from article space.-- PBS (talk) 18:50, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I changed my mind, I redirected the templates to the default one (white), and protected them so that only autoconfirmed users can edit them. -- PBS (talk) 19:20, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Papademos cabinet
Template:Papademos cabinet has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. PanchoS (talk) 02:10, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Ngathrek Golop Lhakpa. Well spotted. Dougweller (talk) 16:28, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Pretentiousness
"Nazi" may be used as a handy shortcut among scholars rather than repeating the breadth of National Socialism ad nauseam, but the same can be said for Jobbik, a right-wing (to quote the outdated terms of the dichotomical political spectrum) party whose article FIRST refers to it by its full name, but many scholars just call it Jobbik. We must be neutral for every subject, just because you don't like it means nothing.--Sigehelmus (talk) 21:39, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I have answered you at Talk:Nazism --RJFF (talk) 19:09, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Government of Extremadura, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mérida. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Hillary Rodham Clinton - Move Discussion
Hi,

This is a notification to let you know that there is a requested move discussion ongoing at Talk:Hillary_Rodham_Clinton/April_2015_move_request. You are receiving this notification because you have previously participated in some capacity in naming discussions related to the article in question.

Thanks. And have a nice day. NickCT (talk) 18:48, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mường Thanh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tai Dam. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 3 May 2015 (UTC)