User talk:Ruber chiken

Your edit to European Flag
Hello and Welcome. Could you add a source at your edit to European flag. I don't disagree that it's a bad flag, just that you can say that someone compared it to a bathroom toal (is that a word) without citing a source. Thank You,

Lee S. Svoboda tɑk 20:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I hope this edit expresses better what you meant. Lee S. Svoboda tɑk 20:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes thats ok.

USA Economics
Hi Ruber Chicken, I think you misunderstood me, I am not saying that the economics of the US are unsound. Don't get me wrong the economy of the US is going great. I am just saying that the EU is as much of a superpower as the US. By stating: "The media also says the US is the world's richest country - which is not true, wehther you count per capita income or per capita GDP or HDI. If your only source for stating that the US is a superpower is a "source for the US pre 1991" I meant that the media like TV news casts is not always a trustworthy source because they exaggurate. I hope this clears up our misunderstanding. Also, I am going to add a section on the "No superpower ideology." Regards,  Signature brendel  04:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Not yet ;-) but both the EU and US have their economic problems. In Germany unemployment is too high and economic growth too low, in the US those at the bottom live in miserable poverty without healthcare and the public as well as the government have gone deep into debt. Nonetheless the basis for my argument remains that so long we talk about superpowers, we should mention that there are two very powerful unions in the world, the US and the EU. We should also mention as you suggested that the idea of a superpower might just be antique by now.  Signature brendel  04:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Of course, it a problem. I was trying to lighten the mood a bit, that's why I added the ";-)." But something else, have you added these issues to the Economy of the United States article. I think it would make an interesting addition - and don't worry about spelling. Regards,  Signature brendel  05:40, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

EU
I was reading your last post on the superpower page, but I didn't quite understand what you were saying. Do you think the EU is as much as superpower as the US. Please note that you don't have to be a country to be a superpower. You just need to be powerful. Thanks. Regards, 01:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing out what you meant. Regards,  Signature brendel  01:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Oil reserves
Please undo your revert. I did not remove your suspicious reserves information, only the grammer changes you made. If you do go back to my revert, I will fix up the spelling and grammer in the content you added so the cleanup tag can be removed.

Carbonate 11:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

superpower article
Objective? What is the objective? Trip: The Light Fantastic 17:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC) Exactly.. that's what I put.... Trip: The Light Fantastic 17:29, 15 June 2006 (UTC) Precisely. Trip: The Light Fantastic 21:51, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Superpower compromise
Hi, Ruber Chiken I have prosed a comprise in which the EU is listed in a seperated section not under "today's superpowers" (as we could argue about that forever) but sperate from China and India. Trip: The Light Fantastic has alreade concurred with my proposal and I am awaiting a response from Nobleeagle. Do you favor such as compromise ( a seperate section for the EU)?  Signature brendel  17:53, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, Ruber Chiken, I'm sorry I have to do this but could you tell me what the last part of your post meant, "what about the multipolar section,he was contesting that?I don't see where." Are you asking me whether or not Nobleeagle was contesting the multipolar section? Thank you. Regards,  Signature brendel  22:13, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for calrifying, I think since we just reached a consensus on the EU lets wait before asking for a Multipolar section. Lets not rock the boat to much and wait a bit until things calm down and the EU section is established. I know there'll be some controversy over the Multiploar section. There is, however, one other possiblity, a seperate article. If we can generate enough text we can create a sperate article called Multipolar world in which it is stated how the era of superpowers is over. I'll give you my thoughts on the article later when I log back on. Regards,  Signature brendel  23:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Well the EU has its own section now I added some mention of some EU sections, otherwise we have reached a compromise and can now relax a bit ;-) If you'd like, you could start an article regarding the the Multipolar theory - I'll correct you spelling and sentence structre.  Signature brendel  05:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, could you give me the link to that debt section you wrote, I wasn't able to find it under your contributions as though I'd be able to.  Signature brendel  06:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Regional power
It's not a matter of one reference. Note that a full and politically unified European Union would be the ONLY nation in Europe (only nation that has a say in anything anyway), so it would be absolutely pointless to include the Europe region anyway. I don't see why you have a problem with the way things stand at the moment, the article is quite comprehensive in its dealing with Europe, splitting it into three parts and then saying which nations are the most powerful in these three regions.  Noble eagle  (Talk)  07:17, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't disagree with a short mention of the European Union debate in the intro, but no need to go into the European Union's power and details in that article. It's not a matter of sources, its a matter of common sense and article format.  Noble eagle  (Talk)  07:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Please use proper spelling and fix all your previous posts. I currently skip your posts due to the inconvenience of having to deal with your 'funny' spelling. --I 04:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment
"brendel,your losing your time." - Was does this mean?  Signature brendel  23:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay I see, you meant I was "wasting my time." Sorry about the confusion. Regards,  Signature brendel  00:06, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

EU Energy
Erm, no, Britain, Germany and France are considering building more nuclear fission reactors. A nuclear fusion reactor is being built in Cadrache, France. Trip: The Light Fantastic 15:35, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

It means I can't believe you put what you did when editing the EU energy section. Please do not comment on my talkpage again, you've gotten on my nerves with that. Trip: The Light Fantastic 16:01, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Talk deletion

 * Primary user talk pages are generally not deleted. Please see WP:USER for more information. —  xaosflux  Talk  01:04, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Reply
You are certainly allowed to reply to anything on the talk page, but when you begin to make personal attacks you will be blocked. So this is the last and final warning. This is your last warning. If you continue to make personal attacks, you may be blocked for disruption. Iola  k  ana |(talk) 15:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies
Hi. I would like to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change (survey described here). If interested, please get in touch via my talkpage or email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 20:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)