User talk:Ssolbergj/Archive 02

Iceland and Norway not debating about EU membership
I don't know where to place this so I'll put it here: Your picture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Further_European_Union_enlargement.svg is fundamentally wrong, Iceland is not debating about membership to the EU, knowing this as I am politically aware Icelander. I'd like you to fix that so I don't have to remove it all together based on the un-correctness of it. Thanks,.. Edit: Norway is not debating about membership as far as I know so I'd get my facts right before posting that..
 * I am Norwegian, and there is "EU-debate" going on in Norway constantly. Hasn't measures to adopt the euro, e.g. via EU membership been an issue in Iceland lately? - SSJ ☎ 15:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

There is a big difference in people discussing the pros and cons of EU membership locally and being engaged in an official debate with EU for a membership. This picture is wrong, fix it or I will remove it and report you for putting wrong information on here, thanks.


 * "Discussing the pros and cons" is generally called 'debate'. What is an "official debate"? Oh are you going to "report me"? - SSJ ☎ 00:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't be such a child, with that you could paint all countries yellow. When local discussion has lead to people deciding to join the EU, the government of that particulat country engages in an official talk with EU of membership. Neither Iceland nor Norway has got to that point, and that only shows how much you know about the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.213.139.3 (talk) 12:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Aircraft
Please stop editing the infobox and revertings those changes some minutes later when they are not working as intended. Use your personal sandbox to test those edits and include only the final version to the infobox. Thank you. --Denniss 23:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I knew that the changes I made were isolated from things that might have changed anything in other articles. I know what you mean, and I've started my own sandbox testing. - S. Solberg J. 00:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

euro spot rates
Some of your edits to Euro were reverted becuase we can't use spot rates as these aren't readily verifiable or were momentary. We use the ECB's formal record, which is. The editor who reverted should have told you this. --Red King 18:28, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok tanks!:) - S. Solberg J. 19:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

EP distance image
Hi. The colour changes are great, however could you upload it under a different name so the original version is still available? Thanks. - J Logan t: 14:23, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've done so. (Image:European Parliament Distance modified.jpg) - S. Solberg J. 14:58, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! - J Logan t: 08:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Location of European Union institutions map
Hello, i'm sorry but Strasbourg is also the seat of the European Ombudsman and the Eurocorps. Yes, the city is mostly Council of Europe, but the EU is not represented by the sole Parliament in it ! Cheers, RCS 08:16, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

NASA
Hi Ssolbergj, I hope you don't mind, but I've reverted the NASA article back to the government infobox. NASA is a government agency first, and space agency second, and as part of the US Government, that infobox should be used for the article. Cheers, Ariel ♥ Gold 23:25, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

> Rugby471 talk ⚔ 11:36, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Template:Euro topics
Great job! Way cool! This is much better than the old version. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 07:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks for uploading. The templates it's on look much better. Rocket000 01:23, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Template:European Union Labelled Map (blue)
Just to let you know that your recent change to this template has altered the posistion of "Belgium". Any chance you could fix it? Wiki01916 11:52, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure - S. Solberg J. 14:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Possible problem with Image:European Union Population Density.png
Hi Ssolbergj, during the GA review of European Union there were some doubts about copyrights of several images. After checking the Image:European Union Population Density.png originally uploaded by you might be one of the images that cause problems. You claim it is fair use. However there is some doubt (see the image talk page). Can you fix that? If so, please can you do it as fast as possible, as the GA review of European Union demands these issues are solved and we want to maintain the image. Thanks a lot Arnoutf 18:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
 * A second image was flagged up, also uploaded by you Image:EUCoJ.jpg. Can you expand the information of that one as well. Thanks. Arnoutf 20:26, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Aircrafts
You've been around on en.wkik long enough that you should know that "aircrafts" is not the English plural for "aircraft". As such, I assume this edit was just a typig/edit mistake. I certainly hope it wasn't a joke, as that form is considered vandalism. - BillCJ 01:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm glad to see you're assuming good faith. - S. Solberg J. 09:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

article name change
Hello, can you revert the name change of the Reform Treaty article? It has not yet been ratified, so until December 13, it is still the Reform Treaty. Furthermore, the way you moved the article, has caused the edit histories to go in all different directions (the full edit history of the Reform Treaty can not be seen in the current Lisbon Treaty article!). Intangible2.0 10:53, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to euro
Please read Template:Infobox Currency and leave a comment on Talk:Euro before editing the page again. – Zntrip 22:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

EU page map
Great work on it, fantastic as always. However don't forget about Czechoslovakia! - J Logan t: 16:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you! It's fixed. - S. Solberg J. 16:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi S, awesome new map! Saves a lot of double and triple maps. The fine Crete image is also much better. Some thoughts to the new map: a) Is it possible to slow down the enlargements steps? It´s hard to follow the timeline AND the territory simultaneously. b) Could the new cycle of enlargement start a little earlier, I think it is a long time to wait now. And another thing, remember your great map for Berlin? It is disputed and replaced. Maybe you could have an eye on it, because right now I´m unable to discuss and reinsert it. .. By the way, Lear 22 was you wasnt it? If so, you are blocked as well, haha! Because this message is topsecret, delete it when read. Jagshemash —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.11.197 (talk) 23:34, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you! a) I know what you mean with the animation speed, but it's a real dilemma; it has to work for people simply wanting to see which are member states in general, and at the same time give visitors a lucid enlargement overview. I thought people wanting to study the EU enlargement step by step could just visit.
 * ...so my compromise was rapid (0,8 sec i think) expansion. b) "new cycle of enlargement"?


 * No, I'm not Lear 22. I'll try to insert an improved berlin-EU map when I've got time. - S. Solberg J. 23:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Not Lear 22, mysterious, it wasn´t me either... Concerning the "new cycle": I mean the timespan when Enlargement series is finshed and Enlargement series begins, it could be shorter IMHO. And, just a reinsert for Berlin-EU would be very helpful for the beginning, if you want to... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.11.197 (talk) 00:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The map looks really chaotic when the enlargement animation is going on. ("Ukraine" in the middle of the Soviet Union, Impossible to create text for both Western and Eastern Germany etc.) So I thought the animation would just work as a cool start that could replace the old enlargement gif, and after that being a normal map that people have time to study.. If readers want a replay or a more detailed introduction they can click on the "main:" link or 're-scroll' to the image. I'll wait util I've made a better one before I reinsert the Berlin-EU map.) - S. Solberg J. 00:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

A comment on the talk page concerning the EU-Berlin map would be much appreciated. The best argument though would be the installation of several EU-City-maps. Maybe we can still uphold this one for now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.159.235 (talk) 17:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

European Parliament
Continued from my edit summery. How does that sound? The App. info should be with members and if you could shorten it (two cols?) I'll see if I can make the section longer. Might that work? - J Logan t: 15:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes probably, I'll try to shorten the table. - S. Solberg J. 15:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for the awesome blu-ray portal logo. If you have any spare time, could you make one for Portal:Insomniac Games? I understand if you don't.--Playstationdude 00:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Lisbon Treaty structure
Hi! Thanks for svg-ing my png picture! I'm using Microsoft Visio and the results of it's svg export aren't compatible with Wikipedia. Sincerely --Fred Stober 21:11, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem! :) - S. Solberg J. 23:44, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

International Space Station expedition crew member nationalities
Hi! I remember your insightful contributions recently during the discussion of the use of flags for the ESA article. If you have a moment, would you please take a look at Talk:Expedition_16 and add your views to the discussion? Thanks! (sdsds - talk) 23:08, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:EU Constitution structure.svg
Hi Ssolbergj, I've seen your images about the european Constitution and the Reform Treaty: you should add another treaty on the left part of the Image:EU Constitution structure.svg: the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. This treaty was included in the constitution and it is not included in the reform treaty which has an article referring to it. You should add it also in the Image:Lisbon Treaty structure.svg, clarifying that before it was not legally binding whereas now it is. Ciao, Sinigagl 15:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Now only traditional treaties are included. I don't know how the rights charter relates to the other treaties. Can't we just mention the rights charter in the image caption? - S. Solberg J. 16:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I've made the changes by myself: can you fix the images/template please?
 * Ciao, Sinigagl 17:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've tagged all the fine images you've put on commons with the proper categories within commons:Category:European Union: please do it by yourself next time you upload a new image. I see that you are norvegian, and I also see that you live in Bruxells and you love the EU (maybe you also work for the EU): you are such a strange norvegian!!! ;-) I lived in Trondheim and I know something about you as a people... Ciao, Sinigagl 22:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Haha.. I don't live in Brussels (that was just a userbox I made) and I'm sorry to say that I don't work for the EU.. Why would it be paradoxal that a Norwegian is pro-european? ;-) But yes unfortunately I have many uninformed and egoistic countrymen.. - S. Solberg J. 22:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

AEGEE logo image
Hi, I noticed the AEGEE-Europe logo you uploaded was tagged as having an invalid fair use rationale, but you then deleted the tag without making any other changes. I'm by no means an IP lawyer and don't really see what was wrong with your rationale, but surely problems need to be discussed and not just blanked?

I'm an AEGEE member myself and I think I can get the board to release a GDFL copy of the logo, so unless you object I think I'll do that :-)

cheers, Moyabrit 13:59, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I added in which articles it's used. Of course, who doesn't love GDFL? ;-) But I'm pretty sure the fair use rationale now works fine with english wikipedia- S. Solberg J. 01:02, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Maps
Hi, I wondered if you knew if there were any free satellite images around that might have Brussels, Google Maps is copyrighted isn't it? I was wondering about doing a graphic for Brussels and the European Union with a satellite image overlaid with locations (we have the Lanmark Publishing PDF with most) but I can't find anything suitable to use as the base image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JLogan (talk • contribs) 14:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * NASA World Wind. (Image:Brussles 4.35995E 50.84400N.jpg I haven't downloaded it, maybe it's possible to zoom further in.) For optimal sharpness you should upload the image with the same size you'd like it to be rendered in the article. Are you thinking of a labelled map? - S. Solberg J. 16:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I was thinking about perhaps colour coding those of the different institutions, providing a semi-transparent overlay for them and fading out the area outside the EU district. Not sure exactly, it's just an idea I'm looking into right now, if I can get one I was thinking of overlaying a streetmap like on google, just basic roads. Still not sure what would be best, one just showing the major buildings or one showing the density of all those EU buildings. The latter may be more informative but they're doing rebuilding soon so I don't know how up to date it will be after a while. - J Logan t: 16:33, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Request for creation of seat map of 9VSPK of Singapore Airlines Flight 006
Hello! Since you made the A380 seat map, do you mind if you make a seat map for the Singapore Airlines plane that crashed in Taipei in 2000?

The seat map is in this document: http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/ASCAAR-02-01.pdf WhisperToMe 17:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Put back old Wim into ECB
I put back the picture of Duisenberg into the ECB article. Lots of people are usually interested in who the 1st president of an organization was/looks like. Ugliness is irrelevant. Smallbones 17:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Help
I made a image on inkscape and saved it, but when I view it on a internet browser it blacks out the text. Do you know what I am doing wrong? If you could respond on my talk page that would be great.--Playstationdude 03:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Is there a button for that or something?--Playstationdude 20:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I will try it out in a couple of hours. Thanks for helping. Your page is what showed me inkscape in the first place. You wouldn't happen to be the guy from The Feed on G4tv.com? One of the people on there has almost the exact name.--Playstationdude 20:36, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem ;-). No I'm probably not that guy. - S. Solberg J. 20:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Help 2: If you are really interested in the EU sport subject, continue the support. And even more, reinsert the content/para about popular sports. all the best Lear 21 17:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you want to comment this. Lear 21 01:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

EU again
Hi, look, the discussion on the EU talk page isn't going well. While I sympathise with Lear he appears to have difficulty articulating himself in a manner which would induce the others to listen. To put it politely. As you are the only other person backing him up, I'd appreciate some ideas/arguments from you on how to accommodate yours and Lear's point of view on the page. Were any of the ideas I posted up during the rant helpful at all to your position? Thanks. - J Logan t: 20:57, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh and this isn't a request to get back into the EU talk page if you want to avoid that ramble, this is just bilateral. - J Logan t: 20:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Did you ever voted and commented here? :, ,  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.6.74 (talk) 00:46, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


 * If you don't see my signature; then obviously not. There are so many debates on what the EU is, and I'm tired of using time and energy to shape arguments with my relatively limited english, on this extremely repetitive and sometimes difficult issue on talk pages. Please log in. - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 02:30, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to DOLLAR AND EURO IN THE WORLD.svg
Ssolbergj, please revert to the last version at your own! This file is about the US dollar and the euro in the world, the legend says it all: dark blue for countries which adopted the euro as legal tender. Cyprus and Malta did not adopt the euro as book currency and legal tender. Cyprus and Malta will adopt the euro as book currency and legal tender as of January 1, 2008. Countries with currencies pegged to the euro are in the lighter shade of blue. Nerd says: Cyprus will adopt the euro one hour before Malta. You can make a living of that by editing and uploading the file two times on New Year's Eve'. If you like the euro so much, adopt it in a country of your choice. Sorry. Best, 80.137.244.197 (talk) 17:15, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Done. 80.137.248.13 (talk) 13:10, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Brussels in Belgium and the EU map
Hi. I'd like to congratulate on your excellent replacement of the rather poor map I made. It's excellent. I think it would be useful to add a similar one for Strassbourg and perhaps Frankfurt, end maybe offer the option on the sites of other EU capitals. athinaios (talk) 02:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Ditto, it is a fantastic map once more SSJ, you're a wonder. - J Logan t: 20:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I'll do more cities when I get the time. You could also do it by downloading Inkscape.. - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 21:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Was just wondering if, when you have the time of course, you could look back at the location of EU institutions map. While you did a good job before it was too detailed for the corner (still looking for somewhere to put it, needs to be somewhere), perhaps you could do one in the Brussels style for the 5 top cities in one? Would be great, but of course I appreciate you must have a lot of work on your plate!- J Logan t: 22:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Brussels
Hey. I see you've done some extensive work on the articles, Brussels, would you mind if I help? I'm presuming your trying to do this? Best, – Rudget contributions 18:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not an expert on Brussels, but I consider it an article worth a lot of improvement. I'm willing to help out on it too where I can if you need.- J Logan t: 20:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course, all help is needed!;) I'm also not an expert, but the city deserves better.. I know it's just de facto etc., but do you think it could be put under the EU project? - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 21:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Been tempted to put it under it, but I think a domino effect would be a problem? The Brussels and the European Union is WP:EU's domain, unless plans to make it an EU city state come about! Doesn't stop us working on it though. - J Logan t: 22:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Coat of arms of Rome.png
Can you tell me by any chance the source of the image? I seen it tagged with several difference licenses and I want to sort it out for good. Thanks.
 * The source is obviously http://www.comune.roma.it/. I just made a transparent PNG version of Image:Roma01.jpg (now deleted). You could ask some admin to resurrect it and check what it was. - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 23:31, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I am an admin and was the one that deleted the JPEG version. I'll readd the source now. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:18, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Strasbourg Louise Weiss building being modeled on Tower of Babel
Now, this is something of an urban legend, i fear : proof is that only this kind of site draws lengthily on the subject. Anyway, this one (just as loony) makes a good synthesis. Cheers, RCS 07:55, 2 December 2007(UTC)

I was not confirmed
If you read my user page I'm 17 I was at high school at the time even though it was not on my user page at the time you should know that but please I like the image on my user page. And it my favorite out of all of my images so leave me a message on my talk page before 9:10 so you can help me out a little Thanks for your help. -The luigi kart assasions 4:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm 17 too, but you need to understand that copyrighted images can't be placed in userpages. There are strict rules about how commercial pictures can be used in wikipedia. You'll learn. It's not that dramatic if you place fair use rationals on the commercial images you upload. And don't even think about placing an "I made this" tag on an image you (clearly) didn't make. And f you did make it yourself, you should upload it to Wikimedia Commons, (not wikipedia) and write some info about it + the date.- $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 00:47, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry I have a new image dont worry about that old one it's still withme:). And this time I actually did make it on vgcharts.com. And I have a acount for it to If the image is alright tell me if it aint alright then. But beware the website does have a busy server but a few minutes it'll start. And one last thing I mad that smash bros didn't came out yet because it was supposed to come out today 12/3/07 Talk to me about those two Thanks. -The luigi kart assasions 5:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Stop doing that! You simply don't get the point. I don't care if you like R&C. I'll delete it. - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 01:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

You know what just fuck it I don't care no more But check out my ps2 please (NEW) Don't listen to my IP adressed It's just me. -The luigi kart assasions 6:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

WPHV Coat of Arms
I invite you to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology. – I. Pankonin (t/c) 08:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't mean to rip into your image. It's really pleasing to the eye. The thing is, the project is full of people that follow the heraldic and vexillologic tradition that words and letters don't belong on coats of arms and flags. This tradition is evident when you see the results of a survey that ranked flags in North America. Of the top 10 flags, none had words or letters, and all of the bottom 10 flags had words. So please don't think we don't appreciate your hard work. It's a beautiful image, and it makes the ones I made look like toilet food. And please take heart in the fact that it looks like the final image we agree on will use the shield and the shading you made. – I. Pankonin (t/c) 07:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Award
Cool! Thanks! - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 02:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

News media
Hi, if you're still working on the News media in the European Union, there is an interesting commentary piece on EU Observer here relating to the new European Radio Project but I think it could help a lot on the news media article. I don't have time to start working on that one again but I thought you might be wanting to.- J Logan t: 12:53, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yea I know. I thought just the same! I'll focus on it when I get the time. - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 19:58, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Ssolbergj/question
Hi, FYI the question about EC layout that you originally posted using the above page has become a bit confusing after editors have started to reply on that page. --rxnd ( t | &#8364; | c ) 22:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hans-Gert Pöttering signature.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Hans-Gert Pöttering signature.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot (talk) 03:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Barroso signature.png
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Barroso signature.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --—Remember the dot (talk) 03:35, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Treaty of Lisbon
Hi, I think it was you who added the template European Union Treaty Scenario. With my browser, the graphic starts with the left edge aligned roughly with the right border, i.e. it is mostly off the screen until I scroll right. This happens in Treaty of Lisbon and if I go to the template directly. I looked at the template but couldn't find the cause. I presume it is a browser problem. Not a great problem, but I thought you might have an idea how to fix it. --Boson (talk) 16:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Is it fixed now? I changed the "margin-right". $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 20:02, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No apparent change.--Boson (talk) 21:54, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiCommons
Hey, as another member who is active on commons, I was wondering what you might think about some kind of WP:EU presence on WikiCommons? I think think it might be good to have some kind of organisation over there as we have a lot of maps and images flying around. It would be minimal, say one page with some basic data on (standards, needed images and so fourth) with its talk page. Could also get us in touch with people from the other wiki's who have images we don't. Still thinking on it though, but do you think it might be helpful?- J Logan t: 19:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I haven't seen much of a real community on commons other than people wanting to delete images.. So I'm not sure what more we can do than to work on, which I will. (and other EU-related sets) - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 20:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well that's why really, I was hoping we could get people talking through it. I'll drop a note on the talk page there and see if anyone picks it up.- J Logan t: 20:43, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Schengen Agreement
Can you also change the color for Switcherland,in your map, to green, please? – Magioladitis (talk) 20:56, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It is green. The wiki-servers are just lagging I think... - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 21:02, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Could you, please correct Schengen Agreement map? You have two choices: 1. if you want to show internationaly recognized borders you should delete Kosovo-Serbia Border. 2. if you want to show de facto borders in Europe you should draw borders between Greek and Turkish part of Cyprus and between Transnistria and Moldova. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.191.42 (talk) 11:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

EU semi protection
Maybe you want to support this. Lear 21 (talk) 16:45, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Note
Hi. Thank you for your work. I have two requests. First, I wonder if you could use a edit summary when you contribute, it greatly helps others understand what you change. Second, I'd like to note that your infobox additions leave a very large (and unpleasing) space at the top of articles, as you can see at Merger Treaty, Treaty of Rome, and a few others. Thanks for reading! You can reply here. Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:49, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Edit summaries are not optional. They are necessary to ensure the smooth flow of Wikipedia.  You just made three edits  to 2008 South Ossetia war without summaries, which is unacceptable. Superm401 - Talk 04:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Ode to Joy violin.ogg
A recording that you uploaded or altered, Image:Ode to Joy violin.ogg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the recording's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on its description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. - Mark 12:01, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Coat of arms of Rome.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Coat of arms of Rome.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:47, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Merit for outstanding contributions
I want to thank you personally for a year of cooperative work during the time spent at Wikipedia. Your tireless efforts have major impact of a comprehensible approach to the EU and related issues. Together we achieved to uphold an EU article presenting more than daily prejudices and shortsighted knowledge. It was a pleasure. If you ever consider to visit my little hometown Berlin write an e-mail. Merry Christmas, Frohe Weihnachten and a Happy New Year. Lear 21 (talk) 20:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm deeply honored. Yes after checking the difference between the EU article anno 2005 and anno 2006, versus 2006 compared to 2007, it's clear that EU project editors have made a 'revolution' the last year. You were the first editor on Wikipedia I really spoke with. Marry Christmas, God jul and a happy new year. Personally I'm confident that the ToL ratification will be successful due to the fact that I read in an EUobserver article that Irish people are the most pro-European. - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 23:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Nothing less than a Revolution, correct ! Lear 21 (talk) 12:33, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Template needs work
See talk page of Template:Schengen Agreement Labelled Map. – Kendrick7talk 07:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Politics of the European Union mini
I mentioned it on the talk page of the main one, it is for where there are two boxes, national and EU, side by side. Such as election pages. Or indeed international relations pages if it were to be used instead of the FR one, but also where there is little room (if there is a full width table straight below). I'll start feeding it onto pages soon when I find my list of pages that needed it.- J Logan t: 09:28, 23 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay all right. I'll use it to. - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 17:13, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Airbus/Boeing 2007 orders
justplanes.com is not a proper reference and is inconsistent with the other years. Please refer to the discussion page.


 * Get yourself a user page and sign comments. Should I refer to a blank talk page? - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 20:36, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:Torre Espacio2.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Torre Espacio2.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. —Remember the dot (talk) 20:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Euro
Template:Euro has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Richard Ω6  12  18:36, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

ECSC infobox
Hey, happy new year (almost). Had an idea a while back for the European Coal and Steel Community article, that it might be good to create an infobox that would be along the lines of Template:Infobox Former Country but I was rubbish with the code and it needed editing rather than using in its native state as the ECSC was too different from a country. If you think it might be worth it, I was wondering if you could create a modified version for international organisations.

If you are interested, as far as I can see the following changes would have to be made: the title box does not seem to welcome the drop down box used on the EU page, name of "capital" would have to be changed, perhaps a more flexible system of names for things like the legislature and a removal of the autocategory system. What do you think? Sorry to take up your time again, you're just so good with graphics and code, I haven't a clue! - J Logan t: 20:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Happy new year! Of course, I'll try. No problem. I've been thinking about that to. - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 21:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your work on that. Was wondering, do we put the member states as previous entities for the ECSC? Or stick to including them in some kind of list?- J Logan t: 09:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Doesn't that imply that it was a classical country merge. I guess some editors won't like that. $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 22:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That was what I was worried about, it may well be misleading like that as, even if it may be now, it wasn't a federation back then. Supose best play it safe and leave it.- J Logan t: 13:08, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Timeline of European Union history/left panel, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template   to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Truthanado (talk) 03:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Timeline of European Union history/right panel, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template   to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Truthanado (talk) 03:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Middle-earth.svg
Thanks for uploading Image:Middle-earth.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

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


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – lucasbfr  talk 15:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Brussels
Etymology (if required) is usually discussed within the History section as per WikiProject_Cities/Guideline, which is why I moved it into that section. If you feel that a separate etymology section is appropriate for some articles, it would be worth raising the issue on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities. Regards SilkTork  *What's YOUR point? 19:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * WikiProject_Cities/Guideline says that etymology can be included in the history section. I was just copying from Paris. - $\mathrm{S}$. $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$. 19:40, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Newropeans
Hey Ssolbergj,

I wanted to create an article about Newropeans, but I noticed that you already wrote an article about them in your namespace (User:Ssolbergj/Newropeans). That article look rather finished to me. Why not create it in the article namespace? Kind regards, Maarten (talk) 02:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see! I find the deletion a bit strange, because Newropeans has been featured in the media (in the Dutch media at least, the Trouw newspaper had an article about them), but I guess I'll have to wait a year then. Thanks for the fast reply. Maarten (talk) 02:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Europe Portal Image
Hi. It seems like we both are interested in keeping a distinctive image for the Europe Portal. Maybe we should talk about this and find a resolution. i would like to add that my image is represented by the distinctive Wikipedia logo. I don't know, drop me a line if you wanna talk about it.Camilo Sanchez (talk) 03:19, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that your logo/banner is not representative. I do not see what the problem with the Old English Text typeface is. I think it is representative of Europe (since I am a Visual Artist and I have to deal with this kind of topic often) What you say about it not being readable I disagree with. Your logo is just as small and does not acknowledge Wikipedia as i have done it in a humble way. Maybe we can workout a common logo with your ideas and mine ideas. Maybe I can just modify your banner by adding the Wikipedia logo (which I think should be represented in every portal I am committed to work with.) Thanks.Camilo Sanchez (talk) 17:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

My answer is hereCamilo Sanchez (talk) 17:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:EU accession for infobox
A tag has been placed on Template:EU accession for infobox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:33, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:European Parliament apportionment graph
A tag has been placed on Template:European Parliament apportionment graph requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:European Union Labelled Map Legend
A tag has been placed on Template:European Union Labelled Map Legend requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Eurovision Song Contest Labelled Map
A tag has been placed on Template:Eurovision Song Contest Labelled Map requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:03, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

EU re-check needed
The layout is disrupted by the notorious editors again. You might want to check in from time to time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.10.76 (talk) 03:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Just wondering...
Do you happen to have a vector version of Image:Coat of arms of Rome.png? It came up for vectorization on WP:GL/IMPROVE, and I recognized your work right away. – I. Pankonin (t·c) 05:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've partially vectorised it before.. I'll try to make a complete image. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 18:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Columbus logo.svg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Columbus logo.svg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow
Just wondering, do you ever plan on making a vector Wii? -- penubag  (talk) 03:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! I haven't thought about it before, maybe I'll do it. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 15:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Geographic Features of the European Union Labelled Map
A tag has been placed on Template:Geographic Features of the European Union Labelled Map requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Euro coins
Template:Euro coins has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 21:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Middle-earth.svg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Middle-earth.svg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 03:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Armoiries Bruxelles.png
A tag has been placed on Image:Armoiries Bruxelles.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on  explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 03:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Barroso signature.png
A tag has been placed on Image:Barroso signature.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on  explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 05:06, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:NATO compass rose.svg
I recently marked Image:NATO compass rose.svg on commons as a copyvio  Barliner  talk 15:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

ERASMUS Image
Hi S, I´m thinking about to add this image of ERASMUS students to the EU article. It would be integrated in Education and research. Not only that I was an ERASMUS student myself (Madrid), I think it would be a useful visualization of the content. Lear 21 (talk) 08:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you mean the image in the top of the ERAMUS article? If so; it's certainly not a bad image, but I guess some editors won't consider a group of smiling people as encyclopedic and NPOV. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 14:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I´d really appreciate, to see you taking a stance on the introduction issue at the EU article. Especially if this version is better or the Sandpiper one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.19.156 (talk) 11:44, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:France_24_News_presenter.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:France_24_News_presenter.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 11:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:France_24_News_ident.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:France_24_News_ident.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 11:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Espace Léopold under construction.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Espace Léopold under construction.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Polly (Parrot) 21:34, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

A380 image
Hello, it is not an extra image, it is replacing another. I think an atractive picture is good for the article.Cirrocumulus (talk) 21:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Did it replace the 2005 Paris Airshow image? If so, I think there should only be historical images in the history section. Images of special manoeuvres don't really add anything to the article. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 21:12, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, this image. I don't see the historical relevance in this image also. But for me a unusual picture contributes more to an article (as an image from behind the plane). For the testing section is a manouver also interesting.Cirrocumulus (talk) 22:12, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think the manoeuvre image is that fantastic, but the quality of the image is not the important thing. The historical significance of the 2005 Paris Airshow image is that it was one of the first times the A380 was shown in public. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 22:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Treaty of Lisbon
Hi. Sorry for maybe being a little pain on the ass. But, can you please use the summary box to describe a little bit yur actions. You are doing a marvelous job in the article and i just want to have an idea of what you add each time. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 17:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll write more edit summaries. I'm just used to editing in my own sandbox. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 18:23, 23 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The same for Template:EU evolvement timeline. Why you don't use your sandbox and make complete changes when you are ready? Your edits, even they are very nice, they really confuse me. Moreover, the way you do them is very difficult to come and make corrections and improvements. Now you changed colors, title, etc. in the template and I don't know how to react. For example, i like the new code but not the colors and i don't know in which point to start the discussion in the talk page with all these changes! – Magioladitis (talk) 19:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not intending to write a summary for every little tweak I do. I never left the main template in disarray, and I used my sandbox most of the time. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 00:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with that. My suggestion is that you can make the changes alltogether (and not in pieces) and then add a short summary. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 00:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * But when I think I'm finished, I see new things that can be improved. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 01:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

On a related note, since you seem to be active on both the EU page and this one I thought I'd see what your opinion was on the competition discussion I'm having with this other guy on the talk page. I don't know who removed the point but its an area I know a lot about and I'd heavily suggest putting back in, in at least some form. Also, on the Court of Justice, I dunno, I think it might be worth informing people that though the pillars collapse, the ECJ's jurisdiction is still excluded from covering CFSP and JHA matters. What do you reckon? --Simonski (talk) 11:42, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Political post
Hi, many thanks for your creating Template:Infobox Political post. Can you add a parameter for the political organization that the post is responsible for? For example, the United States Secretary of State is responsible for the United States Department of State. I have placed this request at Template talk:Infobox Political post. It will be great if you can help. Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 00:52, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:EU evolvement timeline.
Hi Ssolbergj, as somebody introduced the Western European Union in the Template:EU evolvement timeline, I think it's necessary to introduce also the Schengen Agreement! Can you try to do it? Ciao, Sinigagl (talk) 13:24, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Schengen is only one part of the cooperation, like the euro. The WEU is a separate organisation. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 14:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Ssolbergj,
 * You got a reply here
 * Ciao, Sinigagl (talk) 16:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

barnstars
hello. i couldnt help notice that your very good at making barn stars. I am currently working on WikiProject Papua New Guinea, however we havn't got a "Papua New Guinea national merit barnstar". I would much appreciate it if you could make one using the Flag of Papua New Guinea for us. thank you very much Ijanderson977 (talk) 23:11, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem! :) - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 20:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Brussels (language)
I *really* don't want to get into the minefield of Belgian languages, but isn't German valid in the Brussels article by virtue of being an official language of Belgium? – Ian Dalziel (talk) 23:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The official languages of Brussels-Capital Region are French and Dutch. I don't have strong feelings on this subject, but shouldn't language bracket in the intro be as small as strictly possible? - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 23:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Probably. No strong feelings either way here either - I can see a case for mentioning a name which appears on Belgian roadsigns, though. No doubt someone who does have strong feelings will be along shortly. :-) --Ian Dalziel (talk) 23:46, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Dow Jones logo.svg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Dow Jones logo.svg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Brussels photos
I'll be in Brussels over the weekend, do you know of any photo's we could do with? Thanks.- J Logan t: 08:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps an overview of the city ("skyline" for the infobox), Résidence Palace (including the area where the Council's extension will be built), Brussels Airport (from the outside) and Law Courts of Brussels (perhaps the renovation is finished). The European Quarter in general; Justus Lipsius, Berlaymont, Espace Léopold, Cinquantenaire and Résidence Palace - where they are placed in relation to eachother. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 13:19, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do. I won't be out at the airport though. Getting relative ones and skylines are hard but with a bit of luck I should be able to get something.- J Logan t: 16:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright, good luck! - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 19:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ferrari-Logo.svg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Ferrari-Logo.svg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:09, 7 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi there. Just wanted to ask you, why do you removing the Scuderia Ferrari Logo.png from the Ferrari article? -- KaragouniS :  Chat 12:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Because SVGs are generally preferred, and they are sharper. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 12:38, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Airbus Logo.svg
Thanks for uploading Image:Airbus Logo.svg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --00:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for consensus
A question has arisen concerning classification of groups in the European Parliament. A discussion has opened up in Talk:Political groups of the European Parliament. Your input is requested there. This is a neutrally worded notification sent to a small number of informed, but uninvolved, editors and is intended to improve rather than to influence the discussion. This notification falls under the "friendly notice" clause of WP:CANVASS. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Le Monde logo.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Le Monde logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[[Image:Roman Empire map.svg|thumb]]
Hello, why do you have temporary conquests if the map depicts the empire under it's greatest extent in 117? thanks Mallerd (talk) 18:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hello, you should perhaps check the image I linked to in the image description. I used the borders from that one..- $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 18:40, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:ENGVAR
Hi. Under WP:ENGVAR, European articles do not have to be in UK English. You'll notice it says EU Institutions and not all European related articles, for which the general rule applies. In the Francization of Brussels' case, the translator is American, so we stick with that. Cheers. - Oreo Priest  talk 18:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * If there is a single city that should use UK/IRL/EU English, it would be french-speaking and de facto EU capital Brussels. This is justifiable common sense; the Wikipedia guidelines shouldn't always be followed slavishly. - and especially when it comes to UK/US English. "Honour" is the name of an article, not "Honor". Wonder why. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 19:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * If you'r OK with it, perhaps we can use Frenchification? - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 19:30, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Discussion moved to article's talk page. - Oreo Priest  talk 15:45, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:A319liveries.jpg
I'd rather not speedy delete the above image. Could you instead list it on WP:PUI or WP:IFD? J Milburn (talk) 11:58, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

reverted map for EU
So you really reverted the map. From you edit summary I understand that the missing margin is more important to you than the invisibility of French Guyana in the smaller map. How would you react to a map that has a margin and still shows up larger upon clicking? Or, do you completely dismiss clicking an svg as a method to display it larger? Do you still prefer Mercator to Robinson? Tomea s y talk 15:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I prefer the mercator projection. Please keep this discussion within the EU's talk page. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 17:17, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:European Union topics ("Topics on/in...")
Hi. In case you're not aware, this makes the template's title unlike most of those used by before I worked through them to make them consistent. Also, if you're not a native English speaker – sorry if I missed that info on your userpage – you may not know that "Topics on" is an... odd-sounding turn of phrase. At least, it's not something I can recall coming across before these template titles. Perhaps it's an Americanism I've yet to encounter (as such)? Anyhow, please reconsider "X topics" as a simpler, perhaps less provincial title, even when X isn't an adjective. Sardanaphalus (talk) 15:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:European_Union_topics&curid=9077169&diff=213746855&oldid=213375675


 * I didn't come up with "topics on x" myself. I took it from some other country/territory template. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 15:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, so does that mean you wouldn't mind if I restored the kind of name most other country/territory templates seem to be using? Sardanaphalus (talk) 16:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * A bit strange that Template:British topics has had "topics on X" for so long, if that is so terrible English. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 17:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't think it's terrible English; I just realize that I don't believe it's a common turn of phrase. I'm not sure whether it might be an Americanism, for instance, as I thought I might've come across it before if it was in common use, at least in books etc. Anyhow, it's probably not that strange, as it wouldn't be the only curious phrasing people have identified on Wikipedia. I've posted this query to see what happens. Is there anywhere else you think it might collect more responses? Sardanaphalus (talk) 17:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, so far it's only a few opinions, but they seem to agree that "topics on/in" is awkward English, so do you now feel able to accept "X topics" as this and similar templates' titles? (Incidentally, Template:British topics is on my to-do list to rename (to "United Kingdom topics") and retitle accordingly, then add to, along with some other templates yet to be categorized there.) Sardanaphalus (talk) 15:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * It's ok for me, no strong feelings. ; ) - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 19:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Have restored name and will use format on similar templates. Thanks for understanding. Sardanaphalus (talk) 13:35, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Problem
So wiki felow what is your problem vith the name of my country. I was looking at your contributions in the article Accession of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to the European Union and I think such behaviour is not human and civil at all. My country has right to call itself as it want. And no one wants you to be the godfather of the name of our country.--Raso mk (talk) 22:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not being personal or POV. I just want a solution that is sustainable, and calling it just 'Macedonia' is obviously not something everyone will be ok with. Please keep this discussion within the article's talk page. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 23:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Europol article infobox/es
Hi,

I note that you have changed the infobox for Europol back to from.

May I suggest that before you did this it might have been better to discuss it at Talk:Europol, which I set up for this very issue.

Please note that when you removed you missed the categorisation being done by. As a result there has been a cascade effect and some categories have been deleted, and will have to be recreated, with the possible jags for the recreation of deleted things, as part of the the initiative to tidy up law enforcement agency categorisation.

I would like to understand why you feel it is a European Union agency rather than a law enforcement agency ?

I note that you got nudged for the opposite some time ago, User talk:Ssolbergj, that is when you did the same for NASA as what I did with Europol.

For what it is worth, I think you were correct, and User:ArielGold was and is wrong. The US Government did not say lets create a government agency and then find something to do with it. They said, we need a space agency.

Similarly, my view is that the European Union wanted to create a law enforcement agency. They did not say lets create a government agency and then find something to do with it. They said, we need a law enforcement agency.

Note that as a law enforcement agency, Europol still needs to be categorised as an agency of the EU, and the EU nav box at the bottom is still required, etc.

I would like to try to convince you to agree to change the infobox back to. Can you advise what your main objections might be ?

Regards. Peet Ern (talk) 04:09, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for doing this so properly! I've written my answer in the article's talk page. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 13:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Treaty
Hi, could you add a "Parties" (or "States parties") field to the treaty infobox, please? I notice a few treaty articles have mistakenly included the number of states parties in the "Signatories" field. Cheers, Polemarchus (talk) 01:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * A signatory can also be a part of the Treaty. France is a part in the Lisbon Treaty, but it's also a signatory. - $\mathrm{S}$ $\mathrm{Solberg}$ $\mathrm{J}$ 13:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That's true but, in general, it's the states parties that are important, not the signatories. In any case, what's happening with this infobox at the moment is, because there's no "Parties" field, people are putting the number of parties in the "Signatories" field, which is blatantly wrong.  Look at Kyoto Protocol, for example: the infobox says there are 178 signatories but according to the official website there are 84 signatories and 181 states parties (up from 178).  The Kyoto Protocol is a highly visible article, so it's pretty embarrassing that Wikipedia doesn't seem to know the difference between a signatory and a state party.  Because there's no "parties" field, editors have to either leave out the number of states parties or put it in the wrong field, both of which are terrible options.  And besides, we've nothing to lose by adding an optional "Parties" field: if people want to, they can just ignore it and keep adding the number of states parties to the "Signatories" field :-)  Polemarchus (talk) 13:57, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:Euro notes
Template deletion requests that do not meet one of the criteria at WP:CSD should go to WP:TFD. Thanks. --- RockMFR 23:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Fiat logo.svg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Fiat logo.svg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 07:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:EUR 5 holographic band.jpg
Hi! I've listed Image:EUR 5 holographic band.jpg for speedy deletion on Commons. The design of the Euro banknotes is copyrighted by ECB, so this image doesn't meet the Commons criteria. Cheers, Pruneautalk 12:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Your Champions League map
I don't think it looks as good as the old one because the proportions are way off. I don't like that it is a Mercator projection. The borders of nations are messed up. Slovenia for example hardly exists in you map. Serbia looks odd and also Kosovo is colored in as a country when 150 out of 192 U.N. member states recognize it as part of Serbia. Sorry. :) --Tocino 17:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Euronews logo text.svg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Euronews logo text.svg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Euronews logo globe.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Euronews logo globe.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

CERN member states map
Hi,

I noticed that you created Image:CERN_member_states.svg and added it to CERN. Did you notice that there is already Image:CERN members.svg in that article? It is essentially the same as your map, but with more information (the distinction between the original member states and the new ones.) I don't think there is any need to have two maps showing essentially the same thing, but perhaps you have a reason for it. I'm also wondering why you changed the CERN logo. --Angelastic (talk) 21:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It's standard to have a map of members in the infobox. I thought it would be better if the one in the infobox didn't differentiate when countries joined. SVG images are sharper, and preferred in wikipedia guidelines. - $\mathbb{SSJ}$ ☎ 21:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Quick note
I happened to run across Image:Wikiproject European Union.svg while browsing, and just wanted to say I was very impressed with the quality of the image. Well done. –  Luna Santin  (talk) 01:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you! ;) - $\mathbb{SSJ}$ ☎ 06:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:French European Union presidency 2008.png
Thanks for uploading Image:French European Union presidency 2008.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 03:12, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Move of International Paneuropean Union flag.svg to Wiki Commons
Hi!

I just wanted to inform you that i have moved the image International Paneuropean Union flag.svg to Wikicommons.

All the best greetings --Oren neu dag (talk) 01:17, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice! Thank you. - SSJ ☎ 06:45, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Cheers!
Thanks for the change you made on Template:Euro coins (collectors edition) it looks much better.Kevin hipwell (talk) 15:35, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

European anthem
Hi there,

Just wondering if the removal of the image of the coin with the first verse of the European anthem was intentional or by mistake. The reasons you put in the comment of the removal does not seem to apply to the coin. If on purpose, can I know why? As you see the final article is lacking lots of images and a small comment of a commemorative coin in the see also section, I thought it does not hurt, on the contrary ... but it is my opinion.

Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 22:53, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think the 'See also' section is the ideal place in the article, but I reinserted the coin. Sorry. - SSJ ☎ 08:20, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * If you think it should be somewhere else in the article, or should be removed completely, just let me know, I am very open to ideas. Thanks for the quick action! Miguel.mateo (talk) 09:29, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Treaty of Lisbon ratification.svg
Hello. Poland should be marked on this map as "not ratified". In Polish law system treaties are ratified by the President with the permission of the Parliament. The parliament has already granted the permission for ratification, but the President has not ratified the treaty yet (due to political games with the Prime Minister). Micga (talk) 20:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks. - SSJ ☎ 20:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * As has since been noted at the image's page, we usually use the convention to consider it ratified once the parliamentary chambers have done so. — Nightstallion 21:47, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Update to map
Hi! Please see Image talk:Further European Union enlargement.svg. Thanks! — Nightstallion 17:07, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks! Not that I won't do it, but are other editors using Inkscape? People seem to shy away from editing SVG images. - SSJ ☎ 17:26, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — Nightstallion 21:46, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Lisbon
So, what do you think happens now? — Nightstallion 21:46, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * What's certain is that everyone knows that renegotiation of Lisbon is meaningless and that 26 will ratify it by the end of 2008 (the Czech president will probably be persuaded). The European Council will then make the irish government put the same Lisbon, with some extra clarifying declarations, to a new referendum.


 * If the Lisbon II referendum fails, time would probably ensure that the Conservatives have taken over in London. They will perhaps do as they've said, and demand renegotiation. Federalist leaders will not accept that, and a the UK and Ireland are in some way legally forced out of the integration mainstream. Merkel, Juncker and Sarkozy will push ahead, ratify a constitutional treaty, rename the EU "Federation of Europe", and create a foreign minister and a common defence. Later, Ireland will come to its senses and rejoin. By that time, perhaps NI and Scotland are independent and willing to accede. Apart from the last bit of science fiction, I guess that's about how dramatic a double 'no' can get. Because now, parliamentary ratification is the only thing that is ever going to be used, and continental leaders are undoubtedly eager to accelerate the integration freely in parliaments.


 * But seriously, I am afraid of what the UK Conservative party could do. House of Lords will on 19 June vote in favour of Lisbon, and the UK "instruments of ratification" will be deposited in Rome. After that, can a new government demand renegotiation? - SSJ ☎ 22:50, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Lisbon Treaty Ratification map
I have edited to reflect Ireland's rejection of the Treaty. However, I noticed that you reverted the changes to the Lisbon Treaty article, stating that "rejected goes under not ratified".

Is there any reason why you do not want to show which countries have rejected the Treaty? Does it not make the map less informative by lumping 'rejected' under 'not ratified'? Please refer to the BBC's EU constitution: Where member states stand.

You should also note that Ireland's rejection of the Treaty is shown in the maps in the following wiki articles: Spanish, French, Irish, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese.

I look forward to your response.

Regards, Wiki01916 (talk) 23:25, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh i hadn't refreshed the image in my browser. Ireland's 'no' doesn't have any legal effect. To the Government of Italy, which deposits the incoming "instruments of ratification" from the EU member states, Ireland's status is still "has not ratified". This is very clear. I'm not trying to undermine anything. And the table speaks for itself. To place Ireland under "rejected" is, realistically speaking, just for now, and not a de facto status for all eternity. There is no differentiation between "rejected" and "not ratified" in the nature of international treaties. The Lisbon treaty says on page 51 of its PDF that "If one or more Member States have encountered difficulties in proceeding with ratification, the matter shall be referred to the European Council". Not "if the national ratification is rejected". - SSJ ☎ 23:33, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Understood. When, in your view, do you think the government of Italy will realise the Irish rejection of the Treaty? And would you want to change the ratification map to reflect the final decision? Wiki01916 (talk) 23:55, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The "legal mind" of the Italian depositary will never know what the word 'rejected' means. If all member states except Ireland ratify, I guess the map will be a good enough indicator of what's status quo. - regards, SSJ ☎ 00:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You're saying that you would not expect Ireland EVER to be Red in the map. So you'd ignore the outright rejection of the treaty from one country because the governments of all other States may pass it? It's not a very good argument. If you're not willing to show Ireland as a State that has outright rejected the treaty, I will have no other option but to fight this and to make sure the Irish State is shown in red. Regards. Wiki01916 (talk) 01:54, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * No, I am saying that both in real world and in legal terms, the only effect of ireland's domestic rejection is that Ireland stays in the "not ratified" category, in line with the nature of international treaties. Only two categories matter; national ratification instruments are either deposited in Rome, or they are not. If Ireland becomes the only country marked with the colour of "not ratified", it would be clear enough to readers, wouldn't it? I wouldn't mind if you then would like to change the colour to red. - SSJ ☎ 02:01, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * No, it wouldn't be clear to readers. The readers would prefer to know which States have rejected the treaty. I really don't understand why you are against this. The major papers here in Spain have printed maps with Ireland as red, same as the some of the papers in Ireland and France. You wish to mislead the reader, giving them the idea that all is peachy when it is not. Ireland rejected the treaty outright, regardless of what the 'Italian Government need to say'. Please may I refer you to the other Wiki articles: French, Irish, Italian, Norwegian,Portuguese.


 * What ultimately matters is whether a national ratification is deposited or not, not which advice a national electorate has given their respective leader. Given the table with all results is right next to the map (something the Spanish newspapers probably didn't have in these articles), it will not be misleading to use the two correct legal categories of international treaty ratification for the map. That is legitimate. - SSJ ☎ 02:28, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Seriously man, do you not realise the fact that the Irish people voted NO, that this Treaty cannot be applied to the constitution of Ireland? Whatever the Italians say, this Treaty has been rejected by the Irish people, I know you find this difficult to believe - so do I, but you have to respect the democratic voice from the Irish people.


 * Lisbon Treaty has been REJECTED OUTRIGHT by the Irish people, therefore, Ireland should be listed as RED by rejecting the treaty.


 * Honestly, do you not read European newspapers? They have EU maps with Ireland marked in the bloodiest Red you could imagine,.


 * Why don't you just step down from you 'Italains have to approve' and just listen to what the Irish have said. The Lisbon Treaty has been REFUSED REFUSED REFUSED in Ireland, therfore RED in the map. Wiki01916 (talk) 02:55, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You should read what I've written here, give serious responses and not write capitalised. Just understand that I am arguing for using two legitimate categories that are in line with the principle of ratification deposition (which is the function that is written into the treaty itself). You have clearly not understood what I said about Italy. The Italian Government happens to be the depositaty used in all ratification processes for EU treaties. The thing that decides whether the Lisbon Treaty comes into force, is whether all national "instruments of ratifications" are sent to Rome. If you want three categories, you must at least rename "not ratified", because "rejected" implies just that. - SSJ ☎ 03:19, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Big news
BIG news: The SPÖ states that in the future, it wants referendums on EU treaties. — Nightstallion 15:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Lets see what happens. Isnt Austria fairly euroskepic right now? I think EU-wide refendums will replace national veto-referndums sooner or later. Probably before the next treaty is set to be ratified, and that might be far into the future. - SSJ ☎ 20:30, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * wouldn't a treaty have to be passed before they could change from a veto to an EU-wide referendum.Kevin hipwell (talk) 23:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think putting things from unanimity to QMV in many cases only requires unanimous approval in the European Council under the Lisbon Treaty. Hope you're right, SSJ... — Nightstallion 18:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Brussels metro
Hi, how's it going? I was wondering, as you have been doing a lot on Brussels, if you had any plans for diagrams/clickable maps regarding the Brussels metro. I'm trying to create pages for all the stations but overall navigation is a bit chaotic (mainly this page: List of Brussels metro and premetro stations) and am wondering how best to organise it (bearing in mind it will all change in February). Thanks.- J Logan t: 18:13, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi! I'm on holiday on Crete, but of course I'll check out equivalent articles for other cities once I'm home again and see what I can do. Did you take any photos when you were in Brussels this spring? When I visited this internetcafe a few days ago, I was surprised to see that the Flag of Europe article had been blatantly renamed and frozen by an admin. We have to fix that. - SSJ ☎ 15:23, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * We'll always have those problems with the flag articles, and regarding the photos, I'm afraid I didn't manage to get much and am having technical problems regarding the photos I do have. But I'll get that sorted soon and I'll head back to Brussels at some point too. Thanks for looking into the Brussels issue, and enjoy your holiday!- J Logan t: 23:03, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've begun with a clickable map here. - SSJ ☎ 18:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * That's great, thanks. I'll start adding the stations. I think French and Dutch is probably best as the Flemish will be complaining if we only use English and French. Width is okay for a full map diagram. Though aside from this, have you see any better way of presenting the stations on their pages for navigation use (i.e. instead of the lists in the nav boxes as current) as I feel it could be better but I don't have any ideas. If i manage to get more data on the lines I can create maps for each line like most LUL have but that is just for the line page.- J Logan t: 19:24, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Not sure how to fit the names into the central segment. Perhaps a non-geographical map might be best? Or is it possible to fit it in some how, can we write vertically?- J Logan t: 20:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * We could have two different versions; one french and one dutch, and then make it optional which to view in the article ("[show]" option). E.g. the route illustration for eurostar is [show]/[hide]. - SSJ ☎ 22:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Aye, that would work, might still be a bit tight in the middle but worth a try. I'll get on it soon.- J Logan t: 08:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Lisbon Treaty, Poland will not sign.
Lech Kaczynski has stated that he will not sign the Lisbon Treaty. http://www.dziennik.pl/polityka/article200983/Prezydent_Traktat_jest_martwy_Nie_podpisze_go.html

If the presidential ratification act isn't going to happen, what should be written there if not Denied? Looking forward to your reply. 213.112.137.176 (talk) 14:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * He won't sign the treaty before Ireland knows what to do. - SSJ ☎ 16:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Not true. He has said: "The treaty is dead [with the Irish vote], I will not sign it". If you don't come up with anything better than that I will revert your edit. 213.112.137.176 (talk) 19:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * "Not granted" is not a legal status, just an assumed current status based on one quote. - SSJ ☎ 22:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Template:Members of the European Union (EU)
It's high-risk even though it wasn't vandalized; similar templates were vandalized at the time I protected it, and I believe this one would be as well, because it's used on many high-profile pages (namely, the countries of the EU). Ral315 (talk) 03:09, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * What about Template:G8 nations and all the other ones? Protection is not the standard when it comes to this type of templates (no matter "profile", and it works. Protection is just disruptive for now. Protecting Template:Members of the European Union (EU) from anonymous users would be much better and more constructive. - SSJ ☎ 09:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Treaty of Lisbon ratification.svg
Hi Ssolbergj, why is there a difference between Poland (Cyan) and Germany (Teal Blue)? Both countries haven't ratified the treaty yet. --Kolja21 (talk) 10:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, I'll change it. Yes I guess the presidential signing is part of the ratification process. - SSJ ☎ 11:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Request for consensus
A question has arisen concerning the name of the article "Anthem of Europe". A discussion has opened up in Talk:Anthem of Europe. Your input is requested there. This is a neutrally worded notification sent to a small number of editors informed by a previous discussion of a similar nature about the article "Flag of Europe" and is intended to improve rather than to influence the discussion. This notification falls under the "friendly notice" clause of WP:CANVASS. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks - SSJ ☎ 05:54, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Brussels metro map
Just finished adding the names, but I can't seem to put it onto a page, all the text below it disappears.- J Logan t: 13:44, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it's fixed now. It had too few  s. - SSJ ☎ 13:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and thanks for putting it together, great work as always.- J Logan t: 15:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * ^_^ - SSJ ☎ 16:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Greater Brussels
Thanks for your addition on the B&EU page, though you seem to have misunderstood the extent of the expansion. If you look at the cited material, it does not see Brussels taking in the entire province, only those municipalities directly bordering Brussels which fall within those provinces. It would be a large area, but not as big as the map you've created. I've adjusted the articles text a bit, if it is still misleading please tell me.- J Logan t: 20:22, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah ok. Do you think changing the map caption is enough? We don't know how many municipalities could merge into Brussels, so I reckon highlighting all of both Brabants seems alright. - SSJ ☎ 20:33, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Partly, it fixes the discrepancy however I feel it doubtful it would include the whole of the two provinces hence it may be pointless at best I'm afraid. What I'd suggest is just showing a map of the BHV electoral district and the other surrounding municipalities on both side of the border. Might that work for you?- J Logan t: 16:45, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Correct me if I'm wrong; but the sources don't mention the BHV, so wouldn't this just be a confusing compromise? I'm not sure. Anyway, I haven't got vector images of non-Brussels municipalities. - SSJ ☎ 23:48, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I mention BHV as that covers areas of French speaking communities and hence be communes likely to vote to join Brussels. Though granted it is not exact. I'll leave what to do up to you, the text is clarified which is the important thing.- J Logan t: 10:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yoyr removal of the remarks of "sale Flamand" stinks to censorship. According to your attitude it would have been forbidden to write about the discrimination of Jews in Germany of the thirties or about the discrimination of Afro-Americans in the United States in the sixties. Of course, this discrimination is of another order, but essential to understanding the city. Dutch speaking peeolpe are fleeing the city and Dutch speaking people who work there refuse to live there. The hate terms exist over more than a century and are wellknown among Dutch speaking people. French speaking people ignore to a large extent this situation. And people speaking another language are unable to read about it and receive completely one-sided information. Even an organisation as Amnesty International mentions this racism from French speaking people, I cited that organisation. This situation of discrimination is nowadays splitting the country and is a serious hinder to expand the city. Flemish people feel it as a kind of ethnic cleansing. So, in my opinion your removal is very close to (linguistic) racism.Robvhoorn (talk) 10:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No matter how evil Hitler was, his wikipedia article would never say that "he was a bad man". Writing neutral facts is the way to do it on Wikipedia. You have no reason to be angry; the section you wrote would have been removed by other eitors if I didn't. You should read WP:NPOV, and rewrite your section. - SSJ ☎ 11:13, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

New article needed
I think we'll soon need an article on the enhanced co-operation procedure, as it seems it may come into effect for the first time rather soon, compare this article on divorce rules in the EU... — Nightstallion 07:48, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

European Quarter
Oh SSJ I love you! Looks great, and yes there is a map: - As you can see, might be a bit much to mark them all. Perhaps if you just shade the presence of EU buildings rather than label them all? Then again, hard to know how up to date that map is, they are going to do extensive rebuilding.- J Logan t: 12:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC) ? - SSJ ☎ 00:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes labelling all of them is probably impossibe. An yes, it's hard to find up to date maps in english. The google aerial photos could be from 2005. - SSJ ☎ 12:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Bingo, the Commission's own maps: .- J Logan t: 13:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice! I'll see if I can improve the map I've uploaded. - SSJ ☎ 13:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I like the changes, good work. I'm going to attack that article properly soon and improve it with a book I got in Brussels but haven't got round to reading through yet. On a separate point, sorry to load another issue onto you but do you know how to force wrap text? I was wanting to do it to the treaties page's table (the drop down boxes) and I was just trying on the flag's common page (tried making it hide/show boxes but with no luck. Is there some code for wrapping I don't know about? Thanks.- J Logan t: 00:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * That's for a specific place though, I'm thinking of it wrapping according to window size, not everyone is on the same resolution.- J Logan t: 09:33, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * style="padding:10px" or style="padding-right:10px" `- SSJ ☎ 10:17, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Capitalization with city names
Hello SSJ- Please see my post here: Talk:Brussels -Eric talk 13:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Région Wallonne logo.svg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Région Wallonne logo.svg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Logos in newspaper articles
Hi, I noticed you undid my removal of the logo from a newspaper article. I attempted to discuss the matter centrally back in May at Template talk:Infobox Newspaper but nobody was interested. Perhaps you could raise your reasons for wishing to keep the logos there; my own view is that they are ugly, unencyclopedic and an abuse of our nonfree image guidelines, but if you can get a consensus that goes against this view I will certainly abide by it. Best wishes, --John (talk) 19:31, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:The Independent.svg)
Thanks for uploading Image:The Independent.svg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:03, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Municipalities of the Brussels-Capital Region
Thanks for helping to expand the above article with me. I personally find the white text for the numbers in the map to be hard to read. Could you perhaps change them to black or the original blue? Malinaccier (talk) 22:19, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. And also, the reflabels that you removed because they are "dead" work for me.  It may be a problem with the browser you are using, and after comments made at the FLC, I believe they should be included. Malinaccier (talk) 22:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay I can fix it. - SSJ ☎ 22:31, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Map for the article on the latest conflict in South Ossetia
I am sorry if somebody else has brought it up already, as I do admit to being somewhat lazy to looking through your talk page. At any rate, the map you did for the article in question is well done, however you forgot the northern bit of North Ossetia around the city of Mozdok. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:North_ossetia_map.png Here goes da map of North Ossetia. So, if you could just correct it, would be great for cartographic veracity :) Thank you in advance! Russoswiss (talk) 01:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. No problem. - SSJ ☎ 01:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I just came here to request the exact same thing! Congratulations on such a nice looking map. I had seen the old map a while ago (before this current trouble pushed the page into prominence) and it was ugly. This is a great improvement. However, you say that the change is "done" but I do not see North Ossetia on the map - at least, not on the map being used in the article. Perhaps you made it but used a different filename (rather than update the existing one). Could you please check that the current map (with north ossetia) is the one being used. One more thing, are you aware of the "Greenspun illustration project". Check it out on PGIP if you're not. You should be involved in that - there's money to be made! Witty Lama 08:11, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I fixed N. Ossetia and uploaded a new version (same name). However, later I came to tha conlclusion that N. Ossetia has very little to do with the conflict and would just confuse the already intricate situation the map is illustrating. So I removed it. - SSJ ☎ 15:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

A new task force under wikiproject Europe
Hello,

I've noticed that you are active in the area of Europe. I just wanted to let you know that a European Space Agency task force has been set up to improve the presently very poor condition of articles about ESA and related topics. If you are interested, please join the task force here. We sure could use your help. Thanks.U5K0 (talk) 19:31, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I already have, thank you. - SSJ ☎ 19:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. :|U5K0 (talk) 19:42, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem :) - SSJ ☎ 19:43, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Easy to get featured list
Featured list is something weird to me, its just a list. Personally, if you would just rename it and that's it, then it is a list already regardless of title - I prefer the current title. But, although it is easy to get, I think it would restrict the article. Nothing has happened so far but I think an important potential development would be the addition of info on benefits and drawbacks of membership, representation, change in public perception and legitimacy (e.g. no early referenda, now essential due to the new demands upon a state) and a section on enlargement (i.e. a summary with a main link to the page). That would make the article really useful and important, featured list is a bit of window dressing. If someone else helps out in getting the data together, I can work on such sections soon. I'll have to see if my real work lets up.- J.Logan`t : 18:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You know I'm rather happy with the enlargement section on the MS page. What do you think? Decent summery? Its okay to miss out the names isn't it as we have the large list up to for details like that, but with this we have, in one fully referenced section, details on enlargements, rejections, criteria, withdrawals and the future to give a rounded picture of it. Or am I just getting giddy and have missed something important?
 * But anyway, remaining sections to be started I think are relationship between states (I remember something reading that they were the most institutionalised in the world because of the EU, then there is the peace thing) and benefits. Now I'm not sure how to approach the latter without it coming out very POV. It might be safe to leave that off so we don't get POV wars but do you think that undermines the article's coverage?- J.Logan`t : 23:06, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Interesting, though we may stray into something just detailing arguments for the EU. I was thinking "reasons for a country joining the EU" but that is very individual and pov (we'd just end up with a list of party lines). So perhaps on your point of poor countries, it could be "affects of membership"? But we'd still be open to pov dumping. So perhaps "economic impact of membership"? That might be sufficiently limited - but from what we still need decent sources and to play it as even handed as possible. What do you think of that title though. Works?- <font size="1" style="font-family:Zapfino, sans-serif">J.Logan`t : 10:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Aye, point taken. Lets go with that, it just a case of finding sources then. I'll do some research later but it may take some time, I am tempted to start writing off the top of my head like I did with enlargement and representation but it might be risky with these sections so it might be best to wait till we at least have a few core sources.- <font size="1" style="font-family:Zapfino, sans-serif">J.Logan`t : 12:31, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Lux Sq
"the block of buildings between Rue d’Arlon and Rue de Trêves would be removed, creating a broad boulevard-like extension of Luxembourg Square" - woh, hold on there. The article mentions a new square between these two roads. Now this could be a small square somewhere to the north of these (it was just talking about the rue de la loi) roads. I think it is a bit much to say the whole block is being taken down to have one huge long square. Do you have another source I haven't seen?- <font size="1" style="font-family:Zapfino, sans-serif">J.Logan`t : 00:53, 23 August 2008 (UTC)