User talk:XJeanLuc

Speedy deletion of Krcevac
A tag has been placed on Krcevac requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of 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.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:43, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I converted it into a redirect to Krćevac. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Krćevac
Hi. The article is much improved now, but you'll need to tidy up the remaining Serbian (first sentence in the 'demographics' section, and English descriptions of the references). There may be small changes made in terms of layout, spelling etc., but nothign major to worry about :-) CultureDrone (talk) 15:03, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * As regards deleting the Krcevac article, what you should use is a redirect, which will automatically take you to the Krćevac article - remember, this is the English wikipedia, so very few people use accents when typing - it's therefore more likely that they'd type "Krcevac". However, having said that, Orangemike has created the redirect for you, so typing either will take you to the same article. CultureDrone (talk) 15:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi. I've made a few more minor changes to the article - you may want to check them over. :-) CultureDrone (talk) 12:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Civil
Might want to watch your WP:CIVIL....Your anger may be justified, but the attitude is not. Cheers.  Im per a t § r (Talk) 14:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't worry too much; we all have those days ;) Cheers.  Im per a t § r (Talk) 18:07, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

American ancestry
I think a couple of things play a role in the American ancestry phenomenon. The first thing is education. The counties which have majority American ancestry are mostly rural, poorer, and less educated. Secondly I think the lack of identity Scots-Irish people have plays another role. Most of the people who claim American ancestry are actually Scots-Irish, as the Scots-Irish article clearly states. Scots-Ireland isn't a nation with its own culture and customs. They're people from Ulster who moved from Scotland, and obviously these people didn't settle in Ireland well or else they would've stayed instead of coming to America. On the Redneck article one of the possible explanations for the origin of the term is that actually started as a description for Scots-Irish Presbyterians back in the old country and the immigrants brought the term over with them.

Why do over 36 million Americans, as the second largest ethnic group behind German Americans, claim Irish ancestry then? I think it's because the Irish Irish are unique from the rest of the British Isles. They have their own independent nation and more importantly their own religion (Catholicism). But then again some estimate that there's an equal amount, perhaps more, people of Scots-Irish ancestry in America than there are of people of Irish ancestry. Identity is the key. The Irish have a strong, unique identity, while the Scots-Irish are suffering from an identity crisis. Just for the record, my mom's side of the family are Irish Catholic from Kansas and New York who fought for the Union in the Civil War while my dad's side are Southern and their ancestry is a mixture of all the British nations and they mostly fought for the Confederacy. Only in the USA.

I think a lot of people who are of English, Scottish, Welsh, or Scots-Irish ancestry think of themselves as the first civilized Americans. They may think (probably erroneously) that their ancestors were actually here during the time of the Thirteen Colonies and after the Revolution they became the first Americans as we know them, so therefore they (modern day Scots-Irish, English, Scottish, Welsh heritage people) claim American ancestry. But then why do counties up in New England have majority English ancestry? I think we come back to the regional education discrepancies here. --Tocino 18:40, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Tribes of Old Montenegro et al. move discussion
You have previously participated in discussions about the title of the article now called Tribes of Old Montenegro, Brda, Old Herzegovina and Primorje. There is currently a formal move request discussion of the issue here if you are interested in participating. —  AjaxSmack  21:39, 31 May 2016 (UTC)