Misplaced Pages

User talk:Mountolive: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:39, 16 February 2007 editProvocateur (talk | contribs)3,836 edits →Editing Spain← Previous edit Revision as of 02:53, 16 February 2007 edit undoProvocateur (talk | contribs)3,836 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 158: Line 158:


Hi guys, you may want to move discussion to the relative talk page, not in this one. Thanks! ] 08:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC) Hi guys, you may want to move discussion to the relative talk page, not in this one. Thanks! ] 08:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

== Editing Spain ==
I'm an Australian citizen - born here - a Melbournian (BEST CITY IN OZ!) but I'm also of solidly Galician descent - (I've been mistaken by English for an Englishman and Italians (my tan) for an Italian). My Spanish, sadly, is mediocre, but improving. Actually my original historical interest was not Spain, but China & Europe generally, esp France - but when I stumbled onto the Spanish related pages here I was shocked - I've made many, many errors - and have been learning along the way - correcting myself, using corrections and specific info added by others and using my feel for wider history to guide me as I go along. Most of my stuff is broad brush. I hoped to spur others, even if only to correct or qualify my statments - hence my username. (By the way I only got on to check for your replies & have made two article changes (Sp & Sp Emp) I long intended - pls forgive me.) Now, I better be off to my own Garden of Gethsemane... Cheers

Revision as of 02:53, 16 February 2007

Welcome!

Hello, Mountolive, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  AdamBiswanger1 05:48, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

ETA

Hi Jmabel.

Well, I do hope your optimistic view on the ending of ETA comes to fruition, however, let me insist in the "to date" part when we are talking of the last of the assassinations, since actually we are only in a "ceasefire", like there were others in the past which suddenly ended when new terrorist actions (killings) were carried by the band. I strongly feel like, until there is no "official" statement from ETA that they give up violence, the "to date" part should be there and this "official" statement is, as for now, just a hope.

Anyway, feel free if you want to revert your own change yourself: I don't want to start one of those stupid fights when I change it, you change it, I change it again....it's up to you if you want to consider to my opinion or not.

On the other side, I would sincerely appreciate if you know the English term for "draconian" in this regard. I mean, which English term would suit well the ETA demands of not releasing and not killing (as they eventually did) Miguel Ángel Blanco unless all ETA inmates were brought to jails within the Basque Country in a matter of two days. The only term trying to describe these demands I know is "draconian", therefore I'd appreciate it if you knew the correct one and post it by yourself (same reason as above for not doing it myself). Another solution would be simply explaining these unreasonable demands which I guess they speak by themselves, without needing further adjectivation.

Thanks.

Mountolive

Feel free to restore "to date". I'm not going to put it there, but I won't revert it again if you insist.
I don't have a specific suggestion for what to say rather than "draconian". Maybe "extreme" or "drastic"? But "draconian" is pretty specific. Its eponym is the legal code of Draco. - Jmabel | Talk 06:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
No problem at all. I have copyedited your last edit, changed haven't to have not, band in English is a grupo musical, etc. The other thing is that regarding the negotiation talks, I'm not sure whether they could be considered stalled or over when as far as I know they have never been formally announced till a couple of weeks ago? (Everyone knows that there must surely have been some talks but this has never been made totally clear). Your thoughts? Asterion 21:49, 27 September 2006 (UTC) PS: By the way, I agree with your removal of the reference, we needed one in Spanish. I have added a few, feel free to edit them.

Editing

As Adam Biswanger and the edition pages say you can sign your messages in talk pages by typing four ~ characters. There is also a button depicting some scribbles above the text box that does the same.

To see changes in a page, click the page history link of that page, and click the start and the end dates which you want to compare.

You may see in the page histories one-line descriptions of the changes. You can add them when you do your editions by typing on the Edit Summary text field.

You can add several templates to pages with shorthand. The non-neutrality one is added by typing {{NPOV}} if I remember it well. But, in the Talk page, you should provide a detailed description of your issues with the current state of the page. Otherwise, there can not be a meaningful discussion, unless those issues are evident.

Before, read the talk page (also labelled as "Discussion") corresponding to the page you are concerned about. The issues you have may have already been discussed.

--Error 02:23, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Re Isla Perejil

Hi o hola Mountolive. Thanks for your message. I agree w/ much of what you commented on my talk p. However, i don't understand what you meant by ...in contrast with the Moroccan to say the least loose action in this regard to date.... It looks a POV but again i agree w/ you that we can formulate that in a better way.

By the way, are you Spanish? Cheers. -- Szvest 16:34, 13 September 2006 (UTC) User:FayssalF/Sign

Hans Van Themsche

I reverted your edit at Hans Van Themsche, for a number of reasons.

  • the heading you changed was created after a long -and heated- debate on the article's talk page. We're risking to reopen the debate, disrupting Misplaced Pages
  • I believe the heading accurately describes the content of its section
  • Your Point of view ("Vlaams Belang may share responsability as a legal organization which can be targeted if needed, but you just can't make responsible a blurring mass of people -its voters- (unless you are biased)") is one of the POV's that is discussed in the section. Maybe it should be expanded. The discussion about it might be reflected better in the article.

-- ➌  LucVerhelst  19:09, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for apologizing with regard to inserting a comment. Indeed it may be considered impolite, and furthermore it disrupts talk pages in a way that makes it sometimes hard for other talkers and confuses other readers who come later to the talk page. There is a template {{talkheader}} intended for the top of a talk page but it is too large to show it on most talk pages; I would only use it if many people would keep inserting remarks or answers inside another user's comment, or comments/answers between other comments, or at top of the comments. The place for a comment is always at the bottom of the relevant section (or if there is no sufficiently relevant section, an entirely new section at the bottom of the talk page). If someone beats you to it, simply refer to the earlier comment like for instance "About User:X's comment of date/time, ..." or "As at date/time, User:X pointed out in the topic paragraph, ..." etc. — Something like this is somewhere in the guidelines... ;-) — SomeHuman 8 Oct2006 02:41 (UTC)

RE: Crown of Aragón

Thanks for commenting on my talk page. While I don't doubt the factual accuracy of the information you introduced, placing it in the introduction attaches a hugely disproportionate importance to what are really minor political distinctions (that's what I meant by "politicizing"—if it matters mostly to (say) Catalan nationalists, then describing their concerns in great detail in the introduction promotes their POV unfairly). Also, I reverted because some of your additions seemed redundant with what is written under "History," i.e.:

This union was made while respecting the existing institutions of both places. This situation was mostly maintained until the abolition of the Crown of Aragon early in the 18th century.
However, Castile and the Crown of Aragon remained different states, each keeping its own institutions and laws. The Crown of Aragon was abolished during the War of the Spanish Succession (1702–1713) by the Decretos de Nueva Planta, and all its lands were incorporated, as provinces, into Spanish administration.

If my revert was too drastic, I apologize. I actually encourage you to write on this topic in as much detail you like, but instead of lengthening the introduction, could you write under "History" or even a new section created for the purpose? Also, the article really should keep the title "Aragonese Empire" as this is common nomenclature in English-language material, questions of accuracy aside. Let me know if there are any more problems. Albrecht 04:08, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Re Mauritania

Hola Mountolive. Gracias por la rectificacíon. Removí Egipto y Jordania. Saludos. -- Szvest 23:21, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Spain's demographics and Vinalopó river

Hello Mountolive! Thanks you for your remarks. I have given the references that you asked me in the articles of Spain and Demographics of Spain. The demographics in Spain are followed by the "Instituto Nacional de Estadística" (Nacional Statistics Institute, in english), whose webpage is . You can find there all the informations about population by region/province, foreign population, population by sex or age, historical data... If you are keen on this subject, I have been working lately on the spanish Misplaced Pages in the article es:Inmigración en España, a very interesting topic to my mind.

I have also added two pictures in the article of Vinalopó river. Do you live nearby Alicante? Greetings, --Rodriguillo 15:44, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello! For the comarcas, "Valles del Vinalopó" is a generic name that includes the region crossed by the Vinalopó river, and it includes more or less the three comarcas of Alto Vinalopó, Vinalopó Medio and Bajo Vinalopó. In fact, comarcas in this part of Spain haven't been traditionally very well defined (only in some cases, like the Vega Baja del Segura), and, although the regional government tried to do a systematic classification (but with not any administrative consequence), the item is not very clear.
Spain has not any more the second sub replacement fertility rate in the world, although I heard something like that some years ago, so it's very likely it was the case in some year of the nineties. Fertility rate has slightly increased these last years because of the highest fertility rate of the immigrant population. In 2004 the natural growth rate was of 1,94‰, but it's true that in 1998 (when it took the smallest rate) it was just of 0,12‰ . Anyway, I don't know where we can find the source for this comparation: maybe in some newspaper, or in an UN classification. Anyway, I agree with you that citations are necessary: I am going to try to give sources to the other statements in the article of Demographics of Spain.
Yours sincerely, --Rodriguillo 00:59, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Spain

Hi Mountolive, the {{sprotected}} template appeared in the article but it was not semi-protected. Only administrators can protect or unprotect a page, adding this template to an article does not protect it. Since the presence of the template was invalid I removed it. If you wish to request that the page be protected, you can make a request at WP:RFP. However, in this case it has only been vandalized about 5 times in the last day, so I doubt an administrator would choose to protect it. Personally, I don't request protection for an article until it has been vandalized about 12 times in a day. I hope this information is helpful, if you have any further questions please don't hesitate to ask. Regards, Accurizer 17:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Movement for unification of Romania and Moldova

No problem with your edit. I am glad that you felt that I could help out. - Mauco 01:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Spanish Gibraltarians

Hi Mountolive, I would really appreciate your vote and opinion on the undeletion process of "Spanish Gibraltarians". A copy of the article can be found on my talk page. I personally feel it was unfairly deleted. Here is a link to the undeletion process.http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_November_16#Spanish_Gibraltarians

Thanks--Burgas00 17:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Cabo de Gata

I'm not sure it is, but if you want to put it back in, I'd suggest in the body rather than the lead, and drop the "allegedly" - it can either be verified or not. Thanks for the monk seal spot - do you have a verifiable date for the last sighting? Yomangani 03:19, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I thought that was clear from the reference to the depth and the marine life, "underwater" sounds to me like just underwater rather than the whole zone, but that might be just me. Yomangani 03:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
I found a ref for "the driest place in Europe" so I put it back in. Yomangani 03:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
I also found a "official" date from the Ministerio de Medio Ambiente for the last seals, so I've added that. Cheers, Yomangani 09:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Carxe

Well, of course! If you change the template, you change it everywhere. That's the whole point of a template. For now, I'll just revert you, then I'll try to do it right. - Jmabel | Talk 20:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe Template:Catalan language should be about right. In addition to what you had, I added "spoken in": after all, that is the exact criterion for the articles where you were talking about using it.

Yes, you can customize templates, per page, that is exactly what template parser functions are about. See m:ParserFunctions if you want a lesson; it's not easy stuff, though, I think that only a few hundred of us have learned to do this and only about 20-30 (and I'm not one of those) have really mastered them. - Jmabel | Talk 21:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

ETA, again

I replied on my talk page. The short of it is, I doubt you have a case that the arbitrators would take, and can't see why you would want them involved in this; mediation, though, might make sense. - Jmabel | Talk 05:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Neither Error nor I are officially mediators, and I don't know how much time I have to give this (and I bet similar remarks apply for him), but if Error will also participate (and, of course, if Sugaar is also willing) then, sure, I'm willing to see if we can help work it out. It's worth a try, and we can always bring in someone from the "mediation cabal" later if it doesn't. - Jmabel | Talk 05:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Still waiting to hear from you at Talk:ETA#Article mediation. - Jmabel | Talk 01:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Si me pregunta en un bar, le diría lo que pienso sobre la ETA, que no son mas que una banda de asesinos que no han sabido adaptarse al paso de los tiempos, pero este no es el lenguaje adecuado para la wikipedia. --Asterion 08:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
El lenguaje es correcto: creo que fue usted mismo el que le hizo saber Squeakbox que citar hechos tipo "ETA está incluida en las listas de organizaciones terroristas de X, Y y Z" es perfectamente adecuado a wikipedia.
Lo que fastidia es que, partiendo de esta directriz (un poco inspirada en el perro del hortelano, que ni come ni deja comer, pero eso es otra historia) ya vengan a sacar como consecuencia que, bueno, en realidad, tampoco es politicamente correcto citar eso en la información básica de ETA....entonces ¿qué decimos sobre ETA en su definición? ¿sólo que quiere la independencia del País Vasco y dejamos lo de su caracter terrorista para aquél que tenga ganas de leerse un artículo de cuatro páginas y encuentre la sección donde pone eso? ¿es eso dar una información veraz y sin tergiversar como wikipedia manda?
En fin, insisto en que la historia no va con usted: al menos usted trajo de vuelta esa referencia que Squeakbox había borrado, pero creo que mis razones son bastante claras y, además, no se salen del wikiguión.
Un saludo. Mountolive 02:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Spanish Morocco and Paul Bowles

I was fixing the other version according to the MoS. Your final version can be put in perenthesis as it directs you to the relevent section. It's fine now. -- Szvest - 20:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

How can we make it so that Paul Bowles directs us directly to its Tangiers times? I'm trying but it keeps taking it to the whole article, which is fine, but the other way would be nicer...
Muy extraño! Ahora funciona. A veces pasan cosas extrañas. Puedes verificar ahora de tu parte? -- Szvest - 20:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Sí, ahora sí...tienes razón, a veces pasan cosas muy raras. Gracias. :)
No cambie nada pero funciono! lol :)
Szvest, I don't think " in a time when the kingdom of Morocco was still being splitted between multiple dynasties and kingdoms" sounds right. You can not have something (the kingdom of Morocco) existing if is split "in multiple dynasties and kingdoms". I still think that "did not exist" is more accurate...what do you think?
...in a time when the kingdom of Morocco did not encompass the Rif area. sounds correct though it encompased the Rif area some times in history before. The case is a bit more complicated than that in terms of the involvment of other parties as the Nasrid dynasty, the Kingdom of Fez and the conflict between the Moroccans and the Portuguese. Anyway, i'll say the above phrasing is accurate although a bit simplistic. In brief, i agree we keep it that way and not complicate it further as we already have other articles where the idea could be devolopped further. Happy editing. -- Szvest - 16:08, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


Gagauzia

Hi. You have added the follwoing sentence to the article Gagauzia: In other words, in the event -and only in that event- that Moldova decided to join Romania, the Gagauzians would be entitled to decide whether to remain or not a part of the new state by means of a self determination referendum. As far as I know, from purely juridical point of view, if Moldova would decide to become part of Australia, the same stipulation applies. So, "in the event and only in that event" is not legal correct. I suggest to put your sentence as a footnote, and without and only in that event. Your oppinion? :Dc76 16:32, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, the possibility of Moldova joining Australia is remote, literally speaking. Moldova only could possibly decide to join Romania or Ukraine and common sense dictates that the latter is not a real possibility. Anyway, I'll amend this sentence for the sake of legal sticklers :P Mountolive 18:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Catalan references

Dear Mountolive, I don't think so much severe the name controversy (despite the different possibilities should be respected), since I'm personally of the opinion «El nom no fa la cosa», as the continuous denial of Catalan references (sometimes even surrealistic), now impulsed by Maurice27, which you would seem to be supporting in Valencian article. Salut! Toniher 00:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

«El nom no fa la cosa»??? You gotta be kiding! Just like in the Rosselló/Roussillon pages, right?... Toniher says white here, and black there... Just hilarious! Don't worry, I'll use this «El nom no fa la cosa» each time you erase other's edits. Maurice27 01:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Of course, names matter, because they often confer an associated view associated, so that's the polemic we have with Valencian Country naming. However, your case is plainly lamentable, not as with the Valencian Country name polemics, since you could not even distinguish Catalan from Occitan, and you are not able to understand the polysemy of Roussillon term. Toniher 08:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi guys, you may want to move discussion to the relative talk page, not in this one. Thanks! Mountolive 08:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Editing Spain

I'm an Australian citizen - born here - a Melbournian (BEST CITY IN OZ!) but I'm also of solidly Galician descent - (I've been mistaken by English for an Englishman and Italians (my tan) for an Italian). My Spanish, sadly, is mediocre, but improving. Actually my original historical interest was not Spain, but China & Europe generally, esp France - but when I stumbled onto the Spanish related pages here I was shocked - I've made many, many errors - and have been learning along the way - correcting myself, using corrections and specific info added by others and using my feel for wider history to guide me as I go along. Most of my stuff is broad brush. I hoped to spur others, even if only to correct or qualify my statments - hence my username. (By the way I only got on to check for your replies & have made two article changes (Sp & Sp Emp) I long intended - pls forgive me.) Now, I better be off to my own Garden of Gethsemane... Cheers