User talk:Martg76

Hello, "Martg76Template:Infrog welcome. -- Infrogmation 23:49, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Many thanks for your additions at German legal citation. Do you have any citations/references for any of that? -- Jmabel | Talk 20:01, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)

I'm happy to hear that my contributions are appreciated. With respect to Austria, there is a standard book on legal citation, which I will add to the page. Concerning Germany, what I wrote is based on my own observations of the (not really big) differences from reading German law reviews, books etc. I've submitted a piece to a German journal recently, and they sent me their own rules of citation, in which they asked for the format "Court, date, docket number, journal cite" for the first cite, while in subsequent cites the docket number can be left out. But that's probably particular to that journal. Martg76 21:12, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Wien River

Hi Martg76-- Sorry to have gotten the German wrong about "Wienfluss". I checked the Vienna Municipal Water site linked from the German Wikipedia and added a few more details to the English article. Since (as you have already probably guessed) my German is imperfect, could you please check the current version of Wien (river) and make sure it doesn't contain any blunders? Thanks very much, Opus33 19:13, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi Opus33 -- it looks perfect to me now! Thanks for adding all the additional information. Martg76 23:54, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

And same to you re. further additions. Cheers, Opus33 04:43, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Re: Combino categorization

Well, it's got wheels, and it rolls on the rails, so by that definition it is rolling stock. It should probably be in the subcategory Category:Passenger equipment like the PCC streetcar and Tram articles are since its main purpose is to haul passengers. slambo 19:13, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)

Habsburg

Good job fixing up those red links I made, thanks. Cheers, [[User:Sam Spade|Sam Spade Arb Com election]] 20:59, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Ostmark

What you've written has the ring of truth, but since apparently this is a contested area, could you possibly cite some sources? It would really improve the article. When you say that something is commonly thought, but wrong, it is particularly important to have some citations. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:13, Dec 4, 2004 (UTC)

I hope the cite provided is enough for now. Unfortunately, the AEIOU server, which certainly has some good information in English on this, seems to be down at the moment.Martg76 01:26, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Category:Czech monarchs

Concerning our discussion at my talk page, and noting your lack of objection, I've filed a motion for the deletion of Category:Czech monarchs. Just to let you know. (If you would rather have Category:Bohemian monarchs, I honestly don't mind, but one has to go.) -- Itai 22:36, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

By the way, regarding List of rulers of Austria and the problem of telling Dukes and Archdukes apart - other than the fact that the latter are more likely to be shot - what do you think is better: creating a Category:Dukes and Archdukes of Austria or simply creating a Category:Dukes of Austria, and simply noting in its description that some of these are Archdukes and that all are quite certainly dead? (I favor the latter, although we can drop the dead part pending further evidence.) -- Itai 22:57, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The Humungous Image Tagging Project

Hi. You've helped with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Professor in accounting VfD

Please consider changing your vote on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Professor in accounting, if you see this soon enough: we are supposed to be voting on whether there could ever be an article deserving the title Professor in accounting. If this ends up keep, the result will be a RfD on Professor in accounting, (and a VfD on Accounting scholarship, for that matter). The result of the vote going for Del is not about deleting Accounting scholarship, so your current vote says just that the title you didn't like should be kept. --Jerzy (t) 22:21, 2005 Jan 11 (UTC)

Vienna

Hey, I want to thank you for helping me with my new Viennese articles. I was wondering if you wouldn't mind helping me to translate de:Wien into English, as well as the relevant articles that are, at the moment, all very, very red in English. I would really appreciate it! Páll 02:26, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

moving images

Rather than duplicating gfdl or other free content across projects, why not put images you're wanting to use on commons so that they can be used by all projects? --BesigedB ^(talk) 20:26, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

{{cleanup-verify}} at Timeline of Slovene history

Hi there. What is in fact wrong with the article about the timeline of Slovene history, so that you've put a template {{cleanup-verify}} in it? The article is an effort of many wikipedians and this speedy designation might put some damage on it and to all the inserted work. The article itself has also a NPOV disputation, so both of them may also be united in {{totallydisputed}}, but I really can't see what is wrong with it. Best regards. --XJamRastafire 21:25, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I do not claim to be an expert, but I think someone with some knowledge of pre-Roman history of the region should seriously clean up the article with respect to issues which seem to relate rather to simple facts than to a particular point of view. Here are some of the problems I observed that induced me to add that tag:

The Venedes stuff in general: If it is pseudohistorical, which it seems to be, then it should be removed. If it is at least a valid theory, it should be mentioned in the History of Slovenia article and discussed in more detail in the Venedes article. But in a timeline I would only expect to see a well-ascertained facts.
1300 BC:"Slo-Veneti" suggests a linguistic connection which, I am sorry to say, without any reference, seems to be a far-flung speculation.
1200 BC: If the Veneti were the bearers of the Urnfield culture, why are they not mentioned in that article? Could it be that this is simply another speculation?
1100 BC: This should be totally deleted IMHO, since it has nothing to do with the topic of the article. (Persia, Afghanistan, Pubjab, India=Vindia??? Get real!)
700BC: This contradicts the Etruscans article. Better delete this. Did they live in Slovenia, too?
200BC: Why is the Hallstatt culture only mentioned here (as being replaced), but not before?
Shouldn't the kingdom of Noricum be mentioned also in pre-Roman times?

Other than that, the timeline seems okay to me -- it's just its first millenium or so. I hope you don't plan to accuse me of anything. Personally I just do not see how it should be possible to identify a specific people mentioned in writing only much later with some archeological findings from pre-literary times. Furthermore, given all the mixing of populations and migrations even in historical times, I cannot see how postulating a historical continuity or even ancestry should be meaningful in any sense. To summarize, what I am saying is, someone with considerable historical knowledge should check what facts are known with a high degree of probability about that period, put them into the article, delete all what is just speculative and make sure that the facts mantioned concur with relating articles. Martg76 01:08, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I won't accuse you for anything of course. I was just asking to improve the article. If it is so, then the best way is to delete doubtful statements. --XJamRastafire 08:40, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

approved external spam links

What particularly about this is spam?

Vienna Tourist Guide Austrosearch - Directory and search engine for Austria

I understand that some folks seem to be quite teritorial regarding their favorite categories but it is ridiculous to indicate that the removed url is off topic, not informational or not authoritative for Vienna. In any case other websites should also be deleted that are external links because they are no more no less comercial than Austrosearch.

Regards

There are two reasons why I found the addition of the link (both to Vienna, and to Austria, where it was removed by someone else), suspicious.

It didn't work at that time.
It was added by a user whose username is the same as the domain name of the site, which suggests self-promotion instead of an independent evaluation of the link by the contributor.

Martg76 19:23, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Being a new contributor to Wikipedia is definately a learning experience. Firstly I wish to thank you for your answer and also I wish to let you know that after being "mentored" on IRC I must agree with you that you correctly removed my url. I believe it is inappropriate for myself to submit the url because I am afiliated with it. Perhaps it will be added in the future by someone else, but sadly it was two rejections to what I felt was placed apropraitely that was a source of frustration. Being a member of several open source communities I must say I am a bit embarrased how things started out. I think it really should be considered to warn folks such as myself wishing to contribute to wikipedia that starting off adding your own link is definately the wrong first move. On an interesting sidenote I discovered the following which may change at any time:
1-10 of 1,423 containing link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria -site:wikipedia.org
Austrosearch was the top result for websites that link to the Austria - Wikipedia page.
Thanks for your newbie tolerance!
Jason Austrosearch 00:38, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Naschmarkt, Victor Gruen

Hy! I'm from the german wikipedia, where I call myself Otto Normalverbraucher, which means in american english I think about the same as "John Doe" or "Joe Sixpack" (I read somewhere de:Otto Normalverbraucher). I'm actually writing about the in austria and/or germany nearly unknown architect Victor Gruen, which is in the US better known. At least he is mentioned in a few articles, an he has his own article too :-P Now I'm making the article about the Naschmarkt of Vienna, and I want to include a picture of it, and that is the problem. In the german article is a picture, but I tried at least one hour to use it in the english wikipedia, and I didn't made it (ich habe es nicht geschafft *G*) Because of the english Victor Gruen-article with it's links, I viewed the "versions"-page of Wienfluss etc., and I found your page, so I thought it might be possible that you correct the Naschmarkt article (too?) and probably add the picture (?) If you have no time it's no probleme. I'm only a guest in english wikipedia, so I won't mind. Ok thats all. I'll go on editing and writing now :-) -- Otto Normalverbraucher 19:55, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Done. You've done good work on the two pages! Martg76 20:57, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

What Wikipedia:WikiProject Rankings project is not

This is not suggesting a hierarcal system.
It will be used only by users who want to use it.
Only ranking will be assigend to users who want to use it.
The idea ment to make it like barn stars, but based on regular contribution.
It is currently a prototype, likely that it is nothing like the final version.

I urge you to reconsider your vote based on this clarification. Thanks --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 08:45, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Vienna

Hey, thanks a lot for fixing my "Häferl" error on Vienna. I have the bad habit of Wikipediaing late at night, when I often make errors like that. It's a good thing the Vienna article is expanding. I'd like to get some more photos in there, especially current ones! The UN Complex photo is at least seven years old, and it's a difference like night and day when comparing it to today! I'll check Creative Commons, etc. to see if I can find something newer. Otherwise, I'll be in Vienna for several months this summer when I can take a few photos of my own. Anyway, thanks for the correction! newkai 16:00, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the edits you've done on my pieces. I hope we can get the Vienna pages all ported over! - grubber 12:22, 2005 Jun 25 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for helping to fix the mistake I made on my user page! Dwain 22:18, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

Habsburgs

The acquisition of the crowns of Bohemia and Hungary is what created the "Habsburg Monarchy" in the form that we know it. The holding of the Holy Roman Imperial crown no more created a "Habsburg Monarchy" than the Luxembourg family holding it for 90 years created a "Luxembourg Monarchy". The Habsburg Monarchy is, in essence, Hereditary Lands+Hungary+Bohemia, and that unit was created in 1526. Emperor Charles V, it should be noted, didn't rule any of these places, so it's even harder to make the case that emperor=Habsburg monarchy. john k 13:34, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Let me add that princes of the Holy Roman Empire, on their own, would not have been called "monarchs" - that would generally be reserved for kings and emperors. You never hear about the Saxon Monarchy, or the Bavarian Monarchy, do you? john k 13:46, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Habsburg monarchy until the 18th century (Pragmatic sanction of Charles VI) was not a single state, but an aglomeration of different kingdoms, principalities etc. In the 16th century, especially under Charles V, that was meant by the term "monarchy" - various lands united by one ruler. When this thing starts is hard to tell. What John is talking about is mainly the Austrian monarchy/Danube monarchy, that was effecticely forged by putting together the Austrian lands, kingdom of Bohemia and kingdom of Hungary (again, after failed attempt in the 15th century). Charles V never ruled Bohemia (apart from him being the Emperor of course) or Hungary, and Austria proper only until he ceded it to his brother Ferdinand. Only after 1804 is there a "Emperor of Austria" (Francis II becomes Francis I). As regards to the dukes and archdukes: dukes are not strictly monarchs, but since ca 1220 they are princes (before that only the King/Emperor and the Bohmeian were princes). The title of Archduke is a thing specific to the Habsburgs. Austria was not one of the Electors (Golden Bull of 1356) and Rudolf IV of Austria was disappointed, so he fabricated a document, in supposedly Emperor Frederick I granted special privileged and liberties to the duke of Austria, one being the title Archduke. This "fake" was legitimized when Frederick of Austria became Emperor Frederick III. Increasingly every male member of the house received the title of "Archduke", whether he ruled some territory or not. Str1977 22:17, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As you probably can guess, these facts are not new to me. It still seems arbitrary to me to let the Habsburg monarchy as described on that page start in 1526. Why not let it start in 1278? Even at that time, there were two separate duchies (Austria and Styria). John, I suppose you never hear of the Bavarian or Saxon monarchy because there was only one principality. In any case, I think the Habsburg monarchy page can serve a useful purpose, namely we could link to it when referring to Austria pre-1804, for which the page on modern Austria doesn't make much sense. Martg76 08:14, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Electricity Transmission and Distribution

The category "electricity distribution" should not be applied to high-voltage DC projects since these are only used for bulk transmission. In many places a "transmission" company is a different organization than a "distribution" company. Distribution connects the grid to end users, transmission (such as by high-voltage DC) transmits large quantities of power within the grid. --Wtshymanski 20:50, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VFD

Just to let you know that the "old format" of the page is on WP:VFDL (or Wikipedia:Votes for deletion (long form)).

This allows those, such as yourself, to see VfD in the format they are used to, whilst also allowing those who have serious difficulties loading and following the long-form page to have access to VfD. By having the short-form page as the default, we help reduce the load on the servers quite considerably, as Tim Starling has noted. So we are very much going for the best of both worlds. Kind regards, jguk 11:48, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. Martg76 11:54, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image source

Thank you for uploading Image:Southern Limestone Alps.png. Its copyright status is unclear, so it may have to be deleted. Please leave a note on the image page about the source of the image. Thank you.

Image Source

Need to tag the image in the English Wikipedia with the same image tag as the German Wikipedia to clear up any copyright confusion. If the German Wikipedia image is not tagged, then it may be a copyright violation also. Thanks Nv8200p 21:55, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the link. I see it is tagged GFDL in the German Wikipedia. I will tag the image GFDL inthe English version. Nv8200p 21:57, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:South Tyrol Meran.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:South Tyrol Meran.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Need tag from German Wikipedia also.Nv8200p 18:35, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Schleswig-Holstein

Martg7, this is just to say thank you for the work you are doing on History of Schleswig-Holstein. I've had that page on my watchlist for some time, but never got around to giving it the attention it needs. Arbor 10:44, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

lots of edits, not an admin

Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:30, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Seeing your work here, I very much second this. Being admin would help both you (better tools) and Wikipedia as well. I'd be the first one to nominate you if you wish. Thanks for all the work. Pavel Vozenilek 16:10, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll nominate you a week from now (when my current nominee gets finished). (There should be crowd fighting for getting the prestige ;-) Pavel Vozenilek 04:10, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sorry: I got into time pressure and had not time for Wiki (and likely won't have much for net few months). So I am not ready to nominate you though I have very high esteen to your work here.

If someone else nominates you, please ber very careful since the RFA procedure could be very stressfull. Usually the less one says and the less opinion one has the better chance to pass - too many people voting feel themselves as "dissidents" as search every reason for to show how much they know to oppose. The example could be User:RI, very active keeper of quality of Wikipedia I nominated [1]. Unfortunately I forgot to warn him, he got caught into some childish accusations and finally left Wikipedia in frustration. Pavel Vozenilek 21:04, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging

Can you please put an image copyright tag on Image:Panorama-Podersdorf.jpg? If you need help, post to my talk page. Superm401 | Talk July 3, 2005 17:00 (UTC)

Comment

Hi. You have had problems with this too, so maybe you'd like to read this RfC,and maybe post your impressions? At your convenience. Regards, Redux 5 July 2005 23:47 (UTC)

Liesland

No idea how that typo got there! But I would like to say that I've enjoyed working on the project for the last week or so, and I'm enthusiastic about continuing on... Also: We were neighbors in Cambridge for a couple of years; I graduated from Harvard in 2004. What were you up to in the area?

And I made a translation of Viennese cafe from the German Wikipedia. Perhaps you could add something. Tfine80 05:12, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That page Vorstadt is a help! I wasn't sure about it in relation to Vienna and had translated it as "origin city"... Suburb or outside city doesn't really fit; I think it's a great idea to link to the page. Tfine80 02:54, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know?

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Loser (mountain), which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently-created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

— Knowledge Seeker দ 07:38, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Great job on Gemeindebau

Wanted to say great job on the new article. I've seen that word a lot in the district articles I've been translating. It's nice to see it! Thanks! I'll work to wikilink it. - grubber 10:55, 2005 July 14 (UTC)

Vienna U-Bahn

Thanks for reformatting the Vienna U-Bahn article (making the lines into headlines). I had put that on my to-do list for today, but when I woke up this morning I got a pleasant surprise! -newkai | talk | contribs 10:41, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Frankfurt

After working with a handful of people on the Frankfurt am Main Wikireader for the Wikimania, I transferred the efforts to a Frankfurt Project in the model of the Vienna project. Wikipedia:WikiProject Frankfurt Don't be shocked that I stole most of the format! Best, Tfine80 03:55, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Articles by MPLX

Hi, I noticed you participated in the VFD for Eric Gilder (professor). I am also nominating another page created by this same user, which is also vanity/soapbox/original research: Four Freedoms Federation. See talk page for details. --JW1805 20:11, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just renominated this one by the same user: John Lilburne Research Institute. --JW1805 01:00, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion#Admira Ismić and Boško Brkić

You voted in the VfD for Admira Ismić and Boško Brkić. I believe that this article was deleted without a clear consensus, and have nominated the article for undeletion. If you would like to contribute to the VfU discussion, please follow the link above. Thanks for your time! Pburka 00:23, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Gryffindor

Regarding sudden changes where some nobility or royalty paraphernalia is added/changed into the articles, these are the trademark of user Gryffindor, nee user Antares, also formerly user Bhinneka and user At-whatever. The said person has attempted to add styles and titles to a vast number of locations, and also attempts to "make things consistent" in that regard. You have faced an influx of "von" additions to names which are perfectly capable of living without von. There are certain signs that the aforementioned user is somewhat neurotic, as she soon erases comments from others that questions her actions. 217.140.193.123 11:19, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vielen Dank

Thanks for fixing my error about Leopold II on the Imperial Crypt page. I do know better, but I was so concentrated on drawing the stammtafel of his many descendents that I forgot about Josef I when later writing those captions. I envy you, being able to now live in Vienna. I've been there several times, and must say it is my favorite city. --StanZegel 03:20, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Friedrich von Sachsen (Deutschmeister)

Hi, again. Thanks for the nice words about my stammtafeln in Imperial Crypt.

I have a request to make: the Deutschmeister references here linked to the wrong "Frederich of Saxony" so I researched and wrote Friedrich of Saxony (1473-1510) and corrected the linkages. There were similar linkage problems in the German Wikipedia, so I (in meine sehrstrengbegrenzde deutsch) wrote Friedrich von Sachsen (Deutschmeister) into the German wiki, but I know that my translation will bring both smiles and tears to any native German-speaker who reads it. Would you mind, please, cleaning up some of the more embarrassing parts when you have a moment? --StanZegel 22:04, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

With my poor German grammar, I'm not sure if I wrote what I really intended to say: that it was the Vetter selben Namens (Friedrich III. von Sachen), not the entire Ernestinischen Linien, who was the protector of Luther. I'm confused by the word endings, and the fact that I wrote vertiger when I think I should have written vertidiger, so I can't tell whether I got the correct point across before your kind translation. If I didn't make it clear in the original poor German, I'm know you'll be sure it is correct now. And of course, there is always my original English version for reference. It is always easier to read the general sense in a Fremdsprache than to compose something precisely in it! Thanks again, and regards from --StanZegel 02:27, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When you added the de: to the English version, did you intend to remove most of the text from that version? --StanZegel 18:42, 18 August 2005 (UTC) I assume it was an accident, so I reverted it to the fuller article, but with your :de added. --StanZegel 19:04, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tradition und Leben

Hello, you labelled a previous version of the article "Neutrality Disputed"— without entering any dispute on its Talk page. Perhaps now you'd translate some of the presumably more nuanced material from the German version of the article, and then remove the label when it meets your personal approval. Thank you. --Wetman 06:58, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anfrage

hallo Martg76, zu Deiner Frage wegen Kurt von Schuschnigg dachte ich seine Name war von Schuschnigg? Zumindest war er auch unter diesen Namen bekannt? Bei einer Suche bei Google liegen die zwei Versionen fast gleich auf. Da sowieso ein Redirect besteht, dachte es bestehe kein Problem.. lg File:Gryffindor.jpgGryffindor 15:18, August 25, 2005 (UTC) ps: wegen einem bestimmten anonymen Nutzer würde ich mich freuen eine eventuelle Rücksprache per Email zu kriegen und nicht als Posting.

Sorry

Instead of suggesting to suppress discussion, why don't you give a reason for your vote? Martg76 16:03, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

I shouldn't have said "ignore previous editor" It's just that you sounded a little arrogant. Please except my alology

Also I give you a Deletionist's Barnstar for dedicated participation in VfDs. Take care,

D. J. Bracey (talk) 16:08, 25 August 2005 (UTC) Take care, [reply]

D. J. Bracey (talk) 16:08, 25 August 2005 (UTC) [reply]

Minister-Presidents Ministers-President?

hallo Martg76, I was wondering what the correct usage is for "Ministerpräsidenten", is it ministers-president or minister-presidents? A little bit confusing, I tend to go for the minister-president although User John k has made a good point too. Feel free to take a look at our talk pages. Eine andere Frage habe ich noch wegen "Bundesländer", meiner Meinung nach eigentlich ein irreführendes Wort. [2]. Maybe if you could care to reply, that would be cool... with kind regards File:Gryffindor.jpgGryffindor 23:50, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Baden

Hallo Martg

Sorry, habe nicht ganz verstanden was du jetzt meinst mit dem Verschieben?`Baden soll als Disambiguation page gelten, vorallem wenn man Baden eintippt, dass dann diese Verlinkungsseite auftritt.Das fände ich richtig.Nette Grüsse aus der Schweiz --Viperch 21:19, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dunkelsteinerwald

Hallo Martg, ich habe diese Links auf Dunkelsteinerwald (municipality) nur entfernt weil ich mir dachte es gibt ohnehin nur für Mauer bei Melk und für Thal derzeit einen Artikel. Ist aber auf jeden Fall ok. Liebe Grüße aus Niederösterreich --HochauerW 08:26, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CP

Hi, you've reported copyright infringements to WP:CP in the last week, a new measure was recently passed to allow the speedy deltion of new pages that are cut and paste copyvios. Please follow these instructions if you come across this type of copyvio. Thanks. --nixie 00:22, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Blatant copyright infringements may now be "speedied"

If an article and all its revisions are unquestionably copied from the website of a commercial content provider and there is no assertion of permission, ownership or fair use and none seems likely, and the article is less than 48 hours old, it may be speedily deleted. See CSD A8 for full conditions.

After notifying the uploading editor by using wording similar to:

{{nothanks-sd|pg=page name|url=url of source}} -- ~~~~

Blank the page and replace the text with

{{db-copyvio|url=url of source}}

to the article in question, leaving the content visible. An administrator will examine the article and decide whether to speedily delete it or not.

United States Of Great Austria

grüß Dich Martg76,

ich habe hier diesen meiner Meinung nach etwas eigenartigen Artikel entdeckt, United States Of Great Austria. Schon mal was davon gehört? I'm thinking about merging it with the Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria article, however maybe you can say something about this as well? merci. Gryffindor 14:20, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Vienna

dear friend of Wikipedia:WikiProject Vienna. I have created a template that you can from now on "schmücken" yourself with if you want. It can be found here Template:User Vienna-member. mit freundlichen Grüßen.. Gryffindor 20:10, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Alpine Huts

you're right...the page was loading really oddly, but i think it was just my browser. it looks good now, thoughjfg284 22:54, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Trentino-South Tyrol

hello there Martg76, there is a discussion going on if Trentino-Südtirol should be named as Trentino-Alto Adige, instead of Trentino-South Tyrol. maybe you care to take a look.... Talk:Trentino-South Tyrol. mfg Gryffindor

Grüß Dich, sorry to disturb again, similar moves are happening at Talk:Eisack-Isarco and Talk:Etsch-Adige. Gryffindor

Thanks

for your votes, comments, and edits on the article Coop Himmelb(l)au. Davidrowe 08:56, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Translation help, please

Hi. I'm working on Stephansdom and am having trouble translating from here the names of the bells in the Nördlichen Heidenturm. Could you please fix up the that section of the article? Vielen Dank, --StanZegel (talk) 17:34, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo, again. Thanks for correcting my error on Vindobona. Perhaps I was too hasty in removing the assertion that Wien was originally a Celtic settlement... maybe it was true after all? If Vindobona is not corrupted Latin for "Good Wine," then what is the accepted translation for it? I have found more on the names of the bells in the Stephansdom and have added it. I hope all goes well within the house at Martingasse 76. --StanZegel (talk) 17:58, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Steffl

How would you translate this? As the name of an adult (Steve) or as the name of a child (Stevie)? How do you Viennese think of the name of the Hochturm... as an Erwachsene or as a Kind? --StanZegel (talk) 09:08, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll use "Steve" then.

I feel like an intruder, writing 99% of the Stephansdom article, because I am not a Viennese and yet there are others here who are from Vienna and are even writing as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Vienna. Yet, it is an American who is writing about the most sacred place and very symbol of Vienna, and the person who most frequently cleans up after my edits is another American who has never been inside the Stephansdom (his only connection is that he has a girlfriend who lives in a village in Lower Austria)!

But then, perhaps I'm only following in the footsteps of many others: The Romans built the city, the Habsburgs came from Switzerland, the Pummerin is made with Turkish metal, the most sacred painting inside the Stephansdom is from Hungary, Prinz Eugene of Savoy was from France as was Kaiser Franz I Stephen the progenitor of the imperial line after Maria Theresa, Metternich was from the Rhineland, the Parlament and Musikverein were built by a Theophil Hansen from Denmark, and the most spendid hotel on the Ringstrasse was built by the King of Württemberg as his own residence. You may be reading this while drinking a cup of coffee, a legacy to Vienna from the Turks. Don't the Viennese ever do anything for themselves? :-)

I am trying to take great care in such an important topic, lest I make mistakes. I take comfort, though, in knowing that Viennese will be reviewing my Stephansdom compilations and correct any major errors. I depend upon you to keep me from making too many foolish errors! Hôchste freunlichen Grüße sendet --StanZegel (talk) 14:25, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I used "Steve" but I'm wondering what you think of using "Steve-o" as a way of showing the Dutzschaft that the diminuitive "L" implies? We would call an adult Steve, and Steve-o in a familiar manner. I'll do whatever you think best conveys the flavor of "Steffel." --StanZegel (talk) 01:24, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Entschuldigung: I'm sorry if my attempted humor about the cosmopolitan nature of Wien and the many who have been drawn to it and made contributions to it over the centuries might have been construed as offensive or a criticism. I was trying to show an appreciation with a bit of humor, but rereading it, I realize that it could be misinterpreted. I meant no offense, and apologize if it was taken that way. Grüße, --StanZegel (talk) 20:56, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it may be too early to do formal peer review on Stephansdom: I still need to add to history, and I've asked the Dombauhuette for graphics. I'm also trying to buy the Domfuehrerbuch on line, but the Domshop does not seem to have a webpage, nor do the Rettet den Stephansdom or Dommuseum sites. Nor can I find it on Amazon.com. I think it is the most authoritative (it is written by the chief archivist of the Dom) and guidebooks I have here contain obvious errors ("Churhaus is the "election house" near the Stephansdom..." when I know that "Chur" is for Curia because it contains the Pfarramt.) I also then need to look at the German version in Wiki to see what may be there that I can translate over to the English version. --StanZegel (talk) 13:46, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Landeshauptmann

The reason I removed "rural" is because it suggests that the Bezirke are always non-urban. If you think of Urfahr-Umgebung or Mödling, then these are not really predominatly countryside. Look at wiktionary or dictionary.com for their definitions. Is there a better way of getting the point across that they are not Statuarstädte, but not necessarily rustic? Garethhamilton 23:03, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image galleries

You have in the past commented on Image Galleries nominated for deletion. Most galleries are nominated because the nominators feels that galleries violate WP:NOT. The William-Adolphe Bouguereau gallery has been nominated for deletion (here). A proposal to modify WP:NOT is here. Please join either or both conversations and comment as you see fit. Dsmdgold 16:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Leibnitz.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Leibnitz.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. Thank you.

Stephansdom graphics

Hallo Martg, eine Fröhliche Weihnacten u. Guten Rütsch! I put a couple of graphics into the Stephansdom article, but I'm not sure I like the way I tied them to section headings using red letters. There might be a better way. Would you take a look at let me know what you think? Vielen Dank, --StanZegel (talk) 00:31, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Moerbisch 2.jpg

Hallo Martg, einen guten Rutsch, ich wollte dir nur mitteilen dass ich das Foto, dass du von der deutschen wiki verlinkt hast, auf Commons geladen habe mit Image:Moerbisch 2.jpg und ich ich es im deutschen jetzt löschen werde. Schön langsam sollten ja alle auf Commons. --gruß K@rl (212.88.172.4 11:12, 31 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Hey

So your from Germany? Thats cool I would like to go there. Anyways i agree with deleting the list of "comperary Germanics" because people are not listing all of them also. Also one question Spaniards are Germanic also right? but they just speak a Latin based langauge that is heavily influenced on other Germanic languages.

Privatsprach

Please e-mail me from my user page, so I respond to it. --StanZegel (talk) 00:05, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

your input

hello Martg76, and a Happy New Year to you. There is a vote going on to rename South Tyrol into Alto Adige, as well as Trentino-South Tyrol. I think we have visited this issue already, frankly I don't know why these votes have to be. however your input would be greatly appreciated as usual. with kind regards Gryffindor 23:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

how do you translate Gemeinderat?

Hi Martg, I have a question maybe you could help out thanks alot.. [3]. Gryffindor 11:17, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tag removal.

Good day,

According to the page history for the Jury article, you tagged it for {{cleanup}}; that was more than a year ago. May I ask why the tag is still up there? Folajimi^(talk)

Please check your WP:NA entry

Greetings, editor! Your name appears on Wikipedia:List of non-admins with high edit counts. If you have not done so lately, please take a look at that page and check your listing to be sure that following the particulars are correct:

If you are an admin, please remove your name from the list.
If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in bold; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.

Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! BD2412 T 03:43, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Naschmarkt.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Naschmarkt.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. SteinbDJ 17:20, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

question

hi Martg76, how are you? question, long time ago you translated the article Leopold V of Austria (Habsburg) from German into English, thank you for your work. I am trying to find a solution to the naming issue of the article, since according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles), article "Other royals" point 1 states "For royalty other than monarchs: 1. If they hold a princely substantive title, use "{first name}, {title}". Examples: Charles, Prince of Wales, Anne, Princess Royal, Felipe, Prince of Asturias." and point 2 "If they hold a substantive title that is not princely (a peerage, for instance), use "Prince/ss {first name}, {title}". Examples: Prince Andrew, Duke of York, Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex.". I guess if you don't want to count the non-ruling Habsburg's as royalty but as nobility, "Other non-royal names" point 1 "Members of the hereditary Peerage (people who inherit their title), such as a marquess, viscount, count, duke, earl, etc., as with royals have two names....etc." (I won't post everything down, you can click here for the full text [4] gives a further guideline. Basically my question is, since you created the article, do you think moving it to another location such as "Archduke Leopold V of Austria" is ok with you? Only if he was a ruler of a place is the format "xxxx of xxxx" used for males (see Wikipedia convention on "Monarchical titles", point 1). Similarly, the current Leopold V of Austria (Babenberg) would be moved to "Leopold V, Duke of Austria", similar to the format Henry XIII, Duke of Bavaria. Do you see what I am trying to say? Following this pattern, the current non-ruling Habsburg articles would be moved in order to make a differentiation easier and have them comply with the current Wikipedia rules. Looking forward to your thoughts, thank you. Gryffindor 18:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Long talk page

Greetings! Your talk page is getting a bit long in the tooth - please consider archiving your talk page (or ask me and I'll archive it for you). Cheers! BD2412 T 00:12, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]