User talk:DirkvdM

Photograph Identification

If you recognise any of the plants or animals in the photographs in my Photograph portfolio, please tell me here. Thanx :) DirkvdM 13:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Wikipedia

I noticed you were new, and wanted to share some links I thought useful:

For more information click here. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

(Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 11:07, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

re: Your article

Putting it on that subpage was good. Any work in progress that doesn't qualify as an article should be put elsewhere such as your userspace. What I meant about "you can't put those kind of articles in the article namespace" I meant exactly that. Articles that call for comments, and/or is written from an original research point of view will quickly be either VfD'ed or deleted, as I did in your case. To spare you the process of going through VfD I suggested it be moved to a subpage which you did. I referred to the article itself in the way it was written, not what it was about.

Usually when I (and many others) come across articles like that, they may or may not be deleted or VfD'ed. It depends if the bulk of the article is written informally, ie encyclopædic, or not. take a look at any FA's for example to see how articles should be written. Anything else that doesn't have that formal style should not (and will not) be included in the article namespace. If the bulk of the content is fine, an editor may slap a {{cleanup}} or {{wikify}} tag on the article or clean up the article themselves. Me, being an administrator, I tend to just either delete it or ignore it if it is passable and can be cleaned up by somebody else. This isnt because I am lazy, it is because I see so many articles like this every day and I have a thousand things to do. :>

As for the single sign-on issue. Nothing I can do about that. We do not currently have a shared user-database on all Wikipedias, and hence you have to do that. You can make WP remember you by clicking in the "Remember me" box when you log in. That makes it a whole lot easier, especially for people (like me) who are active on many wikis.

Hope this helps, if there is any confusion, dont hesitate to ask. Inter\^Echo 10:21, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Greetings

Hi Derick, thanks for the hello :) I guess I hadn't gotten around to updating my own drug chart... although it was more designed for the layman to read, hence the use of common names and brand names ;)

I don't have any experience setting up a political party... my activism is mostly confined to my keyboard. I would imagine it would be a great deal of work though.

Living in Amsterdam must be great. Your city (country) is decades ahead of the rest of the world on drug policies. I visited there a few years ago and was amazed at the "coffee shops", and how fresh (or dried) psilocybe mushrooms were available for purchase in several varieties. --Thoric 14:22, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to chat, but I know this is not the place for it, so I won't. Still, I wonder how I would have to reply to your above message if I wanted to. I've started a discussion on a subpage of mine, and those who I alerted to it now where to look, but if I want to give you a reply, which I can't expect you to expect, then doing that here will only work if you have me on your watchlist (automatically or set manually). Or should I do that on your talk page, the way you responded to my message? That would have the advantage that you are automatically notified of the message without checking your watchlist. Even if you don't have an answer, drop me a note so I'll know if you got this. Excuse the stupid question, but I'm fairly new to Wikipedia and even to participating on the Internet. (I know it's the future, but still I'm not really part of it - how stupid is that?) DirkvdM 17:52, 2005 May 5 (UTC)

Trey Stone

I see you've met Trey Stone; you're not the first. FYI, he hasn't been blocked for being obnoxious in days.

— Davenbelle July 9, 2005 07:54 (UTC)

...really necessary considering our dispute was about the name of an island. J. Parker Stone 05:27, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Confussion

I think you don't know who you're talking to pall. You sayd that you would correct me. But all I could find was left-wing propaganda. Next time I will edit with my account. 213.73.149.61 9 July 2005 15:40 (UTC)

Oh by the way. You corrected my at the SGP page.

With all due respect, but what party do you think can measure up to the Anglo-Saxon model? The SGP isn't as radical as you think. They may have hard-christian values, but so does conservatif-Republicans and rightwing-Conservatives in Brittain. I think you're not up to date with you're knowledge of Brittish-American politics. And also with those inside you're own country. Let me guess; you're a PVDA or a SP voter. Greetings bro. Wiki213ip 20:33, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This belongs on the SGP talkpage, so I've moved it there. DirkvdM 05:25, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry my fellow wikipedian. I sometimes can't control my angryness. It won't happen again. And no religion hasn't killed peoples life. It has helped people building up a society in the Middle ages and afther WOII. So i conclude it has helped peoples lifes. Wiki213ip 19:21, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I grant you that religion is a source of solace and an inspiration to do good deeds to many people and it can also bring stability (if everyone in a region folows the same religion!). But loads of people have been killed in the name of religion (I think the balance tips heavily in that direction). The recent Islamic terrorist attacks along with, say, the IRA, are just the tip of an iceberg. What about the Jews in WWII? And you speak of the Middle Ages. What about the crusades? DirkvdM 07:15, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If there's was no religion there was nothing. I dont't have anything to say about the Islam because it ain't my religion. I don't have anything to say about the IRA because they are catholic and thats not my religion. I don't have anything to say about the crusades because the crusades where from the catholic idea. My religon (i'm a protestant) hasn't anything to do with all those things. Wiki213ip 20:13, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but I was talking about religion in general, I don't care which one (Buddhism might be different, but then that's not really a religion I believe, more of a Philosophy). And you're religious. And a Christian, like the crusaders (Protestantism didn't even exist in those days, so what religion do you think you would have followed if you would have lived then?). If I'd come up with something about protestants (say, staying with a previous example, the Orangists in Ireland) you'd probably say that's not your protestantism. And so on, narrowing it down further and further, until you might finally reach something that is specifically you. And that's the way to go. Think for yourself. Don't be a sheep. You've got a mind of your own, haven't you? Believe in a God if you wish, but believe in your God, not some fantasy in a dusty book. And above all don't let others do your thinking for you (when it comes to this sort of thing anyway). Believe in yourself. Think! DirkvdM 16:43, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, believing in yourself is believing in god because He has created mankind. I am not a sheep because i really believe in God just like you believe in yourself. You can't convince me, not believing in God because I have just like you believe in yourself, such an enormous believe in God that it would be the same that I convince you believing in Him. And that's impossible right? Wiki213ip 17:51, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That one's right on the nose. I've had too many discussions about religion that after several hours resulted in no-one having changed their mind and thus have been wasted hours, so we'd better stop here. I wanted to state my bit, jut like you. DirkvdM 17:57, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you see that people with or without religion won't change that fast. Wiki213ip 08:35, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My point was that, specifically when it comes to religion, people don't seem to be willing to change at all. Concerning other issues people may be headstrong (which often makes sense), but when it comes to religion there's hardly a point in discussing since it doesn't lead anywhere. Unless it's between non-believers, but even then. DirkvdM 09:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sure and my point was that you won't change either. I've i'm right you are an atheist or non-believer and those people won't change sooner than people with a religion. A good example (which i'm not supporting) is that more and more people become non-believers (in percentage) and that less people become a christian. Who are the real changers here huh. Wiki213ip 14:38, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

British Spelling in Che Guevara

Hi Dirk. Any reason you insist on BE in the Guevara article (labour, organisation)? There have been some reverts on that in the past, so please consider wether its necessary and or justified. Best user:bastel

It's my spell checker that's set to 'English English' and keeps telling me American English is wrong :) . But seriously, I was only editing the section and just saw one or two 'wrong' spellings and assumed that the rest of the article was in BE. My mistake, it turns out. DirkvdM 19:23, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Football (soccer) names of the game

Hi Dirk,

I thought I should give you some background regarding the Names of the game section of the Football (soccer) article.

Until a few months ago a large portion of the article was taken up by unwieldy information regarding the names of football; everyone wanted to add their little take on what is the "best" or "correct" name, and we even ended up with a long list of different names for the sport in different parts of the world. The core issues were lost amongst a fairly trivial issue.

In response, initially we moved this to its own section (the Names of the game section), and then spun-off the "debate" to its own page: Football (soccer) names. A similar issue arose on the Football article, and they similar responded by spinning off Football (word).

For Football (soccer), there has been a focussed attempt to keep the whole naming issue as small as possible in the core article and to keep discussions regarding the name in its own article, so that the main article can focus on the major issues. It is for this reason I have reverted your edits. I am sure you will understand where we are coming from.

Regards, --Daveb 03:22, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cuba and so forth

Hello. I feel you and I have gotten off on several wrong feet as we have collided on a few articles where my pertinent interests were mainly in rolling back extreme POV inserted by users such as NWOG; however we clearly have editing disputes even beyond this basic point. It has gotten a little heated and I believe this is largely due to collision over other editor's insertions but I think there is a tiny bit of misreading, perhaps a language barrier? I have felt at a few points that some things I attempted to get across were either misread or not understood. I don't mean this as an insult to you but as a means of explaining my frustration, particularly at cult of personality, where I feel I am being unfairly reverted when I am making an extraordinary effort (relative to material gleaned) to make neutrally-worded insertions (which can be built upon and expanded further in other sections); this is compounded by the fact that the other disputing editor has come into conflict with me elsewhere, and that this itself was further compounded by a sockpuppet which went around reverting any contributions I made, no matter how extremely minute or pedantic they could be viewed. I would welcome a fresh start perhaps in attempting to understand and collaborate in material where we naturally and mutually find ourselves editing. Thank you very much. --TJive 08:43, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not surprised that the edit war over whether to call Cuba a Communist or a Socialist state is continuing. I had but a small hope that pointing out that I was using the same terminology as that used in the People's Republic of China article might calm things down. Anyway, I'll leave you, TJive, and NWOG to continue the good fight over that point. Caerwine 18:10, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've put up an rfc to resolve it, but not with much success so far. Any idea how long we should wait until we should call in a mediator? DirkvdM 18:26, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Sociocracy, 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.

Ali's Hitler comment

Muhammad Ali did not make the Hitler comment at World Trade Center. Please visit Muhammad_Ali#Urban_legends for clarification.

Photos

Hi Dirk, you've uploaded some great photos. I was wondering why you have uploaded them as {{fairuse}} given that they are your own images? You may want to consider adding a licence to the image like {{PD-user}} if you want to release them into the public domain, {{CopyrightedFreeUse-User}} if you'd like to maintain copyright, the {{GFDL}} is the licence most used by Wikipedia's contributors, and there is a host of Creative Commons Licenses. --nixie 07:24, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip. I still needed to look into this, but you've made my job somewhat easier. I've decided for the moment to use the creative commons license. I've found out how to use it with just the 'by' tag, thus: {{cc-by}}. That will do for the moment, but I don't know how to aloso add the 'nc' and 'nd' tags. Could you tell me? DirkvdM 08:53, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to identify your hummingbird image - it would narrow it down a bit if you could say where it was photographed - not in the Netherlands!

Don't bother, it's a Costa's Hummingbird, so probably in [[california

Nope! That's a photograph that was already there. The one I placed is the green flying one next to the text about flying (seemed appropriate). You're half-right in an odd way, though, with the Costa bit, because it was photographed in Costa Rica :) .

By the way, if you know about other animals than butterflies (or plants) you might also take a look at these: User:DirkvdM/Photographs#Plants_and_Animals. Or just enjoy them! I'm quite a bit proud I must say (and this isn't even my best selection). DirkvdM 20:01, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I've identified Image:Butterfly panama.jpg as Heliconius sara, and also wrote an article for it: see Sara Longwing. I would have edited the image description, but you left a note indicating that you'd prefer to do it yourself. Thanks for contributing so many excellent images! -- Hadal 20:17, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Me again; I've also identified Image:What butterfly is this-2.jpg as Chlosyne janais, and wrote up an article for it too: Crimson Patch. Cheers, -- Hadal 05:20, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Hadal. I've also uploaded a side-view of the Crimson Patch and put it in the article. Not as nice-looking, but scientifically equally interresting, I suppose. DirkvdM 07:32, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DirkvdM - your pic image:treemoss_panama.jpg is almost certainly a Tillandsia, not Usnea, hope you won't mind that I've moved it out of the Usnea page - MPF 01:04, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to put the photo in the Tillandsia article, but I see you've already put it in the Spanish Moss article (which is also a Tillansia although it doesn't look like the other varieties). You might have pointed that out to me (and you might have put it in a bit bigger - sob, sob :( ). At first I thought you were referring to the smaller Tillandsiae (is that a correct plural?), but then I realised that Spanish moss looks like Usnea. DirkvdM 07:11, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I only added it to the Spanish Moss page after adding my note above - I needed to check that the species occurs in Costa Rica (which it does) before being sure of the ident. The 'beards' are too long, and in too exposed a position for Usnea, but match Tillandsia usneiodes perfectly. Sorry about the size, but it's difficult to fit lots of large pics around the small amount of text! - MPF 10:09, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Which Castro pic?

I don't care much about the decision, but when every editor changes the lead image on every edit, it just gets silly. Any of the recent pix are better than the old one (just because more recent, the old pic wasn't necessarily bad photographically), but let's just decide on one. Please participate in the informal poll on the Castro talk page. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters