User talk:Bonaparte

Multumesc :) Nu e usor sa faci dezbatere cu rusi si cu tradatorii aia de basarabeni care isi scuipa poporul si istoria neamului romanesc, dar asta e. --Anittas 01:35, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sa stii ca ma consider Roman (desi traiesc in basarabia) si ceea ce tu ai spus, in special "tradatorii aia de basarabeni" chiar m-a ofensat...

Imi place mult comparatiile care le-ai facut intre limbi si constitutiile celor doua state. Tot inainte! :) --Anittas 20:36, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bonaparte

De ce Bonaparte daca esti roman? Nu mi se pare corect! --Dacodava Ar trebui totusi sa-ti exprimi identitatea de roman. Chiar daca si eu il simpatizez pe Napoleon, nu cred ca e cazul sa-mi asum istoria unei alte natiuni.Dacodava

About the "so-called Moldovan language" and Romanian

Hi Bonaparte,

Yes, you're right, every linguist knows what you're saying is essentially correct. However, there are minor distinguos to be made in terms of: (1) What is the difference between a language and a dialect; (2) standard language vs. dialects; (3) national language vs. language from a linguist's point of view, and so on and so forth. Romanian, or more precisely Daco-Romanian, is obviously one language, but it has some dialectal variation (not a whole lot, really, compared to some other European languages), among Oltenian, Muntenian, Transylvanian, Moldavian dialects, etc. (I am referring to the Moldavia, or Moldova, that is part of Romania, not to the old province of Bessarabia, which corresponds more or less with the present-day country of Moldova).

When the Soviets decided to invent a "Moldovan" language, they essentially took standard Romanian, wrote it in Cyrillic (to be fair, that is the way Romanian was written up until the mid-nineteenth century anyway), and gave it just a little regional flavor by adding some dialectal features, characteristic however of the Moldavian dialect within Romania, not specifically of the Bessarabian dialect). But these dialectal features are not very significant.

As a result, there is no question that Moldovan and Romanian are essentially the same language. So, what is the difference between a language and a dialect? "A language is a dialect with an army and a navy" (a quote from Antoine Meillet, but also -- erroneously??? -- attributed to Max Weinreich, Uriel Weinreich, and Joshua Fishman). That's it. Consider the case of Dutch. Technically, linguists should consider it a dialect of German, specifically the Netherlandic subgroup of the Lower Franconian dialect group (there is of course huge variation among the dialects of German), but imagine telling the Dutch that. They are a very proud national group. And what about the difference between Dutch and Flemish? Of course, the Flemish dialects are a distinct subgroup of Lower Franconian dialects than the dialects of Holland, but in Belgium they use the same standard language as in Holland, so, despite the dialectal differences, the Dutch/Flemish standard language is the same. Finally, one additional complication: all the dialects from the eastern part of the Netherlands aren't even Lower Franconian, but Lower Saxon dialects, just like the Plattdeutch dialects of the German state of Niedersachsen.

So, what do you want me to say? Historically, whether Moldovan and Romanian will be considered different "languages" (not, of course, from a linguist's point of view, which they will never be really, but in the sense of "national languages") will depend on whether they will remain as separate countries in the centuries ahead. So, ultimately, this whole question has a lot more to do with politics than with linguistics.

I hope I didn't disappoint you. Îmǐ place foarte mult limba romînǎ. Pasquale 22:31, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Bonaparte, most linguists consider Aroumanian (or Macedo-Romanian), Istro-Romanian, and Meglenitic as separate languages, not dialects. That's why I said above: "Romanian, or more precisely Daco-Romanian, is obviously one language". By specifying Daco-Romanian, I was precisely excluding Aroumanian, Istro-Romanian, and Meglenitic. As far as the dialectal variation within Daco-Romanian, well, it's not completely insignificant. I remember looking at a Romanian Dialect Atlas once and finding considerable variation, especially within Transylvania, if I remember correctly. Anyway, these are minor points.

I am very sorry about the vandalism you're complaining about. However, I am a little tired right now of Wikipedia fights and I would rather not get involved in another one, if you don't mind, especially knowing how vicious some of these can get. Sorry! Pasquale 17:18, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bonaparte, Please don't push me. I've had a couple of bruising Wikipedia fights recently and my conclusion is that they lead nowhere. Besides, I am extremely busy with work right now, and I know this kind of effort takes A LOT of time, because you have to explain things VERY, VERY clearly to convince people. But, if something needs to be voted on, I will vote. Pasquale 18:04, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

 Thanks for your nice words. Unfortunately I can not be so much time on net.
 You make a good job. Keep doing it!!! Dacodava

Thanks

Thanks for the useful comparison. Maybe the difference is like the difference between Swiss German and (Standard) German. I have a clearer picture now. How did you find my question anyway? :) Best, Dpr 03:31, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Glad to help you. Bonaparte talk & contribs

Barnstar

Salut. Mulţumesc pentru barnstar! Ronline 09:43, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mersi si eu pentru stea. --Anittas 09:49, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Salut, Bonaparte. Multam' fain pentru barnstar. User:Dpotop

Thanks man!

I like this star :)
EvilAlex 12:46, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Admin

You know, if you start changing your edit tactics now, you can be an Admin in the future. That is, if you want to. It's not too late to change, and if you do, I'm sure many people would vote for you in the future, including me. Alexander 007 12:33, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Remember, you chose the name Bonaparte. Alexander 007 12:42, 11 December 2005 (UTC) Multumesc Alexandru. Bonaparte talk 12:50, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Orioane's RfA

Pe tine te-am lăsat mai la urmă, ca să scriu un mesaj personalizat. Iată-l pe cel standard:

Hey Bonaparte! Thank you very much for your support on my RfA. To my amazement there were no negative or neutral votes and the result was (28/0/0). I am now an administrator so I'll try and do my best in this new position. I'll be happy to answer any comments or requests from you. Thanks one more time!

Acum, în plus, ai fost cel mai puternic suporter al meu şi pentru asta îţi mulţumesc în mod special. Cu siguranţă o să mai lucrăm împreună la articole, aşa că sigur o să discutăm şi în viitor. Eu o să intru într-o Wikipauză şi sper să ajung pe acasă, aşa că îţi urez "Crăciun Fericit" şi "La Mulţi Ani!". --Mihai -^talk 20:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Secrets of Effective Leadership

I like very much what Fred Manske once said: "To me, a leader is a visionary who energizes others. This definition has two key dimensions: (1) creating a vision of the future and (2) inspiring people to make the vision reality".

Bonaparte talk 17:28, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your personal vision should do three things:

1.It should incorporate your dreams and passions; the things that excite you.

2.It should be authentic and true to your realities, anchored in who you really are. It doesn't have to meet anyone else's standards.

3.It should continue to evolve. Personal vision is not static, like a photograph, but rather like frames from a videotape that change slightly from day to day. It reflects where you are in your own evolution and where you think you are heading.

Take a moment here to reflect a bit your personal vision.

What are you passionate about?

What are your dreams?

Where do you want to be in five years? Ten years?

If you live your life to its fullest, what will you have accomplished?

What impact do you want to make?

Bonaparte talk 17:38, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Israel

Hello Bonaparte,
What I can find about Romania's ascension to the EU is at the BBC. You may also want to see Enlargement of the European Union, it has sections on both Romania and Israel. Regarding Israel and the EU, I don't know much. I live in England and therefore already am a European citizen. In 2007 you will be too :-) Izehar (talk) 11:52, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Izehar for your link :) Bonaparte talk 14:38, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Couplet I

Allons enfants de la Patrie,

Le jour de gloire est arrivé !

Contre nous de la tyrannie,

L'étendard sanglant est levé, (bis)

Entendez-vous dans les campagnes

Mugir ces féroces soldats ?

Ils viennent jusque dans vos bras

Égorger vos fils et vos compagnes !

Refrain

Aux armes, citoyens,

Formez vos bataillons,

Marchons, marchons !

Qu'un sang impur

Abreuve nos sillons !

Couplet II

Que veut cette horde d'esclaves

De traîtres, de rois conjurés ?

Pour qui ces ignobles entraves

Ces fers dès longtemps préparés ? (bis)

Français, pour nous, ah ! quel outrage

Quels transports il doit exciter ?

C'est nous qu'on ose méditer

De rendre à l'antique esclavage !

Refrain

Couplet III

Quoi ces cohortes étrangères !

Feraient la loi dans nos foyers !

Quoi ! ces phalanges mercenaires

Terrasseraient nos fils guerriers ! (bis)

Grand Dieu ! par des mains enchaînées

Nos fronts sous le joug se ploieraient

De vils despotes deviendraient

Les maîtres des destinées.

Refrain

Couplet IV

Tremblez, tyrans et vous perfides

L'opprobre de tous les partis

Tremblez ! vos projets parricides

Vont enfin recevoir leurs prix ! (bis)

Tout est soldat pour vous combattre

S'ils tombent, nos jeunes héros

La France en produit de nouveaux,

Contre vous tout prêts à se battre

Refrain

Couplet V

Français, en guerriers magnanimes

Portez ou retenez vos coups !

Épargnez ces tristes victimes

À regret s'armant contre nous (bis)

Mais ces despotes sanguinaires,

Mais ces complices de Bouillé

Tous ces tigres qui, sans pitié

Déchirent le sein de leur mère !

Refrain

Couplet VI

Amour sacré de la Patrie,

Conduis, soutiens nos bras vengeurs

Liberté, Liberté chérie,

Combats avec tes défenseurs ! (bis)

Sous nos drapeaux que la victoire

Accoure à tes mâles accents,

Que tes ennemis expirants

Voient ton triomphe et notre gloire !

Refrain

Couplet VII

Nous entrerons dans la carrière

Quand nos aînés n'y seront plus,

Nous y trouverons leur poussière

Et la trace de leurs vertus (bis)

Bien moins jaloux de leur survivre

Que de partager leur cercueil,

Nous aurons le sublime orgueil

De les venger ou de les suivre !

Oooh...

Multilingual page! I love it! Want Portuguese here? ε γκυκλοπαίδεια* 18:54, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! Why not? -- Bonaparte talk 19:06, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Eu não sei o que eu devo dizer. Algumas coisas no português são difíceis de escrever. Talvez, escreverei algo no espanhol tambem! ε γκυκλοπαίδεια* 19:23, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You may say everthing you like. What's your interest and how can we collaborate. Is not a problem for me, you may write in any langauge as you wish. I have to admit I would like not to be in English :) since I want to practice other languages as well. Thank you. -- Bonaparte talk 19:26, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So far I see German, French, Italian, Romanian, now Portugues, naturally English; Spanish should be here too.... Y lo puedo hacer, me gusta hablar en el español...pero es un idioma muy fácil, entonces, no creo que hago algo tan especial.ε γκυκλοπαίδεια* 19:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly how many languages do you speak, I really admire people that speak a whole lot of them...ε γκυκλοπαίδεια* 19:29, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re:RfA

Thanks : ), but I have to decline. I do not wish, on any terms, to be an admin. Thanks for thinking I would be good for the job. : )

Take care, ε γκυκλοπαίδεια* 00:18, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Izehar's RfA

Hi Bonaparte,

I would like to thank you for your kind support on my RfA. I'll do my best to be a good administrator. If you need anything or if I ever do something I shouldn't have, please, don't hesitate to drop me a line. Izehar 16:44, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Basescu

I think you noticed that I did not say "the Moldovan people" but "the people of Moldova"-Basescu [[1]]

http://www.freedomhouse.org/research/nitransit/2003/moldova2003.pdf

http://www.freedomhouse.org/research/nitransit/2004/moldova2004.pdf

http://www.freedomhouse.org/research/nitransit/2005/moldova2005.pdf

RfA

Thank you for your support in my request for adminship. I was promoted with a final tally of 31/1/1. Don't hesitate to contact me if there is anything I can assist. --BorgQueen 21:56, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you Bonaparte for the new award---it looks nice. Stylish. Alexander 007 22:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thanks man ;) --Just a tag 18:31, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Man, you are cool!

Take care, ε γκυκλοπαίδεια* 22:30, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I dub ye your Portuguese name:

"Napoleão I de França!" 65.35.196.18 22:34, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Transnistria

Hi,

I took a look at the Transnistria page and I believe that the correct version is up. Of course I am only referring to this exact instance of time, because Mikka and his friends and aliases are very actively trying to undermine the content of the page. In any case, I am sure we can stop his non-sense and continue developing the page.

Lol, I am glad Mikka is finally out of the picture. Of course he had it coming for a long time.

No, I do not have any admin priveleges.

I come from Moldova (Republic of), Chişinău to be more exact.

Nu, sunt român.

Mulţumesc pentru sfat, astfel şi am procedat. TSO1D 15:41, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:) am vazut. Poti sa iei si tu cuvantul acolo si sa-ti sustii punctul tau de vedere. Bonaparte talk 15:42, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

update

Good to see you Joe in 2006! You should make an update on your user page ;) Bogdan is back again by long time now http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jmabel#Trust :) Bonaparte talk 15:53, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder! Şi la mulţi ani! -- Jmabel | Talk 21:21, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mulţumesc Joe, gândurile şi urările mele de bine ţie şi familiei tale şi un start bun în Anul Nou! Bonaparte talk 21:24, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mikka

Look Bonaparte, Mikka is angry now - I know that he was quite rude about the RWNB, especially that bit about the "snake's nest", but let's not be stubborn and seek apologies. Izehar 21:22, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ucraina

Salut. Nu ştiu dacă e bine să se scrie: "Note: All of people consider Moldovans as Romanians." Am investigat şi într-adevăr, recensământul din Ucraina este liber, adică - lumea se poate declara cum vrea. Deci, cât timp s-au declarat nişte persoane ca "moldoveni" (care nu înseamnă că nu sunt români, doar că se autoidentifică mai mult cu Rep Moldova decât cu România), trebuie respectat asta. Eventual se poate scrie "Note: Some consider Moldovans to be the same ethnic group as Romanians". Ronline ✉ 08:14, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

E bine să se amintească pentru că sunt utilizatori din toata lumea care ar percepe diferit si ar crede ca este vorba de doua popoare diferite. De aceea doar o scurta nota ar fi buna. Nu stiu "some" e cam slab poate "most" e mai bine. Bonaparte talk 08:18, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eu sunt de acord cu Ronline aici, daca s-au identificat la recansamant ca moldoveni atunci asa si trebuie de scris, si de adaugat o nota ca unii considera etc.. --Just a tag 14:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the best NPOV and reasonable compromise

I read and decided that you should let the compromise offered by Ccson. I will ask an Admin to unblock the page so you could modify in this way. Once it is done I consider this case as closed. You still contact me if you have minor changes/issues. Bonaparte talk 17:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is truly unfair being that Alpha Kappa Nu http://web.umr.edu/~kapsi/publications/History%20of%20Kappa%20Alpha%20Psi.htm which was founded in the year 1903 http://copland.udel.edu/stu-org/nuxinupes/grandchapterhistory.html . Kappa Alpha Psi and Alpha Kappa Nu are 2 different fraternities as a whole. The website spoke of the existance of another fraternity that existed before them, and that fraternity is Alpha Kappa Nu It was the first inter collegiate fraternity founded for and by black men. I have provided 2 points of reference to show this. So how could Alpha Phi Apha be the first one when there is one that was founded before them? Do the fact not mean anything? If you look at the links provided they show that this is the case. I am totally disputing the fact and the claim at this point of A Phi A being the first inter collegiate black fraternity. I have provided 2 places that show that it isn't! Other fraternities have hazing as well, but not as flagrant as those that occurred in Alpha Phi Alpha! Ccson makes the claim that the reference website isn't updated but then makes another claim that there are recent changes??? How is that possible? I'd like the websites provided to be looked into. I'd also like to have a re evaluation. 24.239.149.9 18:32, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 24.239.149.9 18:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, don't worry. Recheck again. Untill then keep cool and try to understand that you also have to give a compromise solution. Bonaparte talk 18:39, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked, they aren't the first black fraternity of any kind. Alpha Kappa Nu is the first inter collegiate black fraternity and Sigma Pi Phi is the first black fraternity. I have provided references for each. I am keeping cool, but it's as if the information that I've provided is being ignored. The compromise I've asked for is that Alpha Phi Alpha is stated to be the second oldest surviving fraternity founded by black men. 68.175.26.54 20:06, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mark K. Bilbo entry

Bonaparte, please see the talk page for Mark K. Bilbo. WarriorScribe has disregarded your input and has deleted nearly all of the paragraph that we worked hard to form. He has even deleted my contribution, in the talk page, about your help and decision. I just put it back, but he may delete it again. Please help. --Jason Gastrich 23:12, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe while Gastrich is busy whining that he's not getting his way, he can explain exactly what commentary of his was deleted by me...I sure don't recall doing that.

What Gastrich neglects to mention is that there has been additional discussion of the issue (that did not include him) and a reasonable, compromise sentence was included that supports more fully the concept of nPOV.

It's time for an RfC on Jason Gastrich. WarriorScribe 23:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is turning into quite a revert war with Jason Gastrich referencing your mediation as a mandate to include the following sentence in the article Mark_K._Bilbo

In Bilbo's public conversations (usually with Christians), he can become condescending and offensive. For instance, Bilbo calls Jesus "Jeebus" and God "your perfect god widget." Bilbo has been known to make fun of people's names, calling Uncle Davey "Unca Dorky" and Pastor Frank "Plastic Fake." His condescending remarks also include "dense one, twit boy, disphit, hypocritical asshole, bite me, and fuck you."

I find this sentence to be overly long, border line POV as well as a bit petty for an encylopedia. It reads like gossip. A compromise sentence was inserted to replace the above. It reads:

Some people, usually Christians, find many of his contributions in Usenet to be condescending and offensive, while others find his articles entertaining and informative.

Did you really mean that Jason Gastrich could insert that sentence without comment and editing from other users? David D. (Talk) 23:52, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That sentence is a pathetic attempt to replicate the controversial nature of Bilbo's statements. There are no citations. There are no examples. It reads like, "Some people don't like what he says and some do." La, la, la. That's simply not going to cut it because it's too vague and incomplete.

Bonaparte, I suggest you recommend this go to formal mediation, now. WarriorScribe is intent on reverting everything until he gets his way. You probably know this but WarriorScribe (Dave Horn) and Mark Bilbo have been friends for some time. You can draw your own conclusions from there. Plus, David isn't much help. According to his contributions, he could care less about your input or the original paragraph. --Jason Gastrich 00:35, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jason, the use of the word pathetic is describing who? Since I wrote the short version i would ask you to calm down. My preference is to cut the sentence completely. But, as a compromise to your insistence to incorporate the sentence, i wrote the tamer version. Usenet is a known den of iniquity and trollism; it is not relevent to how a people or a specific person behaves in real life. This wikipedia article should be responsible and not be colored by personal bias. Given you are sore at being the recipient of Bilbo's tongue you should not be the one calling the shots. Wikipedia is not a place for you to write about people you dislike. It looks like retribution and it looks petty.

I do care less about the arbitration decision other wise I would have deleted the point you are trying to make outright. Nevertheless, I do happen to think that the original sentence is inappropriate and I am sure Bonaparte agrees that such a decision by himself is still open to discussion. David D. (Talk) 00:50, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence is a more accurate, less POV-driven statement about what actually occurs in Usenet and similar venues, and it's hysterical to watch Gastrich whimper about how I have such fire to get my way.

Gastrich probably could not tell you how long Mark Bilbo and I have been "friends," though he says that it has been "for some time." I don't know how true that is. I've never met Mark, personally, though we have corresponded a few times, most frequently in the last few weeks. Mark and I are acquaintences on friendly terms. Whether we are "friends" or not depends on your point of view.

Regardless, whatever "conclusions" that Gastrich claims can be drawn are not explained. Perhaps the fact that Gastrich and Usenet's "Uncle Davey" (the "Unca Dorkey" in Mark's comments) are much closer friends has no bearing on Gastrich's desire to see Mark's comments entered in an encyclopedia article. Perhaps...but not likely...

The fact is that Gastrich keeps screwing these things up, gets detail after detail wrong, and it's clearly his own agenda that's on the table, here, and under scrutiny. Gastrich, alone, is the one insisting on the specific wording that he wants, while at least two of us (with another couple of people inputting) have suggested and gone with less provocative wording in the sentence--a sentence that appears, mind you, in an "encyclopedia" used by children.

Meanwhile, another Christian has pointedly challenged Gastrich on this and asked him what Jesus would do. It's noteworthy that Gastrich will not answer that question.

Gastrich has a personal vendetta against Mark Bilbo, and is galled by the presence of a biographical article about him in the collection, here. It is his desire to insure that all "atheists" that he can label as such are labelled as such (check his listing of "contributions"), and to discredit those with whom he has issues. Gastrich is using Wikipedia to advance his own, personal, self-promoting agenda, and should be sanctioned. I am preparing a case for exactly that. WarriorScribe 00:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bonaparte, there is no resolution as of yet, you gave a deadline of 01/02/06. Right now things on that page are peaceful because Jason Gastrich hasn't been online for a while. As soon as he comes back on line, he's going to start his whining again about everyone reverting his edits and going contrary to your "ruling." As far as he's concerned, once you agreed with him on his second paragraph, he won. He has repeated this over and over, and tells everyone that an Admin has made a ruling. Watch, as soon as he logs back on he's going to go in there and revert it to his last entry and than it's going to start all over again. He needs to be booted perm. He does nothing but spout his rhetoric, conspiracy theories, and POV. Icj tlc 20:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bonarparte, someone has deleted the entire reference to Bilbo's profanity and mockery toward God and Christians. I strongly recommend that you recommend this go to formal mediation, now. It's apparently a hot issue that won't get settled, otherwise. --Jason Gastrich 16:15, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So we have another claim to a deletion. Last time this was claimed, it didn't happen. The only thing that needs to happen here is an RfC that removes Gastrich from participating in Wikipedia. I'll try to have it submitted by the end of the day. It's clear that the only reason that this "won't get settled" is because Gastrich can't get his way and there are enough honest people around to make sure that this is done in a more even-handed manner, assuming that it must be done, at all. WarriorScribe 16:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alpha Phi Alpha

Part of the compromise was that the contributor who not update the Hazing section. He has totally rewritten this part and removed the part he originally put in that says "it is not condoned by the fraterntiy". By adding the "Pledging" to the title, I assume he has more information to update as he promised during the compromise discussion. Again, this tripod website is obviously something he has control regarding the content because it changes as he updates wikipedia, and then says this source is verifiable. I urge you only allow official website, newspaper, or anthing that is static and constantly changing. I really think this contributor should be forbidden from updatin this article because it appears his motive is biased and vendictive. I hope you can help. Ccson 00:59, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The contributors are updating the main article with their comments from this discussion that were rejected by the mediators and not considered the best neutral point of view. Please inform the contributors that the hazing text and the status of "intercollegiate" was deemed a NPOV and not to add text still saying this is a falsehood. We just had this discussion. Ccson 08:19, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even after your comment to respect the compromise someone has replaced the hazing section again and continue to add op-ed comments within the article (i.e whom did not attend any college) in his way of saying the fraternity is not intercollegiate. (this was settled) He removed a picture of the founders saying the founders are not relevant to the fraternity's history (huh). What can be done to ensure the unbiased integrity of this article? Ccson 15:37, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will look right now. Bonaparte talk 15:38, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I re-added the founders picture, however; he may have removed just that quickly. The picture has been there for weeks before this started. His actions now are retalitory for not having his pov expressed in the previous discussion. Ccson 15:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, he has reverted my changes and removed the picture of the founders again that I re-added. please review his user ID page, he's creating an contentious relationship with multiple contributors on several different articles--we all can't be wrong since we don't know each other. Ccson 18:42, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made a request on the Alpha Phi Alpha article for permission to make some changes. Since then, there have been multiple changes which again are distorting the original information I entered--look at the notable alphas section, it was a simple sentence to note members with postal stamp images, now its just a comment at the bottom. Please review my request and give me persmission to what changes you feel are relevant, hopefully all. Again this bobbydoop contributor is not providing a NPVO on this topic and by his personal discussion page, many other contributors are having issues with him. we can't all be wrong. Ccson 13:30, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made the changes you approved and they were summarily reversed within 5 minutes. I'm about to give up on this since no one else is following the rules of getting permission to add or delete information. What can be done to restore the changes I implemented. I don't want to revert, because the revert war will start again. Ccson 18:39, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will reach out to the contributors to see if a compromise can be reached before changes are made. 67.34.213.68 19:01, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A contributor has updated article without permission or a discussion. There are only 3 persons concered only one of the 3 that wants his changes to stay. the user has not signed in so we can't verify the user and the IP address has never been used, at least not in this article or discussion, unless you can determine from prior updates in wikipedia. Is there a way in wikipedia to block this page from being updated if you haven't signed in (something like when trying to upload files). Please revert back to the last version approved by yourself. Ccson 04:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oanabay

Yes, I am Romanian. I was born in Bucharest and moved to the US when I was ten. I recently visited my home country in September. Thanx for asking! Oanabay04 07:41, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Servus Oana! Ti-am raspuns si pe pagina ta. Te rog sa te inscrii si tu pe forumul nostru. Asa putem tine legatura mai bine. La Multi Ani Oana! Bonaparte talk 12:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Niš population

Population of 173,000 is correct number from 2002 census (actually, it would be 173,400). See: Serbian cities (I posted that numbers there). The number of 374,000 is wrong. I do not know from what source that number come. Also, in Serbia, you have two population figures for the cities, the one is for the cities themselves, while the other is for municipalities, including all neighbouring towns and villages. You can see both population figures here: Serbia#Cities. In both cases, Niš does not have a population of 374,000. PANONIAN (talk) 15:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK Thank you Panonian. I just wanted to check it. Bonaparte talk 15:42, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your last edit on "Avram Iancu, Alba"

Dude, I swear you've got hawk eyes. Thanks for adding the full stop. Dunemaire 15:47, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

La multi ani! --Vasile 16:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

For your New Year wishes.I hope you had a Happy New Year also. --Molobo 16:18, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Thank you very much for your support and for your good wishes. I wish you happy new year too!--AndriyK 16:52, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Joining the "nationalist" AndriyK in his wishes. Fair position towards Ghirla, Mikka and alike. Number of contributions does not reflect their quality. Thanks. La multi ani! --Oleh Petriv 23:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Counties in Transylvania

Salut Bonaparte! I've reverted your edits (as noted in the edit summaries), because a consensus has been reached previously in this issue on Talk:Harghita/Vote. If you feel that the solution worked out there is not right, please initiate a discussion istead of reverting. Vay 17:15, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, your link is not working.

Second, I think is POV fork. Bonaparte talk 17:17, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Romanian in intro

Hello. Regarding Avram Iancu, Alba, I advise you not to list it as "Avram Iancu (Romanian: Avram Iancu, Hungarian: Felsővidra)". You mentioned it is no problem to list the Romanian first; because the article is about a locality in Romania, it is automatically assumed that the title of the article is also the name in Romanian. When this is not the case (as in Bucharest), a Romanian language qualifier is added. In previous months when working with localities I included the native language within the parentheses as such: "Avram Iancu (-Romanian, Hungarian: Felsővidra)". However, that approach was generally disapproved of by other users and the majority of such additions have since been removed. Duplicating a name in the introduction as you have done just adds redundant information. As I have already mentioned, if you wish to change the method of listing names (common throughout Wikipedia), please discuss it as Naming Conventions first. Olessi 18:26, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen this Naming Conventions and is not yet reglemented. However, I've seen for other countries that they do not add double names only where really is needed. To a lot of cities from Transylvania, I've seen that is added even if there is no need for that. Bonaparte talk 18:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you list some examples so localities can be standardized? Olessi 23:00, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bucharest between world wars

Salut Joe! Am gasit un site interesant cu multe imagini din perioada interbelica. Sper sa-ti placa.

Cand mai vii in Romania? Bonaparte talk 11:04, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just added that to the Bucharest article yesterday. Came upon it hoping to find some PD images, but the earliest is 1923, one year too late to fall into PD. Did you find that independently, or because I'd linked to it? - Jmabel | Talk 19:14, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Caraşova

Do you maybe have a location map of Caraşova commune where Krashovani live? PANONIAN (talk) 22:24, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Request for Adminship

Greetings, Bonaparte! I wanted to sincerely thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with a final result of 55/14/3. Your support means a lot to me! If you have any questions or input regarding my activities, be they adminly or just a "normal" user's, or if you just want to chat about anything at all, feel free to drop me a line. Cheers! —Nightstallion (?) 07:42, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

László Tőkés

I see that you tagged László Tőkés, primarily my work, as a copyvio. You did not give any indication of what you claim to be the issue, and appear not to have followed through with posting to WP:CP; I have now done the latter, at Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2006_January_4. I have also remarked there on why I do not believe there is a copyvio problem in the article. You may want to comment on what you believe to be a problem. -- Jmabel | Talk 12:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I didn't know how to state it and where to comment about it, but it seems for me for a first impression that is copyvio. I will look one more time. Yes, it is for all paragraphs something like this [Deletant, online, p. 51,...etc]. Isn't it this word by word? Bonaparte talk 12:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. Can you point to anywhere that my wording is unacceptably close to the original? The notation is a minor variation on Harvard citation, which was the norm in Wikipedia before we had a footnoting mechanism. It no more implies direct quotation than does a footnote. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for your support of my RfA, and for your generous comments. I appreciate your confidence, and hope to remain calm and friendly in the coming year. Best regards, Tom Harrison ^Talk 13:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

la multi ani si tieConstantzeanu 17:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed your comment, sorry

I've decided to remove my recent comment from Ghirlandajo's talk page, as he's only started a couple of revert wars today (but on the articles that were otherwise peaceful). I've also taken off your comment, which related to mine and I apologize for that. --Wojsyl ^(talk) 19:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good job. Don't worry. He will get the message. Bonaparte talk 19:35, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bonaparte, how is the WarriorScribe-Gastrich mediation going? I tried doing something for them, but it turns out that this os more than a mere content dispute :-( Izehar 19:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well Izehar, thank you for asking :) I am still optimist that they are very near to find a solution. It takes time I know but finally they will succed. By the way can you help me to expand that article of Romania's integration in EU? Bonaparte talk 19:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Map, Karashova

"I think is not used your proposed form "Karashova". Where did you find such transliteration? It looks like trasnformation from romanian into english."

Well, yes, I only tried to write this in english there, but I only used this name to explain my change in Timisoara article, so no problem about this, I will not use this name in any article. As for location map of Carasova, do you have one like this here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Botosani_in_Romania.png

Or I should ask user:Orioane to upload one? PANONIAN (talk) 20:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"I hope is good one :) I did all my best"

You made it yourself? Ok, but it is located too much in the south. Carasova town should be located somewhere in this Krashovani inhabited area:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Krashovani.png

PANONIAN (talk) 20:28, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I just saw that somebody added Hungarian names for counties, thus I added Serbian too, since there is also Serbian minority there. I do not care if you delete those, I will not return them back. As for location map, when you change it, the Carasova town should be located just near Resita. You can change this one instead:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Resita_in_Romania.png

PANONIAN (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, the Caraşova article is now complete with this map. I do not know why, but I just do not like articles, which does not have maps. :)) PANONIAN (talk) 20:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Panorama

Please see my question at Talk:Târgu-Mureş#Panorama. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Romanian names

Can you add Romanian names for those places if you know them: Novi Kneževac, Banatsko Aranđelovo, Nakovo, Novi Bečej, Aradac, Kačarevo. Unlike in Romanian counties, there are 6 official languages in Vojvodina, and the NPOV use of alternative names for the places in Vojvodina would be to post names in all 6 languages or at least 3-4 of them. Since somebody already added Hungarian names for those places, I do not see why Romanian names should not be added too. PANONIAN (talk) 23:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transnistria

As I promised you a couple of days ago, I have spent some time trying to clean up the Transnistria article and even kept them from be reverted by a anonymous reverter. The edits were somehow censored by User:TSO1D ( I am not fully agree with his corrections but lets discuss them first on the talkpage). I am neutral about the alleged COPYVIO paragraph since I have not seen the alleged original and I am trying not to interfere with its removal or insertion by people who probably have stronger opinion of the matter than me. I believe that my changes are improvement to the article and after censoring by User:TSO1D are devoid from the Russian POV. Can you spent a few minutes and explain your grievances against my edits. I will appreciate your output as I consider you as a bright representative of a Romanian POV abakharev 00:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bilbo

Just saw your note. Seems like a good plan. David D. (Talk) 06:14, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]