User talk:Gerdbrendel

; Archives
	/November-December-January 2006 How to edit, templates editing, blue boxes, Acura RL a full-size car?; /February 2006 Luxury Car defenition debate between Samstayton and myself as well as other issues that were disussed such as copyright problems with certain images.; /March 2006 Luxury Car debate between Zouf, Samstayton and myself, Lincoln MKX MKS discussion.; /April/May 2006 Images, Take Me Higher Request for comment, infoboxes, Palm Desert, and other various questions.;

Welcome!

Hello Gerdbrendel, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! HGB 08:31, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Signature^brendel

This is my new Signature! Signature^brendel 06:46, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like it! I do have a question about how you managed to post this nice signature each time you sign. Surely you don't write all of the code out each time? Nhprman 07:16, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And of course, I just did three seconds of research and discovered on my own that the "nickname" line in My Preferences does this just fine. Thanks! I'll be working on a nicer one, like yours. User:Nhprman ^UserLists 07:23, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm glad you like my new signature. Thanks. Signature^brendel 07:35, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lincoln Town Car

You are plainly a major Town Car fan! The number of edits you have put into the article is phenomenal. Your infoboxes are particularly good. Thanks for all your efforts. RivGuySC 03:48, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I sure am a Town Car fan. Thank you, I really apreciate it! Signature^brendel 04:36, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Brendel, I am simply overwhelmed by the barnstar that you awarded to me. Thanks so very, very much! Stu

Another Thanks!

For another barnstar! My first one. :-) RivGuySC 04:29, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From bok269

Thank you, I didn't know which page to do that on. Bok269 15:36, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Upper Middle Class

What do I mean by being both a professional and a manager. Well, from personal experience working in a factory, the majority of foremen were also engineers. All plant managers are engineers (as well as MBA's usually). You can be both. Paul Fussell for instance said you can be both, and it can be an conflict. Think Red + Blue = Purple. rasblue 03:05, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I understand what you mean. Thanks for claryfyng. Regards, Signature^brendel 03:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- - I understand what you mean. I was just trying to point out to the folks who thought that doctors and lawyers were upper-class because of their US Average Salaries that this is not true in the rest of the world.

But to go back on your salary grid.... I have issues with your averages. I'm an electrical engineer and also an e€conomist (MBA Econ) by profession and by licensure. I think you have underestimated all of the salaries. Just to use an example you might relate to, I was in the Ford Wixom Plant very recently (Rumor is it will be shut down). I live in Metro Detroit $68,000US/year is the salary of an engineer with 2-4 years experience, and Detroit is a low salary city with the worst unemployment for a major city in the US. Also, true economists with either a masters (magistar?) or a doctorate usually earn more than $90,000US a year. Maybe if they are writing they do not earn, but most economists work in government, large corporations, or in finance. I just write about what I have first hand experience in. Perhaps you are referring too engineering technicians or people with only Bachelors in Economics degrees? rasblue 07:15, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- - I would be sceptical about using salary surveys. JUst by their nature they cannot provide a comprehensive survey. Many people work in areas where they cannot be pigeonholed into a simple career and salary category. This is especially true with engineers and people in finance. After all, most engineers do not work as strictly engineers by the time they are 40 years old. Many/Most gravitate to management, consulting, or entrepeneurship eventually.

BTW The Ford St. Thomas Plant, home of the Grand Marquis and the Maurauder is slated to be shut down also. Its not definite, nothing is with Bill Ford's "Great Leap Forward" but it still is sad to see. I do wonder what Ford will build to replace this popular large fleet vehicle. rasblue 18:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right you can't pigeonwhole many people but what other choice do we have? Also, yest it's a shame and I don't even know whether or not the workers in Oantrio will enter the job bank. For me its also a shame since I love the Town Car. Regards, Signature^brendel 00:02, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

eu superpower

your crazy.It's amazing that they didn't revert it yet.And on the discussions your seem all alone(for now).If they revert it don't be intimidated revert it back.Well my stance is a littel bit different,i'm saying that the thrue power of usa is overestimated and eu power is underestimated.We leave in a multipolar world,with several regional powers.Superpower thing is just cold war propaganda.--Ruber chiken 15:22, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point about superpowers. I do agre we live in a multipolar world and yes the US is overestimated while the EU is underestimated. Thanks for your support! Regards, Signature^brendel 17:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Passenger vehicles in the United States

Gerd, seems like we're clashing with our edits concerning this article. Could you please stop editing for a moment and I will try to merge both your and mine edits and then I'll keep off? Thanks! Bravada, talk - 23:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, sorry I didn't really notice ;-) Signature^brendel 23:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now I am the one who should apologize, I should have noticed you are continually expanding the article and stopped as I saw your edits. Anyway, I am done for now, but I have some general thoughts:

First of all, please check whether I haven't messed up with your edits in the stats sections, especially whether the refs are alright.
Can we use the present-style references in general, it will be much easier to work with them in the future?
I never heard a formal definition of the largest industrialized country in the world, therefore it sounds slightly POV to me. If you can provide a reference, I would be OK with that.
The stats are insightful perhaps, but pretty indigestive if I am to be honest here. Some graphs instead of raw data and tables would help, and more importantly some notes on trends and why are they so. I hope we can make it more reader-friendly in the future. Bravada, talk - 23:41, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean about the stats, it might be a bit overwhelming. As to the industrialized country question, well the US is the largest country to have a GDP per capita of over $7k, I have added a link to the world bank for that, if you still think its POV you can remove it. Signature^brendel 23:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gerd, I found myself unable to resist editing, or at least "reviewing" your edits and suggesting some other, so I have decided to post my thoughts on the article's talk page. I would be grateful if you would take a look at it from time to time. Thx. Bravada, talk - 00:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I have also responeded there. Signature^brendel 00:31, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Please do not bother me about opinions I write in Discussion pages. I know the rules of Wikipedia. (This comment was left by 68.65.33.193)

Really? You seem to have forgotten to sign your name, and what you said was offensive. Please refrain from phrases such as "Shut up," "How obvious that a Dutch man would bitch about something like that," or "What moron [is this contribution attributed to]." Please, lets keep it professional. Thank you. Regards, Signature^brendel 02:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I lost the pw to my user name, which was Subversive. Not being an uber-intelligent person such as yourself, I don't go around advertising my IP address. 68.65.33.193 23:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC) (Please note that the offensive content of this message has been removed)[reply]

Image:LTCDashboard.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:LTCDashboard.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.

Actually, the image has proven unecessary for its intended use, so it can be deleted as there is no need to waste server space. Regards, Signature^brendel 17:34, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wiki directory?

Have you heard anything about a wiki internet directory or some thing? Thers wikispecies,wikinews ... why not wikidirectory,like odp? What you thots?Isn't weard that this progect didn't started?--Ruber chiken 14:53, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

usa superpower

It's not contradictory,that an european ,that lives in the US,is payd in dollars.And at the same time ,saying that the economics of the US are not sound.--Ruber chiken 19:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't really saying that, I think you might have misunderstood me. I responded on your talk page. Regards, Signature^brendel 04:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So the 7% comercial deficit don't wory you at all.--Ruber chiken 04:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(See response on Ruber chiken's talk page) Signature^brendel 06:14, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet???And the external net debt,is not worry you???i don't remambeur the exacte number,it's something like 50%.EU's external net debt is ...minus something very small(i mean peopol boroud from them).--Ruber chiken 04:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(See response on Ruber chiken's talk page) Signature^brendel 06:14, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aaa yes,;-). is a smaley,for me it's just a ; - ) .How do you do(yes very british) for shoing them up,i'm on LINUX.You don't understand,50% external net debt is not a problem,is THE problem.EU problems are trivial,compared to that.Argentina colapsed for less debt,the usa are biger,so last logner,but live in the same univers then ours.On top of that,the monetary mass of the dolar is huge.There are more dolars outside the usa,then inside,in fact is kind of debt to,combined with 7% comercial debt,at witch point foreners will lose fath in the dollar.In physics,this is colde an instable system,a littel topel,and the inertia of the system can brign it down.I mean if you pass acertain limit foreners will lose faith and stop buying,that will provoce a resecion,the recesion will provoce many bancrapsyies in the indebt americans,in turn this will fuel the recession,then forener get even more scared,you see,this sets a chain reaction,suposesly this hapened in the great resesion of 1929.In contrast ,the euro outside the eurozone is almost inexistant(exepte montenegro,kosovo,east europe,they will joine the euro anyway).See what i mean that kind of level of debt is unafordable by any one,for what reson the USA should afford it.Every body says that debt is not a problem,so it have to be thrue,this is groupsthinking.If you see it objectivly,ofcaurse debt is a problem.I think the usual thinking is,since usa is a superpower she can do as she pleases,so she can do as she pleases on her debt.For me the debt in economics is the equivalent of the iraq war in international affers.Is titanic thinking,we are the best,the greatest,the mightyest,the hugest,the smartest,the ..bagn on the iceberg.--Ruber chiken 15:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it's not just me see Second Great Depression.You have to be carfull when reeding articles that tries to predict the future.--Ruber chiken 17:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Nevertheless, its an interesting article. Regards, Signature^brendel 17:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You mean that you have to be careful in reading articles?Objsctivly i don't see how they will get them selfs out of the hole they get in too.Do you have any theory?The debt to be repayed have to,reduce the deficit from 7% to something negative(if you don't anderstant what that means is that american living standards will fall for more then 7%,and continue to overwork),i don't see how you can do that any time soon,plus external debt is alredy more than 50%--Ruber chiken 17:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you do have to read articles carefully. As to the US deficit, I think the first step would be to stop borrowing money. Regards, Signature^brendel 19:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can't do that emiditly.It's not just the goverment,also the privet debt.All the projections are made under the asomption that the growth will continue.Stop borowing,means a reduction in the deficit,from 7% to 0.How on earth are they going to do that,without a recession,that mean that americans will consume 7% less then today.--Ruber chiken 20:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I meant both the gov and private housholds should slow their borrowing. You're right if they stop borrowing money altoghether there'll be a huge recession. Signature^brendel 21:31, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey the UN flag is nice in the multipolar section.--Ruber chiken 18:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Signature^brendel 19:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but debt is alredy <50%.If they don't do something quik,thers someting like 7% addition each year.The debt then will even biger.I mean,may be they alredy past the point of no return.And if they didn't alredy,they probably will,since your assured that nothing will be don at least the new elections.And even then they schould reduce the deficit slowly enof,so that they don't create aressecion.If we supose a 1% decreace in the deficit,that mean that you will nead 7 years to reach 0.So is a de facto 18% more in debt before starting repaying.50+18=68%,and this IF you start today,IF you can reach your goal of 1% for 7 years in a roal,IF you don't provoque a ressesion.This seems hi unlikly since the decline started 50 years ago.After the war,they begin eating ther surplus ,then in the 70s,the comersial deficits started,that blow away the breton woods agreamant,then in the 80s,the balance of paymants became negative(they wher major instabilities in the price of the dolar at that time) and debt began to bild up constantly,and resently the debt bild up accelareted.Do you rely think that you can stop a 50 year old trend in 7 years?Plus the recent accelaration(i mean last 5 years),make you suspect that a hang up is iminent(i mean in years time).What makes it even more probable,is that americans asume ther economy is invulnerble,and that they can do as they pleas.So the chances that they start doing something about it is extrimly slim.You leave in america,just ask them if they are concerned about the debt ant what ther goverment should do about it.May be i'm rogn,may be i'm right,any way i am a very big courd(see my boxs:no reson to die for) so i wouldn't take any chances if i was you.--Ruber chiken 02:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

chek

chek my spelling in the USA section,and try to read the new paragraph,i gave birth too again,above.Tell me what you think,i'm planing to put it in the Second Great Depression article--Ruber chiken 02:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

superpower debate

you have too be diplomatic.The argument is what have too go in the article.Don't dispurce from the objective.Don't forget what the objective is--Ruber chiken 16:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know. See my new, "Compromise" post on the talk page. Regards, Signature^brendel 16:58, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes.for the EU section?But whats the status on the statement,that some beleave that is alredy a superpower?If this last one ,is not axepted,i'm in favor any way for the EU as a separet section.--Ruber chiken 17:57, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The EU would be mentioned in a seperate section in which all related cirsumstances would be discussed. Signature^brendel 19:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes i meant,if they will be problems with that.If you didn't get it,the multipolar section,will implay explicitly that the usa is not a superpower,backed with evidences.And the usa section would imply explicitly that it is the sole superpower.Do you see the storm comming.Any way we have enof reference to back it up,folowing the neutral point of vieu rule.So beter obtain a concensus separetly for each case EU-Multipolar.And pleas try read the last paragraph a roote in the section above,i whant to now what you have to say.--Ruber chiken 23:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

nobel eagel says that he axeptes the compromise.That we can copy the paragraph of EU emergine superpower on a diferent section.What do we do?--Ruber chiken 05:36, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well the EU has its own section now I added some mention of some EU sections, otherwise we have reached a compromise and can now relax a bit ;-) If you'd like, you could start an article regarding the the Multipolar theory - I'll correct you spelling and sentence structre. Signature^brendel 05:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is no section,it's a paragraph.They think they whone the page.Neutrality rule has been breached,the page is biaised.Did you read the section on USA debt i wrote some time now?I realy whant to now your opinion.--Ruber chiken 06:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

reginal power

You don't understand.Once your inside the EU.Power of states don't mean zap.France for example has 40% of it GDP dun with the rest of EU countries,belgium 60%.And thers the EURO,and the schegen treity ....Once incide the eurozone,what are you going to do booly,your eurozone partnair.And if a eurozone partnair is in truble,you leting him down?Whats the diference betewn france and luxemburg then?The EU is a confederation,just see the definition,is perfectly clear.Whel,deep down,i think,i chouldn't complaine.EU is more valiouble stelth technology then the B-2.I think you alredy now my vieus on self oganizing systems.Did you read the thing on usa debt,i whant to now what you think?--Ruber chiken 06:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

on your talk page(here)-section-usa superpower-->last paragraph.--Ruber chiken 06:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

how can you say,without been reduculous,that the eu is an emergin superpower but,it's not a regional power.--Ruber chiken 06:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay the statistics you mention are very interesting and the paragraph states sufficient evidence to supports its warning against America's growing defeicit. Obviously it would take longer then seven years and it is good to see that you pointed out how long America's deficit dates back. There are, however, two other things you should include: 1) In the 1990s the US government had a surplus for the first time since the 1950s, so the policies leading up to the 90s surplus could also be mentioned and used as an example of how to reduce debt. 2)Regan had huge effect on the gov deficit in the 1980s, he brought the idea of deficit spedning to help the country's economy really to life. In other words Ronald Regan was the first to openly express the idea that if spending a lot of borrowed money might help the economy. It does, its called Regonomics. It is practiced until today, as you said the US needs deficit spending to maintain its economy. It would be interesting to also point out how Regan effected this trend. Regards, Signature^brendel 17:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You don't understand.In the 90s the goverment had a surplus,but the rest of the economy didn't.They just move around the deficit without fixing any thing,is enron like acountents,ther still was a global deficit,just hiden in the numbers.I'm not talking about the goverments deficits,i'm talking about the contries deficitis.Japan has 150% or something public debt,but all of it,is from japanies it self.So japan,as a contry,don't have external debt,in fact a good portion,of american debt is woned by japanies.Goverment budjet is a portion of the economy,in order to now if things are rely going beter,you have to see the sum.Or you can imagine,simply shift problem from one part of the economy to the auther,isn't doing any thing real.You mean that you beleave in Regonomics?It is in the expence of the future,some day,foreners will demand ther maney back,with an interest.Borwing,in now doubt boustens todays economy,but whats going to hapen to tomoraws economy?US needs deficit spending to maintain its economy,but it also need to stop increasing it's debt,if she want's to maintain the economy.You can't,ither go back nor advance.--Ruber chiken 19:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't beleive in Regonomics, I am saying that he was the first to openly express the idea that deficit spending is a good way to jumpstart the economy. You're right it does come at the expense of the future, that is why deficit spedning needs to be slowly reduced or at least stabelized. I merely find the connection between Regan and deficit spending very interesting and noteworthy. Signature^brendel 19:48, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You don't seem very concernd.For some one how hase a life there.--Ruber chiken 02:48, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

proposal for EU

why we don't change the EU emerging article,toards, say emergine-debated or something.We let the small paragraph on the superpower page,and move our material ther.--Ruber chiken 07:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You, mean change the name of the European Union as an emerging superpower article to European Union Debate and leave the European Union debate section on the superpower article. Yes I would be in favor of that. Regards, Signature^brendel 17:01, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whel i was thinking,to some thig like,EU power,or something.Because on the contrary of what some may argue,EU is not a talking chop like the african union.And in the political tamplet to give it a plce on it's won,and to move it from the emergin powers section.It would explain the importants of EU in the region and in the world.Ther is a need for such an article,thers so much ignorance on the subject.I bet that britanica don't have such an article.Plus it will eliminate any threat of deleation,as it will not be crystal balling,and will have legitimate claims.--Ruber chiken 19:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let me do some reseach on what articles already exists regarding the EU and come back to you on that one. Signature^brendel 19:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thers no article of that nature.Is all about the institutions,statistics....EU is invisible.--Ruber chiken 00:06, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what kind of article exactly are we talking about, you mean the forgeing policy and international impact of the EU. What shall this article be called? EU foreign policy? Sounds like a good idea. Signature^brendel 00:08, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

to explain the curent impact of EU on the world and region.The defacto status of integration.For example the eurozone;is not just a corency,and for all the rest we do like it don't exist.Not just external policy,internal cohesion too(economic interdepedence).In combination with the welth of it's members.Caul it something like"european soft power".Thers a book wher it says,that the 21 century,will be nither american,chinease or indian,but it will be eupean,in the sence that this kind of model is bean exported(mercosur).The kind of article that X*** and eagel chould read --Ruber chiken 00:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)schould read.[reply]

Europe as a soft power, yes that's a good idea. Do you have enough references? Then go ahead! Signature^brendel 02:25, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

a quick search on the internet ,and your fluded.It's clearly endicated that europeans don't beleav much in hard power.--Ruber chiken 02:51, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, neither do I. The EU is a softpower. Signature^brendel 02:57, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We schould point out that,is a kind of superpower that don't beleave in hard power,so mesuring his hard power is misliding.Let's try to discuss this with light fantastic.In my last edit,i over exagerate a litel,and now his pist with me.So can you proposing it to him.Don't foget to point out that this will eliminate the specter of deletion,onese and for all(for the EU emerging superpower).--Ruber chiken 19:35, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

in the contry of the blind on eye man is king

[1]

Hey.

Thanks for the signature! Just to make sure, I will browse throught he articles you have created just to make sure the spelling is correct! Thanks again. - Erebus555 19:14, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, but that's probably a lot of work ;-) Signature^brendel 19:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind. As long as it helps Wikipedia, I'm fine. :) - Erebus555 19:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty then, thank you for helping Wikipedia and my articles gain and maintain their integrity! Regards, Signature^brendel 19:19, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

chiken

For a moment,i thouth,that it was you how thanked me for the italian edit,how did he find this out????he now even less italian then me,and very inlikly that he will hang there.Yes it's me,i'm droping the registration,several peopol whant me out of english wikipedia because of my speling,well,they can trie to bother me now.I'm countinuing my "disruptive editing",they can go *****.chiken

Great,you spoted me,because of my,eee,my nice ,clean ,ordered and clear whriting.My hand whriting is even beter.chiken.

Hey,the history of galileo(european gps),is funy.In 2002,it was suposed to be underfunded and olmost dead,after american presiours to stop the progect,they ,over funded the project.Thank you mister bush.chiken

well at least the man has one accomplushment on his record ; - ) (sarcasm)- see my dems userbox. Signature^brendel 02:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About the emergin superpower article on EU.My proposition is ,to tern the article,towrds,todays EU power,left the ferther integration as a future perspective ,hilite the special cases of EU(we don't beleav in war...)and move the article from the emergine superpowers section(in the tamplate),in it's owne section,rename it in to something else(the old mane will countinue to point to the article),the name schould make reference to todays and future power.In my proposition we will actually expande the scope of the article,we will not reduse it by any mean(we will concider today situation).Also note that this move will eliminate the thrate of deleation,the last time was a majority for deleation,but it wasn't enouft acording to wikipedia rules.If you agry,anounce the proposition in the talkpage of the article,your englich is beater,and your registered,it will look more serious.chiken

I have already started talking to Light the Trip Fantastic but am approaching this carefully. I agree the article should be renamed and recategorized. Regards, Signature^brendel 06:29, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

EU debate?is an ugly title.I had in minde;something cute and marcetable.chiken

Is Italy a Great Power?

Please see the related discussion on Talk:Great power. Nobleeagle (Talk) 08:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lol no I think you misunderstood what I was talking about...I want more Europeans to look at that page as the discussion is getting nowhere, please WP:Be Bold and vote your opinion so that we can have consensus, the vote's been open for ages. Nobleeagle (Talk) 08:28, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see, I'll cast my vote on the discussion page (I see what you're talking about) tomrrow as it is 1:30am here. Signature^brendel 08:32, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All things considered, when you take into account the earthquakes, floods and the fact that the Government changes forms every thirty minutes, the only smart people in Italy are the ones that left. And by the way, here, in the bowels of Canada, it is 2:52 P.M. Im Glad Im Sicilian, The woman from mainland Italy are to Hairy, and dont forget, there is no such thing as an Italian war hero. The only gear on an Italian tank, reverse.... (This comment was left by Kaltenborn)

wow, what creative racist remarks. your mum must be so proud. 192.45.72.26 01:24, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Very funny!!!!" That of the tank I always heard it related to french,but nevermind. So there isn't Italian war heros, say that to the families of the dead soldiers in Kosovo,Irak, Afghanistan.... And in WWI who beat you up, not italians too? And you Germans always call Italians cowards and say Italians have double-crossed you, well,who double-crossed who, really? Hitler and Germany when invaded Poland without saying a word to Italy and promissed Mussolini it wouldn't start a war untill 1942-43 and then what. This is the true word of Germans. Worth nothing.

And about women, italian ones are of the most beautifull and sexy in the world and not only a few, the majority. Germany has wonderfull women but the majority are fat, ugly men-looking women.

ACamposPinho 22:55, 29 June 2006

TODAY ITALY WON IT'S 4th WORLD CUP in hitler's stadium in germany

An eye for an eye- You won ITALIA 90,now Italy won in germany. And germany got the third place because PORTUGAL was very very stolen in the game with France and yesterday was very unlucky. If Nuno Gomes and Figo entered earlier you would see.....but since PORTUGAL is much smaller and less important than Germanyand since Germany was playing at home, Germany would have win in any way. If it was necessary the referee would create a penalty or something in order that Germany would won. But the fairness would be Italy-first place, Portugal-second place and France-third.

ACamposPinho 23:43, 9 July 2006

Wikiproject?

Please see this. Nobleeagle (Talk) 03:57, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what will be the difference with now?chiken

Better cooperation between editors, a more clearly outlined list of taks, and a new dicussion forum in which all members of the project can participate in discussing everything from disputed edits to adopting templates and layout standards. Generally articles part of a Wiki project also appear more unified thus giving adding to Wikipedia's creditbility. Regards, Signature^brendel 20:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pheaton?

In the U.S., a Pheaton has been known as a four door convertible, as marketed in the twentys and thirtys. I was curious as to why Volkswagen would call its high priced sedan a Pheaton, unless this term is used to describe four door sedans in Germany, is this the case? Example: a Cadillac four door convertible-circa 1938-was refered to as an "all weather Pheaton", being that it had roll up side windows and removable "B" pillars. Regards Kaltenborn 01:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, now I see what you meant. Yes the Pheaton is called Pheaton in Germany. As the car was and is mainly intended for the European market, VW probably overlooked this piece of automotive history. Thanks for your quick reply. Regards, Signature^brendel 02:09, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

EU debate

EU fragmantation is perseved as a weakness,unuf to consider her economic clout meaningless.It's in that way,that EU unity is taken in to considaration.So take in to acount her auther powers,is not ouside of the discution.The title,i find it ugly,i'm trying to propose something,cute and marketable,like i sead before.chiken(anser back here)

Well, the dabate is over whether or not the EU is unified enough to be counted as a superpower. Some think yes, some think no, and yet others like yourself think that there are no superpower. The current section clearly mentiones the controversy whether or not the EU is a superpower. As there is no definite answer, we need to mention all ideologies. As to the title, yes, European Union Debate may not be cute but it I don't want to jeopardize the entire compromise because of the title. Neverhteless let me know any better suggestion you have and we can discuss them right here. Thank you. Best Regards, Signature^brendel 23:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"whether or not the EU is unified enough to be counted as a superpower".Yes,but,why unity is a isue,in the first place? because it is persived as too cripling,it's a weakness.So talking about her forces,is not outside of the discution.The curent section,concentrate only on the unity isue,and complitly overlooks,her curent powers and her unique properties,the advantages that arise by not beening fuly united,lack of unity is not 100% problems.For example in iraq,a normal country whould have been 100% for or against,the EU,all the time,is a litel bit for,a litel bit against,so on average,a fiasco like iraq,is less likely to come from EU,it's also thrue that astonoching good thing are also less likely to arise.Plus EU,looks very cooperative from the out side,because inside they have to be a wide consensus in order to take a dessision.So,over all,say if EU is powerfull enauf to be considered a superpower,is very,confusing to say the list.I'm not chalenging the place of the auther ideologies in the article,i don't see where you came up whith that.Title "ambiguous status" is it beter? Eu,terned the isue about power on it's head "Europe's structure as a club has allowed it to reverse the very idea of the balance of power. As its strength grows, its neighbors want to join it rather than balance it.".This is a positive feadback .chiken

can the USA force a country to do this [2]

Ban gay marriage, No. Especially not in a EU country. FYI: I'll respond to your post above as soon as I get the time. Best Regards, Signature^brendel 23:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A , yes,it takes time,to sifer it.

Barnstar

US native speaker percentage

Hi, it just occured to me that difference in our percentages (79% vs. 82%) could be as we are using differently dated info. What year is the 214.8 mil figure? Signature^brendel 03:40, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I've made a post about this at the Talk page for the U.S. article. Hope it helps. — President Lethe 04:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

tamplate

dosn't this has it place in the template,of international relations? Multipolar chiken

Yes it does, it beloings alongside the power articles as it deals with very similar subject matter. Regards, Signature^brendel 04:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Next step for the Project

Thanks for your support of the new upcoming International Relations WikiProject. Please see Talk:Superpower and vote... Nobleeagle (Talk) 07:40, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Median household income

Hi - I tweaked your new entry in Template:Infobox U.S. state a bit. It's now 1) conditional on the article providing a value (are you intending to add values for all 50 states? - if so, we can delete the conditional after all the values are added), 2) includes the rank, e.g. 14^th (superscripting the "th" or "st" or "rd" is assumed), and 3) is a "subrow" in the larger box with the population figures. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Town Car replacement

HI, I noticed you put the MKS in as replacement. While yes it will be the flagship, please note that we have taken the flagship name off the template and now only have a full size category, the MKS won't be the replacement for the Town Car. Auto Week said it well, "If Ford stops making the Town Car with the closure of the Wixom plant next year, there will be a gap before a replacement product is on the market. Ford plans a production version of the Lincoln MKS concept car featured at the 2006 Detroit auto show. It could arrive as early as late 2007. But that vehicle, based on the Ford Five Hundred platform, is much smaller." You see the MKS is to small, over a foot shorter, than the TC to be Town Car. Autoweed also states that the DTS will be the only cay left in the "old cooger" segment, and they're right the MKS will be the new flagship but won't replace the Town Car. Just like there has never been a replacement for the Fleetwood Bourgham, there won't be one for the TC in the near future. As we have taken out the flagship category, I think its fair to have the TC end in '07 w/ nothing to follow and put the MKS in the Continental line only. Regards, Signature^brendel 05:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two flaws in your logic: 1) the Continental was considered a "midsize" car (your own claim) and the Town Car is considered "full size". The MkS is called a "full size flagship" in all the Ford media releases. Even if it is a "foot shorter", the interior space is comparable (except perhaps for the extended wheelbase Town Car and certainly the stretched limo versions). 2) The MkS is also AWD - so it crosses both the Continental (FWD) and Town Car (RWD) platform configurations. I had assumed until recently that the Town Car was a continuing carline to be produced in canada alongside it's platform mates Crown Vic and Grand Marquis, and that the MkS was essentially a replacement for the Continental and to an extent the "loaded" LS, which was in turn the de facto replacement for the Mark VIII, in spite of significant platform and visual styling variations. With the closing of the Wixom plant, and the decision not to transfer Town car production to Canada (and what appears to be a move towards cancelling the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis as well), then the "full size Flagship" line you originally created is indeed being filled by the MKS - and conveniently at about the same time as Wixom is scheduled to close and Town Car production will cease.

This is why I decided the "best compromise" is to cross both the midsize and fullsize "flagship" carlines with the MkS - again I was setting what is factually correct and "right" as opposed to what might be "believed" or "understood" or "conceptualized" by fans, who tend to be fanatical in their biases about "their cars" - which usually yields problems related to POV. I have known your edits for a long time now, and I know you to be highly protective of your Lincoln articles, and especially that of your beloved Town Car. You have a tendancy to lean towards what I call "automotive classism" where you tend to try to keep certain vehicles "pidgeonholed" - as seen in the automotive timelines you have so meticulously created, and often fight any changes to them. The problem with this static approach is that the automotive industry and marketplace and consumer demographics is highly dynamic - constantly shifting and adjusting and expanding and shrinking to the needs and wants and preferences of the buying public. I think the "best" and most "correct" solution here is to allow the MkS to do its job as advertised, and cover the Continental and Town Car class carlines as it in fact does.

But I am not interested in an edit war with you. I put that edit to the Lincoln timeline up for a reason, and that was to make you think about it a little deeper, and come to your own conclusions, and consider "letting go" of the Town Car as a "protected" carline, and consider the MkS for what it is intended for in the marketplace, rather than highlighting how it differs from the venerable Town Car. I think when the MkS comes out, and you get to test drive one, you will like it and be thrilled that it is the defacto Lincoln Flagship "replacement" for the Town Car - carrying the Lincoln name and flag with some long deserved pride and respect. It will be a quantum leap, ready to take on all comers from Japan, Europe, and even Cadillac; as you will see as more information is released. By the way - I have been adopting the "MkS" moniker for a reason - that is sort of how it will appear on the nameplate - almost like "Mk S" where the "k" is actually capital but slightly reduced in font size and dropped down, and a slight gap between the "Mk" and the "S" - as will also be seen on the "MkX / Mk X" crossover coming out in a few weeks. Anyway for now, check out the media previews again on the MkS: [3]. --T-dot 11:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polarity in international relations

I just discuvered this article.It gives an interesting definition about unipolarity.I did some merge with the multipolar article,could you sex it up and redirect the multipolar links towrds Polarity in international relations.Thanks you.chiken.

I'll be glad to look over the Multipolar section of the Polarity article but why do you want to merge them. Why not give the view of Multipolar world more weight by letting it have its own article? Let me know what you think. Regards, Signature^brendel 00:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unipolarity in international politics describes a distribution of power in which there is one state with a preponderance of strategically relevant resources.

In a unipolar system in which there are multiple centers of power, one state controls 50 % or more of available strategic resources.
In a unipolar system in which there are only two centers of power, one state controls 76 % or more of the available strategic resources.
In a near-unipolar system (or highly-asymmetrical multipolarity), one state controls more than 45 % but less than 50 % of available strategic resources, and no other state controls 25 % or more.

in wich of the three,is our unipolar world classified in?

Well, no one state controls more than 45% of resources. The US and EU together control roughly 51% of the world's resources. Regards, Signature^brendel 00:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hem,what's your definition of resources control?And according your definition of resources,if we don't count EU as a unit ,we are retrograded further to a multipolar world, this is by no means a unipolar world ,as preached by many.Plus the superpower ideology is undermind in a multipolar system,hence by definition, thers no dominant power.Hyperpower thing looks complitly ridiculous.The multipolar article has very small readers,it discussion page was 2 lines,from weach i reaten one,in the polarity article ,it will have more chances to be read and it would be side by side with the other "point of views".chiken

I see, but why not have both an article for multipolar world and a mention in the polarity article. Just like there is an article for Emerging Superpowers and a secrtion for emerging superpower in the superpower article. Again, we could do the same here, have both a seperate article and a section. BTW: I use GDP, and the use of resouces as outlined on the superpower talk page to determine a country's control. Regards, Signature^brendel 00:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stil ,is more of a fork.The curent polarity article alredy absorbed several smaler one.And it will still need to mention auther polarities,except unipolarity,all polarity article is special cases of multipolarity.The emergine power articles are huge,thats why they each have ther whon .For the reader is not nice to split content in too small articles.from a marketing perspective ,i beleave is beter to have relevent stuf grouped ,when possible, over categorisation becomes a problem.Peopol how were surching for some thing else will have it directly under theyr nose.plus having them in the same page ,permits too compare the theories more easily.Plus it seems that the multipolar section has more potential in over whelming the polarity article ,in the long run(what kind of aditions would be add in the unipolar and bipolar section).chiken

p.s. its always possible to split it later, in case that it whould be nasacary.

Template Suggestion

Hello - I've been kicking around a small modification and hopefully "improvement" to the automotive templates - specifically on the "model years" row. I find it "easier" to read and comprehend the table if I substiture the '01 / '02 / '03 (etc) model year format instead of the current 1 / 2 / 3 (etc) year format under the 2000's banner (and correspondingly under the 1990's as '91 / '92 etc.). I have posted a sandbox example of the improved Lincoln Vehicles template at the bottom of my talk page. Please look over what I did and see if you like it better that way, or the original way. I was also wondering if we could/should "flag" the future years '08, '09 etc. in perhaps a red font color - as a sort of warning that anything beyond the current launching model year ('07) is by definition speculative and subject to change. Just some thoughts I had that I wanted to bounce off you. I would rather work with you on changes like this, and avoid the embarrassment of reverting each other. Thanks. --T-dot 14:12, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Household income in the United States

File:286px-Map of below national USA 3 svg.png

The image you uploaded (to the left) is somewhat incorrect. North Carolina should be red. However, it is both highlighted in red and yellow. If you could correct the image I'd appreciate it. Refer to "income by state" for the data. Thanks! --Tokachu 01:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sorry for my mistake. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. Regards, Signature^brendel 05:09, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Automobile manufacturers

The issue of whether to list the parent company or the subsidiary has come up again on Talk:Lamborghini Murciélago. I thought you might want to check it out. TomTheHand 13:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding ==Millionaire==

Nope, found it in Will & Grace;; search for it.

100110100 08:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, 176,000 google hits for millionairess and 38,000,000 for millionaire. That's a vague verdict causing me to beleive that the former is not really commonly used, I'll think about chagning the article later on... Signature^brendel 08:51, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Luxury Cars

Hi Gerdbrendel,

I am a bit concerned about your article on luxury cars. Firstly, where do you get the 36K figure? Any reference? I am actually curious. Secondly, car.com clearly states that luxury cars start at 25K, "Entry luxury cars usually cost between $25,000 and $40,000". To classify a car as a luxury car is an open discussion and it would be bias of the author to tout his classification as correct.

Metrothesis(Metrothesis 01:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Where did you get the "General definition"? You say, "Currently, that means its Mean Selling Price (MSP) is in excess of roughly US$36,000 or higher." Could you please explain your methodology?

Metrothesis (Metrothesis 02:16, 29 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]

What were the difference in makes between kbb and 36K? Also, on what basis do you classify "Prestige"?

Metrothesis (Metrothesis 03:08, 29 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Italy - Great Power

You said, "Becuase Italy has neither an economy close to size of Germany's or nuclear weapons and seat on the Security Council like France and the UK"

That isn't really the case. Germany's GDP is roughly 2.5 trillion. Italy's is roughly 1.7 trillion. GDP/per capita is basically the same. Germany's economy is larger on the gross scale because of a higher population. In the grand scale of things it is indeed close. Second, Italy does not have it's own nuclear arsenal or a seat on the Security Council, true, but neighter does Japan. Actually, I've read once that Italy has nuclear weapons that were placed by the US (sorry no reference at the moment). Anyway, getting to the criteria on the page:

The capacity to contribute to the international order
Internal cohesion to allow for effective state action
Economic power, such as high levels of economic growth or a large market
Military power, with the ability to compete with other dominant powers in a conventional war

I would argue that Italy, Germany and Japan do not fit these criteria. Two and Three, yes, for all. The first, highly debatable. The second, no debate at all. So I would say 2 1/2 points for all three.

Also, the sentence: "There is debate on whether Italy should be included as a Great power as it meets some of the common characteristics of the other powers." does not sound encyclopedic. I mean, there may be a discussion going on in Wiki, it doesn't mean there is a worldwide debate on this. :) To be fair, and if this sentence is kept, it should include Germany and Japan, by the above argument. I hope this sentence isn't favoured just because of the World Cup semifinals game. :) I'm not Italian, by the way. It is just the logic on this page of Modern Powers leaves a bit to be desired. 192.45.72.26 17:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Come on brendel, dont' tell me you're going to let the page fall into disarray. Canada a Great Power? Personal attacks can be hard to withstand but lets just fact it coolly and sensibly. This person relies purely on OR and is basically saying that if there is no Italy on the list there should be no Germany. I mean, come on, as if Germany's not a Great power, there has never been debate on that! Nobleeagle (Talk) 06:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fall into disarray?? Because it doesn't meet your opinions? My God. I like how you try and pull the German smoozing with Brendel though, that was pretty entertaining. Anyway, though you seem to mock Canada now, at least it sends UN troops, has a large and stable economy. I'd certainly like to live in Canada before I would live in India. Personal attack again? No, my personal preference and opinion. Deal with it. 71.106.195.5 08:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject United States

Hi Gerdbrendel. I added my name to the roster. Please see the note I put on there and chime in here if you have time. Thanks! CQ 16:44, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need a solution...Partial protection?

Working with IPs is especially difficult on the Power pages, because everyone has such strong views on the subject. If you see Wikipedia:Sockpuppets, sockpuppets are likely to know more about Wikipedia than other newcomers and are likely to launch straight into edit wars without an introduction to a particular subject. On the Emerging superpower pages, I often suspect various IPs to be the same people, as many of them immediately launch into attacks on the fact that I am Indian. Something that a newcomer wouldn't immediately know. Do you think there is any possible solution? Nobleeagle (Talk) 07:11, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, the emerging superpower IPs are definitely not the same person as this guy. As they are heavily pro-China and this guy was insulting how these nations pop out children like popcorn.. But it's just an example, there are many various IPs on the China page that not only seem the same person but seem the same as a registered user. By the way, I wouldn't bother with the fact that his IP changed after a few hours, he probably just has a dynamic IP and can't help it. Nobleeagle (Talk) 07:22, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Nobleeagle (Talk) 07:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are just (Personal attack removed) Why don't you have a fair debate, (Personal attack removed) 71.106.195.5 07:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uncanny. Well at least Brethel has some respect from me. But, dude, you need to (Personal attack removed). You wonder why I'm on the floor laughing? I guess me laughing is a personal attack. 71.106.195.5 07:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here, I signed it for you. I definitely want to be given credit for showing your true colours. 71.106.195.5 07:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archives