User talk:Nightstallion/notes

Wonderful

Compliments! This page is wonderful and very useful. --Checco 10:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! —Nightst a llion (?) 22:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Unarguably the MOST USEFUL/BEST Wikipedia page I've seen so far

Just FYI

If you want to add something to the page, feel free; I'd prefer it if you post it to the talk page here or to my talk page as well, though. Thanks! —Nightst a llion (?) 05:43, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Puerto Rico and New Columbia as 51st and 52nd States?

First, let me say that this is a very good page, although I don't agree that some of things listed as "certain" in your unknown dates section are necessarily so, e.g. Irish reunification. Now I noticed in section 3.3 of this page you have listed Puerto Rico and New Columbia as US territories to become the 51st and 52nd states, and if you don't mind I was wondering what you think the chances are for Puerto Rico to become a state. Personally, I think Puerto Rico is going to hit a figurative wall in the future over its status. As it is now, 46% seem to definitely support statehood, while 48% support the current status (or controversially an "enhanced commonwealth") and the remaining 4% support independence. I've browsed through articles online that discuss the "enhanced commonwealth" proposals and quite frankly the proposals are pretty unrealistic if not totally farfetched (basically wanting a non-territorial status that isn't statehood or independence with all the benefits of being a U.S. state and being sovereign), however, it seems the idea has gained currency in the territory. I have to wonder though, what will happen in the future if the commonwealth supporters try to implement the enhanced commonwealth proposals only to have them struck down as unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court. If (or more likely when) the enhanced commonwealth proposals are shown to be unachievable in their current form then the only viable options are statehood, status quo or independence (including free association, which is the status that most closely resembles the enhanced commonwealth). If that happens, then I see one of three things happening:

nothing changes; Puerto Rico continues as it is with it's never-ending debate.
the supporters of commonwealth status then begin to support the other options, with statehood gaining the majority
the supporters of commonwealth status then begin supporting free association (independence) as the closest form of the enhanced commonwealth proposal.

To that end I think it's a little bit more likely that New Columbia (minus the National Capital Services Area which would become a rump DC according to the draft constitutions) might become a state. Well, those are my thoughts, just wanted to get your views on the issues.72.27.1.101 05:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think in the end Irish reunification is inevitable simply because the Catholic population is growing and the Protestant part is shrinking; plus the British don't really want Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom any longer, as polls attest. I think it'll happen in the next fifty years or so.

Regarding Puerto Rico... Well, I think there's some *very* strong lobbying going on currently on behalf of many politicians from the United States would like to secure the additional electoral college votes Puerto Rico will bring; it's all open now, but I think it's likely that Puerto Rico will be a state within ten years (and most likely before New Columbia, sadly enough). —Nightst a llion (?) 16:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point now regarding Ireland. I had originally thought that with 1) various all-island bodies, 2) the fact that British and Irish citizens can move freely between the UK and Ireland, 3) with both the UK and Ireland in the EU and 3) with the Irish nationality law covering Northern Ireland that the Catholics in Northern Ireland would become content with the situation as it is (a sort of don't rock the boat situation, where they get most of the benefits of a united Ireland and the protestants get to remain in the UK). I didn't know about the polls showing that most of the British population want to get rid of Northern Ireland.

I know there is some extremely strong lobbying going on for Puerto Rico in order to pick up additional electoral college votes. Kind of a silly reason to make Puerto Rico a state in my opinion. If all the greedy politicians want is more electoral votes, they may as well try and make Cuba into a state (that at least would almost certainly secure the permanent vote of the Cuban Americans). It'd be better to make New Columbia a state and then wait until a truly significant number of Puerto Ricans decide what they want for the island. If say 51% voted in favour of statehood (and I can't see the figure rising much above that within the next 10 years) then what will become of the other 49% (the majority of which would probably want to remain a commonwealth)? Would they still be opposed to statehood? and if so what would they support then?, Oh yeah (almost forgot), I agree that it would be sad if Puerto Rico became a state before New Columbia, especially since it would seem that a significant majority of D.C. (at least more than 50%) inhabitants would support the initiative.72.27.1.101 17:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my information about Northern Ireland, confer this Guardian article from six years ago, it's pretty clear on the issue; polls can always be manipulated, but this one's quite straightforward. I think it's simply a question of time, especially if the United Kingdom disintegrates.

Regarding Puerto Rico... Yeah, the population would have to be convinced first, that much is certain. I strongly believe that either independence in association with the United States (like Palau or the Marshall Islands) or complete statehood would be better for Puerto Rico than its current territorial status; frankly, I believe that having the United States' territories only partially integrated for such a long time is rather unfair and injust.

I believe all of them should be incorporated into the United States in some form (either as states, or rather -- since they are too small -- as parts of existing states; Hawaii could be enlarged with American Samoa, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands to form a State of Pacifica or something like that, and the United States Virgin Islands could simply be added to Florida or Puerto Rico. —Nightst a llion (?) 22:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the article link. I wonder what opinions are like today? Probably not much different. It does seem like the British citizens (in Great Britain at least) are moving towards favouring Irish reunification, although 41% is not a majority, but a plurality. That works just as well, since 33% either don't know or care and it will probably take a prolonged period of true peace and stability to convince the undecided 33% to favour Northern Ireland remaining in the UK (not to mention convincing the 41% favouring Irish reunification). In the end though it's probably a good thing. It will remove the complex situation of having persons born in a part of the UK being eligible for Irish citizenship. Anyway, with both the UK and Ireland having free movement between the two countries (for their citizens) and what with the EU as well, it really shouldn't matter should it? After all, anyone who comes from Northern Ireland can freely move, work and take up residence in Ireland (now that they are separate) or in the UK (should it become part of the Republic). I doubt the UK itself will disintegrate anytime soon (I seem to recall a recent issue of the Economist having an short article about that - something to do with the anniversary of the 1707 Act of Union). However, if the UK were to become a republic (a la the Commonwealth of Britain bill) then naturally there would be little reason for Northern Ireland to remain in the...UK..sorry UC?...hmmm...maybe that's one reason why they haven't chosen to become a republic.

Frankly, I'm absolutely sure that Scotland will become independent within ten years or so -- if not after this election, then certainly after the Tories win the next election or the one after that. Scotland certainly won't put up with another Tory government that ignores their wishes after what Thatcher did to it. —Nightst a llion (?) 14:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree entirely that either statehood or independence through free association would be better for Puerto Rico (and the other US territories too). It is not only unfair and unjust, but unhealthy (politically speaking). It leads to situations where the representatives of the territories (delegates or resident commissioners or whatever they want to call them) are used by whichever party wants extra votes in certain issues....e.g. Recently I think a move was made to have the delegates be able to vote on the Committee of the Whole (since the delegates can vote in committees but not on other Congressional business since they do not represent states). However, if any of the delegates provided the deciding vote, then the issue would voted on again but without the delegates. What's the point of giving them the ability to vote in the Committee of the Whole anyway, if their vote is not equal and cannot be decisive (as all votes are supposed to be in theory)? The perpetual territorial status also leads to exploitation (which is the only word I can use to describe what happened in the Northern Marianas) that would never be allowed to occur on a large scale in a state. I also think they should all be incorporated or let go. When you think about, none of the territories is actually too small to be independent either; the Northern Marianas have a larger population than 11 independent countries (excluding the Vatican), the US Virgin Islands is similarly more populous than 14 independent countries (again excluding the Vatican), and Guam is larger than 18 countries (again leaving out the Vatican). Puerto Rico speaks for itself when one considers that it has more people Bosnia. It's a shame really.72.27.175.32 03:11, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, yes. —Nightst a llion (?) 14:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Transitional

What do you mean by "Transitional" governments? Could the current Serbian government (in resignation) be counted there? --PaxEquilibrium 11:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. I mean countries where elections are immiment due to severe political upheaval, Serbia doesn't qualify. —Nightst a llion (?) 14:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aha. OK.

BTW, do you not like my edits to the SRB on this subpage of yours? --PaxEquilibrium 15:36, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm quite fine with them; I just sometimes correct them to fit into my scheme of things (for one thing, the "crises" section is mainly for things I have to check every week or so for news). —Nightst a llion (?) 13:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, two things (about Kosovo): The flag's deleted; you've gotta just a red link over there. Negotiations are over, page needs updating.

BTW Kosovo does not belong to "Will hold a referendum", but to "Certainly wants to secede". Kosovo did have (regardless as unorthodox, even illegal and improper as it can be) in 1992 (more than 90% of those who voted voted for independence; turnout was over 70%). --PaxEquilibrium 10:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, I amended both of those mistakes, thank you! —Nightst a llion (?) 13:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger

You could/should note the merger of GSS into LDP on this article... --PaxEquilibrium 22:32, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did, but it already happened... —Nightst a llion (?) 21:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, I get it now. This is about the future events? --PaxEquilibrium 23:23, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aye. —Nightst a llion (?) 14:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correction

Hi! About the new Chilean regions, they will be official in October 3rd AND 9th: October 3rd for Los Ríos and October 9th for Arica y Parinacota. Greetings... I really like this page :) --B1mbo 20:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! —Nightst a llion (?) 21:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Government

You do not think so?

BTW you should add the incoming new election (it's become evident). --PaxEquilibrium 09:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting

This page is quite useful, even if I disagree on a couple of points. Cheers Nightstallion Brian | (Talk) 20:55, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which points do you disagree on? —Nightstallion 21:06, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The points about the Realms becoming Republics. A republic is not inevitable. Brian | (Talk) 18:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not in my view. ;) —Nightstallion 11:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just stumble onto here. Great article. Pretty useful if I ever want to put a wager on who will be the 200th UN member (and when). BTW, Bougainville should be Bougainville Province. I've made the dab for you. Chanheigeorge 22:36, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! —Nightstallion 18:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Republic of Choson Flag.png

Image:Republic of Choson Flag.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian SAP

I'd like to start out that I agree that this is a fantastic page and probably agree with it all (although I can't remember what I may have disagreed on!) Anyway, according to our page, France, Germany and Greece ratified on 4 December, 7 November and 14 January, respectively. If this is correct, Albania will only need the European Communities to ratify before its SAP can come into force and you could be getting a definitive date for their membership application soon. Therequiembellishere (talk) 05:35, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Crime and Courts Bill

Hey Nightstallion, noticed one of your red links so have created http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_and_Courts_Bill for you (and others, obvz) to keep an eye on doktorb _words^deeds 20:31, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Republican referendum in St. Kitts and Nevis

Hello, Nightstallion, please add information about plans of St. Kitts and Nevis to transition into republic status on your page. https://www.voice-online.co.uk/news/world-news/2022/10/04/st-kitts-and-nevis-to-consider-becoming-a-republic/ (talk) 17:06, 14 November 2022. CrazyRepublican (talk) 14:07, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Togolese Election

Howdy! Just wanted to give you a heads up that the 2023 Togolese election has been postponed to 2024. I moved the page and saw that you're one of the last pages linking to it, so I thought I'd drop in and give you the chance to update that. wherethetacos (talk) 00:47, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]