User talk:Nightstallion/ο
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Reply
Well, a ministry will have to be given to the Serbs if they join the ruling coalition - there is little doubt there. And to what I've heard both SDP and HDZ are offering it to SDSS. HSS is the toughest player though - they want practically a third of the governmental posts. :) And since HDZ is willing to trade to stay in power, I stand by my belief that there is much more possibility for Sanader to remain PM - HDZ is in a delicate position. The party, like DSS in Serbia (or even SRS), has just one strongman and he is adding the necessary force to the everlasting national-romantic spirit of independence needed to keep HDZ in power. SDP is a huge party of all kinds of individuals (like DS in Serbia) and they know rely on their very stable strength.
P.S. Yes, the coalition gathering around SDP has more votes than a potential HDZ-led government. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Little good that will do, as they will not be in a position to change the voting system to a sensible one in which the HDZ does not enjoy a substantial bonus... sighs Well, at least I can hope the SDP will finally win the election in 2011, then. —Nightstallion 14:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Latest update: HSS & HSLS will side with HDZ, only a matter of time. HDZ already has made a contract with the Roma minority representative. The 4 will likely make the spine of the government. According to contracts, it's 67:67 of the total 153 seats. When HSS and HSLS join HDZ, it will be 75:67 for Sanader... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 14:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- President Stjepan Mesic is stalling to start open talks with Ivo Sanader. He has compared HDZ's victory to that of SRS's in Serbia. He doesn't feel quite good to hand him over (again) the mandate. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Damn. If they get the Serbs' votes as well, they've got it, then... Any chance Mesic will be able to turn the tide? —Nightstallion 14:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- However, if Nazif Memedi is gonna be a minister - there's little chance another one is going to be granted to another minority. SDP's offer might counter that. It's now technically impossible unite practically the whole of the rest of the parliament, except one MP, to form an SDP-led government. Mesic has stated that we shall all wait for 11 December, when final results will be published. President of DIP has stated that just a little bit over 95% of the votes were counted, and they weren't recounted at all. Plus, repeated elections for several places have been scheduled for 9 December. Because in some locations HDZ won only by several votes (hence such insane variations) and the other way around, changes are still expected - Mesic and SDP count on this. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- We can only wait and hope... —Nightstallion 15:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Zoran Milanovic promised a breakthrough in relations towards Serbs, to cut away the nationalistic policies of HDZ - in exchange for SDSS support. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- After this there have been pictures of Zoran Milanovic with the Serbian flag in the background, catching him when he shows three fingers and adding Chetnik attire. This is probably Sanader's work. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- P.S. Polls (on many varieties) show the public opinion is for a minority government under SDP. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Update: SDP will locally in Osijek support HDSSB that left its partners HDZ and HSP. HDSSB has agreed to support an SDP minority government. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- So there's still hope? This suspension is killing me, I tell you. ;) —Nightstallion 16:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Well I'm not sure. Officially on paper it's still 67:67. And frankly, I fear that a large coalition is impossible to stand - that's why I actually think it's better that they "grow a little more" - with this pace, they wouldn't need coalition partners on the next election. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Another thing for which SDP is criticized by HDZ and other nationalists is that at the night of the election when Milanovic has claimed a huge leap for SDP, they held a celebration. The Social Democrats were dancing around, cheering and having a big party with Yugoslavian patriotic songs, many of whom are dedicated to Tito. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, true enough, but 2011 is so far away... Plus, HDZ would get the bonus of having brought Croatia into the EU... I'm afraid they might win again. —Nightstallion 19:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Another major difference is that SDP is not willing to recognize an independent Kosovo, while HDZ supports it fiercely. This might affect SDSS's decision, although that political party is perceived mostly as "Zagreb party" if you know what I mean. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Not quite precisely, no...? —Nightstallion 20:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- It has no links to Serbia absolutely in any way imaginable and is very, very akin to HDZ. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- So it's four more years of HDZ. How likely is it that HDZ will win the 2011 elections with the EU accession boost...? —Nightstallion 21:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Probably none, because experts say Croatia will not join the EU by 2011. And since this is a coalition government that's left-right, there is no way it'll last a full mandate. In addition to this, HSS opposes membership in the NATO and one of its requests for a coalition contract is a referendum, for which there is a great possibility for rejection, because the public opinion is greatly divided onto the half that supports NATO and the one that opposes - with opposition perhaps slightly prevailing; which will be another setback for Sanader's second gov. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- So you think there'll be early elections, and that NATO accession may be a problem? What's SDP's opinion on NATO? —Nightstallion 22:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Same with HDZ's, although with some reserve. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:06, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Mh. Well, we'll wait and see then... —Nightstallion 13:38, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Same with HDZ's, although with some reserve. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:06, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- So you think there'll be early elections, and that NATO accession may be a problem? What's SDP's opinion on NATO? —Nightstallion 22:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Probably none, because experts say Croatia will not join the EU by 2011. And since this is a coalition government that's left-right, there is no way it'll last a full mandate. In addition to this, HSS opposes membership in the NATO and one of its requests for a coalition contract is a referendum, for which there is a great possibility for rejection, because the public opinion is greatly divided onto the half that supports NATO and the one that opposes - with opposition perhaps slightly prevailing; which will be another setback for Sanader's second gov. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- So it's four more years of HDZ. How likely is it that HDZ will win the 2011 elections with the EU accession boost...? —Nightstallion 21:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- It has no links to Serbia absolutely in any way imaginable and is very, very akin to HDZ. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Not quite precisely, no...? —Nightstallion 20:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Another major difference is that SDP is not willing to recognize an independent Kosovo, while HDZ supports it fiercely. This might affect SDSS's decision, although that political party is perceived mostly as "Zagreb party" if you know what I mean. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, true enough, but 2011 is so far away... Plus, HDZ would get the bonus of having brought Croatia into the EU... I'm afraid they might win again. —Nightstallion 19:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- So there's still hope? This suspension is killing me, I tell you. ;) —Nightstallion 16:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- We can only wait and hope... —Nightstallion 15:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- However, if Nazif Memedi is gonna be a minister - there's little chance another one is going to be granted to another minority. SDP's offer might counter that. It's now technically impossible unite practically the whole of the rest of the parliament, except one MP, to form an SDP-led government. Mesic has stated that we shall all wait for 11 December, when final results will be published. President of DIP has stated that just a little bit over 95% of the votes were counted, and they weren't recounted at all. Plus, repeated elections for several places have been scheduled for 9 December. Because in some locations HDZ won only by several votes (hence such insane variations) and the other way around, changes are still expected - Mesic and SDP count on this. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Damn. If they get the Serbs' votes as well, they've got it, then... Any chance Mesic will be able to turn the tide? —Nightstallion 14:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Controversial conservative Ljubo Jurcic withdraws from politics and the declaration of premiership. Zoran Milanovic himself makes shocking statement that he accepts to be the Prime Minister. --PaxEquilibrium 13:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Is that good or bad? What's the background of this? —Nightstallion 13:03, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Elimination of a controversial person and a direct decisive move of the leader - why not? --PaxEquilibrium 13:33, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know, I just don't dare to hope any more right now... —Nightstallion 13:34, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Elimination of a controversial person and a direct decisive move of the leader - why not? --PaxEquilibrium 13:33, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
MNE
A little side-note - Milo Djukanovic is also a member of the Socialdemocratic Party of Montenegro (in MNE one cannot be solely a member of one party). :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Mh? Why can one not? Too few benefits from only being in one party? ;) —Nightstallion 16:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- I dunno. I thought it was normal - in other ex Yugoslav states one cannot be a member of more than one political party at the same time. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- As far as I know, that's not regulated by the state but rather by the individual parties' constitutions... But it's typical for parties to demand that their members not be members of other parties, yeah. —Nightstallion 19:23, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- I dunno. I thought it was normal - in other ex Yugoslav states one cannot be a member of more than one political party at the same time. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Spiffier triple crown, new awards available
Hi, I've been sprucing up the triple crown awards. Here's the new version of the standard triple crown you've already earned. Feel free to replace your old one with this if you like the new version better. I've also introduced two new triple crown awards for editors who've done a lot of triple crown work: the Napoleonic and Alexander the Great edition awards. If you're active in a WikiProject, check out the new offer for custom WikiProject triple crowns. I'll make those upon request if five or more editors qualify. See User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle for more information. Thanks for your hard work, and cheers! DurovaCharge! 22:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! —Nightstallion 16:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Identifying marks on euro coins article
The numis assessment indicates a start class. I really thought of it as at least a 'B'. Can you help me interpret the comments on the Talk page? I don't understand the part about 'To many bolded words and phrases' and 'overlinking of engravers/designers with no articles'. The bold text is just the nature of the wikitable class. Also, there is a bit of contradiction between the statements 'not enough wikilinks' and 'overlinking... with no articles'. Isn't the point of having links to articles that aren't there encouragement for someone to create the article? Your input is greatly appreciated!! --Theeuro (talk) 20:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- I replied on the talk page. —Nightstallion 20:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
ICJ
...has accepted the Bosnian suite against UN and the Netherlands. --PaxEquilibrium 14:10, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- I know -- why not? Will be interesting to see what the verdict is, and what the reasons will be... —Nightstallion 14:14, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- In Serbia the prevailing opinion is that Holland hates the Serbs because of all this with the Yugoslav wars, and with this coming it will further antagonize the relations. --PaxEquilibrium 14:38, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- sighs You know, sometimes I think Serbian public opinion is beyond all redemption... But hey, if France and Germany managed to get on rather well only shortly after WWII, who knows... —Nightstallion 14:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'll be long dead by then. --PaxEquilibrium 17:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'd be more optimistic. —Nightstallion 10:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'll be long dead by then. --PaxEquilibrium 17:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- sighs You know, sometimes I think Serbian public opinion is beyond all redemption... But hey, if France and Germany managed to get on rather well only shortly after WWII, who knows... —Nightstallion 14:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- In Serbia the prevailing opinion is that Holland hates the Serbs because of all this with the Yugoslav wars, and with this coming it will further antagonize the relations. --PaxEquilibrium 14:38, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Made..
...Andrija Mandić and Miodrag Živković to evade red links in the election table. --PaxEquilibrium 18:25, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting articles! —Nightstallion 10:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Berlin semi protection
Hi N! Can you please consider installing the discreet version "sprotect2" in the Berlin article ? Thanks in advance & Danke vielmals. Lear 21
- There already is a small template in there, isn't that enough? —Nightstallion 10:54, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I asked 2 Admins & one (the other) was a little quicker in changing the template. Concerning the EU article: Because of ongoing vandalism acts throughout every month no matter what section, I suggest keeping a "sprotect2" on a constant base. all the best Lear 21 10:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Bosnian Crisis
..has been temporary solved. The country will return to peace, and probably very soon sign SAA which will strengthen the country, but the problem has been Balkanistically delayed for now, probably to be reopened more fiercely in due time. --PaxEquilibrium 14:42, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've read about it, yeah. AFAIK, they'll only initial the SAA soon, but sign it only when they finally adopt the police reforms... BTW, they still need a new PM, don't they? —Nightstallion 16:36, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Vojvodinian Magyars
All 4 political parties have announced to present a common candidate at the presidential election that would represent the political strength of their whole people. They have all also agreed that their common aims will be a Hungarian national autonomous region in Vojvodina. See: Hungarian Regional Autonomy. Although they have given up, and were completely disunited - now all Hungarians seem to be united in the desire for their own autonomous region. The SRS and others scream about separatism. --PaxEquilibrium 14:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting... —Nightstallion 16:36, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Doesn't sound sympathetic to you? It's based on South Tyrol. --PaxEquilibrium 19:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- It sure does! I'm just not sure whether they'll be able to get it through... —Nightstallion 20:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- It's interesting to me too, but I find one problem with it - it brakes the multiethnic character of Vojvodina. Creation of national autonomous regions within already an autonomous province brakes its character. If a Hungarian Autonomous Region is formed, should the Slovaks be deprived of the same thing? And so forth, bringing to the question of very existence of Vojvodina as an autonomous province. --PaxEquilibrium 21:17, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh, got a point there, yeah. —Nightstallion 21:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- I always support the highest autonomy and recognition for minorities - that's why I still think about the unresolved status of Albanians in the Presevo Valley and even Bulgarians at the very east. There is also the extremely jeopardized status of the Serb minority in Kosovo. However I consider the Hungarians, Romanians, Croats, Slovaks and Rusyns statuses relatively resolved. --PaxEquilibrium 21:47, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, you're probably right. —Nightstallion 22:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Unrelated - remember when we talked about fake liberals? Well, do you know the Russian LDP? :))) --PaxEquilibrium 22:12, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, of course... sighs Russian politics are even sadder than Serbian. —Nightstallion 23:22, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Unrelated - remember when we talked about fake liberals? Well, do you know the Russian LDP? :))) --PaxEquilibrium 22:12, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, you're probably right. —Nightstallion 22:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- I always support the highest autonomy and recognition for minorities - that's why I still think about the unresolved status of Albanians in the Presevo Valley and even Bulgarians at the very east. There is also the extremely jeopardized status of the Serb minority in Kosovo. However I consider the Hungarians, Romanians, Croats, Slovaks and Rusyns statuses relatively resolved. --PaxEquilibrium 21:47, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh, got a point there, yeah. —Nightstallion 21:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- It's interesting to me too, but I find one problem with it - it brakes the multiethnic character of Vojvodina. Creation of national autonomous regions within already an autonomous province brakes its character. If a Hungarian Autonomous Region is formed, should the Slovaks be deprived of the same thing? And so forth, bringing to the question of very existence of Vojvodina as an autonomous province. --PaxEquilibrium 21:17, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- It sure does! I'm just not sure whether they'll be able to get it through... —Nightstallion 20:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Doesn't sound sympathetic to you? It's based on South Tyrol. --PaxEquilibrium 19:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
LOTD under way
Thanks for submitting a list to WP:LOTD. January nominations are closed and February nominations are open. The January nominee commenting has begun. Feel free to participate in the commentary.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 16:21, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for nominating a candidate at WP:LOTD. You may want to come by and address some of the feedback you have received before voting begins, which it will in less than 24 hours.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 00:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- I am surprised at the number of people who have nominated candidates and participated in feedback, but have not voted. If I had made voting mandatory, would it have kept you from nominating an article?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 16:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I simply forgot. Voted now. —Nightstallion 17:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I noticed your supports for the following lists: United Nations member states, List of circulating currencies, List of countries, List of popes (graphical), List of European Union member states by accession. Thanks for taking the time to look things over. When you get a chance could you please move your support to the voting section in the same format as everyone else's.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 06:40, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oops, sorry -- I just fixed it. —Nightstallion 08:43, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- I noticed your supports for the following lists: United Nations member states, List of circulating currencies, List of countries, List of popes (graphical), List of European Union member states by accession. Thanks for taking the time to look things over. When you get a chance could you please move your support to the voting section in the same format as everyone else's.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 06:40, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I simply forgot. Voted now. —Nightstallion 17:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I am surprised at the number of people who have nominated candidates and participated in feedback, but have not voted. If I had made voting mandatory, would it have kept you from nominating an article?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 16:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Template:Montenegrin parliamentary election, 2006
Could you please help me integrate some of the data on the 26th page of this document to the table? I have no idea how to pull it off. --PaxEquilibrium 20:26, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Which part of page 26? —Nightstallion 21:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- I see you figured out - the upper. Could you also please check out my work at the Template:Montenegrin parliamentary election, 2002 too? --PaxEquilibrium 21:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done. —Nightstallion 21:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Why remove the 0s? --PaxEquilibrium 21:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Usually, we have "0" if they had seats before but lost them, but "—" if they're a negligible party, anyway. Make the template more easily readable. —Nightstallion 21:59, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't understand. What does ±0 mean then? --PaxEquilibrium 22:03, 1 December 2007 (UTC)- ..and did Template:Montenegrin parliamentary election, 2001. Assistance and comment? --PaxEquilibrium 22:59, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done. —Nightstallion 23:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Template:Montenegrin parliamentary election, 1996. --PaxEquilibrium 09:09, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Take a look at the very last list. Is this a record or what? :))) --PaxEquilibrium 11:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Do you mean the reduction in seats? —Nightstallion 11:10, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, the votes of the last list. Also, I made Template:Montenegrin parliamentary election, 1998. --PaxEquilibrium 12:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ah. Well, that's not a record -- Greek legislative election, 2007 had a party with one vote, and I'm fairly sure there have been elections where some parties got no votes at all. —Nightstallion 12:18, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oh and the reduction of total seats (and then expansion) is that planned manipulation, mostly to retain majority by Milo, which I talked about. Seems bizarre, doesn't it? --PaxEquilibrium 12:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Are the bottoms (turnout, etc) OK? --PaxEquilibrium 12:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, it does, and yes, they are. No news from Croatia, BTW? —Nightstallion 12:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nope. Not even from Kosovo. I'm gonna make Template:Montenegrin parliamentary election, 1992 in a few minutes... --PaxEquilibrium 12:32, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, that means more waiting... —Nightstallion 12:39, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done. Notice how the pathetically undemocratic electoral laws favor the first list, as well as disunity of numerous non-DPS parties. --PaxEquilibrium 13:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting, yeah... —Nightstallion 13:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- What's the standard used for writing the original names of the lists? I cannot figure out whether to use Cyrillic or Latin? --PaxEquilibrium 15:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Whichever is the official script; if both are official, use both, and use the more commonly used one first.
- Wouldn't this be a rather ugly precedent? --PaxEquilibrium 08:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think that's the best solution... —Nightstallion 08:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- According to Article 9 of the former Constitution of the Republic of Montenegro from 12 October 1992: "Equal are Cyrillic and Latin scripts". But that still seems far too overcrowded. --PaxEquilibrium 09:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Then don't include any of them... —Nightstallion 15:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- According to Article 9 of the former Constitution of the Republic of Montenegro from 12 October 1992: "Equal are Cyrillic and Latin scripts". But that still seems far too overcrowded. --PaxEquilibrium 09:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think that's the best solution... —Nightstallion 08:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Wouldn't this be a rather ugly precedent? --PaxEquilibrium 08:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Whichever is the official script; if both are official, use both, and use the more commonly used one first.
- What's the standard used for writing the original names of the lists? I cannot figure out whether to use Cyrillic or Latin? --PaxEquilibrium 15:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting, yeah... —Nightstallion 13:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done. Notice how the pathetically undemocratic electoral laws favor the first list, as well as disunity of numerous non-DPS parties. --PaxEquilibrium 13:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, that means more waiting... —Nightstallion 12:39, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nope. Not even from Kosovo. I'm gonna make Template:Montenegrin parliamentary election, 1992 in a few minutes... --PaxEquilibrium 12:32, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, it does, and yes, they are. No news from Croatia, BTW? —Nightstallion 12:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ah. Well, that's not a record -- Greek legislative election, 2007 had a party with one vote, and I'm fairly sure there have been elections where some parties got no votes at all. —Nightstallion 12:18, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, the votes of the last list. Also, I made Template:Montenegrin parliamentary election, 1998. --PaxEquilibrium 12:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Do you mean the reduction in seats? —Nightstallion 11:10, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done. —Nightstallion 23:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Usually, we have "0" if they had seats before but lost them, but "—" if they're a negligible party, anyway. Make the template more easily readable. —Nightstallion 21:59, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Why remove the 0s? --PaxEquilibrium 21:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done. —Nightstallion 21:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- I see you figured out - the upper. Could you also please check out my work at the Template:Montenegrin parliamentary election, 2002 too? --PaxEquilibrium 21:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
By the way - you probably don't know this, but OSCE report on the 2006 parliamentary election found vote-rigging by DPS on numerous occasions, including e.g. openly buying votes in the Berane municipality by the local DPS-dominated administration from the local citizens. --PaxEquilibrium 16:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting, but that doesn't surprise me, I'm afraid to say. —Nightstallion 14:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Another question: what about semi-liberal parties that are nationalist, or reformist/democratic parties that are prone to nationalism and conservatism in one way - but generally aren't conservative. That's not National conservatism. What is that? --PaxEquilibrium 18:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh. "Reformist with nationalist elements"? —Nightstallion 14:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- Would you reall put that in an infobox? --PaxEquilibrium 08:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Possibly -- give reformism as the main ideology, and state nationalism is also shown in the party's ranks. —Nightstallion 08:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Would you reall put that in an infobox? --PaxEquilibrium 08:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)
 Issue XXI (November 2007) | ||
|
New featured articles:
New featured lists: New featured portals: New A-Class articles: | |
| ||
| ||
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. | ||
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 04:04, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Elections
Good work - I would be surprised if I managed to find any more! I'm especially impressed with Haitian Senate election, 2008 - I'll have a trawl through t'internet and see if I can find any previous dates for them. пﮟოьεԻ 57 10:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- I believe they are the first to be held under a new electoral law, as all thirty senators were elected in the Haitian general election, 2006... —Nightstallion 11:10, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
A taste of Austria
Just two question about... Austria! Will the recent pictures of Haider at a 99-cent Party lead him to resign or cost him many votes? And, what do the last opinion polls in Austria say about the state of parties?--Checco 19:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that this isn't the case, he's still got very strong support in Carinthia (and barely any in any other state). We'll see how he does in the Carinthian state election in 2009, but the election will be very close between the BZÖ and the SPÖ, I'm afraid...
- Nationally, it's a bit better: SPÖ and ÖVP are neck-to-neck at around 34%-36% each, with the SPÖ having gained a slight lead in the latest polls for the first time since the election (might be due to the so-called "chancellor bonus" finally taking effect, i.e. the positive impression one usually has of the federal chancellor's party), and the FPÖ and Grüne are still very close together, as well, with about 12%-14% each (though the FPÖ has a slight lead, I'm afraid). The BZÖ is at around 3%-4% -- they might make it once more into parliament, but as soon as Haider's out of politics, the party's dead, I can tell you that. The KPÖ is still nowhere to be seen at the national stage, but it's a possibility that we might see a government involving one of the two larger parties and the Greens after the next election. We might also see another grand coalition, however, which I'm afraid would greatly benefit the FPÖ. sighs We'll see. —Nightstallion 20:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- What is the difference in policies between BZÖ and FPÖ? Is the latter more liberal than the former? Is it likely that they will join forces one day? Has FPÖ changed political line since the days of Karl-Heinz Grasser and Susanne Riess-Passer? And what about since the split with BZÖ: is FPÖ more radical now? Is it likely a coalition between ÖVP, FPÖ and BZÖ in the future? And what about an alliance between ÖVP and the Greens? Sorry for the number of questions... --Checco 20:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- BZÖ is Haider's party, and nothing else. They have got few to none independent policies apart from his opinions, and they share the FPÖ's political opinion to 95% -- the other 5% are the same as the ÖVP's opinion. The FPÖ of Grasser and Riess-Passer would be nowadays BZÖ -- no independent policies at all, just used by Haider as his vehicle for political agitation. The FPÖ is a bit more radical than the BZÖ, I suppose, but Haider is pretty radical himself sometimes, so there's little difference. Nonetheless, while Haider is active in poltics, BZÖ and FPÖ will certainly not reunite -- Haider and Strache hate each other far too much for that, and for the very same reason a coalition between the three right-wing parties is very unlikely. A black-green government is technically possible, though the ÖVP would have to shift *STRONGLY* to the centre for that to occur -- currently, they're certainly too much to the right of the political spectrum for a coalition with the Greens to be possible. —Nightstallion 21:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your explanations. --Checco 00:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Gladly! —Nightstallion 08:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your explanations. --Checco 00:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- BZÖ is Haider's party, and nothing else. They have got few to none independent policies apart from his opinions, and they share the FPÖ's political opinion to 95% -- the other 5% are the same as the ÖVP's opinion. The FPÖ of Grasser and Riess-Passer would be nowadays BZÖ -- no independent policies at all, just used by Haider as his vehicle for political agitation. The FPÖ is a bit more radical than the BZÖ, I suppose, but Haider is pretty radical himself sometimes, so there's little difference. Nonetheless, while Haider is active in poltics, BZÖ and FPÖ will certainly not reunite -- Haider and Strache hate each other far too much for that, and for the very same reason a coalition between the three right-wing parties is very unlikely. A black-green government is technically possible, though the ÖVP would have to shift *STRONGLY* to the centre for that to occur -- currently, they're certainly too much to the right of the political spectrum for a coalition with the Greens to be possible. —Nightstallion 21:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- What is the difference in policies between BZÖ and FPÖ? Is the latter more liberal than the former? Is it likely that they will join forces one day? Has FPÖ changed political line since the days of Karl-Heinz Grasser and Susanne Riess-Passer? And what about since the split with BZÖ: is FPÖ more radical now? Is it likely a coalition between ÖVP, FPÖ and BZÖ in the future? And what about an alliance between ÖVP and the Greens? Sorry for the number of questions... --Checco 20:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Is it fair to say that the Liberal Forum is pretty much a moribund entity? --Free Socialist 01:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Free Socialist (talk • contribs)
- I'm afraid so, yeah. It may be revived at the next election -- but if it isn't, then I'd say it's completely dead. —Nightstallion 08:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Canterbury School (Florida)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Canterbury School (Florida), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Canterbury School (Florida). Horologium (talk) 00:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Serbia
The ruling coalition agreed to hold the presidential election in January 2008. It will most probably be the 20th, oddly matching the potential day of Kosovo's independence (again). Amendments shall be adopted to delay the local elections. Only one has registered so far - Cedomir Jovanovic proposed by the Liberal Democratic Party. His campaign has started under the slogan "Life rules". Btw his assault on everyone and stand up to Miroslav Miskovic has actually gained him support. :)
The new laws on the President were supposed to be considered as a fresh start, technically allowing Boris Tadic to be elected three times (two more, next to this one), but on SPS and other insistance since 1991 all have been accounted for. Now, the "Former President" is an official title. He will be entitled to a limousine, a driver and a very expensive working place for the exact amount of his mandate. But the biggest thing is that now Ex Presidents will receive pensions until their deaths, in the range of 80% of their avarage working wage. However, there are also now "First Ladies", who will receive wages (considerably lower though) too due to being President's wives, as well as their own other beneficions. Slobodan Milosevic is dead, while Dobrica Cosic was fired by Milosevic after only a year, so it does not count in his case. Only Zoran Lilic is going to use this speciality. While Vojislav Kostunica as Premier is technically not "retired", Milan Milutinovic should receive it, but his place of residence (ICTY) is a problem.
I think this is totally not necessary. Also, Svetozar Marovic has forced Milo Djukanovic to start the negotiations for a bilateral agreement with Serbia (citizenship problem). Svetozar is going to declare Serbian and take citizenship to enjoy the beneficions of ex president.
I know, but I can't find any data yet. The Kosovo electoral commission has no published it at its website - where it's latest news is from...well, the day of the election. ;) --PaxEquilibrium 09:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. So Tadic will be eligible to stand in this election, but not in the next one?
- nods Good luck in finding it (and possibly some results of the local elections as well?)... Maybe in some Kosovan newspaper...? —Nightstallion 15:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well yeah, I already informed you the first circle will most probably be on 20 January 2008, and that Cedomir Jovanovic has already started his campaign a little up to this. Regarding this Former Presidency, how's in Austria? The ruling coalition is calling upon European countries for this. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, but EUobserver is writing as if the date were already official -- which it isn't, right? When will it be set?
- Any that's quite funny -- because I haven't heard of *ANYTHING* like that in my whole life. I suppose they're trying to draw a parallel to the simple politician's pensions former heads of state normally receive, since they usually have been politicians for most of their life. —Nightstallion 14:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well yeah, I already informed you the first circle will most probably be on 20 January 2008, and that Cedomir Jovanovic has already started his campaign a little up to this. Regarding this Former Presidency, how's in Austria? The ruling coalition is calling upon European countries for this. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, but the ruling coalition has agreed a compromise on this. I doubt it will be exactly 20th/3rd, but it will be something close to that (just a little afterwards). Speaker Oliver Dulic will schedule it on 13 December 2007 (per himself). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, okay. Thanks! —Nightstallion 14:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, and the local and provincial election? —Nightstallion 15:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Completely unrelated: How's the LDP faring in polls after the ... interesting statements by Cedo a few days ago? —Nightstallion 15:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, but the ruling coalition has agreed a compromise on this. I doubt it will be exactly 20th/3rd, but it will be something close to that (just a little afterwards). Speaker Oliver Dulic will schedule it on 13 December 2007 (per himself). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hm, I get the feeling you didn't read this post to the up. ;) I also said that amendments will be adopted to delay the local elections to later in 2008, and that the "interesting statements" have boosted Ceda's popularity. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oops, sorry. Thanks a lot! :) By how much, though? Any poll from the last few days? —Nightstallion 15:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nope, but do you really think there's a chance he'll win? :)
- Also, we (public) have discovered which political parties aren't financed/influenced by Miskovic. Those are LDP, LSV and NS. They supported Ceda's initiative to investigate his Delta company, all others voted against. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, but I'd like to know how much he'd get at a parliamentary election -- i.e. whether a DP-LDP-G17 coalition would be possible at some point in the close future...
- Interesting. LDP and LSV I can understand, but why NS? —Nightstallion 15:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Eh...if it was DSS you would've asked me why DSS and if it were SPS you would've asked me why SPS... ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 10:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Still -- is the NS leader very law-abiding, or is there some other special reason why they refuse Miskovic's money? I can understand that LSV and LDP refuse his money since they want to appear as the "clean" parties. —Nightstallion 17:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, far from law-abiding. :) Velimir Ilic is a very wealthy politician, defined as just another tycoon by his enemies (although becoming rich through the democratic and not Milosevics' reign). Ever since 2000, with small gaps, he manages Serbia's construction - and he is a regional "overlord" of a part of western Serbia since the 1990s to the present. I guess Miskovic being a competitor is a good explanation. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, that would have surprised me, too. ;) Yeah, if he's got enough money himself, that's a reasonable explanation, of course. —Nightstallion 18:27, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, far from law-abiding. :) Velimir Ilic is a very wealthy politician, defined as just another tycoon by his enemies (although becoming rich through the democratic and not Milosevics' reign). Ever since 2000, with small gaps, he manages Serbia's construction - and he is a regional "overlord" of a part of western Serbia since the 1990s to the present. I guess Miskovic being a competitor is a good explanation. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Still -- is the NS leader very law-abiding, or is there some other special reason why they refuse Miskovic's money? I can understand that LSV and LDP refuse his money since they want to appear as the "clean" parties. —Nightstallion 17:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Eh...if it was DSS you would've asked me why DSS and if it were SPS you would've asked me why SPS... ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 10:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oops, sorry. Thanks a lot! :) By how much, though? Any poll from the last few days? —Nightstallion 15:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hm, I get the feeling you didn't read this post to the up. ;) I also said that amendments will be adopted to delay the local elections to later in 2008, and that the "interesting statements" have boosted Ceda's popularity. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 49 | 3 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Deletions in it.Wiki
You may find interested in the fact that the article on the Freedom People party has been proposed for deletion fot the second time in a row and now those who want to delete it are prevailng. See article for deletion page. --Checco 14:33, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Rather a stupid idea -- that certainly won't happen here on en.wiki. —Nightstallion 15:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Even I thought that PL was simply a re-styling of Forza Italia, but I can't understand why some people in it.Wiki act like in this way. The problem is that in it.Wiki users tend to be too ideological: as they dislike Berlusconi (and obviously they are free to do it), they don't want an article on his new party, at least for now. These are the same people who wrote many things about the Democratic Party when it was nothing more than a speculation. Anyway, as the article risks to be deleted, I would like to ask you if you can vote against the deletion there. The article in it.Wiki is not as good as that we wrote in en.Wiki, but the party defenitely deserves one. --Checco 17:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- My account on it.wiki is barely used, so I doubt my vote would be given much weight... —Nightstallion 18:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- If you have done more than 50 edits, your vote has the identical weight of my vote or of that of any administrator. Different Wikipedia, different rules... --Checco 18:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh, okay, I'll check whether I qualify for that... Thanks and good luck with keeping the article! —Nightstallion 22:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- 50 edits is the qualification. Thank you for your vote. --Checco (talk) 22:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Gladly -- let me know how it turns out. —Nightstallion 12:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- 50 edits is the qualification. Thank you for your vote. --Checco (talk) 22:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh, okay, I'll check whether I qualify for that... Thanks and good luck with keeping the article! —Nightstallion 22:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- If you have done more than 50 edits, your vote has the identical weight of my vote or of that of any administrator. Different Wikipedia, different rules... --Checco 18:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- My account on it.wiki is barely used, so I doubt my vote would be given much weight... —Nightstallion 18:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Even I thought that PL was simply a re-styling of Forza Italia, but I can't understand why some people in it.Wiki act like in this way. The problem is that in it.Wiki users tend to be too ideological: as they dislike Berlusconi (and obviously they are free to do it), they don't want an article on his new party, at least for now. These are the same people who wrote many things about the Democratic Party when it was nothing more than a speculation. Anyway, as the article risks to be deleted, I would like to ask you if you can vote against the deletion there. The article in it.Wiki is not as good as that we wrote in en.Wiki, but the party defenitely deserves one. --Checco 17:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
We have turned the tide. Now there are 21 votes in favour of the deletion and 15 againist, making the deletion almost impossible because a 2/3 majority is needed (in this case 31 votes in favour). --Checco (talk) 13:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Glad to hear that! Time to update the article, though, isn't it? It still states the foundation of the party is "announced for 2 December", and it still has the provisional name instead of the officially chosen one... —Nightstallion 13:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- The problem is that there's no official name and indeed I preferred not to move the article... --Checco (talk) 17:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- According to the general definition, there is now an official name, since Berlusconi stated that the choice of the voters would be the name... —Nightstallion 17:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- There are no official results for the votation, even because it has not finished yet. Moreover Berlusconi announced the provisional result in Forza Italia's gazebos, without counting that in the gazebos organized by the Freedom Circles. --Checco (talk) 19:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- But he announced it in the news, so it's certainly the most common name now, isn't it? —Nightstallion 17:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- There are no official results for the votation, even because it has not finished yet. Moreover Berlusconi announced the provisional result in Forza Italia's gazebos, without counting that in the gazebos organized by the Freedom Circles. --Checco (talk) 19:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- According to the general definition, there is now an official name, since Berlusconi stated that the choice of the voters would be the name... —Nightstallion 17:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- The problem is that there's no official name and indeed I preferred not to move the article... --Checco (talk) 17:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Berlusconi declared today that they are counting the votes, that the vote is a tie (there are rumors that both names will be used as the "freedom people" is evenly divided on this, although... very united on policies!) and that people will be able to vote until the official foundation of the party (if I understood correcty). See here). You may find interesting that today Fini and Casini had lunch with Montezemolo... --Checco (talk) 18:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, interesting. Thanks! —Nightstallion 18:27, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XIX - December 2007
 Issue XIX - December 2007 | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. | ||||||||
This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot -- 14:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Montenegrin problems
Remember that Chief Editor? Well, the trial is coming to a close. Contrary to popular demands, the process was closed. Also, the defense claims that the judge has not allowed any single witness of the defense to appear at the court. Journalists are on protest at the capital city. The Head of the Montenegrin Helsinki Board has declared that the freedom of speech is only on paper and that this ambiguous constitution has only left the Montenegrin judicial branch even more controlled by the state. He has also expressed concern about discrimination of Serbs, Bosniacs and Albanians, who together form practically majority of the country's population. He has announced that the Helsinki Commission report for the year 2007 will be extremely negative, and will ask EU for pressure of Montenegro to put the reforms in act.
Since polls show Nebojsa Medojevic will be in the second run-off against a DPS candidate, the Democratic Party of Socialists of Montenegro has announced charges against the Movement of Changes' leaders and the government has again launched an anti-PZP propaganda campaign. As for a minor "battle", SDP is prosecuting the Liberal Party. After Milo Djukanovic has declared the Helsinki Commission's president corrupted, calling him under service of Montenegro's inner and external enemies, he has told to the public that he has been receiving (just like the editor) death threats. Now, mysteriously, he and Milo are negotiating (he's probably trying to bribe and/or intimidate him regarding the 2007 year report, as it will considerably halt MNE's European integrations). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- sighs You know, why can't he simply drop dead? —Nightstallion 15:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- PzP is still second most popular despite the constitution compromise? I thought you said they were as good as dead? —Nightstallion 15:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't say they're still the second most popular. However Nebojsa Medojevic is the only charismatic politician that can stand to Milo. Andrija Mandic is totally uncharismatic. Also, Nebojsa's firm attitude against Kosovo's independence has achieved him significant support. The claims that DPS's neutrality are actually preparations to recognize Kosovo's independence struck Milo significantly. To recuperate in the eyes of the people, DPS has sacked the Montenegrin ambassador in Croatia who has recently on that international summit stated that independence of Kosovo is inevitable. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. What is his real opinion? Does he have one? —Nightstallion 15:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know. He's always (no exception) neutral on any national question (this is a must-be exception). He himself is agnostic, a nationally declared Montenegrin and calls his language Serbo-Croatian. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. —Nightstallion 15:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oh and he himself semi-supported independence of Montenegro. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Only semi-? ;) —Nightstallion 15:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- For the Movement for Changes national-related questions are mostly irrelevant and to its leaders, stupid. The party was neutral and didn't participate in the referendum because of that, Nebojsa said whatever the will of the people is PZP will be behind it. For the invitations to join the independence camp, Nebojsa stated that joining the pro-independence camp would be the same as collaboration in WWII. Before the referendum nasty journalists have forced out of him that he doesn't believe in the functionality of the State Union and in term supports independence, but on the actual referendum he has boycotted it for his personal political beliefs that he should be neutral and that he cannot cast a vote for independence, because to him that is the same as a vote for Milo Djukanovic, insinuating also to his desire to make MNE into his own private state. After the referendum, he sent telegrams of apologies to Serbia that the Union didn't work and promised that his party will make Montenegro the closest ally and friend to Serbia on their common path to lead the Western Balkans into the European Union. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Did the very last one Template:Montenegrin parliamentary election, 1990. Finally all work's done. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 10:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. Thanks! —Nightstallion 17:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Only semi-? ;) —Nightstallion 15:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oh and he himself semi-supported independence of Montenegro. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. —Nightstallion 15:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know. He's always (no exception) neutral on any national question (this is a must-be exception). He himself is agnostic, a nationally declared Montenegrin and calls his language Serbo-Croatian. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. What is his real opinion? Does he have one? —Nightstallion 15:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't say they're still the second most popular. However Nebojsa Medojevic is the only charismatic politician that can stand to Milo. Andrija Mandic is totally uncharismatic. Also, Nebojsa's firm attitude against Kosovo's independence has achieved him significant support. The claims that DPS's neutrality are actually preparations to recognize Kosovo's independence struck Milo significantly. To recuperate in the eyes of the people, DPS has sacked the Montenegrin ambassador in Croatia who has recently on that international summit stated that independence of Kosovo is inevitable. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
The Movement for Changes has conducted some very interesting publishing, since they're solely Economy-related (they're sister-party to G17+). Apparently, DPS is straining the municipalities in which it's not participating locally in administration by sanctions and siege. Having power on the national level, it takes the taxes and all gross income from the state - but invests all the money only in municipalities which are under its control. That way people in DPS-controlled municipalities have unusually higher wages and things are in the heart of the nation always good. However, no investments go to the northern half of the state, at least since the early 1990s. In municipalities in which DPS is in power milk is fairly cheap and in non-DPS milk and electricity have outrageous prices. This underdevelopment is boosting DPS's power greatly, as people choose it either for personal gain or in fear. This "siege" of DPS's "hostile municipalities" is also causing emigration, thereby permanent loss of the pro-opposition electorate. At the southern Sanjak part facing Serbia, more than 20% of the population has permanently moved to Serbia, no longer able to support their lives. This mostly stabs the opposition local administrations in their backs. This is the reason why today there is a shocking development - the heart is very developed in infrastructure, populated and has average living standards, while the remainder of the country is practically in poorer state than Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ouch. Is that revelation likely to change anything? —Nightstallion 19:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well yea, the awareness of the people. :) This is the tactic used ever since 1998, when the government shut down in restrictions all power accesses to municipalities where it didn't have majority and during the NATO bombing of Montenegro negotiated with Washington that only the municipalities in which DPS does not have control be bombed. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- By the way...regarding DPS and SNP today...how is Momir Bulatovic feeling today? Is Slobodan Milosevic turning in his grave? :))) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh? —Nightstallion 19:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- They're the old leaders of both DPS and SNP. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Yeah, most likely. ;) —Nightstallion 21:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Momir is a typical example of a rapidly failing politician. One of the three Communist autocrats of Montenegro (next to Milo Djukanovic and Svetozar Marovic) reigning it in the name of Milosevic, in 1997 he finalized the division within DPS CG by defecting his part of the DPS to form SNP CG in 1998. Leading the most of the opposition as pro-Milosevic forces into failure, after Slobodan's defeat he was in 2001 ousted by the reformist command of Predrag Bulatovic. Then again "Momirists" left and formed yet another party, SNPO. However SNPO was so disappointed and not functional, that it very soon dissolved, with most of them retiring. However on Momir's initiative the very few who still supported him founded the same year NSS CG, a party so pathetic it managed to enter the parliament only by classifying as a Serb party through Mandic's Serbian List. I mean when is NSS going to oust him? ;) Is there any similar other example in global politics (leader, then separating his wing, then again separating his supporters and again...)? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- If *anyone* else can do it, it will be Jörg Haider. ;) —Nightstallion 22:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- I really wonder how the Neo-Nazis emerge at that large in Austria, and not Germany. This is very odd to me. Than again the same thing's with MNE in which the Liberals are revolted at even thinking about the possibility of an independent Kosovo...
- Still, at least Jorg's still Governor. :) Momir lives in Belgrade and spends most of his life deciding when to go to the WC. Is there any chance of Jorg's ousting? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Certainly not from within the party, as he's founded it with only his loyalists in Carinthia as members. Still, he *MIGHT* be ousted at the next state elections in 2009 if Schaunig and the SPÖ do well, but I wouldn't be willing to bet on it... I just *hope* for it. ;) —Nightstallion 22:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- If *anyone* else can do it, it will be Jörg Haider. ;) —Nightstallion 22:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Momir is a typical example of a rapidly failing politician. One of the three Communist autocrats of Montenegro (next to Milo Djukanovic and Svetozar Marovic) reigning it in the name of Milosevic, in 1997 he finalized the division within DPS CG by defecting his part of the DPS to form SNP CG in 1998. Leading the most of the opposition as pro-Milosevic forces into failure, after Slobodan's defeat he was in 2001 ousted by the reformist command of Predrag Bulatovic. Then again "Momirists" left and formed yet another party, SNPO. However SNPO was so disappointed and not functional, that it very soon dissolved, with most of them retiring. However on Momir's initiative the very few who still supported him founded the same year NSS CG, a party so pathetic it managed to enter the parliament only by classifying as a Serb party through Mandic's Serbian List. I mean when is NSS going to oust him? ;) Is there any similar other example in global politics (leader, then separating his wing, then again separating his supporters and again...)? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Yeah, most likely. ;) —Nightstallion 21:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- They're the old leaders of both DPS and SNP. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh? —Nightstallion 19:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Please help!!!
Please help! someone is messing around with 2007 Venezuelan demonstrations, and trying to remove 80% of the content. Could you please look at that article and its histroy, and let me know what you think??!!! I could really use some help. thanks. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 18:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I really don't know, sorry. Both sides have arguments which appear valid and right now I lack the time to scrutinise the issue -- sorry! —Nightstallion 17:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Italian leftist parties
I started the two articles you asked me. Can you upload the symbol of the federation and also that of PRC? --Checco (talk) 20:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- I undeleted the PRC logo, but does La Sinistra have an official logo? I thought the article states they're unlikely to be able to agree on a logo? —Nightstallion 17:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello Nightstallion
It took a while, but check that old thread for my latest addition... NikoSilver 21:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting, thanks! —Nightstallion 17:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Partito Democratico logo.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Partito Democratico logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Templates
Please see the note I left here quite a bit ago. Those templates are horribly formatted, and destroy the formatting of the main article. The results should be arranged side by side, or the template should allow for right alignment so text can be added on the left. I tried, and am unable to make those corrections; I don't "speak HTML", and that template code was removed from the main tally template that was created by someone else. Adding horribly designed templates that disrupt the flow of the text to the middle of an article that is on the main page is not a good idea, IMO. I've moved the templates to the bottom, but they still disrupt the entire article, causing the reader to have to scan a lot of info they won't care about in order to reach the sources, etc. at the bottom of the article. Please help address this if you feel so strongly about including that info in the article, because right now, those templates are truly ugly. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I don't know how to do that, either, but they certainly should be in the article on the referendum itself, and not in the article on elections in Venezuela in general... —Nightstallion 17:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I'm hoping someone will surface who knows how to fix the template, but since it's so disruptively long and ugly for now, can't we leave it in the other article until it gets sorted out, and then bring it back here? The map actually does a good job of conveying the gist of the tallies. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've fixed it. Is it okay like this now? —Nightstallion 19:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- That's better, but I wish someone knew how to fix it to be like other templates, that you can force to the right, allowing for text on the left. I don't know how to do it. I didn't want to edit conflict with you, but there's still a problem in the heading (I'll go fix it now). It is still SO HUGE, that I'd feel better if we moved that entire section now to the bottom of the article, so the rest of the article can be read; the blooming templates are dominating the text. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough, no problem -- I just want to have this template to be in the main article on the issue. Thanks for your help! —Nightstallion 20:06, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- We've got the template twice now; is it OK with you if I move it all to the bottom, so mainpage readers can more easily access all of the prose/text? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nightstallion, I've got to be away from the computer for a while; since the template was in twice, I went ahead and removed one of them, but we may still need a better solution that gives a better overall layout for the article, putting the prose up top. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think it's quite okay as it is now, but I'm sure there are people who could help with making the template floatable. —Nightstallion 21:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough, no problem -- I just want to have this template to be in the main article on the issue. Thanks for your help! —Nightstallion 20:06, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- That's better, but I wish someone knew how to fix it to be like other templates, that you can force to the right, allowing for text on the left. I don't know how to do it. I didn't want to edit conflict with you, but there's still a problem in the heading (I'll go fix it now). It is still SO HUGE, that I'd feel better if we moved that entire section now to the bottom of the article, so the rest of the article can be read; the blooming templates are dominating the text. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've fixed it. Is it okay like this now? —Nightstallion 19:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I'm hoping someone will surface who knows how to fix the template, but since it's so disruptively long and ugly for now, can't we leave it in the other article until it gets sorted out, and then bring it back here? The map actually does a good job of conveying the gist of the tallies. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Can you delete the above article? There is already the marginally useful Swiss Federal Council election, 2007 and the next one is in 2011 (Swiss_Federal_Council#Election_mode). -- User:Docu
- Oops, you're right, sorry. Done! —Nightstallion 18:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Request move
Hi,
I think I made a mistake somewhere, but I can't see where. I wanted to move Abdulaziz Kamilov to Abdulaziz Komilov. By mistake, I moved it to Abdulaziz Kоmilov. I can't see where the difference is, but the fact is Abdulaziz Komilov and Abdulaziz Kоmilov are now two different pages! Could you fix it with your super-extra-powers? Tahnks. Švitrigaila (talk) 11:19, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- Aha! Your second version has an о (cyrillic o) instead of o, that's the problem. Fixed. —Nightstallion 13:55, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Spam
Some users are spamming some pages about ideologies (social democracy, christian democracy, democratic socialism and conservative liberalism) with this image. I don't agree with that and I'm rollbacking that changes. What do you think about it? --Checco (talk) 01:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
In the meantime, another user came in my help... --Checco (talk) 01:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with the rollbacks, the image is completely original research. —Nightstallion 09:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Can you help me in the rollbacks? --Checco (talk) 13:08, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, won't be on-line for most of the weekend... —Nightstallion 14:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Can you help me in the rollbacks? --Checco (talk) 13:08, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- When you come back, please state your opinion at Talk:Conservative liberalism. Thank you! --Checco (talk) 18:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- I was even insulted in that talk page, but I think of having done the right thing to to defend articles from spamming images. --Checco (talk) 13:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Posted there. —Nightstallion 19:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- I was even insulted in that talk page, but I think of having done the right thing to to defend articles from spamming images. --Checco (talk) 13:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
ICTY
According to Florence Artman and Carla del Ponte, the West (USA) has understood that it can't use ICTY for a political weapon, so he wants to get rid of it and pass it by. In Serbia the politicians are comparing this with their desire to pass by the UNSC regarding Kosovo.
It appears that the West will offer Serbia accession into the EU without the war criminals in exchange for independence of Kosovo, thereby fulfilling both protection of Karadzic and Kosovar independence (according to the ICTY). The reason why there were held appears to be to be used as a leverage. There is a possibility that in years from now when SERB is a member of the EU they (Karadzic and perhaps Mladic) get arrested, or turn up dead, according their beliefs. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:48, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh. I'm not really happy with this, but if it gets Serbia to accept Kosovan independence... which I doubt... mh. —Nightstallion 14:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Boris Tadic has agreed on Mladjan Dinkic's insistance that there needs to be a way to open better negotiations, which would include a possibility for independence of Kosovo, but that the Kosovar side should also present a possibility (no matter how unacceptable either were) in which it could accept temporary autonomy before independence, but he won't go public about it before the presidential election. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Finally! :) So there's a chance of an orderly transition for Kosovo and Serbia after the presidential election? —Nightstallion 14:43, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, but if as planned the Assembly of Kosovo declares unilaterally independence in January, it falls to water. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:45, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- The EU is doing what it can to get the Kosovans to wait until after the presidential election, so we'll see. Maybe there can be a mutually agreed independence solution after all... hopes —Nightstallion 14:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Most of the politicians in Serbia are now amending their proposal to the solution for the status of Kosovo. The last was a transitional period of 20 years before the next negotiations, which were expected to be not plagued by nationalism, but with nothing precisely put. Now they're considering to propose a referendum in 20 years, which would decide its final status. I now you said how new negotiations would be pointless (but they occurred) and that they would go on damage to Kosovo (while AFAIK independence seems more fortified now), but you'll have to admit that ever 1999 the wheel obviously is moving, slowly at least. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. I suppose a referendum in five or possibly ten years is something the Kosovans could be forced to accept by EU and US... —Nightstallion 19:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Doesn't look good I'm afraid. The Albanians are already frustrated enough, having a deja vu like in January when Martti Ahtisaari wanted to wait AFTER the parliamentary elections. They feel this is just simple stalling.
- In addition to that, the Serbs in Kosovo are closing down. North Kosovo has invited UN to make a demarcation line at the Ibar river. The southern Strpce municipality is enforcing preparing to live alone, and to survive relied on Macedonia which it borders. The Socialist Party of Serbia has officially called for war, and personal adviser to Vojislav Kostunica Aleksandar Simic has claimed that if all fails, Serbia remains to completely legitimately takeover Kosovo by force. All Ministries have drafted special plans and sent to the Prime Minister preparing for unilateral declaration, and the Albanian National Army is armed and ready to strike at any moment. Everything down there is like on the tip of swords, the relatively disorderly stance still lasts and although guarantees are that no mass-scale violence will erupt, the possibility still remains as in March 2004 things escalated so quickly and well-organized that no reaction is fast enough. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:04, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- sighs We can only hope... —Nightstallion 15:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. I suppose a referendum in five or possibly ten years is something the Kosovans could be forced to accept by EU and US... —Nightstallion 19:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Most of the politicians in Serbia are now amending their proposal to the solution for the status of Kosovo. The last was a transitional period of 20 years before the next negotiations, which were expected to be not plagued by nationalism, but with nothing precisely put. Now they're considering to propose a referendum in 20 years, which would decide its final status. I now you said how new negotiations would be pointless (but they occurred) and that they would go on damage to Kosovo (while AFAIK independence seems more fortified now), but you'll have to admit that ever 1999 the wheel obviously is moving, slowly at least. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- The EU is doing what it can to get the Kosovans to wait until after the presidential election, so we'll see. Maybe there can be a mutually agreed independence solution after all... hopes —Nightstallion 14:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, but if as planned the Assembly of Kosovo declares unilaterally independence in January, it falls to water. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:45, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Finally! :) So there's a chance of an orderly transition for Kosovo and Serbia after the presidential election? —Nightstallion 14:43, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Boris Tadic has agreed on Mladjan Dinkic's insistance that there needs to be a way to open better negotiations, which would include a possibility for independence of Kosovo, but that the Kosovar side should also present a possibility (no matter how unacceptable either were) in which it could accept temporary autonomy before independence, but he won't go public about it before the presidential election. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Kosovo Serb municipalities
The UNMIK has decided to prolong the 5 municipalities' Serbs' mandates for another half a year. Just a new Mayor of Novo Brdo will stand to place (not the parliament), due to the fact that there are more ethnic Albanians than Serbs in the municipality. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:02, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds like a sensible solution for now. —Nightstallion 14:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, the Serbs have accepted it. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods Good. —Nightstallion 19:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, the Serbs have accepted it. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Identifying marks on euro coins
Hi Nightstallion. Would you mind taking a look at Identifying marks on euro coins. A lot of images here are tagged as PD-self, but they look like copyrighted trademarks or logos to me. Please look into this. Thanks. Valentinian T / C 21:59, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I really don't know too much about it, but as the person who uploaded them actually works at the ECB, I suppose he should know what license to use...? —Nightstallion 19:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- I just figured that it was more your area of expertise than mine. However, I doubt that a mere employee has the right to release what is effectively trademarks to be used by everybody else. If I mint a coin tomorrow using any of those marks of identification, I'll commit an act of counterfeiting, so how can they be free? They seem to be - at the very least - copyrighted logos. PD-self must be incorrect, unless the uploader designed all of the original insignia himself. Valentinian T / C 22:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Could you simply ask User:Theeuro about that? I'm sure he'll gladly change the license to whatever is appropriate when prompted to do so, but I simply have rather limited knowledge of licenses. —Nightstallion 15:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- I just figured that it was more your area of expertise than mine. However, I doubt that a mere employee has the right to release what is effectively trademarks to be used by everybody else. If I mint a coin tomorrow using any of those marks of identification, I'll commit an act of counterfeiting, so how can they be free? They seem to be - at the very least - copyrighted logos. PD-self must be incorrect, unless the uploader designed all of the original insignia himself. Valentinian T / C 22:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
First edit day
| HAPPY FIRST EDIT DAY! | from the BIRTHDAYCOMMITTEE | |
|---|---|---|
  Wishing Nightstallion/ο a very Happy First Edit Day! Have a fantastic day! From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee | ||
wwesocks 02:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
|
Happy First Edit Day, Nightstallion/ο, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! |
Category?
How to make a Category:Montenegrin Federalists? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Simply add the category to articles, and then edit the category to say something like "Category containing Montenegrin federalist politicians and statesmen.", and also add [[Category:Montenegrin people]] [[Category:Federalism]] or something like that to the page on the category. —Nightstallion 18:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
National liberalism
I finally started an article on national liberalism. If you there is something to add or to correct (especially about Germany and Austria), feel free to do it and, if you are interested, help me in improving the whole article. --Checco (talk) 19:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Very well done! I have little to add to it for now, I'm afraid, but it's a good start. :) —Nightstallion 15:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Milo...
..I have remembered finally whom he reminds me of: Sekule Drljević. In the early 20th century he was an extreme Serb chauvinist and proponent of Serb unification at all costs, for Montenegro to unite with Serbia, for which he suffered in WWI.
Then after not receiving a high position in the government and seeing how anxiety amongst the people lasts, he became a federalist proponent of an independent Montenegro, joining the Democratic blocs, in the end disappointed by their promises not to break up the state. He thought of theories of superiority of the Montenegrins who're "superior Serbs", compared to other Serbs, and especially the "pathetic inferior Serbians".
In WWII he joined the Axis forces and took part in the Holocaust, writing how Montenegrins are an independent nation of Croat origins, and he spoke of a degenerate "Serb and Jewish race" that plagues the world with its existence. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting... —Nightstallion 15:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Reply
Yeah, but I've stopped following it. It also seems that SDP has given up, although we should see to the end. The good news is that the elections (repetitions, second rounds) are all finally over in Kosovo and Croatia so I will be able to wrap up the final results in no time. By the way, is it actually proper to record the Croatian election results this way? I'm asking because of the 12 electoral units rather than one. This is probably the reason why DIP will not publish results for whole of Croatia (on its website), but only by units.
Socialist People's Party President Srdjan Milic has been to Belgrade talking with Momir Bulatovic, but he aggressively repulsed him, just like I predicted a day ago. ;) Although it seems Momir is reluctant on accepting to be the presidential candidate of the Serb List, the alliance seems to be carefully drawing a progressive campaign.
Bioče train disaster verdict is done. The courts freed all charged and sentenced the train driver, the least man responsible for the accident - another DPS affair, this time messing with the souls of the dead. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh. Maybe it would be a good idea to have a big table with the results listed by electoral units and then add them together for a national result? —Nightstallion 18:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. I'm just not sure how it'll look like... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Just give it a try, I'll try to assist if you need help. —Nightstallion 18:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Don't really count. Even HNS seems to be abandoning SDP, which however seems to be willing to "fight till the end". --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Damn. So SDP will have to win the next election, *AGAINST* the stupid electoral law favouring HDZ? Let's just hope that Croatia doesn't enter EU by then. ;) —Nightstallion 22:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Don't really count. Even HNS seems to be abandoning SDP, which however seems to be willing to "fight till the end". --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Just give it a try, I'll try to assist if you need help. —Nightstallion 18:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. I'm just not sure how it'll look like... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Treaty of Lisbon Ratification
Hi, I thought I'd tell you, if you didn't already know, that Danish PM Rasmussen has announced that he is to put the Treaty of Lisbon to ratification by MPs, and not a referendum.[1] This may be sufficient to change the map Image:Reform Treaty ratification.png, if you feel that it's justified. All the best =) Rossenglish (talk) 18:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! —Nightstallion 18:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Hatikva
Hi Nightstallion. Thanks for the head up about the party. Someone added it as an external link on the List of political parties in Israel, but I hadn't seen it mentioned anywhere in the national press. I've found some info here. As for the article title, I think it should be Hatikva (political party), as this is how the media seem to be referring to it as, and it seems to be tradition not to translate the names unless there the party name is common in English. Anyway, I'll probably create it tomorrow. Cheers, пﮟოьεԻ 57 22:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Great! —Nightstallion 22:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 50 | 10 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:48, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Kosovo
If I understood what you're asking - we can.
4 seats are reserved for Roma, Ashkali and Egyptians. The Democratic Ashkali Party of Kosovo received 3 seats and the United Roma Party of Kosovo 1 and United Roma Party of Kosovo 1. Obviously the latter 2 received guaranteed seats, while the first received the remaining 2 and won one normally.
3 seats for Bosniacs. Vakat Coalition 3+Party of Democratic Action 2 = 5. So this means that most probably the first got 2 and one normal and the latter 1 and a single normally.
2 guaranteed seats for Turks. The Turkish Democratic Party of Kosovo won 3 seats, so it's obvious.
The Civic Initiative of Gora received its sole guaranteed seat. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Great, thanks! —Nightstallion 13:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Presidential election shall be delayed. DSS-NS threatened to block the parliamentary majority if it's scheduled in time. We shall wait until 19 December 2007, when the United Nations Security Council shall discuss on Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not so great, but irrelevant, as the UNSC won't decide anything, anyway. So the decision will be taken on 20 December? —Nightstallion 13:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Vojislav Kostunica will wait to see the decision of the UNSC. If decides something pro-independence, the election will be delayed to March of 2008. If not...who knows. It's now all turning into a big game as DSS constantly tries to delay everything. Understanding that EU has adopted the French wait to presidential election proposal, it will attempt to delay the presidential election at all costs. The only collision is SAA. SAA will be signed on 28 January if a presidential election is held by then. However Carla del Ponte's negative report on Serbia's cooperation with the Hague has jeopardized this, so nothing is sure anymore. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Argh. Can't Kostunica simply be hit by a big rock or something like that? —Nightstallion 13:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nothing looks bright anymore. Nothing. Numerous ultra-nationalist organizations and gatherings are being formed in Serbia, they have their websites, and all are dedicated to Kosovo. On Universities mostly. The ANA is armed and ready at Kosovo itself. Boris Tadic addressed to the nation asking for peace both from Serbia and Kosovo and announced that he expects the UNMIK to annul declaration of unilateral of independence coming from the PISG parliament. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- sighs —Nightstallion 13:53, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nothing looks bright anymore. Nothing. Numerous ultra-nationalist organizations and gatherings are being formed in Serbia, they have their websites, and all are dedicated to Kosovo. On Universities mostly. The ANA is armed and ready at Kosovo itself. Boris Tadic addressed to the nation asking for peace both from Serbia and Kosovo and announced that he expects the UNMIK to annul declaration of unilateral of independence coming from the PISG parliament. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Argh. Can't Kostunica simply be hit by a big rock or something like that? —Nightstallion 13:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Vojislav Kostunica will wait to see the decision of the UNSC. If decides something pro-independence, the election will be delayed to March of 2008. If not...who knows. It's now all turning into a big game as DSS constantly tries to delay everything. Understanding that EU has adopted the French wait to presidential election proposal, it will attempt to delay the presidential election at all costs. The only collision is SAA. SAA will be signed on 28 January if a presidential election is held by then. However Carla del Ponte's negative report on Serbia's cooperation with the Hague has jeopardized this, so nothing is sure anymore. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Serbian president
Could you please "fit in" the confirmed candidates in the article? I have neither time nor patience right now:
- Boris Tadic - DS, SDP, G17+
- Tomislav Nikolic - SRS
- Cedomir Jovanovic - LDP, SDU
- Velimir Ilic - NS
- Milutin Mrkonjic - SPS
- Istvan Pazstor - minorities and ethnic Magyars
Unconfirmed, but most probable:
- Dragan Markovic "Palma" - JS
Thanks in advance. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Oliver Dulic scheduled it for 20 January 2008. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
P.S. money from Croatian electoral campaign:
- Croatian Democratic Union 25.476.833 HRK or 51.9 % of total
- Social Democratic Party of Croatia 8.150.728 HRK or 16.6 % of total
- Croatian Peasant Party-Croatian Social Liberal Party 4.923.277 HRK or 10.0 % of total
- Croatian People's Party 4.204.998 HRK or 8.6 % ot total
- Croatian Party of Rights 3.082.071 HRK or 6.1 % of total
- Istrian Democratic Assembly 611.406 HRK or 1.2 % of total
- Croatian Party of Pensioners 520.362 HRK or 1.1 % ot total
- Only Croatia – Movement for Croatia 348.686 HRK or 0.7 % of total
- Democratic Centre 329.151 HRK or 0.7 of total
- Croatian Democratic Assembly of Slavonija and Baranja 283.212 HRK or 0.6 % of total
HDZ 51.9% and SDP 16.6%. Hmmm.... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done, and interesting... —Nightstallion 16:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- DSS claims DS has violated the coalition agreement and threatened the existence of the government. It will issue its reply after 19 December 2007, which shall be influenced by the UNSC's decision.
- P.S. Check out Novak Kilibarda for another totally bizarre person. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've read it, yeah. What's the likely result? Will they boycott the government or form one with SRS and SPS? —Nightstallion 22:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- That we'll know by 19 December. Also you can read the controversy I added to the presidential election article. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! —Nightstallion 14:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I hope the Constitutional Court doesn't declare Dulic's decision invalid, or there'll big SO big mess up that imminent pre-term parliamentary would be a necessity. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- When will it rule? —Nightstallion 16:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know - it has only been elected. By the way, in election tables - how do we count? Of the valid votes or all? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Of the valid votes only. It will have to rule rather soon, though, as the election is in about a month...? —Nightstallion 16:41, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yep. DSS and SRS are working to vote out Oliver Dulic. Boris Tadic threatens that, if that occurs, he shall dismiss the parliament. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, no. HDZ will form the government. The final results are published but as I said, I'm busy. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- So that means early elections in Serbia are VERY likely now? And that's okay, I'm just waiting to tick the final Croatian results off my to-do list. ;) —Nightstallion 22:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Might be only games. At the actual (closed) session of the Government, everything went well and not a mention of the crisis was on table - the gov works fine. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh, strange. Let me know what happens, would you? May I ask why you're busy right now? Just curious. ;) —Nightstallion 23:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Will do. Well for Wikipedia I am back to researching history a bit and have to finish a lot of things in the real world. By the way, DSS will boycott the first round and support Tadic in the second. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods Just read it at B92. —Nightstallion 12:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- G17+ supported Boris Tadic. Commander of the "Guard of Tsar Lazar" from the Movement of Veterans of Serbia announced to run for President after UNSC's session. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Could you add that to the article? I would do it, but I haven't found a source for it... —Nightstallion 18:23, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- If I get time. The controversial corrupt president of the Party of Serbian Socialists has announced candidacy. And I'm off to prepare to work as a 'you-know-what clerk' on 20 January and 3 February. ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- Great. :) —Nightstallion 15:59, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- If I get time. The controversial corrupt president of the Party of Serbian Socialists has announced candidacy. And I'm off to prepare to work as a 'you-know-what clerk' on 20 January and 3 February. ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- Could you add that to the article? I would do it, but I haven't found a source for it... —Nightstallion 18:23, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- G17+ supported Boris Tadic. Commander of the "Guard of Tsar Lazar" from the Movement of Veterans of Serbia announced to run for President after UNSC's session. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods Just read it at B92. —Nightstallion 12:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Will do. Well for Wikipedia I am back to researching history a bit and have to finish a lot of things in the real world. By the way, DSS will boycott the first round and support Tadic in the second. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh, strange. Let me know what happens, would you? May I ask why you're busy right now? Just curious. ;) —Nightstallion 23:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Might be only games. At the actual (closed) session of the Government, everything went well and not a mention of the crisis was on table - the gov works fine. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- So that means early elections in Serbia are VERY likely now? And that's okay, I'm just waiting to tick the final Croatian results off my to-do list. ;) —Nightstallion 22:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Of the valid votes only. It will have to rule rather soon, though, as the election is in about a month...? —Nightstallion 16:41, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know - it has only been elected. By the way, in election tables - how do we count? Of the valid votes or all? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- When will it rule? —Nightstallion 16:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I hope the Constitutional Court doesn't declare Dulic's decision invalid, or there'll big SO big mess up that imminent pre-term parliamentary would be a necessity. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! —Nightstallion 14:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- That we'll know by 19 December. Also you can read the controversy I added to the presidential election article. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've read it, yeah. What's the likely result? Will they boycott the government or form one with SRS and SPS? —Nightstallion 22:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Far left?
There is an interesting discussion up in Talk:The Left – The Rainbow about the concept of far left which may well affect other pages as it seems that there is not a broadly accepted conceptualization of it. Your opinion would be very useful to us. --Checco (talk) 22:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Suzuki Shin'ichi
As there are at least three such people, I've made a new suggestion at Talk:Shinichi Suzuki. Take a look if you have time. -- Hoary (talk) 10:32, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Rai Coast
I can actually help you for once. Niuro Toko Sapia, the runner-up from the general election, won as an independent candidate. (He was the PNG Country Party candidate in the general election). Henry Baiyema finished second. It's in National.
The article says that he'll be joining the National Alliance, too. Rebecca (talk) 22:31, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- Great, thanks! —Nightstallion 22:52, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
FYI, I've nominated this for deletion. I think due to the fact there is very little information that we should hold off on having this article. Most likely there will be enough information to recreate it sometime around the beginning of March or so. Davidpdx (talk) 04:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about that, it could be that I wasn't able to access it on my computer. It just seems a little pointless to create an article with no information for the heck of it. I'll keep an eye out for information as I'm in Korea now. As soon as I come across something I'll add it. Davidpdx (talk) 05:15, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I think it's not pointless -- it helps to have an overview over all the elections which will take place in the coming year, and it makes it easier for people who have info to add it to the right place immediately. I did the same thing last year, and noone thought it was a bad thing; I only create articles for the next year, usually, so as to not to be accused of crystalballing. Still, no hard feelings for the AfD -- I have no problem with having to argue precisely *WHY* I think it's good the way I'm doing things. ;) —Nightstallion 08:42, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Image:European-political-spectrum.png/2
Discussion continues. --Checco (talk) 15:44, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
MNE
By the way, the Serb List is prosecuting the parliament for not supplementing simultaneous translations when the parliament works from Montenegrin to Serbian and vice-versa, as per guaranteed by the constitution and the law. They've been discussing this for the past days, also wanting translation of every single official document to Serbian and supplying them to Serb MPs. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods Sounds fair. —Nightstallion 16:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- Are you kidding me? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- The point of the act is similar to violating WP:POINT in Wikipedia. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- I know -- I still think it's fair; if some people want to establish Montenegrin as a language, they should be prepared to translate between Montenegrin and Serbian. ;) —Nightstallion 16:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- But for all MPs to have all those gizmos on their ears and await translation, like at the Hague? Even though all the deputies use the very same identical wording. If that occurs, shouldn't the assembly rename itself to House of Idiots? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, that's something they'll have to consider, then... ;) —Nightstallion 16:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- Parliamentary majority adopts a change in regulation of public services & media on opposition's outrage. It is no longer in the juristiction of the assembly, but of the government from now on. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 09:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ouch... —Nightstallion 11:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Parliamentary majority adopts a change in regulation of public services & media on opposition's outrage. It is no longer in the juristiction of the assembly, but of the government from now on. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 09:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, that's something they'll have to consider, then... ;) —Nightstallion 16:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- But for all MPs to have all those gizmos on their ears and await translation, like at the Hague? Even though all the deputies use the very same identical wording. If that occurs, shouldn't the assembly rename itself to House of Idiots? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- I know -- I still think it's fair; if some people want to establish Montenegrin as a language, they should be prepared to translate between Montenegrin and Serbian. ;) —Nightstallion 16:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Several weeks ago Predrag Popovic President of People's Party changed his ethnicity to Serb from Montenegrin. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:35, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. Will others follow suit? —Nightstallion 19:43, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- I thought that was over by now, but new switches will probably occur amongst the declared Montenegrins to opt Serbian ethnicity, in order to (similarly to Popovic) to take the Serbian citizenship, a mentioned figure of 100,000, however the greatest majority of them already are self-declared Serbs.
- Predrag is actually a sort of cynical person. In the long years he has often switched his national declaration from Montenegrin to Serb and backwards. The most well known event is when not many years ago his friend from DPS asked him to "make more Serbs" in the parliament, because the number was close to zero, for at least some sort of proportional justice. One day later Predrag convinced two MPs from in a phone call to become Serbs. :))) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:46, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Heh, very nice. ;) —Nightstallion 11:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Most of the political parties in Montenegro support national nihilism and non identification, because whomever stands firmly on one "ethnic side" is bound to wane (today the one in the precise "center" PZP). Just the difference that some are pro-Montenegrin and others are pro-Serbian. The only parties which are openly ethnic are SNS as Serb and SDP CG and LP CG as Montenegrin.
- nods —Nightstallion 12:53, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Most of the political parties in Montenegro support national nihilism and non identification, because whomever stands firmly on one "ethnic side" is bound to wane (today the one in the precise "center" PZP). Just the difference that some are pro-Montenegrin and others are pro-Serbian. The only parties which are openly ethnic are SNS as Serb and SDP CG and LP CG as Montenegrin.
- Heh, very nice. ;) —Nightstallion 11:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
There is also something interesting. The Serbian citizens living in Montenegro will be allowed to vote at the Presidential election it would seem. Also the DPS-SDP majority has raised the electoral threshold to 5%. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- What was the threshold before that? And Serbs weren't allowed to vote before? —Nightstallion 12:53, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- It was three percent.
- Serbian citizens on the Serbian presidential election. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Which parties will suffer from that?
- Ah, of course. —Nightstallion 14:29, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- The opposition. The Liberals for instance will be deleted.
- This foolish attempt to liken the Montenegrin inhabitants to take Serbian citizenship will backfire, as probably most of the voters down there would support Tomislav Nikolic. It's also everything against the Serbian parliament stood, not allowing "outsiders" to decide for the people. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Aye... sighs —Nightstallion 15:21, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Serbia
It is DSS's opinion that if the EU wholesomely supports Kosovo's independence and if it unanimously recognizes it, Serbia should treat it the same as NATO.
The presidential election is going to be more fierce than the parliamentary and is going to be the biggest since...well, perhaps 1990. :) Boris Tadic is leader of one half of Serbia and Tomislav Nikolic of the other (remember that potential referendum-election? and how SRS and DS are eating every other party)? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- And what do you think will be the result? And will Tadic start working to make Serbia accept Kosovan independence after the election? —Nightstallion 18:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- I really don't know. Boris Tadic has more chance than Tomislav, but only just enough. Kostunica's support will prove crucial. Kostunica is now carefully inspecting trying to find place for himself in the 2008 Serbia, but he is looking at his career on the long run, so that's why he's hesitating. The strength in Toma lies that in these presidential elections Kosovo will be the main subject, unlike the previous when it wasn't even mentioned. Tomislav will strongly assert itself as the anti-NATO candidate, and he will position himself on the other side against Boris Tadic, whom he shall do everything in his power to present as a NATO candidate. As you know, sentiment against the NATO is strong in Serbia. So unless Boris Tadic also questions Serbia's membership in the NATO (which is not gonna happen), this will be his greatest threat. Also DSS is slowly bringing to the public table (as we can see) Euroskeptic discussions, possibly questioning it some time in the future just like the matter with the NATO. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ouch. Doesn't sound good... —Nightstallion 22:06, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- I really don't know. Boris Tadic has more chance than Tomislav, but only just enough. Kostunica's support will prove crucial. Kostunica is now carefully inspecting trying to find place for himself in the 2008 Serbia, but he is looking at his career on the long run, so that's why he's hesitating. The strength in Toma lies that in these presidential elections Kosovo will be the main subject, unlike the previous when it wasn't even mentioned. Tomislav will strongly assert itself as the anti-NATO candidate, and he will position himself on the other side against Boris Tadic, whom he shall do everything in his power to present as a NATO candidate. As you know, sentiment against the NATO is strong in Serbia. So unless Boris Tadic also questions Serbia's membership in the NATO (which is not gonna happen), this will be his greatest threat. Also DSS is slowly bringing to the public table (as we can see) Euroskeptic discussions, possibly questioning it some time in the future just like the matter with the NATO. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 51 | 17 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 19:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
EU semi protection
Maybe you want to support this [2]. Lear 21 (talk) 16:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Italian Liberal Right
The Liberal Right - Liberals for Italy returned to its original name "Italian Liberal Right". Can you fix the title of the article? --Checco (talk) 15:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done. —Nightstallion 15:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. I also made some changes to the text. Can you please check if they are correct in English? --Checco (talk) 15:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Seems fine to me. —Nightstallion 16:01, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. I also made some changes to the text. Can you please check if they are correct in English? --Checco (talk) 15:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
SNSD & other
Why do you think is SNSD's support relevant?
Could you please include into the article a "table" similar to the one on the US presidential Democratic (or Republican) candidates? That's what I thought when I asked you to include...
By the way, "hazdija" is a title. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Because it's an important declaration of support, in my opinion. Wouldn't you agree?
- What kind of table do you mean?
- Fair enough, still should be capitalised. —Nightstallion 20:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but then we should also put the other foreign supporters as well (so far none, but probably will show up).
- United_States_Republican_presidential_candidates,_2008. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:03, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- By the way, only Ceda and Toma have registered (by that order). Boki will do it tomorrow. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:08, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sure, why not?
- Mh. Do you really think that's necessary? I don't think the table layout is that good, actually...
- nods —Nightstallion 21:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- An adapted version "picture|nominator|campaign slogan and/or whatever". Much more attractive than this right now, isn't it? Toma's slogan is
"With Love"!!:) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)- ... seriously? —Nightstallion 21:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Pardon, I've just rechecked, it's "With All Heart!" (Svim srcem).
- By the way, LSV has supported the democratic candidates. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Meaning it supports Boris and Cedo? —Nightstallion 21:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yep. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oh and Pastor (for the Magyars in Vojvodina). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Meaning it supports Boris and Cedo? —Nightstallion 21:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- ... seriously? —Nightstallion 21:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- An adapted version "picture|nominator|campaign slogan and/or whatever". Much more attractive than this right now, isn't it? Toma's slogan is
- By the way, only Ceda and Toma have registered (by that order). Boki will do it tomorrow. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:08, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Kosovo
The Democratic Party of Kosovo has expressed demands for supervised independence of Kosovo. They state that all options for the solution of Kosovo are still open, that they are for coordination with the US and EU and other important factors and put the deadline to May 2008, when the Kosovo Assembly will adopt a Declaration of Independence, no matter what (or before if compromise reached).
PDK expresses worry about Ahtisaari's peace plan and supports changing it for a basis of Kosovo's supervised independence, paying too much attention to a neighboring country (Serbia) and the Serbs who are just a 5% minority, and that it introduces disunity of the Albanian people. It also expressed that supervised independence is an Albanian national interest and the first step towards the dream of all ethnic Albanians. After independence polls will be conducted and the Kosovar authorities will have to conduct a referendum on joining the Republic of Albania if sufficient signatures are collected, as a final step in fulfilling the right of self-determination. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:49, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, that's not a good idea, I'd say... At least EU and US definitely won't like that. —Nightstallion 21:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- PDK's speaker also stated that Kosovo should not fear Serbia's reaction, embargos, sanctions or any other response, claiming that Serbia is no factor and is not important for Kosovo. International aid and full-scale opened border to Albania could fix it, also bringing closer relations and stepping towards special links to Albania. He claims that PDK and the Albanian people are after decades of all they've been through prepared for everything, even if Serbia uses armed force, which he is convinced though will not happen. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:01, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- sighs Very smart. First, get Serbia really angry by pursuing independence -- fair enough; but then, get the EU and US angry by pursuing unification with Albania and disregarding Serbia completely. —Nightstallion 22:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- LDK has long ago abandoned Greater Albanian ideology. This is why Thaci's PDK won and the only way to secure power by enjoying support of the majority. Plus it's a smart move since the public favors union with Albania - remember how the Self-determination! movement calls all government and parties traitors, how the terrorist Albanian National Army has sprung into Kosovo from Macedonia and how too little people vote. This "adaption" is a necessity, or some SRS-party will win most votes, like in Serbia. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Still, if he actually means it, it won't be good for Kosovo... —Nightstallion 22:59, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- He has to. Just like SDP has to be a little Croat nationalistic, because unlike HDZ who have the war they have to "prove" they're Croats if you know what I mean. Just like I think Tadic will need to be a little "softer" during the presidential campaign about his pro-NATO attitudes if he intends to win, by my personal opinion. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh, yeah, you're probably right. —Nightstallion 23:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- He has to. Just like SDP has to be a little Croat nationalistic, because unlike HDZ who have the war they have to "prove" they're Croats if you know what I mean. Just like I think Tadic will need to be a little "softer" during the presidential campaign about his pro-NATO attitudes if he intends to win, by my personal opinion. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Still, if he actually means it, it won't be good for Kosovo... —Nightstallion 22:59, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- LDK has long ago abandoned Greater Albanian ideology. This is why Thaci's PDK won and the only way to secure power by enjoying support of the majority. Plus it's a smart move since the public favors union with Albania - remember how the Self-determination! movement calls all government and parties traitors, how the terrorist Albanian National Army has sprung into Kosovo from Macedonia and how too little people vote. This "adaption" is a necessity, or some SRS-party will win most votes, like in Serbia. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- sighs Very smart. First, get Serbia really angry by pursuing independence -- fair enough; but then, get the EU and US angry by pursuing unification with Albania and disregarding Serbia completely. —Nightstallion 22:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- PDK's speaker also stated that Kosovo should not fear Serbia's reaction, embargos, sanctions or any other response, claiming that Serbia is no factor and is not important for Kosovo. International aid and full-scale opened border to Albania could fix it, also bringing closer relations and stepping towards special links to Albania. He claims that PDK and the Albanian people are after decades of all they've been through prepared for everything, even if Serbia uses armed force, which he is convinced though will not happen. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:01, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
DSS-NS just strengthened their coalition. They agreed that Serbia needs to go on faster towards European integrations and preserve its national integrity. They (Voja and Velja) condemn DS's decision to hold the elections and demand them not to schedule the local elections the same way for February 3rd. They have agreed that Serbia cannot sign the SAA if the European Union doesn't add a special article in the agreement which affirms the independence within its internationally recognized borders, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Serbia, binding all EU Member States to respect it. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:13, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ouch. Well, that will turn out to be quite interesting, as it's the head of state who signs treaties, after all -- ratification in parliament may turn out to be a problem, though. —Nightstallion 12:16, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- President Boris Tadic is chief of state. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:38, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- Precisely, so he can sign the SAA whether DSS-NS want or not. Still, it has to be ratified in parliament, too, and there, SRS-DSS/NS-SPS can block ratification... —Nightstallion 12:52, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I wrote to the up, but the Populists are now very cautious and will not allow to be ignored. They might trade not signing the SAA for holding the local elections. By the way this "2nd parliamentary majority in shadow" is sometimes excessed in Serbia. For example Serbia has allied with Cuba through a resolution (mostly aimed against the US's plans of an independent Kosovo I guess). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:30, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods Well, we'll see. Why are DSS-NS against holding local elections right now? —Nightstallion 10:30, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- There always delaying the elections fearing the results for themselves, if you haven't noticed. Also I guess some hope that all this "loosening" the three types of elections is delaying Kosovo's independence, so they're pulling the best of it (so far from late 2006 because of Serbian election it has come to early 2008). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:09, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- True enough, yeah. Do you think three years to the next election in 2011 will be enough time for the Serbian people to accept that Kosovo is lost for Serbia? —Nightstallion 09:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Since the political leadership does not take that as an option, no. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh. Jovanovic certainly does, the question lies in whether Tadic will accept such a thing in the long run, right? Any chance? —Nightstallion 13:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Now - political suicide. When - depends on others. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it doesn't seem to be political suicide for Jovanovic -- at least he's still stable at around 10%, isn't he? —Nightstallion 14:41, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- And on which others does it depend? —Nightstallion 14:43, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'd bid a little weaker than that.
- Those that *control* the majority of the people's will - Tomislav Nikolic, Vojislav Kostunica, Ivica Dacic and Velimir Ilic. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Still, not bad, is it?
- Mh. And how do you think they'll act? —Nightstallion 17:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- For now.
- Tomislav Nikolic and Ivica Dacic will never ever to the death recognize independence of Kosovo and Vojislav Kostunica will act with the wind...as a true natural political [reference to Winston Churchil's quotes removed]. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:33, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods We'll have to hope, then, I suppose. I suppose, though, that Tadic will play along with what the others do, but won't do anything which will change the situation de facto? —Nightstallion 22:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Now - political suicide. When - depends on others. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh. Jovanovic certainly does, the question lies in whether Tadic will accept such a thing in the long run, right? Any chance? —Nightstallion 13:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Since the political leadership does not take that as an option, no. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- True enough, yeah. Do you think three years to the next election in 2011 will be enough time for the Serbian people to accept that Kosovo is lost for Serbia? —Nightstallion 09:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- There always delaying the elections fearing the results for themselves, if you haven't noticed. Also I guess some hope that all this "loosening" the three types of elections is delaying Kosovo's independence, so they're pulling the best of it (so far from late 2006 because of Serbian election it has come to early 2008). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:09, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods Well, we'll see. Why are DSS-NS against holding local elections right now? —Nightstallion 10:30, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I wrote to the up, but the Populists are now very cautious and will not allow to be ignored. They might trade not signing the SAA for holding the local elections. By the way this "2nd parliamentary majority in shadow" is sometimes excessed in Serbia. For example Serbia has allied with Cuba through a resolution (mostly aimed against the US's plans of an independent Kosovo I guess). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:30, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- Precisely, so he can sign the SAA whether DSS-NS want or not. Still, it has to be ratified in parliament, too, and there, SRS-DSS/NS-SPS can block ratification... —Nightstallion 12:52, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- President Boris Tadic is chief of state. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:38, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I think some might complain about the election. All three contestants (so far) have agreed to maintain a very short (month long) and slow peaceful campaign, without political propaganda, Nikolic went to a mine in eastern Serbia and Ceda had a small speech in a tiny town - but Boris didn't hold it out. The day before yesterday he held a massive gathering in front of thousands in Vojvodina's capital. Prime Minister of RS Milorad Dodik went to the gathering and spoke just about the Radicals, how in Bosnia and Herzegovina he defeated them, how they can't pass even 3% and begged the people of Serbia not to support an enemy of the Serbian nation (in Bosnia and elsewhere). It took Tadic one night to put on a campaign website (the only candidate that will have it) and solely Boris Tadic is promoted on media political marketing.
Boris will undoubtedly win huge support thanks to this, although this might cause many problems later on in the campaign.
By the way, the Party of Serbian Unity merged today into SRS. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:15, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- I certainly hope Tadic will win no matter what happens...
- I read about SSJ, yeah. —Nightstallion 09:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- I meant to say that his competitors will probably use this aggressive campaign against him. Although winning probably more votes, he's bent to lose some of those that will be disgusted by the political propaganda. I'm saying that although he broke no "rule", others may dispute him. The reason why I am pointing this out is because the parliamentary election at the beginning of this year was pulled out amazingly, with watchers from all over the world, very little localized irregularities and, especially noted to the history of Serbian democracy, that it was noted by the OSCE as the most democratically held election of the year. No one was present more than the other in the campaign, unless they wanted it, as well as all must spend similar funds. For it SDP stands in Croatia - if it was that way, the preelectoral political marketing wouldn't've been swarmed by HDZ. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh. Well, we'll see... —Nightstallion 13:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- The Party for Sanjak supported Boris Tadic (it also supported DS on the parliamentary election) and the Movement for the Frontier akin to Vuk Draskovic and his SPO supported Tomislav Nikolic.
- Today the National Assembly of Serbia is adopting a very fierce resolution, in the huge former Parliament of Yugoslavia (as some sort of an important mark), centered around the future status of Kosovo. It will secure DSS's support of Tadic's candidacy as well as formally strengthen the ruling coalition to last a full mandate. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:32, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- So that means no tacit acceptance of Kosovan independence before the 2011 elections. —Nightstallion 15:36, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh. Well, we'll see... —Nightstallion 13:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- I meant to say that his competitors will probably use this aggressive campaign against him. Although winning probably more votes, he's bent to lose some of those that will be disgusted by the political propaganda. I'm saying that although he broke no "rule", others may dispute him. The reason why I am pointing this out is because the parliamentary election at the beginning of this year was pulled out amazingly, with watchers from all over the world, very little localized irregularities and, especially noted to the history of Serbian democracy, that it was noted by the OSCE as the most democratically held election of the year. No one was present more than the other in the campaign, unless they wanted it, as well as all must spend similar funds. For it SDP stands in Croatia - if it was that way, the preelectoral political marketing wouldn't've been swarmed by HDZ. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
LOL, Toma has completely copied Gaspari's campaign from Slovenia, it is identical in every way and it also seems SRS is hiring the same people. ;))) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- Completely ignoring that they're from vastly different political backgrounds, with Gaspari being a liberal democrat and Toma a nationalist conservative? —Nightstallion 10:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yep. ;) It's even filmed in the very same room.
- Ceda's campaign is based on SDP's in Croatia as well as a Croatian beer commercial.
- Boris Tadic copied a typical US presidential campaign and has hired American political marketing experts. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:34, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting, thanks! BTW, completely different issue: Any idea when you'll have time to compile the final Croatian election results? —Nightstallion 11:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Croatia
SDP will be able to recuperate from its dreadful electoral campaign. It was very unorganized and they , at first, presented a terrible man for PM candidate. They're also poor so HDZ pretty much dominated everything, and they were like a minor party. SDP should use the fact that it didn't win power to reorganize, that Zoran Milanovic who's a freshman and elected only a short time before the election implants himself in 3-4 years as a strong Croatian politician. This time also SDP will be considerably wealthier and by the next election new laws will be regulated and campaign balanced & neutral like it was in Serbia in January 2007. I mean, next to all these problems, SDP still grew this much. What would've happened if it led a HDZ-like campaign. 100% votes? :) But it should learn, and if as it seems Croatia doesn't get accepted into the EU (and Sanader's government collapses, as it probably will after two or three years), the next election will be a victory in which SDP will be able to form a government alone - if nothing great changes badly for them.
P.S. Serbia is appealing to the UN SC for its 1997 November resolution on discrimination in citizenship for the 200,000 Serbs in Montenegro. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:13, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- I hope your optimism is correct. :) —Nightstallion 23:23, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- And the Montenegrin citizenship problem? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know the background, I believe (or if I do, I can't remember right now). What happened back then? —Nightstallion 09:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- In 1997 the United Nations Security Council endorsed that no discrimination on ethnic, religious or other basis in the rights for citizenship is prohibited and that one's democratic right for domestic citizenship is supreme. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- I suppose you mean "no discrimination ... is allowed", not "is prohibited", right? Will be highly interesting to see what will be the result of the appeal. —Nightstallion 12:15, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, yep. Well Filip Vujanovic is asking to drop that for better relations and promises negotiations to come right now because of Svetozar Marovic's demands to use Serbia's Former President privileges, so the suit will probably be dropped. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:53, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, if the issue can be resolved through negotiations instead... —Nightstallion 13:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- This just dropped in, Milo wrote to the European MP that asked him not to run before the investigations about his criminal activities are over, Djukanovic accused him and several other people who suggested the same of meddling inside Montenegro's internal affairs. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- I seriously hope that a) Milo is indicted very soon by Interpol and/or b) there will be no further steps in Montenegro's EU accession until Milo's gone... —Nightstallion 10:38, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- I had just checked, it seems that according to Montenegrin law only the President, Premier and Minister of Foreign Affairs have political immunity (this is because from 1989 to today there were a lot of political purges of officials that aren't loyal to Milo). Suddenly his candidacy has become more obvious then ever. ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:49, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not if Interpol or Europol succeed in getting him *before* that... ;) —Nightstallion 11:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- I had just checked, it seems that according to Montenegrin law only the President, Premier and Minister of Foreign Affairs have political immunity (this is because from 1989 to today there were a lot of political purges of officials that aren't loyal to Milo). Suddenly his candidacy has become more obvious then ever. ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:49, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- I seriously hope that a) Milo is indicted very soon by Interpol and/or b) there will be no further steps in Montenegro's EU accession until Milo's gone... —Nightstallion 10:38, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- This just dropped in, Milo wrote to the European MP that asked him not to run before the investigations about his criminal activities are over, Djukanovic accused him and several other people who suggested the same of meddling inside Montenegro's internal affairs. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, if the issue can be resolved through negotiations instead... —Nightstallion 13:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, yep. Well Filip Vujanovic is asking to drop that for better relations and promises negotiations to come right now because of Svetozar Marovic's demands to use Serbia's Former President privileges, so the suit will probably be dropped. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:53, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- I suppose you mean "no discrimination ... is allowed", not "is prohibited", right? Will be highly interesting to see what will be the result of the appeal. —Nightstallion 12:15, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- In 1997 the United Nations Security Council endorsed that no discrimination on ethnic, religious or other basis in the rights for citizenship is prohibited and that one's democratic right for domestic citizenship is supreme. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know the background, I believe (or if I do, I can't remember right now). What happened back then? —Nightstallion 09:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- And the Montenegrin citizenship problem? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Belarus FAC
I took your suggestion and tried this out. Would this work for you? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
LOTD congratulations
Congratulations!!! List of European Union member states by accession has been chosen in the inaugural class of January 2008 LOTDs. I hope you will continue to participate in the WP:LOTD process. If you have a date preference get back to me by the end of 2007-12-23 UTC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyTheTiger (talk • contribs) 06:16, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Great! :) Mh, I don't think there's any date that would have special relevance in that month, so I've got no real preference. Just let me know when it's on. —Nightstallion 09:04, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
by-elections
I hadn't thought of it. You may as well do it, unless you really want me to. -- Earl Andrew - talk 15:39, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- shrugs I'm not sure when I'll have time to do it, may take a few days, but if you aren't keen on it, it's no problem for me to do it. BTW, shouldn't we move the electoral calendar to "... 2007" instead and replace it with one for 2008? —Nightstallion 15:41, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Merit for outstanding contributions
|
The Barnstar of European Merit | |
| I hereby award you Nightstallion The Barnstar of European Merit for tireless contributions to EU related articles in the year 2007. Lear 21 (talk) 20:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| this WikiAward was given to {{subst:PAGENAME}} by ~~~ on ~~~~~ |
I want to personally thank you and want to say that I appreciate your pro-European stance. If you ever consider to visit my little hometown Berlin write an e-mail to CENSORED (please delete after you read it). Merry Christmas, Frohe Weihnachten and a Happy New Year. Lear 21 (talk) 20:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot for the barnstar and the offer! I've just been to Berlin this September, I liked it a lot. ;) —Nightstallion 10:34, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Question
On Infobox Countries templates, what's the criteria for those important dates (establishment/independence bit)? I want to expand that one over at Montenegro. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- Basically, whichever important dates there are -- previous dates of independence, important treaties and events affecting Montenegrin sovereignty, ... —Nightstallion 10:31, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- For just the modern state or historical predecessors too? And what's the magical number? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Both, if there's significant info on it; and I suppose more then five or six would be too much. —Nightstallion 09:17, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- 1484 - founded
- 1499 - Ottoman takeover
- 1514 - Ottoman autonomy
- 1516 - Theocratic state
- 1528 - autonomy abolished
- 1597 - a. restored
- by 1614 - a. abolished
- 1841 - demarcation with Austrian Empire
- 1852 - Princedom
- 1859 - demarcation with Ottoman Empire
- 1878 - independence
- 1910 - Kingdom
- 1918 - unification
- 1941 - WWII occupation
- 1945 - autonomous Yugoslav republic (?)
- 1963 - SR Montenegro
- 1974 - more autonomy and self-government
- 1992 - FR Yugoslavia
- 2006 - independence
- There. I've marked the important ones (and one I don't know if is important), but it's still too much. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:03, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- I say you should have 1484, 1499, 1852, 1878, 1910, 1918 and 2007. Seven may seem a bit much, but I think it's okay. —Nightstallion 13:12, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Aha, I understand, watching through international eyes? :)
- Between 1516 and 1852 the local Serb Archbishops were factual rulers of the people. In 1516 the last member of the ruling dynasty left in heritage all land to the Serbian Church, so the titles were "Prince-Bishops". In 1852 the Prince-Bishop forgot about the Church, married, proclaimed him a secular Prince and abdicated in favor of an Archbishop. From 1516 to 1852 the Prince-Bishop seat was mostly hereditary. Should I then scrap 1852 as well? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:41, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, that was my idea.
- Mh, in that case, I'd say we would have to include 1516, as well (though I'd call it "Prince-Bishopric", not theocracy). —Nightstallion 14:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- But since it's about international views, shouldn't I leave it out altogether (in 1856 on the Treaty of Paris though totally independent, the Princedom of Montenegro was designated as a part of the Ottoman Empire - some factual recognition from the Ottomans came only in the demarcation in 1859), since only on the 1878 Congress of Berlin independence was recognized? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:11, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough, leave out 1516, 1852 and 1910, then. —Nightstallion 15:12, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Why 1910? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Because that's just a change in the form of government, while 1484, 1499, 1878, 1918 and 2007 affect the sovereignty of the Montenegrin state itself. Good? —Nightstallion 17:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Great. All done. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Although this brings me to another questionable thing - the 1918 union was not negal was recognized only when the deposed King in exile "gave up" in 1920, and received formal power when on the Treaty of Versailles the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was internationally recognized in 1919. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:42, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Use the official date of 1919, then... —Nightstallion 22:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Pax, you do realise that you are forgetting one date. That date is 1356, when Zeta became independent from the Serbian Empire of Tsar Dušan. How could have you forgotten that date? --Prevalis (talk) 21:35, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, I didn't. 1484 is used as an epic-heroic start date for Montenegro, just like 330 is for the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire (though ever more illogically). 1356 as independence of Zeta would be a little awkward, because technically, the lordships that were in the anarchic Serbian Empire were still bound to the inexistent spirit of the Empire and through the Serbian Orthodox Church - thus George Ist Balsha for instance refers that he reigns a part of the Serbian Tsardom, even though it no longer existed. And from its foundation in 1484 to today Cetinje was always the capital of one continuum, of one realm and always and only it. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 08:34, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oh and it lost its independence in 1918. From the founding of the union, the Kingdom of Serbia ruled Montenegro until forming the Kingdom of SCS. And as for the fact that the Kingdom of SCS wasn't recognised until a year later, in the meantime, Montenegro was still under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Serbia, and thus was a part of it. I think I repeat myself a little too much. :P --Prevalis (talk) 21:35, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh, then we should perhaps use 1918. —Nightstallion 22:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Still, lawyers won't agree. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 08:34, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Mh, then we should perhaps use 1918. —Nightstallion 22:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Because that's just a change in the form of government, while 1484, 1499, 1878, 1918 and 2007 affect the sovereignty of the Montenegrin state itself. Good? —Nightstallion 17:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Why 1910? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough, leave out 1516, 1852 and 1910, then. —Nightstallion 15:12, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- But since it's about international views, shouldn't I leave it out altogether (in 1856 on the Treaty of Paris though totally independent, the Princedom of Montenegro was designated as a part of the Ottoman Empire - some factual recognition from the Ottomans came only in the demarcation in 1859), since only on the 1878 Congress of Berlin independence was recognized? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:11, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- I say you should have 1484, 1499, 1852, 1878, 1910, 1918 and 2007. Seven may seem a bit much, but I think it's okay. —Nightstallion 13:12, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Both, if there's significant info on it; and I suppose more then five or six would be too much. —Nightstallion 09:17, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- For just the modern state or historical predecessors too? And what's the magical number? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Sanader..
..has led Croatia into catastrophic relations with Italy and Slovenia. He accuses the Italian government of irredentism and revisionism for references to Dalmatia on a recent postmark.
On the other hand he can't agree with the Slovenes about the sea and relations are further worsening as Slovenia is blocking Croatia's European integrations and openly supporting Serbia's entrance indirectly before Croatia. "Just in spite" for typical hostile neighbors of Croatia and Serbia, Slovenia is creating closer and closer links and offering assistance to Serbia, especially in the wake of their preceding the EU. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not to sound too cynical, but that's good, then -- it means Croatia won't join the EU under Sanader and the SDP will almost HAVE to win the next election. ;) —Nightstallion 22:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Seasons Greetings
US Black list
The newest United States of America black list is very interesting. Aside from numerous islamists and possible terrorists, it includes all criminals from former Yugoslavia. Naser Oric is there, Tihomir Blaskic, as well as dead people like Slobodan Milosevic, and the sentenced Biljana Plavsic. Also the Serb Democratic Party is there. However, Ratko Mladic, Radovan Karadzic or Veljko Kadijevic are not there at all. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Huh? That's *VERY* strange... Any explanation? —Nightstallion 17:24, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Veljko Kadijevic is only wanted by Croatia and Interpol has issued a warrant as per its request, just like the warrant for Agim Ceku (on Serbian request). He has worked for the US, mostly related to the Iraqi war, so it figures (even though he now lives in Russia).
- For Radovan Karadzic this might be another inclining towards some of the ICTY's insinuations that the West is protecting the war criminals, and in particular Hoolbroke's guarantee of protection of Radovan Karadzic. Although there were controversies about Ratko Mladic too, there is little doubt that he is outside Serbia, so for him I have no answer. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:37, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods Doesn't seem as if Serbia's outstanding issues are being solved any time soon... —Nightstallion 17:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes. And related to the one hundred thousand Serbs in Montenegro that have petitioned for Serbian citizenship, one million Serbs from Bosnia and Herzegovina have did the same. In my opinion this is very bad, starting to look like Croatia's situation. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods Not good at all... —Nightstallion 18:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- By the way, after a journalist investigation on Djukanovic's property, he has finally publicly admitted that he is very wealthy. So far he has been claiming that he lives a modest private life with only several hundred euros wage, barely able to finance his family. It appears that (from now on's research), and he has finally admitted, that he possesses millions of euros, but not precisely how many and along the claim that he earned them fair and square. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- At least it's a first step. —Nightstallion 18:53, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- By the way, after a journalist investigation on Djukanovic's property, he has finally publicly admitted that he is very wealthy. So far he has been claiming that he lives a modest private life with only several hundred euros wage, barely able to finance his family. It appears that (from now on's research), and he has finally admitted, that he possesses millions of euros, but not precisely how many and along the claim that he earned them fair and square. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods Not good at all... —Nightstallion 18:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes. And related to the one hundred thousand Serbs in Montenegro that have petitioned for Serbian citizenship, one million Serbs from Bosnia and Herzegovina have did the same. In my opinion this is very bad, starting to look like Croatia's situation. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods Doesn't seem as if Serbia's outstanding issues are being solved any time soon... —Nightstallion 17:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Closing voting
Hey man, can I ask you for a favor? Could you, as an uninvolved party, close this vote (I'd rather not do it myself as I was the one who submitted this proposal in the first place)? I requested help with this at AN, but, apparently, the lazy butts frequenting that board are more interested in discussing finer theoretical points of adminship rather than in doing good old grunt work. The vote is pretty straightforward, and I can add the proposal to the guideline myself; I just need an outsider to close it. No rush, but please let me know if you can't do it for some reason.
Have a great New Year! Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've declared it closed with universal support, good enough? Same to you! —Nightstallion 22:26, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks a bunch!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 03:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- Gladly! —Nightstallion 08:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks a bunch!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 03:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 52 | 26 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Deletions
What do you think about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008? --Checco (talk) 03:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've stated my opinion there. —Nightstallion 10:32, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: Kosovo and newspapers
An individual newspaper openly supporting independence of Kosovo in Serbia? Nope, not one. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
..nor a TV station if that is what you asked. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:25, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- So it's just Ceda against the rest of the political landscape...
- Two more questions: Croatian election results? ;) And I thought the ruling party of Montenegro should have decided on their presidential candidate yesterday? —Nightstallion 16:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- They've split (definitely not like at the parliamentary elections), B92 only promotes Boris Tadic and Cedomir Jovanovic, while TV PINK supports mostly Toma, who is also supported by the EuroVision 2007 Song Contest winner Marija Serifovic.
- By the way, HDZ based its campaign in Croatia on Serbia's SPS - Ivo Sanader completely copied Slobodan Milosevic. :)))
- I promised to try it soon...the final results are there, just need to be fit in.
- Well, the decision is not yet final. However, he has returned to the TV and has just now congratulated Christmas to the Roman Catholic Serbian Primate and Archbishop of Antivari (dominating local Catholic Christian leader).
- SL and SNP CG will support an common candidate for President together. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I've read about that. I liked Serifovic's performance, but as it seems she supports the Radicals... Blergh.
- Okay, fine. :)
- So it seems it'll be Milo against the Serb candidate against the PzP candidate? —Nightstallion 17:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Milo Djukanovic vs Andrija Mandic vs Nebojsa Medojevic. They are the only true leaders that are well known amongst the populace, just like next to Milo Predrag Bulatovic was up to only recently. But of course, the 1st and especially 3rd are not yet sure. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods With what likely result? Who'll make it to the run-off round? —Nightstallion 18:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nebojsa Medojevic has the capacity to unite and defeat any DPS candidate, but he doesn't stand good at entering the 2nd round at all in the wake of a Serb national, who in turn will not get support from majority of the people most surely. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Damn. And no chance of the Serb candidate standing aside for Nebojsa in exchange for something else? —Nightstallion 22:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well the Unified Opposition's plan was a common presidential candidate, but when PZP supported the Constitution the rift between the two sides of the opposition was final. Mandic publicly hates Medojevic and considers him a traitor. It's like Predrag Bulatovic split on two extreme halves - all democratic and reformist went to one, and all pro-Serbian to another. :)
- By the way, the madness in MNE continues. Today Montenegrin diplomat Ivo Armenko declared himself Montenegrin when asked if he's Serb (he always considered himself a Serb) and when asked about his "Serbdom", he replied yesterday's news. :))) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. Are people being paid to change their ethnicity? —Nightstallion 23:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Dunno. Probably. Neither heads nor tails can be caught in the bizarre Montenegrin world nowadays. ;) By the way, it seems that Svetozar Marovic might be willing to switch his ethnicity for the fourth (or fifth, I can't remember) time, in order to take "Ex President" in Serbia. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it'll be to his benefit, I suppose. BTW -- United Serbia and New Serbia now support Nikolic? Since when? Haven't read that yet anywhere... —Nightstallion 00:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- That's definitely false. Velimir Ilic of New Serbia is about to register and Dragan Markovic "Palma" of United Serbia withdrew from the race, claiming that he can "win only 6%" and that that'd be stealing from Serbia's reserve to further expand the costs. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 01:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed those claims, but we should mention Palma's withdrawal, no? —Nightstallion 10:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yep. LOL, the Reformist Party is having another go (the 20th very last on the parliamentary election, winning less votes than notable to actually be mentioned). :)
- By the way, here's something very little people have figured out - the new Constitution of Serbia has been brought to enable Kosovo' secession. The 1990 Constitution barred that as a possibility, and after the Kumanovo Military-Technical Agreement was signed between NATO and FRY the SRS broke its coalition with SPS and the government collapsed, causing new elections - because that was unconstitutional, as an act of highest treason, enough to be tried from maximum sentence (which the Radicals demanded from then to his death, to have a trial in Serbia, and to be tried for treason among other reasons). This constitution releases the authorities from that weight, and they won't have to go to prison if they recognize any form of further loss of sovereignty in Kosovo. ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understood that -- under the previous constitution, the politicians who were incapable of preventing Kosovo from seceding would have been guilty of treason under the old constitution, so the new one is better for Kosovan independence? —Nightstallion 15:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- The current takes off the responsibility of the leaders, when compared to the old one.
- By the way, SNP wants a non-partisan candidate while Andrija Mandic wants to promote himself. On a session SNP CG has brought a decision that there must be a common candidate of the entire not only parliamentary but also non-parliamentary opposition, in an effort to unite all democratic forces. SNP has written to Nebojsa Medojevic and Andrija Mandic inviting them to come to SNP's office to agree on a common & independent candidate. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- That's good, then.
- Sounds like a very good idea -- are Nebojsa and Mandic going to take them up on the offer? —Nightstallion 21:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nebojsa Medojevic would want to promote his policy, but he will step down in favor of defeat of a DPS candidate. As for Andrija, I don't know. He wants to run, but if the only civic social-democratic party that is pro-Serbian (SNP) doesn't support him, he won't risk gaining support from just Serb nationalists. That is, what I'm counting on, 'cause SNP threats - common candidate, or it will nominate its own. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- So there *IS* a chance -- glad to hear that. —Nightstallion 00:20, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Until 11 May? That's too far and the EU sees that as internal (outside Kosovo), not external, but there is a possibility that it gets delayed to that day and so they decide to wait for it as well. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods So they may wait until exactly the time when the polls close, I suppose? —Nightstallion 12:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Until 11 May? That's too far and the EU sees that as internal (outside Kosovo), not external, but there is a possibility that it gets delayed to that day and so they decide to wait for it as well. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- So there *IS* a chance -- glad to hear that. —Nightstallion 00:20, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nebojsa Medojevic would want to promote his policy, but he will step down in favor of defeat of a DPS candidate. As for Andrija, I don't know. He wants to run, but if the only civic social-democratic party that is pro-Serbian (SNP) doesn't support him, he won't risk gaining support from just Serb nationalists. That is, what I'm counting on, 'cause SNP threats - common candidate, or it will nominate its own. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understood that -- under the previous constitution, the politicians who were incapable of preventing Kosovo from seceding would have been guilty of treason under the old constitution, so the new one is better for Kosovan independence? —Nightstallion 15:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed those claims, but we should mention Palma's withdrawal, no? —Nightstallion 10:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- That's definitely false. Velimir Ilic of New Serbia is about to register and Dragan Markovic "Palma" of United Serbia withdrew from the race, claiming that he can "win only 6%" and that that'd be stealing from Serbia's reserve to further expand the costs. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 01:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it'll be to his benefit, I suppose. BTW -- United Serbia and New Serbia now support Nikolic? Since when? Haven't read that yet anywhere... —Nightstallion 00:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Dunno. Probably. Neither heads nor tails can be caught in the bizarre Montenegrin world nowadays. ;) By the way, it seems that Svetozar Marovic might be willing to switch his ethnicity for the fourth (or fifth, I can't remember) time, in order to take "Ex President" in Serbia. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. Are people being paid to change their ethnicity? —Nightstallion 23:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Damn. And no chance of the Serb candidate standing aside for Nebojsa in exchange for something else? —Nightstallion 22:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nebojsa Medojevic has the capacity to unite and defeat any DPS candidate, but he doesn't stand good at entering the 2nd round at all in the wake of a Serb national, who in turn will not get support from majority of the people most surely. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- nods With what likely result? Who'll make it to the run-off round? —Nightstallion 18:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Milo Djukanovic vs Andrija Mandic vs Nebojsa Medojevic. They are the only true leaders that are well known amongst the populace, just like next to Milo Predrag Bulatovic was up to only recently. But of course, the 1st and especially 3rd are not yet sure. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- They've split (definitely not like at the parliamentary elections), B92 only promotes Boris Tadic and Cedomir Jovanovic, while TV PINK supports mostly Toma, who is also supported by the EuroVision 2007 Song Contest winner Marija Serifovic.
Comment on Incubus (demon)
I was wondering what you meant by the line "we're at war." here: "they either kill them or impregnate them... pick a side. we're at war."
It's been bothering me for months on months now and I finally got around to posting this. Please respond. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilreeper (talk • contribs) 01:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but that wasn't me -- that was 72.174.2.252. —Nightstallion 10:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Congratulation!!!
Nepal became a Republic!!! [3][4] Sorry for my unauthorized editing of your personal page, but I believe, that you'll understand me. I'm just a CRAZY REPUBLICAN! Happy New Year!CrazyRepublican (talk) 01:44, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, technically it still has to be confirmed by the Constituent Assembly -- so it's theoretically possible that more than half of the elected members are royalists... But we'll see, I hope it holds. —Nightstallion 10:05, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Bitter editors
Please help me out here - . . 11:40, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Belgian government
I don't know if you are an expert of Belgian politics, but let me ask you a question. Do you know why the Flemish Socialist Party is not part of the government coalition (composed of the two christian-democratic parties, the two liberal ones and the Walloon Socialist Party)? I think it is the first time ever that a party is not in government while its sister party is. Why did that happen? --Checco (talk) 15:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Good question -- I'd ask at the article's talk page. —Nightstallion 21:30, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- In the meantime I will ask the same question to C mon... Happy New Year to you and to your family. --Checco (talk) 00:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Same to you! —Nightstallion 00:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- In the meantime I will ask the same question to C mon... Happy New Year to you and to your family. --Checco (talk) 00:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Kingdom of Montenegro article
Something's wrong, it doesn't show all the Prime Ministers. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:14, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- See Template:Infobox Former Country, there's only slots for six leaders and the template explicitly asks editors not to add more... —Nightstallion 12:22, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Can that be "bended" in any way?
- Also, what's the "1" number I constantly get at the 1910 area estimate? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I've worked around it by hardcoding it with <br> tags. The { { {1}}} you see is probably meant for something like the square miles equivalent, I'd ask at the template's talk page. —Nightstallion 12:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- One other question, for filling in the "important events", should I put in the elections? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:47, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Gladly!
- Mh. Not all of them, I believe, only if they were VERY important ones. —Nightstallion 12:49, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Then none, considering that there were only 1911, 1914 and 1918. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Aye, I'd only mention those in the text of the article. —Nightstallion 12:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Any idea why it won't link the Treaty of London? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, there was a typo, } instead of ). —Nightstallion 13:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Any idea why it won't link the Treaty of London? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Aye, I'd only mention those in the text of the article. —Nightstallion 12:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Then none, considering that there were only 1911, 1914 and 1918. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I've worked around it by hardcoding it with <br> tags. The { { {1}}} you see is probably meant for something like the square miles equivalent, I'd ask at the template's talk page. —Nightstallion 12:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
SNP doesn't give up - they strongly demand a common candidate, but I can think how that is actually possible.
The Montenegrin authorities are renaming various places that have the Serb etnonym in their names scattered across Montenegro. The opposition claims this is a systematic continuation of the culturocide. In most of these locations nationally-declared Serbs are in majority. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Any idea what Milo is trying to accomplish? —Nightstallion 13:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Well by deletion of the Serb name the pro-Serbian forces are weakening and being erased effectively on the long run; it also helps the affirmation of Montenegrin sovereignty.
- Oh and...HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:22, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Mh, I see. What's the other parties' official position on a common candidate, BTW?
- Same to you! :) —Nightstallion 14:24, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
What should I do if a former country has changed in the course of history its administrative structure (the Princedom of Montenegro has, twice)? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Put both time periods in the appropriate place, list it as reestablished, have two rows for predecessor and successor states, I suppose? —Nightstallion 21:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hm, not sure I understood that. What I meant to say is that the Senate was abolished in 1879 and Government and National Assembly established in 1905. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry, I misunderstood you. Simply reflect the changes in the politics section and, if appropriate, in the country template...? —Nightstallion 22:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Not quite sure how to pull that off...anyway, it currently says "1909 est." while AFAIK that was a population census. Does it have to say that? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:37, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm fairly certain it can be done, but I'm not sure how. I'd suggest asking at the template's talk page -- or directly at the creator's talk page... —Nightstallion 22:41, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm still waiting for someone to notice my last questions. :S --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:46, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Well, give them a few days, it's 1 Jan after all. —Nightstallion 23:23, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm still waiting for someone to notice my last questions. :S --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:46, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm fairly certain it can be done, but I'm not sure how. I'd suggest asking at the template's talk page -- or directly at the creator's talk page... —Nightstallion 22:41, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Not quite sure how to pull that off...anyway, it currently says "1909 est." while AFAIK that was a population census. Does it have to say that? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:37, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry, I misunderstood you. Simply reflect the changes in the politics section and, if appropriate, in the country template...? —Nightstallion 22:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hm, not sure I understood that. What I meant to say is that the Senate was abolished in 1879 and Government and National Assembly established in 1905. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Andrija Mandic will run. SNS has put the final word for it. :( --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- So that reduces the opposition's chances, then? —Nightstallion 08:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Opt-outs
I was wondering if you came across anything on the politics of the opt-outs. I was just looking at the Politics of the EU page and thinking about a section there, then I thought that the opt-outs page itself doesn't say much on it. I remember reading an article about Sweden's status as an outside, the expectation that being on the outside of the Eurozone would affect a country politically but the study found no real difference. I don't have a link but I still have the article on my computer (if you have access to academic websites, I've put the details below). If you know of any other material, perhaps we could build a section on that too?
Sweden: The Twin Faces of a Euro-Outsider by Rutger Lindahl and Daniel Naurin. Journal of European Integration, Vol. 27, No. 1, 65–87, March 2005.
Thanks.- J Logan t: 17:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- It would be a very good idea to have such a section, as that would be the final step to good article status for the opt-outs article, but I'm afraid I haven't got access to academic journals... —Nightstallion 13:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Unless you want me to email it to you, I'll write up what I can from that article for the page. Do you know of any details on the toleration of Sweden outside the euro? Or Any other issues we could explore?- J Logan t: 08:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- As the article on Swedish euro coins states, Almunia stated on 2006-10-24 that the EU could take Sweden to the courts for not introducing the euro, but that this wouldn't be a good idea; bad luck, though, that the only source which carried the news was EUobserver. Apart from that, just the regular polls on introducing the euro (which we could, of course, mention), and the statements by Swedish governments when they will or will not hold another referendum. —Nightstallion 12:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- We are kind of lacking proper details on all that, if I come across something I'll say, might be good to have something talking about that if we can get something. I'll start on the Swedish academic article thing soon.- J Logan t: 17:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Great, thanks! —Nightstallion 18:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- We are kind of lacking proper details on all that, if I come across something I'll say, might be good to have something talking about that if we can get something. I'll start on the Swedish academic article thing soon.- J Logan t: 17:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- As the article on Swedish euro coins states, Almunia stated on 2006-10-24 that the EU could take Sweden to the courts for not introducing the euro, but that this wouldn't be a good idea; bad luck, though, that the only source which carried the news was EUobserver. Apart from that, just the regular polls on introducing the euro (which we could, of course, mention), and the statements by Swedish governments when they will or will not hold another referendum. —Nightstallion 12:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Unless you want me to email it to you, I'll write up what I can from that article for the page. Do you know of any details on the toleration of Sweden outside the euro? Or Any other issues we could explore?- J Logan t: 08:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Federation Council of Russia
According to the Federation Council's official website, the Ust-Orda Buryatia's representative's term expires in January 2008. I'll look into this further when I return to editing in a couple of days (I'm still not done celebrating :)). Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:46, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Great, thanks! —Nightstallion 21:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Adminship
|
Wishing Nightstallion/ο a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:07, 3 January 2008 (UTC) |
| Happy Adminship | from the Birthday Committee | |
|---|---|---|
 Wishing Nightstallion/ο a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! -- User:Nightstallion (talk) 04:41, 25 October 2017 (UTC) | ||
-- Idontknow610 (WANNA SIGN??) 17:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
UK SBAs on Cyprus and the Euro
Hello again,
I hope New Years and X-Mas was good for you. As you know, Cyprus and Malta adopted the Euro along with the UK's Sovereign Base Areas on Cyprus. The article on the Eurozone has the SBA's along with Kosovo, Montenegro, & Andorra as areas that adopted the currency without an agreement. However, wouldn't the SBA government have to get an agreement with Cyprus and the UK before doing something this important? (The BBC story on the change says that the SBAs "decided to adopt the same rules as the Cypriot government" on the Euro). I not sure on how to edit the Akrotiri and Dhekelia article on this point. Also thanks for helping to answer my EU questions over the past year! As an American who chewed a bit too much Tory euroscepticism in the past, you are helpful! - Thanks, Hoshie 21:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'd say we've got it about right -- A&D didn't have a formal agreement on using the Cypriot lira before that, either, they just used it because it was sensible to use it. Same with the euro -- they just use it because it's the closest currency which is sensible to use. I think we've got it represented quite right in the articles. —Nightstallion 08:42, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks as always for your help, man! Reading our articles, it seems these agreements are done via the ECB and not between member states. And from the reading of the articles on WSBA/ESBA, we are correct. - Thanks, Hoshie 08:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- nods Yeah, the agreements would certainly need to be between the ECB and the countries in question. Glad I could help you! —Nightstallion 16:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks as always for your help, man! Reading our articles, it seems these agreements are done via the ECB and not between member states. And from the reading of the articles on WSBA/ESBA, we are correct. - Thanks, Hoshie 08:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)
|
Issue XXII (December 2007) | ||
|
New featured articles:
New A-Class articles: | |
| ||
| ||
Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows:
Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes. We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-particpants alike are very welcome and appreciated. | ||
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. | ||
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
A request for your consideration regarding CAT:AOTR
| Hello fellow Wikipedia administrators open to recall category member! |
|---|
|
I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach. But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole. I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though. But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment. Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version. Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled. I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes. Larry Pieniazek NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Wikipedia administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you. |
...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "K"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "L"s through "O"s! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. ++Lar: t/c 00:04, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
DSS-NS
Kostunica has supported Velja for President! --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- I've just read it. Isn't that breaking the coalition agreement? —Nightstallion 13:13, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- No, not really. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- I thought the agreement was that Kostunica would become PM, but DSS would have to support Tadic as president? BTw, how serious is Serbia's threat that "the EU has to decide between Kosovo and Serbia"? —Nightstallion 14:26, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- On that basis Kostunica became PM, but there was no signed agreement, which now enables him to act like this. It will not affect the ruling coalition at all, but the crackdown might be between the two circles. There is high possibility that there will be yet another governmental crisis if the EU decides to sign SAA with Serbia. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- And then? —Nightstallion 14:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps pre-term parliamentary elections? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- You think so? What would DSS get out of them? The only ones who'll benefit are SRS and SPS (Kosovo) and possibly DS (polarisation), so why should DSS risk early elections? —Nightstallion 16:19, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, the DSS has finally stopped it's downfall and strongly determined as a right-wing Serbian semi-nationalistic party. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Really? Argh. —Nightstallion 20:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- DSS's desperate attempt of support of Velja's candidacy is a result of fear that Velja wins most of the votes received by the DSS-NS coalition in the parliamentary election. For if that occurs, Velja would go to prominence and Kostunica's entrance to history would be sealed even while PM. This way, DSS is secured that it could be DSS's electoral body that gave him the strength. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ah. Is Velja *that* popular? —Nightstallion 22:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- More than Kostunica? Sure. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- So, what would you say is in store for Serbia and Kosovo's future in the next five years? —Nightstallion 14:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- Only time will reveal.
- I said I'm quite busy right now with all the things, I'll try for it in the following days, but can't promise anything. ;( --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- nods Do you think a realignment against the EU and towards Russia is likely to come to pass? And if so, to last in the long term? That's one of the fears I have -- that it's not simply an (understandable) anti-EU phase over Kosovan independence, but instead a long-term break...
- Great, no problem -- I was just wondering. ;) —Nightstallion 21:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- There has been an alleged attempt on Ceda's life. The wheel on his campaign's "Liberal-Democrat Bus" was loose. Thankfully however, no one was injured. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ouch! Any idea who's responsible? Will it help Ceda's campaign? —Nightstallion 16:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- It's just a wheel gone off, no one could find out anything from that. Positively, I guess. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- We'll see, I suppose... —Nightstallion 21:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- It's just a wheel gone off, no one could find out anything from that. Positively, I guess. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ouch! Any idea who's responsible? Will it help Ceda's campaign? —Nightstallion 16:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- There has been an alleged attempt on Ceda's life. The wheel on his campaign's "Liberal-Democrat Bus" was loose. Thankfully however, no one was injured. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- So, what would you say is in store for Serbia and Kosovo's future in the next five years? —Nightstallion 14:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- More than Kostunica? Sure. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ah. Is Velja *that* popular? —Nightstallion 22:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- DSS's desperate attempt of support of Velja's candidacy is a result of fear that Velja wins most of the votes received by the DSS-NS coalition in the parliamentary election. For if that occurs, Velja would go to prominence and Kostunica's entrance to history would be sealed even while PM. This way, DSS is secured that it could be DSS's electoral body that gave him the strength. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Really? Argh. —Nightstallion 20:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, the DSS has finally stopped it's downfall and strongly determined as a right-wing Serbian semi-nationalistic party. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- You think so? What would DSS get out of them? The only ones who'll benefit are SRS and SPS (Kosovo) and possibly DS (polarisation), so why should DSS risk early elections? —Nightstallion 16:19, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps pre-term parliamentary elections? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- And then? —Nightstallion 14:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- On that basis Kostunica became PM, but there was no signed agreement, which now enables him to act like this. It will not affect the ruling coalition at all, but the crackdown might be between the two circles. There is high possibility that there will be yet another governmental crisis if the EU decides to sign SAA with Serbia. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- I thought the agreement was that Kostunica would become PM, but DSS would have to support Tadic as president? BTw, how serious is Serbia's threat that "the EU has to decide between Kosovo and Serbia"? —Nightstallion 14:26, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- No, not really. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Lucien Clergue
[5] - Make it better, make it great. Cheers, --Gego (talk) 22:24, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
An RFC on content you have commented on has opened, comments are welcome. MBisanz talk 01:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:ECOWAS Flag.png
Thank you for uploading Image:ECOWAS Flag.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Shell babelfish 11:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Georgian referendums
Would you support merging Georgian legislative election date referendum, 2008 and Georgian NATO membership referendum, 2008 into one article, Georgian referendums, 2008? I don't think either article will be particularly long, so it shouldn't make it too complex. Plus I think it messes up the template to have them listed as seperate articles by their topic! пﮟოьεԻ 57 12:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm in favour ONLY if the two referendums were held on a single ballot, but not if there were two ballots for the two referendums. There's no problem with disambiguating them in the template, we've had that elsewhere, too. —Nightstallion 12:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm. No idea how to find that out. I'll leave it for now then. пﮟოьεԻ 57 12:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- I suppose the best idea would be to ask Kober, the most active Wikipedian from Georgia AFAIK. —Nightstallion 15:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Have done - apparently there were two separate ballots, so no merger. пﮟოьεԻ 57 11:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Okay! :) —Nightstallion 12:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Have done - apparently there were two separate ballots, so no merger. пﮟოьεԻ 57 11:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- I suppose the best idea would be to ask Kober, the most active Wikipedian from Georgia AFAIK. —Nightstallion 15:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm. No idea how to find that out. I'll leave it for now then. пﮟოьεԻ 57 12:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Template help
I screwed up on making a template at results of the 2008 Democratic Presidential primaries and I was woundering if you could help out. I want to get the ball rolling on all the page and I know that you know your templates. – Zntrip 07:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- What's the problem? —Nightstallion 07:42, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Some one else fixed it, sorry to bother you. Anyway, on the subject on 2008 US Presidential election, feel free to help out on the page, you do a good job of keeping election pages in check and foreigners are just as confused as US citizens when it comes to caucuses and things like that. – Zntrip 19:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, will gladly do so. —Nightstallion 19:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Some one else fixed it, sorry to bother you. Anyway, on the subject on 2008 US Presidential election, feel free to help out on the page, you do a good job of keeping election pages in check and foreigners are just as confused as US citizens when it comes to caucuses and things like that. – Zntrip 19:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Clean up after yourself
Don't be making moves like you just did at Grossmarkthalle unless you do them properly and fix it so that it will sort properly in categories. You need to add the magic word DEFAULTSORT or appropriate sort keys in each category to fix it. The move itself is dubious in any case, and there may well be good reason to change it back in accordance with our naming conventions. Among the reasons for doing do would be your failure to correct this. Gene Nygaard (talk) 07:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry for overlooking that mistake, I've just corrected it. —Nightstallion 16:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
New Faroese party
See User_talk:Nidator#Questions. Haukur (talk) 14:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks! —Nightstallion 16:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Re:Election results
Hi Nightstallion. The final results are not yet available. You can find the regularly updated preliminary results here, in English. They are copied from the Central Election Commisssion website. The referenda results are also there. I'll let you know as soon as the final results are announced. Cheers, --KoberTalk 18:42, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Politics of Greenland
If someone wanted to create skeleton articles on parliamentary elections in Greenland, there's a nice overview here: [6] Haukur (talk) 19:51, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
War in Waziristan
Thanks for the notice, it's done. Please revert if you see such a thing again, I'm not always active. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. I just now noticed. —Nightstallion 14:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
See please naming issue I adressed now. Thank you. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XX - January 2008
|
Issue XX - January 2008 | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. | ||||||||
This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot -- 15:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Native names?
Why not add domestic names to presidential elections (i.e. Cyrillic)? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm neutral on the issue, personally. It's more information, but it's not really necessary. shrugs —Nightstallion 10:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #12
Number 12, January 10, 2008
The Hurricane Herald
This is the monthly newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The Hurricane Herald aims to give a summary, both of the activities of the WikiProject and global tropical cyclone activity. If you wish to change how you receive this newsletter, or no longer wish to receive it, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. This edition of the newsletter, after an extended hiatus, covers December 2007 and the first ten days of January 2008.
Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve monitoring of the WikiProject's articles.
Storm of the month
Tropical Storm Olga was a rare Atlantic December tropical cyclone. The fifteenth named storm of the season, it developed near Puerto Rico on December 11, and quickly struck the Dominican Republic. There, it brought heavy rainfall and severe damage, and caused more than 40 deaths. Casualties were also reported in Puerto Rico and Haiti. The storm greatly weakened as it crossed Hispaniola, degenerating into a remnant low pressure area in the Caribbean Sea on December 13. The remnants of Olga passed near the Yucatán Peninsula before turning northward and bringing rainfall to Florida.
Other tropical cyclone activity
- Three named tropical cyclones occurred in the South-West Indian Ocean, the strongest of which being Moderate Tropical Storm Celina
- Two named tropical cyclones occurred in the Australian region, including Tropical Cyclone Helen which struck Australia
- Two named tropical cyclones occurred in the South Pacific ocean, including Tropical Cyclone Elisa which is currently active. Cyclone Daman was the strongest tropical cyclone worldwide during the time period, reaching a pressure of 925 hPa before impacting Fiji.
Member of the month
The December member of the month is Mitchazenia. Mitchazenia has been a project member since 2006. He has created several tropical cyclone related articles, including the good article Subtropical Storm One (1982). Mitchazenia significantly contributed to 1983 Atlantic hurricane season, which is currently a featured article candidate.
New and improved articles
- There were four new pieces of Featured content : 2003 Atlantic hurricane season, Hurricane Danny (1997), Meteorological history of Hurricane Ivan, and List of North Carolina hurricanes (1980-present)
- New Good articles include:
- New storm articles include: Cyclone Inigo, Hurricane Ava (1973), Hurricane Marco (1996)
- New non-storm articles include: Effects of Hurricane Ivan in the Lesser Antilles and South America, Maximum sustained wind, List of North Carolina hurricanes (pre-1900)
Main Page content
- Tropical Storm Allison appeared on the Main Page as Today's featured article on December 19.
- Entries from 2 articles: Hurricane Rick (1997) and 2006 Central Pacific cyclone appeared on the Main Page in the Did you know column during December and early January.
Storm article statistics
| Grade | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 FA
|
30 | 30 | 31 | 33 |
 A
|
4 | 9 | 8 | 9 |
 GA
|
105 | 106 | 109 | 112 |
| B | 80 | 78 | 82 | 86 |
| Start | 213 | 212 | 211 | 208 |
| Stub | 6 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Total | 438 | 440 | 447 | 454 |
| percentage Less than B |
50.0 | 49.3 | 48.5 | 47.1 |
Categories and more The project has gone under somewhat of a revamping. We have a new, more realistic goal. The members list has been dropped from 89 to 34. This newsletter is to inform users of a change in policy with categories. Previously, an Atlantic and Pacific storm article would have both Category:Atlantic hurricanes and Category:Category 3 tropical cyclones. However, the two were combined, resulting in Category:Category 3 Atlantic hurricanes. The same is done with Pacific hurricanes. Tropical storm articles are dealt with either Category:Eastern Pacific tropical storms or Category:Atlantic tropical storms.
Signpost updated for January 2nd and 7th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 1 | 2 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 2 | 7 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Latest developments
The Republican Electoral Commission of the Republic of Serbia has agreed to let OSCE and the CIS watch the election, however it has reached no consensus on British and American watchers, so observers from USA and UK will not be able to observe.
Branimir Glavas has been released, as per elected into the new Parliament. His party and SDP will locally form the government in Slavonia.
The Montenegrin Orthodox Church has several weeks ago filed a request to be enlisted amongst Serbia's religious institutions. They were denied that request, and they and "The Crusader" Montenegrin Vojvodinian society has decided to complain to international bodies. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Interesting. So the SDP is willing to work with Glavas... —Nightstallion 11:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
NEPALI CA ELECTIONS
Please, insert in your page the date of Nepali CA elections - April, 10th, 2008. [7]CrazyRepublican (talk) 10:28, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks! —Nightstallion 11:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
LSV
...supported Boris Tadic. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:48, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- Interesting, I'd have expected support for Ceda or Istvan... —Nightstallion 19:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- He's in bad relations with Ceda for tricking him to enter the parliament and Pastor is a national candidate, so both options are out. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:50, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- How do you mean "national" candidate? —Nightstallion 20:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- An ethnic candidate. Candidate of one ethnic group. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:16, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, okay. —Nightstallion 23:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- An ethnic candidate. Candidate of one ethnic group. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:16, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- How do you mean "national" candidate? —Nightstallion 20:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- He's in bad relations with Ceda for tricking him to enter the parliament and Pastor is a national candidate, so both options are out. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:50, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Georgia elections
Hi. The results of the election and of both referenda are already official.--KoberTalk 20:38, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hi again. I haven't yet found any concrete info sufficient enough to build a table. I'll closely watch updates at the central election commission website. Best, --KoberTalk 06:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
MNE
President of the Democratic Party of Unity Zoran Zizic called for support of Nebojsa Medojevic in the 2nd round. He is convinced that Milo Djukanovic and Nebojsa Medojevic will face-off in the second round and claim that Medojevic can expect support from the Serbs. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:41, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- That's good, isn't it? —Nightstallion 14:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- In any case, seems that they have reached an agreement - if Nebojsa Medojevic goes into the 2nd round, he'll have the support of all the opposition. It seems that Andrija Mandic too would achieve support from PZP likeways. As for the small remaining parties, they have supported indirectly or directly these two candidates...which means there's nothing we need to worry (although personally I'd like to see Medojevic President much more than Mandic). ;)
- P.S. In Serbia SPO supported Tadic after all. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:05, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oh? Well, that's good. —Nightstallion 15:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- According to the article, SPO supports Ilic...? —Nightstallion 15:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sadly, yes...today's news. Several days ago he was on a conference cheering up for Tadic...and now his party decided to support other candidate. :P Politics. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Typical. sighs Well, we'll see whom they'll support in the second round. —Nightstallion 16:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sadly, yes...today's news. Several days ago he was on a conference cheering up for Tadic...and now his party decided to support other candidate. :P Politics. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
The SL was supposed to support Tomislav Nikolic, but because of the recent crackdown (the Serb Radicals in Montenegro seceded) and differences (pro-EU), it can't. So there are now huge arguments over whom to support Tomislav Nikolic or Velimir Ilic. In the end they haven't agreed on anything. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- nods Sounds like a good split, then? —Nightstallion 22:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Ludwigskirche and Hanover City Hall
Hello Nightstallion -
I have just translated the Ludwigskirche article from German. It hasn't yet been proofread.
You had also requested a translation of Hanover City Hall a while back. It had been translated some time ago under the name of New City Hall (Hanover). I also added some missing pieces to this translation and just redirected Hanover City Hall to the article. The updated translation also needs proofreading.
When you request an article on the translation page, please make sure to update either the main translation page or the German-specific page with the request template or the request will get "lost".
Have fun. Scbarry (talk) 21:16, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot! —Nightstallion 22:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Re:Vujanovic
I'm sorry, what do you mean by gets their act together? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Meh. And this means that Filip will probably win, with DPS keeping the presidential seat. Well, off waiting 2009 then. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:47, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Still, at least Milo won't be protected from prosecution -- and I sincerely hope that Europol or Interpol will indict him soon... —Nightstallion 19:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry I didn't get the final results for Cro...where did you find them? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- No problem; I simply took the ones from Adam Carr's Election Archive, as they matched those already in the template. —Nightstallion 20:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- BTW, I'm giving this Croatian government (four Deputy PMs) two and a half years max. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:40, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Any special reason? —Nightstallion 23:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, blockade of progress into the EU, huge coalition and 4 Deputy PMs. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:34, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- Good, then. :) —Nightstallion 15:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, blockade of progress into the EU, huge coalition and 4 Deputy PMs. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:34, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- Any special reason? —Nightstallion 23:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- BTW, I'm giving this Croatian government (four Deputy PMs) two and a half years max. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:40, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- No problem; I simply took the ones from Adam Carr's Election Archive, as they matched those already in the template. —Nightstallion 20:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry I didn't get the final results for Cro...where did you find them? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
NS supported Boris Tadic. SL Velimir Ilic, but said that even if Tomislav Nikolic does win, for Serb national interests cooperation is necessary. DPS and SNP claimed that any candidate is acceptable, because Serbia and Montenegro as brotherly countries together bound more than any other have to cooperate in everything (although DPS indirectly inclined that it would be glad if a democrat candidate wins and not a "past" one, however also drawing that cooperation has no line). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:24, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- nods —Nightstallion 15:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- International Agencies have described Boris Tadic's campaign as fierce and aggressive, and Nikolic's as the most peaceful and attractive. Nikolic's campaign has no nationalism in it, not a single Flag of Serbia and in videos he talks in an all-white room smoothly with a piano in the background. Besides that, Nikolic's campaign is handled by the greatest US political propaganda company and all the people who have organized it are the very same who organized Bush's campaign. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Doesn't Nikolic risk losing his protest voters? —Nightstallion 19:40, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Nope. He has secured his million, and now works for the 2nd. He also has mysteriously taken off the badge of Vojislav Seselj, talks about peace, reform, EU and the NATO. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- And are people believing him? —Nightstallion 21:17, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Well, obviously they are. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- What do you expect from the second round? —Nightstallion 15:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- That's the answer you will not be able to get from anyone, not before the election at all. The maximum difference between the candidates expected is around or up to 1%, just several tens of thousands. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ouch. I'll keep crossing my fingers, then... —Nightstallion 19:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- That's the answer you will not be able to get from anyone, not before the election at all. The maximum difference between the candidates expected is around or up to 1%, just several tens of thousands. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- What do you expect from the second round? —Nightstallion 15:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- Well, obviously they are. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- And are people believing him? —Nightstallion 21:17, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Nope. He has secured his million, and now works for the 2nd. He also has mysteriously taken off the badge of Vojislav Seselj, talks about peace, reform, EU and the NATO. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Doesn't Nikolic risk losing his protest voters? —Nightstallion 19:40, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- International Agencies have described Boris Tadic's campaign as fierce and aggressive, and Nikolic's as the most peaceful and attractive. Nikolic's campaign has no nationalism in it, not a single Flag of Serbia and in videos he talks in an all-white room smoothly with a piano in the background. Besides that, Nikolic's campaign is handled by the greatest US political propaganda company and all the people who have organized it are the very same who organized Bush's campaign. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
2007 Belgian government formation
Another user and I clashed over the use of "Flemish" or "Dutch-speaking" on 2007 Belgian government formation. This user explained me his opinion at User talk:Checco#2007 Belgian government formation. I would like to ask you what do you think about it. --Checco (talk) 23:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- I moved the discussion to Talk:2007 Belgian government formation. --Checco (talk) 14:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- (And compliments for your first 45,000 edits in en.Wiki! --Checco (talk) 15:08, 18 January 2008 (UTC))