User talk:Ecemaml

I'll be off for some time

E-mail     Go Home

Please post new messages at the bottom of this page and don't forget to give your message a heading. I will normally reply to your message on your talk page, but could rarely reply here. I follow the Spanish Wikipedia guidelines on "Archive rather than delete". Unless insulting, I consider the selective deletion of my messages in other fellow editors' talk pages as a hostile behaviour. You are free to leave any kind of message. Although you don't share my points of views, your comments and remarks are always welcome. However, please be civil. Remember to sign using the four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. If you're new to Wikipedia, please see Welcome to Wikipedia or frequently asked questions. If you need editing help, head here. (Templates courtesy of User:Booksworm and User:RedCoat10)

Archives     Write

Chapel of Our Lady of Europe

External links concerns links that are not citations to sources supporting article content. If you're saying they are supporting cites, then please format them as such per the guideline. The article wasn't referenced to wikipedia's guidelines but I see you have added some. Please don't post on my talk page. To add, you're well aware why I changed my username and no longer use my real identity. Don't refer to it again or I will seek action against you. Wee Curry Monster talk 10:24, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

If you have a look at Template:Unreferenced, you'll see the right use of the template:

When to use

You may add this template only to articles that contain zero sources of any kind.

Do not add this template

• In articles that have some citations, but not enough, the {{Refimprove}} template should be used instead as a general template, or the {{Unreferenced section}} template for specific unsourced sections.
• In articles containing a list of sources at the end, but no inline citations, including parenthetical references or in-text attributions, consider {{no footnotes}} when the article would be significantly improved by detailed attribution of sources to specific claims.
• Watch out for lists of general references that someone has incorrectly listed under ==External links==. If the link leads to a reliable source that supports some article content, then that website is a reference, not an external link.
• Other templates, listed below, should be used when the sources are inadequate for other reasons.

Best regards --Ecemaml (talk) 10:46, 20 September 2011 (UTC) PS: I don't have the slightest idea about why you changed your nick, so your usual bad faith assumtion is only that: the usual stuff.

Thank you for pointing out my mistake. I have corrected it. Wee Curry Monster talk 11:06, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

EQUO within the European Green Party

Hi Ecemaml, I have seen you have reverted twice my edits on the European Green Party article, regarding lack of references when entering EQUO as a Spanish party supported by the EGP. In the first case I have to admit you were right, no references were provided.

However, in the second case, I added two different information:

• supported, referencing this official document from the EGP.
• membership in process, referencing this EGP official document about how EQUO and ICV will be integrated both within the EGP (which is complicated, because it means two different parties in one country, but it would not be the first case). You can see this on the first page, to be precise where it says «The representation of the European Green Party (EGP) in Spain and Catalunya is held respectively by EQUO and ICV. As members of the EGP both organizations establish their organic and political relationships, as defined in this protocol». This is an agreement clearly showing the intention of EQUO and ICV to be both integrated within the EGP. And the EGP itself hosts this document, granting they are supporting this plans.

This is about the references. You might be doubtful or even suspicious if you do not know the current political situation about the Greens in Spain. The fact is that earlier this year, on 4th June, 35 political green parties have been integrated in EQUO, which is something historical in the green history of the country. There is still a minority of people who stay in the former Cofederación de Los Verdes (but not even a 10%). The EGP knows the situation, and most people is recognizing that the Confederación de Los Verdes is becoming an empty shell, and most green people in Spain moved to EQUO. However, to become EQUO a full member of the EGP, about 30 parties have to agree the integration of EQUO and the cancellation of the Confederación de Los Verdes. This is not going to be a problem if the Spanish greens show their intention to stay together in EQUO. However, the fact is... it requires time (which can take up to two years). For this reason, the EGP strongly supported EQUO in the past elections (as I showed in the first document).

For these reasons, I ask you to reconsider your last revert, as holding references of documents hosted by the EGP, showing unequivocal support and intention to grant full membership to EQUO in the future.

Eynar Oxartum (talk) 21:18, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok, that's fair enough: "verificability, not truth". I should look for such a document. However, eliminating any reference to EQUO in the EGP article would give misleading information: Monica Frassoni was in several acts of EQUO in Spain, and Cem Özdemir supported EQUO publicly during the Spanish election campaign. For that reason, I think we should at least keep the supported tag (which has the best possible reference), until someone finds the concerning document to prove that EQUO's membership to EGP is in process. Eynar Oxartum (talk) 23:50, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Of course, it is clear at this point that EQUO should not appear as a member party until someone can provide the concerning reference. However, in the list there are also observer parties. Within the same section there should be space enough for EQUO, not just hidden at the bottom of the article, but at the bottom of the list (after the observer parties). I think this would give verifiability and trustworthiness to the article, mainly for readers who already know something about what is going on. Eynar Oxartum (talk) 00:12, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

If not within the list, at least within the section (outside the list, after the comments about De Grønne, for example). Eynar Oxartum (talk) 00:18, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In Gibraltar general election, 1996, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Joseph Garcia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments requested at Flag of Western Sahara

Hello - Your comment is requested over at Talk:Flag of Western Sahara; there is an RfC underway there to help decide what the article contents should be. If you can take some time to share your opinion on the matter, it would be very much appreciated. --Tachfin (talk) 09:44, 21 December 2011 (UTC)