User talk:JLogan/Archive 3

 Userpage | Commons | Wikinews | Talk EN | Recent Contributions | Created Userboxes 

• Okay, I will might reply on your page or mine, usually depending on how long I think the conversation will be (no particular reason aside from that) so don't forget to check back if you don't hear from me (usually within a day or two at most).
• My timezone is Western European Time, that is UTC+1 (summer time), even though Spain is on CET and is further west than I - never understand timezones..
• I am based in London and although I speak a little French but I doubt I'd understand unless you are asking how to get to the train station, what the Russian President's name is or if we should go to your place or mine. So English please (that's British English!).
• Please be polite, comments and criticisms welcome.

EU=federation

• article in a peer-reviewed economic journal

• Springer Science+Business Media

• full text of article

• Wikipedia:Reliable sources

--88.82.47.23 (talk) 15:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

First, please don't delete anything from my talkpage. Second, I do not see any problem with its inclusion, might not be a prime article of choice but I don't believe it is unreliable. Take it to the article talk page if you think the list should be reviewed.- J Logan ^t: 20:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Reply

I've responded here to your message. Anameofmyveryown (talk) 20:21, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Shudder

http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=yLaWTkEUOH4. RCS (talk) 10:21, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh good lord, the conspiracy theories on all this would be funny if the people talking about them weren't serious. Paisly wrote a piece about seat 666 in the European Parliament (when the Strasbourg building was built) would be occupied by the antichrist, as it was then empty. I looked it up the other day, I think it was an old Italian bloke sitting there now, some antichrist. And then we have the Brussels seat... Oh but I don't want to go into all that. I suppose one plus point of all this is that someone finally acknowledges the EU is important, even if it is for the wrong reasons....- J Logan ^t: 17:27, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

But that specific poster is peculiar.. The painter must have seen the symbolism of placing upside-down stars above the Tower of Babel. And Arsène Heitzes inspiration when he made the flag doesn't exactly coincide with the secularism of the EU. They make it easy for (at least YouTube) eurosceptics and christian fanatics to come up with ridiculous conspiracy theories, without any connection to reality. http://youtube.com/watch?v=EBZX_YKNnhE Very convincing...not - $\mathrm {S}$ $\mathrm {Solberg}$ $\mathrm {J}$ 19:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Or it was just stylisation! What motivation would there be for that anyway? Why would you deliberately portray that in a poster for a new building? The original idea of the flag may not have been inline with the secularism of the EU but its no strange idea that the centre of Christian faith might be inspired by Christian symbolism (positive symbolism at that). Do remember that Europe isn't defined by secularism for all - the Catholics build a very strong connection.- J Logan ^t: 10:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Bloody hell SSJ, that video you put up, they learnt all that from Wikipedia didn't they! Haha! (though it seems odd how little they understand it though, maybe we need to clarify a few things)- J Logan ^t: 10:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

The job of the people who make these things is to come up with, and recognise symbolism. Though of course there's probably no satanists and eurosceptics in the EU's poster department. I know that reflecting Europe's Christian heritage in EU contexts isn't necessarily bad thing, but the fact that the EU flag is a Book of Revelation ripoff could theoretically prove controvercial among muslim populations in Turkey and the Balkans. - $\mathrm {S}$ $\mathrm {Solberg}$ $\mathrm {J}$ 22:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed too that they used what sounded like full sequences from the EU article. :D I was however surprised by CNN's politically correct report on the Lisbon Treaty. It seems like they've got an even weirder stance than that of The Sun. Somehow i guess they hadn't claimed that the EU would become an "anti-american superstate", and that the European Council is unelected, in their international channel. - $\mathrm {S}$ $\mathrm {Solberg}$ $\mathrm {J}$ 00:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh I was horrified when I first saw those reports, I thought CNN was mean to be a tiny bit more respectable than Fox but lord I am so glad that data didn't come from us. Maybe we ought to advise CNN reporters that we know more about what's going on than them?

I'm not sure the poster department will like you calling them Satanists! I think in terms of the flag it is coincidence, this always happens when they are so eager for their life time to be the time that they see connections that aren't there (how many times has the world meant to have ended so far?). In fact, the description of the evil empire they go on about seems to me to correspond to another particular world power right now.... Like it matters though, if it is all true then they should be grateful as without the EU they wouldn't have their lord coming back would they. This would probably be the first time an evil empire has come into being by regulating glass sizes and fish quotas though - gosh its terrifying!- J Logan ^t: 12:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

EU=History

I agree that the position of the EU Growth map you deleted was not brilliant, but curious as to why you think it was low quality; the animated version is too fast and it is not useful as a tool for visualising the history of the EU because countries are not even classified/described by colour to explain their accession status. I cannot see how one can really learn too much from the current map - it's a crude graphic that surely only looks 'good' because it is dynamic! Reply welcome.Cantiana (talk) 12:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality as in its image quality. And I find the static images really don't convey much as there are so many successive enlargements it is hard to tell who joined when and what it means. If you think we could improve the maps, I suggest you bring it up on the article talk page and we can look at how to resolve the issue.- J Logan ^t: 12:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Position of European flag in Council of Europe infobox

Since you seem interested by the topic, I'll repost my reply here as well as on the article's discussion page. I'd be interested to know if you would agree with an improvement of the presentation of the Council's visuals. After all, the less confusion there is between the different institutions working in and for Europe, the better for everyoneCoEComm (talk) 10:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC):

Yes, it is the flag of the Council. And I am not proposing to remove it completely (I resorted to the maybe slightly rash measure of removing it temporarily (!) to attract attention to the problem). I know that the confusion is inherent in the emblems of the Council. Therefore it shouldn't be made worse by having the flag first and much larger than the logo, which was specifically designed and adopted to counteract the confusion. All I would like is for the presentation to be as unambiguous as possible, especially since the infobox is the first thing readers look at. Can the placement and the size of the flag be changed?CoEComm (talk) 09:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

D4 photos

Hi Jlogan, this is my first attempt at Wiki-anything. I hope it works. I wondered if you had your images of the EP-D4 building at any higher resolution. Would you please contact me on amy.johnson@redbeemedia.com. Many thanks, avj82 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avj82 (talk • contribs) 14:25, 28 February 2008

I have replied by email.- J Logan ^t: 15:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

EU FA Review

Man I think we have to accept that FA for the EU main page is a lost cause for as long as you know who is around. Its next to impossible to get anything done/changed that said person doesn't agree with. I stupidly assumed that they'd learn from their time off and come back with a bit of a different attitude instead of the typical unyielding one. --Simonski (talk) 10:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry I will have little time to work on it during FA review, have been working to meet a stack of real life deadlines for some time now. I hope we can get through, at least we might get some ideas. Although so far the review does not seem very constructive... Arnoutf (talk) 09:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I suspect the reviewers are busy people and have attacked the most obvious shortcomings first. Sandpiper (talk) 14:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

ERASMUS Image

Hi Jlogan, I´m thinking about to add this image of ERASMUS students to the EU article. It would be integrated in Education and research. Not only that I was an ERASMUS student myself (Madrid), I think it would be a useful visualization of the content. Lear 21 (talk) 08:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I do think those kind of photos are very typical of Erasmus and I'd have no objection. I'm not sure I'd be arguing to much that it is good visualisation of it (really doesn't elaborate the content much) so don't be surprised if you face resistance. Personally, I'd rather get to improving the content on that page - a more fruitful exercise.- J Logan ^t: 08:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

EU page introduction

Hey Logan, this introduction debate is clearly going nowhere fast. Since its about as important a part of the page as it can get I think we need to sort it pronto. I think you're seen as an impartial editor so perhaps you could wade in with your thoughts here? --Simonski (talk) 15:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Tried to read through but I have no idea what anyone is arguing about any more and simply don't have the time to try to work it out. If you give me the jist of it I can intervene but I'm afraid time wise my hands are tied. Sorry, just a busy patch right now.- J Logan ^t: 20:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem man. If it helps I've now summarised the two main issues coupled with a wee edit break, maybe it'll be easier to see the problem now. I think its going to be the GDP issue that will be the sticking point, as there seems to be agreement that we should be more neutral with regards to the intergovernmental/supranational issue. It was maybe a mistake to allow the sui generis thing to be taken out come to think of it, it is the most commonly used description after all... --Simonski (talk) 11:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Most commonly used in technical law books trying to define the EU? We are not writing a technical law textbook, but one for the general public. I have never heard the term in the media. Put such detail in later, yes, but the intro needs to be understandable in plain english. We are not here to confuse people. Sandpiper (talk) 13:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think its a term the media (at least the mainstream media) will use, you're right there, but I guess thats because Average Joe sitting there watching the 10 o'clock news would be like 'wtf is sui generis'. It was my opinion though, and maybe I'm wrong, but I had always assumed that encyclopedic material was not generally to cater to Average Joe, but to provide factual information, regardless of how complex the information is. I should have emphasised though that I am not going to cry over the loss of the sui generis sentence, particularly when my own personal view is that its just a cop-out way to describe the EU when somebody asks what it is :)

Anyway, we'd best return to the EU page rather than clutter up Logans page here. On a side note, I'm sure that 'sui generis' is also widely used in political theory as well, so don't just pick on us lawyers! Infact I'd venture a guess that some political philosopher coined the term or something. --Simonski (talk) 23:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

supranational and intergovernmental, usage in EU introduction

I am curious to know what is your position on the issue essentially raised by Lear (inadvertently). The style guideline on introductions says that technical words should not be used unless their meaning is defined at the same time, not merely by linking them. This is one of the big differences between Lear's suggestion and the version we have now (maybe, was at time of writing). Also, which version do you consider better describes the EU as a whole, considered simply on the wording of the intro without the rest of the article (as the style guide suggest we should judge it). Sandpiper (talk) 23:03, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Stuff the guidelines, its an intro - we don't have the room. Expand on it in the body maybe? Not sure about any of the intro proposals, its just moving commas around as far as I'm concerned and I don't have the time to keep track of everyone's essays. if you really want me to drop in an opinion on the talk page just ask but otherwise I think I'll only be engaging on that topic for a strawpoll.- J Logan ^t: 11:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

It happens that I was plesantly surprised to find the style guide agreed with my own opinions. I see absolutely no point putting something in an introduction which is calculated to baffle readers of the article. This is not informing people, but playing schoolyard tricks on them. Either a concept is worth writing in language which people can understand, or it just isn't worth wasting words on in an introduction. Because if the words will not be understood, then thay are wasted, and we don't have room for them either. How well do you react to opening a book and finding the first paragraph is incomprehensible? Sandpiper (talk) 00:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Not sure, I've never found anything incomprehensible :p (well, in English at least). I don't care much though, so long as it is accurate as its very important we get it factually correct.- J Logan ^t: 10:30, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Very few of the debates we have over the EU article have been about facts, rather which ones are important. If you write an article which can not be understood, then in effect you have left out those facts and failed to write a complete article. As to books, given a choice of two textbooks, both containing the same facts, would you choose to issue all schools with the one generally considered most easy to read and understand, or the one considered most difficult to read and understand? Sandpiper (talk) 13:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

First I'd choose the one that is correct, then easy to read. Might be simple but if it is not factually correct then the point is lost. And I don't mean which ones in terms of single market or when it was created, I mean its nature and basic points about the treaties which have been a tad off of late.- J Logan ^t: 21:13, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I see you are wriggling somewhat. I did say, both contain the same facts. Thus each is equally correct. So which would you support, the hard to read one, or the easy to read one? Sandpiper (talk) 21:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Ugh, easy - but only if it is equally correct which is what I mean. What is proposed as easy to read isn't always correct.- J Logan ^t: 11:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

That is only a matter of working at it untill it is, but thankfully very few wiki articles (certainly including the EU) are good enough that the tiniest change will reduce their accuracy. Though come to think of it, changes to the article frequently do reduce its accuracy, but because the language becomes less clear and open to misinterpretation. Sandpiper (talk) 09:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Last Eurobarometer

Had a look ? Cheers, RCS (talk) 09:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, wish I could think of a place to use it really. On the institutions page, new heading of "public perception"? Or might that be a bit of a minefield. Don't really have the time right now anyway, still need to sort out the new Strasbourg page - getting bogged down in real life crap to work on anything significant. I'll be back on ball soon.- J Logan ^t: 11:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I rather think it should be put into the article on the EP itself, don't you ? Cheers, RCS (talk) 13:48, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Is it really notable though? I mean, where on earth would we put a sentence saying that the public think the EP is important and it shoudl concentrate on this or that. Its a bit of a loose thread.- J Logan ^t: 19:37, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

EU FA review (again)

Hi Logan, I was thinking, we should probably just forget FA review at the moment, not only does nobody seem to really have the time at the moment, but with the intro shinanigans I don't think we can seriously expect the reviewers to even consider it at the moment. Anyway, I left a comment about it on the EU talk page, was wondering if you could give your views on it there! --Simonski (talk) 18:54, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Flags of Europe

Hi J, is there some way you could add the flag of the European Council of Jewish Communities ? Not only is it inspired by the logo of the Council of Europe (with which the ECJC often cooperates), but since the pages includes the flag of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, this can just as legitimùately be put in too. Thanks, RCS (talk) 11:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Isn't that just a logo? I don't see any "flag" anywhere.- J Logan ^t: 20:27, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Hm, maybe you are right, i didn't see it flying from a pole anywhere... RCS (talk) 22:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

London Meetup - April 13th

London Wikipedia Meetup number 8 is happening next Sunday lunchtime (April 13th 1pm) in Holborn. Come along!

-- Harry Wood (talk) 11:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in ...

I saw your name at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers. I revised the pages at Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in England. Please consider adding your name to the top of the page at Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in London and to any of the other subpages for Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in England. Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 01:46, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Hymnus Europae by Miguel Ríos?

In this edit you state that the Latin version of the European anthem was performed by Miguel Ríos. Do you have a citation for that? I know he has sung a Spanish version of An die Freude but I was unaware he had performed the Latin lyrics. Shinobu (talk) 14:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry mate, can't help. I copied that information from the European symbols page: see here. - J Logan ^t: 18:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Apparently it was added by a Spanish anon. The anon doesn't seem to be active on Wikipedia, as it was his only edit. I think that depending on how you read the statement in its original context, it could easily refer to the Spanish version. Again, thank you for your time. Shinobu (talk) 22:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Category:TF Slovenia

Hi. Just curious: What does the "TF" signify in the category name above? Sardanaphalus (talk) 06:01, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Taskforce.- J Logan ^t: 17:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. So, is "Taskforce Slovenia" a kind of WikiProject? Sardanaphalus (talk) 00:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

It is a taskforce of WikiProject Europe. See WP:TASKFORCE.- J Logan ^t: 10:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Aha. Thanks! Sardanaphalus (talk) 13:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

London Meetups - Sunday May 11th

We're hoping to have regular meetups in London. If you're interested, keep an eye on Wikipedia:Meetup/London. The next one is on May 11th Wikipedia:Meetup/London 9. Another Sunday lunch in Holborn. Come along! -- Harry Wood (talk) 11:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandal problem

Hi. I've been monitoring a selection of articles which interest me and have noticed that there is a significant amount of IP user vandalism. I've tried to make sence of all the policy material on wikipedia but I'm afraid I'm not up to the chalange. Could you give me a few pointers as to how I should procede in cases like for exaple this one: [[1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by U5K0 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Only two instances from that IP, there is a lot of that, we can't go round taking action against such things. Only really bother if the same user is going it numerous times. If repetition starts, give a warning. If it continues, contact an administrator for advice.- J Logan ^t: 14:59, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

EP, Strasbourg

Hi! It´s done - finally!! Sunday I attended the "Tag der offenen Tür"/"journée des portes ouvertes" of the Euro-Parliament (it was on May 4th this year as first of May was a thursday) and I took "as many photos as I could". I´m not sure though if you will be very happy with me as the quality of the pictures is maybe not quite as good as you hoped (for contents). I could not get to the visitors ...? tribune (? - is that French?)... balcony (for a better overview of the plenary hall) because as most other important places were open to the public that day, those they are confined to usually were closed then! But I could take pictures right inside it instead. As you can see I just did not manage to organise any other way until this opportunity finally came up! But if we still would like more and better pictures there might be more chances! I will give you more details in my discussion soon at the place where you came p with your request. Greetings, --85.180.217.116 (talk) 22:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)Stephele ?????Nicht mehr interessiert??Stephele--84.176.138.245 (talk) 21:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much, sorry for delay, been tied down a tad. p place is your talk page isn't it?- J Logan ^t: 20:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes - we meet over there if that´s OK for you - the "p" is a fault though, don´t know where that came from?! Don´t mind the delay! I came back from the "public day" quite enthusiastic and thought I could quickly show you what I got - and that you would be happy that I "did it" (- as there still is nothing else or new in the Commons). But then I had again lots of other things to do and little time online... I will give you a description of my pics first of all in the old place. Greetings, --134.176.67.99 (talk) 16:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)Stephele

AEN

Hi! The problem with sourcing this one is that it's a rather obvious bit of facts (the Italian party merger and the low public support for the Polish parties can easily be source, though) which is unlikely to merit mentioning unless someone really publishes an analysis of the events of the election on parliamentary groups, and I've never seen something like that (or at least not yet). Any idea what we could do? —Nightstallion 19:28, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

It is guesswork though, fine for journalists to speculate about who will win what but not an encyclopaedia.- J Logan ^t: 20:37, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not speculating, it's just remarking that two of the Polish parties are down to 2% in the polls and that the Italian party will merge into an EPP-member party by 2009... —Nightstallion 20:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

2% down and then saying they are "unlikely to be present in the European Parliament after the 2009 election" is speculation. Other bits could be cited. No rush though, plenty of problems in that article that need to be cited and sorted.- J Logan ^t: 20:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

So it's okay to leave it in for now? Naturally, as soon as I find sources, I'll put cites into it, but it's hard to find analyses for the election next year so early. —Nightstallion 21:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no problems with it now, aside from any facts that aren't cited. But certainly there's no real speculation now.- J Logan ^t: 08:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, fine. —Nightstallion 16:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for consensus

A question has arisen concerning classification of groups in the European Parliament. A discussion has opened up in Talk:Political groups of the European Parliament. Your input is requested there. This is a neutrally worded notification sent to a small number of informed, but uninvolved, editors and is intended to improve rather than to influence the discussion. This notification falls under the "friendly notice" clause of WP:CANVASS. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Commissioner list

Hi! Could you help with this problem? Thanks! —Nightstallion 20:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Another issue -- is Barrot already justice commissioner? Is Tajani formally commissioner-designate for transport, commissioner for transport, ...? —Nightstallion 21:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Well he is doing both jobs, as far as I am aware he is doing justice as a stand in but of course it is just the start of a full time job. So to be honest I'm not sure when would have officially started.- J Logan ^t: 08:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

So as soon as Tajani is confirmed, he gets the transport ressort -- but when does Barrot OFFICIALLY take over justice? Will there be hearings before the EP again? I just don't really know how we should update the articles... —Nightstallion 16:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Buggered if I know. Phone them up and ask?- J Logan ^t: 11:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Mh, I'd try e-mail, but that might work. You or I? ;) —Nightstallion 14:07, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Personally I can't be arsed, way too much on at the moment, starting to subside but I won't be back here properly for a week or two more. Then I'll get to work again.- J Logan ^t: 18:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Hope you're not too stressed, and if you are, hope it gets better soon. ;) —Nightstallion 20:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

A-ha! Hearings will be held on 16 June for both of them. —Nightstallion 19:52, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Rock the vote 2008-05-11

Thank you for your contributions to the discussion on Talk:Political groups of the European Parliament. You may wish to take part in the vote here if you have not already done so. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 14:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Request

In English...
Dear User:JLogan. Thank you for your changes to "Image:PE1979e.png" and "Image:PE1994e.png". A discussion has taken place on "en:Talk:Political_groups_of_the_European_Parliament". That discussion came to a conclusion. The conclusion was that the color of "CDI" should be changed from #009900 to #999999, and that the color of of "ERA" should be changed from #009900 to #FFFF00. Please make the following changes:

1. Change the color of "CDI" on Image:PE1979e.png from #009900 to #999999
2. Change the color of "ERA" on Image:PE1994e.png from #009900 to #FFFF00

Thank you for your assistance. I have also asked [2] to do this in case you cannot. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 03:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

...et en Francais
Cher User:JLogan. Merci à vous pour que vos modifications "Image:PE1979e.png" et "Image:PE1994e.png". Une discussion a eu lieu sur "en:Talk:Political_groups_of_the_European_Parliament". Ce débat est venu à une conclusion. La conclusion est que la couleur de "CDI" devrait être changée de #009900 à #999999, et que la couleur de de "ERA" devrait être changée de #009900 à #FFFF00. S’il vous plaît apporter les modifications suivantes:

1. Changer la couleur de "CDI" sur Image:PE1979e.png de #009900 à #999999.
2. Variation de la couleur "ERA" sur Image:PE1994e.png de #009900 à #FFFF00.

Merci pour votre aide. J'ai également demandé à [3] à le faire au cas où vous ne le peuvent pas. Cordialement, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 03:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Your French is clearly better than mine! Just English will do thanks. I have a moment so I'll get on it now.- J Logan ^t: 14:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, because of the change of quality it might be best if the person who just changed it could adjust the colour. They should have the working files and hence save me the bother of reworking them as my base files aren't relevant any more. If the other guy doesn't have the time to do it though I'll take it on.- J Logan ^t: 14:31, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I have to point out that my French is courtesy of http://www.google.co.uk/language_tools?hl=en. The rest of my reply is here. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 18:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I would have gone with "...Et déplacer les "non inscrits" vers l'extrême droite, S.V.P., parce que c'est l'ordre dans lequel ils siègent à la Chambre. Cela signifie que nous n'avons pas à décider de l'ordre politique. Pardonnez mon français, je vous remercie..." but that would involve me cheating with Google Translate, so it doesn't count <grin>.

If you are going to knock something up to replace the gif (yay!), use the numbers and colors on Template:EP79Results, Template:EP84Results, Template:EP89Results, Template:EP94Results, Template:EP99Results, Template:EP04Results. The sources for those numbers are on the templates.

The bar-charts/hemicycle argument is unanswerable: bar-charts are easier to understand and can be dynamically coded using Template:Bar percent, (so I wouldn't have had 2 disturb you or Alankazame), but hemicycles are popular and the one's you've produced have been used in other wikis, so people have voted with their clicks. I'm still right, tho...:-)

As for the elections, sooner or later we're gonna have to come up with something like Template:Infobox_Election for the EP elections: that'll be...interesting.

Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, well I was deliberately trying to avoid the use of babel, so no doubt it is worse! Still, I always like reading broken English, maybe they like broken French? :). And if you really want to have an argument on barcharts, well people voted with clicks on a race with no opposition, you could make some bar charts and see which are adopted by the other wikis. I don't have the time to do that as well though. I'll get onto the gif replacement from Friday, am going away these two days so can't work on it now. As for the infobox election, well we could use that as it stands, I see no problem except for the absence of pictures. Well, and any reference to governments and PMs etc. On the other hand, considering the possible indirect link to Commission president we may need to custom make. I don't see it as vital right now though, we're fine without it - we have out own templates.- J Logan ^t: 09:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Just seen your new version of the deprecated gif, and it's brilliant! Gives the progression of the groups at a glance and throws up some interesting results...

• 1) although both the Communists and National Conservatives are in long term decline, they're holding up better than the raw data would suggest.
• 2) Neither the Greens nor the Eurosceptics are doing as well as their publicity would suggest.
• 3) The left in toto (Socialists & Communists) is at its lowest ebb ever, whilst the right in toto (Con/CD/NatCons/Eurosceptic) is doing well, but not as well as it did in, say, 1979.

....My God, one could play for hours just from that one diagram. Well done you! Now, if I could only get http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Alankazame to change "Image:PE1979e.png" and "Image:PE1994e.png", I'd be deliriously happy. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 23:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

No problem, it is fun seeing their growth isn't it, can't wait till 2009. Btw, you been following the recent proposed changes to group limits? I keep meaning to write something on that but never get round to looking into it properly. - J Logan ^t: 20:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Political groups in COR and PACE

I know that you are an expert about political groups in supranational institutions. I would like you to see my posts at Talk:Committee of the Regions#European Alliance and Talk:European Democrats#European Democratic Group respectively. --Checco (talk) 14:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll take a look.- J Logan ^t: 20:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Future enlargement of the European Union

On 8 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Future enlargement of the European Union, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 12:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Brussels and the EU

Just to let you know I just translated your article into Dutch: nl:Brussel als Europese hoofdstad, or Brussels as European capital. Next project I'll work on is Espace Léopold. Very good articles, congratulations.--Hooiwind (talk) 19:15, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see you moved the interwiki links of Leopoldswijk and Quartier Léopold; you're right, they don't belong there but they belonged even less in the other article, and I didn't know where to put them. Once again, a new article is born.--Hooiwind (talk) 19:17, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks for translating these. The interwikis kind of belonged there as that article was formerly talking about the EU district, which overlays Leopold a lot. But yes, a new article, always a good thing (well, nearly always). - J Logan ^t: 10:16, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Good question. I introduced it on the Dutch wiki a few days ago but it has been nominated for deletion this morning. Personally, I think they're rather useful as a means of orientation. Many people tend to orientate themselves more often on subway stations instead of city maps. This kind of templates has been used on the French wiki for a long time now and is also used on pages as fr:Tour Eiffel. I don't think it belongs in the lead though.--Hooiwind (talk) 12:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I think there is a problem with the double image in Espace Léopold#Willy Brandt and József Antall. With both Safari and Firefox the images overlap with the text, and I just cannot get it right.--Hooiwind (talk) 13:02, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Big news

BIG news: The SPÖ states that in the future, it wants referendums on EU treaties. [4] —Nightstallion 15:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Meh, not that big. Lets see what actually happens.- J Logan ^t: 19:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

For Austrian political news, it's very big -- up to now, SPÖ/ÖVP/Greens were united on the stance "no referendums on EU matters". This opens up a new ground. Besides, it's a sign that the SPÖ is giving in to the Kronen Zeitung. (Not good, in case you're wondering.) —Nightstallion 19:32, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually has to happen though, and besides - might be ages before we get another treaty. Noted though.- J Logan ^t: 19:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Frankly, I'd prefer to get Lisbon into force as soon as possible and then start a bottom-up democratisation process in the EU, but I'm not sure how likely that is. :( —Nightstallion 18:16, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Bottom up is hard enough even at a national level. And I have to admit, Lisbon is a really crap treaty - the only thing worth forcing through as far as I'm concerned is the extension of co-decision. The rest is window dressing, can be brought through without a treaty or will make things worse. What we really need is a treaty the people want, rather than need, can read and is short. For example, a "democracy" treaty which extends the powers of Parliament, introduces direct democracy, makes the Commission directly elected by Parliament without the Council and gives some real blocking powers to national parliaments acting in majority. Add in something to slow down enlargement and increase transparency while abandoning every other element and they'll be onto a winner. Then, after doing something popular, they might be in a position to carry through the rest (most of which would have already been brought in in practice anyway as there is enough flexibility in the treaties as they stand).- J Logan ^t: 18:28, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the message on my talk page: I assume you mean my creation of the GB constituencies prior to the introduction of PR. Sorry for not replying earlier, but I've been over at Commons. I've created (well, redrafted using Hix's data) a Hix-Lord diagram for the first half of EP6, and it looks like this:

Vertical axis is europhilia: 0% = anti-EU, 100% = pro-EU. Horizontal axis is economic left-right spectrum: 0% = extreme left, 100% = extreme right. Hix's analysis throws up some interesting points: UEN are more centrist economically speaking than its reputation suggests, and the UKIP contingent of IND/DEM are acting strangely. Have a look, tell me what you think: the rationale for the positions of the squares can be found on the Commons description page. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 13:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Fascinating, we should make good use of these charts to get some analysis on the pages as it is a bit wishy-washy on the ideology. Though what we could do with is a standard left-right / authoritarian-democratic chart for traditional details. Great work on this though, I'm sure it will be of great use. Thanks to you the EU pages are actually showing detailed useful information rather than just acting as an outline and echo of others.- J Logan ^t: 22:54, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for that. The question of which compass is most appropriate for EU matters is the subject of some academic debate, but Hix-Lord is currently the front runner.[5] Interestingly, compasses predicted to be of use in the future include left/right/east/west and left/right/secular/religious. But as we have Hix/Lord models going back to 1979 courtesy of Hix/Noury, I'll stick with that or now <grin>. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:09, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Metro map

I've begun with a clickable map here. Is that what you thought of? If you like it, please help me out with the tedious job of inserting all station lables. Do you think we should have them in both French and Dutch (or a mix of English translations and commonsly used French titles)? And is 750px too wide? - SSJ ☎ 18:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

"nearest tube" template

Since you asked for feedback, I am letting you know why I reverted your "test" addition of this template to Hyde Park.

Nothing much wrong with your template in principle, just that on this article it does not belong in lead. One expects to find this sort of information in an appendix, and the Hyde Park article already has a "transport" appendix giving a better version of the same information.

I suspect (but haven't checked yet) that the same might apply to most other London places.

--NSH001 (talk) 22:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Response: Template talk:Nearest tube - J Logan ^t: 08:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Feeling happy ?

[6] More to follow, but i ain't got much time... Cheers, RCS (talk) 08:10, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Lots of red links, though. This will keep you busy :-). RCS (talk) 09:01, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Quite a find

While trying to put some dates into the article, i discovered that the International Commission on Civil Status actually predates the Council of Europe by a few months and is thus the first genuine post-war European institution. Funny we know so little about it ! Cheers, RCS (talk) 12:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

European Institutions in Strasbourg

J, could you please check the article for grammatical and syntaxic errors ? I'm no native speaker, as you know, and as it stands, i've written 90 % of it. Thank you so much, RCS (talk) 18:32, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Checked and corrected (a few days ago but forgot to reply here).- J Logan ^t: 17:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Origins of the ECSC

Hi, since you are one of the most active in the EU domain, I was wondering if perhaps you had any information on this:

• Ruhr Delegation of the United States of America, Council of Foreign Ministers American Embassy Moscow, March 24, 1947

From the sound of it you strongly get the impression that the ECSC was in reality the brainchild of General Lucius D. Clay. Have you seen any secondary information on U.S. coaxing towards the creation of the institution?--Stor stark7 ^Speak 10:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I am not expert on the ECSC but what I have read has made no mention of US involvement beyond their general encouragement of European integration which is of course well documented. I do not believe it would be his 'brainchild' from what I have read but it sounds worthy of mentioning.- J Logan ^t: 17:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Request for consensus

A question has arisen concerning the name of the article "Anthem of Europe". A discussion has opened up in Talk:Anthem of Europe. Your input is requested there. This is a neutrally worded notification sent to a small number of editors informed by a previous discussion of a similar nature about the article "Flag of Europe" and is intended to improve rather than to influence the discussion. This notification falls under the "friendly notice" clause of WP:CANVASS. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Responded.- J Logan ^t: 17:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Move protection

I've set up this request. [7] I tried to emphesise that this a strong consensus. Please add any comment if something's missing. - SSJ ☎ 05:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I think you got everything and we have what we need now. We can up the protection on the remaining unprotected pages if he starts on them.- J Logan ^t: 09:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you want your archive deleted?

JLogan, your user talk archive is coming up in Category:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion#Pages_in_category. Do you want it deleted? - Richard Cavell (talk) 01:23, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

No thanks, since when did user archives come up for deletion like this?- J Logan ^t: 20:13, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

New article needed

I think we'll soon need an article on the enhanced co-operation procedure, as it seems it may come into effect for the first time rather soon, compare this article on divorce rules in the EU... —Nightstallion 07:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm on it, will have a stub up shortly. Its a good start, but we'll need more data than this though.- J Logan ^t: 11:37, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Done, needs linking into pages though and expanding.- J Logan ^t: 12:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks. I think there's not much more to say about it as long as it isn't used -- once it's in use, I'd like to have a list of all measure adopted under enhanced cooperation on that page. —Nightstallion 14:01, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, that would still be one, I doubt they'd be a second for years even if the divorce one goes through. And if they sort out Lisbon, then that wouldn't even happen. So if we just make sure it is linked in from all the relevant pages - I think we could do with structuring multi-speed Europe articles a bit better though. Some nav box relating to multi-speed issues current and historic?- J Logan ^t: 14:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Good idea. The "opt-outs" article would also qualify. What do you mean, though, if Lisbon enters into force then the divorce thing won't happen? —Nightstallion 16:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Under Lisbon, QMV would apply and hence Sweden wouldn't be able to veto, they'd be over ruled and hence there would be no need for enhanced co-op.- J Logan ^t: 22:27, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, of course. But the matter will come up for voting *this* year, won't it? —Nightstallion 08:20, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

But think how much they've put off to post-Lisbon. They're debating enhanced co-operation because, despite all the talk of getting it past the Irish, they know Lisbon won't happen on time, if at all.- J Logan ^t: 09:32, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Mh, you may be right. I hope it will happen, though... —Nightstallion 10:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

European Quarter

Hello! I've made a labelled map of the European Quarter, and placed it here. Madou tower is a Directorate-General, and there's so many other of Directorate-Generals; I'm not sure if we should include them. Do you know if there's a map showing where all of them are? - SSJ ☎ 12:17, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I've never come into contact with you before, but after recently seeing all your contributions to Europe related articles, and seeing your "call a spade a spade" page, I think you more than deserve it

		The Geography Barnstar
		I've never come into contact with you before, but after recently seeing all your contributions to Europe related articles, and seeing your "call a spade a spade" page, I think you more than deserve this award. Well done. Jkliajmi (talk) 14:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

eu:Txantiloi:Geografia izarra

Wow, thanks! Much appreciated.- J Logan ^t: 15:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

ESA History, ESRO

Hi.

I'm about to add a tonne of new info about ESA history to its article. I have a problem though. ESA is the successor organisation of ESRO which currently just redirects to ESA. It would make my job a lot easier if I could just create an article about ESRO first and then do the main article thing with ESA. My question is: Will there be problems if I do that?

Bare in mind that the whole thing may take about week to complete. Thank you for your help.U5K0 (talk) 19:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

thanx —Preceding unsigned comment added by U5K0 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Capitalization with city names

Hello J- Please see my post here: Talk:Brussels#.22City_of_Brussels.22_capitalization. -Eric ^talk 13:58, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Eurozone

I agree, "sometimes derogatory" are the right words. Thanks. -- Iterator12n ^Talk 13:39, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Invitation to Wikipedia meetup in London

Wikimedia UK logo

Date: 13:00 onwards, Sunday 10 August 2008

Venue: Penderel's Oak pub, Holborn WC1 map

More information: Wikipedia:Meetup/London 12

Hello,

I noticed that you have listed yourself as a Wikipedian in London, so I thought you might like to come to one of our monthly social meetups. The next one is going to be on Sunday 10 August, which might well be rather short notice, but if you can't come this time, we try to have one every second Sunday of the month.

If you haven't been before, these meetups are mainly casual social events for Wikipedia enthusiasts in which we chat about Wikipedia and any other topics we fancy. It's a great way to meet some very keen Wikipedians, but we'd also love for you to come along if you're interested in finding out more about Wikipedia, other Wikimedia projects, or other collaborative wiki projects too.

The location is a pub that is quite quiet and family friendly on a Sunday lunchtime, so hopefully younger Wikipedians will also feel welcome and safe. Alcohol consumption is certainly not required!

Although the meetups are popular, many UK-based editors still don't know about them. It would be great to welcome some fresh faces, so I hope you can come along.

Yours,

James F. (talk) 09:27, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Please forgive the slightly impersonal mass-invite!

Historic Brussels images

If you are interested, please download Google Earth, click on this link, zoom in on Brussels and check out all those historical photographs from pre-war Brussels. Many are from the European Quarter. For example, Luxembourg Square. All public domain and pretty high-quality! We should really upload these. It's incredible. (Why the hell has Brussels become so ugly!?) Also, www.ecli.net has many more old photographs of Leopold II-era parks, monuments and events. - SSJ ☎ 00:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Fantastic, great find. The Leopold Park and Berlaymont (fyi: I'll be going over that article this week) ones for sure, though where exactly is the licensing information? - J Logan ^t: 09:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure, the sources are spread.. Presumably scanned by the something like the City of Brussels library. Found it on this blog. Do you think PD-old applies? - SSJ ☎ 11:40, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Impossible to be sure, EU copyright is 70 years I think, the image doesn't appear to have a date but looks late 19th century, which means we may be in the clear if the photographer died around the 1930s - the image is professional and from a height so he/she wouldn't have been very young and equally life expectancy was shorter - add in the death count from the Great War and it is probably PD Old applies - but we need evidence. They must have some copyright/source information - if not we'll have to contact.- J Logan ^t: 12:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

[8], [9] - some dates and high-res versions. - SSJ ☎ 15:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

They're good, but only for Brussels in general. Right now I'm concentrating on the European quarter and most old photos seem to be of places that haven't changed much. I haven't looked into the other Brussels articles much but if you know of places to use them then great, but right now I'm only seeing the two I mentioned above as being of immediate use and we still lack dates/copyright for them. We could do with some free 50s-80s images as well but they're of course harder to get. I'm going to concentrate on text now (when I have enough free time in one go) - it would be helpful if we could mobilise more people to work on these, get a committed group on Brussels articles (I would suggest a taskforce, though WP:Belgium is too undeveloped to run itself it seems, like WP:EU), and indeed on EU articles (I might try to restart the collaboration system again). On a side note, as I said before I'm going to deal with the Berlaymont article soon. I have a book on the EU quarter - aside from Berlaymont, what article (including ones not yet started) do you think I should concentrate on after if I have the data?- J Logan ^t: 22:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe a taskforce and new structures would attract editors. I've seen many Belgian people editing articles related to Brussels. But there are few who edit the main Brussels article.

What about Breydel? That building has after all played a crucial role. I reckon we shouldn't bother about the smaller, mid-cold war office buildings of the Commission that are scattered around. But aren't there some newly built DGs?

The most exciting thing about the European Quarter is probably its future, so I was wondering whether your book mentions anothing more the just the theoretic possibility of "restoring lost vistas, reducing traffic on Rue de la Loi and improving the metro"? Does it e.g. confirm the probability of the tunnel under a newly Europeanised Cinquantenaire being enclosed, or indicate which buildings could be demolished and how much earth can be moved in order to build bigger and have more open space, green areas and pedestran squares. How feasible is it that Justus Lipsius can be demolished? After all, it does look like a shopping centre, it will be less important after 2013, and texts by city planners online seem to agree that Leopold park should be seen from Berlaymont. - SSJ ☎ 02:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Breydel, yes good point, I'll try to do something on that, though it would help to get some technical details on it as well as the history that's in the book. As for the future, there is little detail - it was translated in 2007 and the current plans are quite recent. There is discussion on how previous building was disastrous and they've learnt their lesson in forming successive masterplans, but nothing much beyond that. I think we need to keep an eye on press releases and plans for that. There is supposed to be the master plan [www.quartiereuropeen-europesewijk.be here] but you can't access the website. It might be worth contacting OIB for their documents, it was going to do it eventually to see if I could influence it (I already emailed them about including a memorial to EU peacekeepers who have been killed in action) so I'll try to get on that soon. (and btw, I doubt JL will be totally demolished, only a corridor of it and the southern facade, as it is relatively new, even if it is disgusting - I'd say prison rather than shopping centre)- J Logan ^t: 11:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Strasbourg ceiling

I can't answer yet, i am still busy gnashing my teeth in anger. Another topic - what do you think of this exchange :

Mr MALINS (United Kingdom). – The Minister will have taken a close interest in the Irish referendum result – the “no” vote on the Lisbon Treaty. However, is he aware the Council of Europe – this body – may have unwittingly, in part, been instrumental in that result because our recent controversial report on a woman’s right to an abortion was, during the referendum campaign, widely read and greatly disliked by a huge number of people through Ireland who, albeit wrongly, took it as a European policy and voted accordingly?

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. I call Mr Bildt to respond.

Mr BILDT. – A direct question requires a direct answer: no, I was not aware that that particular report by the Council of Europe played a role in the Irish referendum campaign. On the other hand, I would need encyclopaedic knowledge to be aware of everything involved in the Irish referendum debate. As far as I can tell from the media, everything under the sun was addressed in that campaign, and not necessarily the content of the Lisbon Treaty.

The soucre is here : http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/Records/2008/E/0806231500E.htm.

Cheers, RCS (talk) 13:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, and I wouldn't be surprised. People seem to have a great deal of difficulty telling the difference between the EU and CoE and that, with a hundred and one things could have affected the result. Next time it is clear they should put Ireland in a vacuum sealed bag first! I wonder what else we can blame it on? Aside from the treaty of course which was flawless.... There is no easy and simple reason to explain the no: maybe next time they should have a follow up question on the ballot paper: why? (a, tick a maximum of three answers and number in order of preference. If other, please state in less than 20 words)- _JLogan^t: 13:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Constructive editing

Constructive editors replace images rather than remove them, like the EC Treaty signing one that you've removed from the competition law articles. I disagree with you that it's not "fair use". Perhaps you aren't clear on the subject matter of the articles (ie. the EC Treaty) or on what "fair use" means. If you could, please either (a) put them back, and take a little more care next time (b) replace them with something that you think is better. But please don't expect other people to fix things up after: be a constructive editor. Wikidea 16:47, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I'm not sure I agree with you either that the EU is a federation. It's just different. It's better than a federation, because it's something new that hasn't happened yet before. Have you come across the case about Van Gend en Loos? Have a read of that. Calling the EU a federation is just pretending its going to be a new big nation state. Really I think we should be brainstorming how we can solve the problem of the nation state. Don't you? All the best. Wikidea 16:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes I understand all that, but so why don't you write in a fair use rationales, instead of deleting them? Is it because it'd be too time consuming for you? I think this system is newer than the pictures on those pages. Come on, be useful!

I've had a quick look at your federalism treatise. Are you a politics student? Apart from reading Van Gend en Loos, try reading Lord Bridge's judgment in the Factortame case no.2, the Solange II decisions (for Germany, if you can find them on the web) and perhaps a little history surrounding the American Civil War. Actually, I'm not sure why I'm telling you all this. It probably wouldn't make a difference! Wikidea 18:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

ESA task force

I've set up what I could using the good old copy-edit technique but I think I probably missed a lot of things in the category infrastructure. I've set up a stub page for the TF but I have no Idea what else needs to be done here. So if you could look over what I've done so far and tell me how to go from here, I'd be really grateful. Also I'd like to know: Do people usually join by themselves or should I contact a few wikipedians who are active in this area? U5K0 (talk) 10:42, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you talk English ?

Sorry, :-), but i dont' understand what you meant here by the sentence : "It is totally separate from the European Union, with a has a legal personality and 47 member states (which contain 800 million citizens)." Cheers, RCS (talk) 11:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Easy to get featured list

I worked on List of municipalities of the Brussels-Capital Region, doing the things that were done with Member State of the European Union. Suddenly the Brussels list was nominated for Featured list, and that was achieved. Do you think we should rename the EU members article "List of Member States of the European Union" and nominate it as a list? Would that disenable the creation of in-depth sections on the functioning of membership? Does the current singular title make more sense? "Featured list" is a peculiar phenomenon. - SSJ ☎ 14:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, let's forget featured list and focus on turning the the EU members article into a proper article in the future. - SSJ ☎ 22:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

The enlargement section you wrote is excellent as always; it sums up the history and relating aspects in a good way and the referencing is accurate.

We should definitely not write a section and name it "Pros and cons" or "Benefits". Documented facts about what happens when a poor country joins is probably okay. Regretfully, I've contributed to (but not started!) this slightly unorthodox collection of bulletpoint arguments. We can perhaps try to write NPOV prose out of some of it. I am not sure. - SSJ ☎ 23:57, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

"Economic impact of membership" is a good title we can use. But after such a section is written, it would become very obvious that the political impact isn't covered. The fact that small member states, through the EU system, are involved in large-scale political processes they otherwise would not be part of; e.g. the EU's foreign policy, is undisputed, given the veto rights. I think I've heard before that concrete research shows that Luxembourg has more influence over the workings of the EU than some of the biggest member states. This (if we find sources), as well as population versus voting power should perhaps be mentioned under either "Representation", a future section on "relationship between members" or "Political impact of membership". The political impact doesn't have to be POV; it's generally accepted that membership allows a country to take part in the shaping of legislation. - SSJ ☎ 12:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Lux Sq

Search the word "Arlon" in this page. - SSJ ☎ 01:01, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Have used the original ref for that then.- _J.Logan`^t: 10:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 19:46, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Recording dutch for Brussels.

I recorder it. However what format does it need to be and how do you add it? Or shall I send it to you and will you add it? Titirius (talk) 09:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. For uploading information, follow this link WP:CMF#Audio.- _J.Logan`^t: 20:54, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Here it is, I didn't add it to the page yet as it was bit confusing (I'm new, as you've noticed): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dutch_Pronounciacion_of_Brussels.ogg Titirius (talk) 12:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I'll deal with it. Thank you very much for your contribution!- _J.Logan`^t: 18:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Erik Young

Is there any need to preserve User:JLogan/Young? That one get posted again and again in different variations on totally unrelated pages (and not just on Wikipedia, also in Blog comments, forums like the one from The Nation), IMHO the poster needs to search for mental care if he seriously means everything he posts. Keeping his nonsense online would only encourage him to continue vandalism pages by posting his essays. andy (talk) 15:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Granted, I think I was being a bit naive back then, had forgotten it was still there.- _J.Logan`^t: 17:13, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

International Commission on Civil Status

Phew, i finally dared starting an article about that organization ! Its only a stub a s of yet, but maybe you'll get round adding some flesh. Cheers, RCS (talk) 19:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Great, we don't need much of course - it isn't that major. So long as we have something.- _J.Logan`^t: 00:30, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

American Committee on United Europe

Hi JLogan, just to let you know I found an article that you might be interested in. Apparently ACUE were quite successful in influencing European public opinion using bucket loads of CIA money, but less successful in steering the shape of the European institutions they helped promote.

Also the topic European Youth Campaign that the ACUE sponsored heavily seems interesting. One source stated that in the mid 50's they conducted 1,900 conferences and activities in the core countries designed to make young people pro-Europe (and I presume anti communist). Just in case you're interested.--Stor stark7 ^Speak 23:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks. I suppose there was a lot of this sort of thing going on back then, if we get anymore I might be able to tie it into the main articles but they themselves need a developing a bit more before think kind of detail can be linked in. I'll look to see where it could be used though. Thanks.- _J.Logan`^t: 00:30, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

federal!=federalism

please don't mix up both.Just stick to federalism.The proposal is about federalism, not federal.These are not sinonimus.--88.82.47.8 (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Large deletion from "History of the European Union"

I respect your experience in this area so haven't reverted yet. A deletion of that magnitude really does need to be explained in the talk page. Please do so. --Red King (talk) 23:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your note. Yes, that explanation is fine - I just don't understand why you couldn't put a short note on the talk page. Well perhaps next time. --Red King (talk) 19:03, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

The edit summary is a very terse way to comment. It is suitable for maybe a paragraph but anything more needs a comment in the talk. That's why it comes up in bold red figures in the history. Definitely WP:be bold about your edits but be kind about about explanations. --Red King (talk) 19:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

G8 summits

I wonder if you might have a view to express in the following context:

• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 September 25#Category:G8 summit resorts

I have expressed an opinion, but I'm not certain that my views are necessarily more important than anyone else's. --Tenmei (talk) 17:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Malta

Malta should be include, in the article. Microstates and UE, due to the fact that in the article European microstates it is included as one. --Erick91 (talk) 03:47, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The general point is to discuss those outside, Malta and Luxembourg are mentioned in the intro. Feel free to add them though if you want but simply stating they are EU members sums up their relation to the EU.- _J.Logan`^t: 08:49, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

"Save our Strasbourg"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2008/09/save_our_strasbourg.html. Cheers, RCS (talk) 17:31, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Just made use of it on the location page, finally fattened that section out a bit more now!- _J.Logan`^t: 20:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

By the way, last week (Monday 22), the Strasbourg municipal council passed a motion to support the EP seat in Strasbourg and to ask (demander ≠ to demand) that all the EP activities be relocated to Strasbourg: http://www.strasbourg.fr/services/municipalite/conseils_municipaux/080922_CR_CM.pdf?FileID=documentsprincipaux%2fmunicipalite%2f080922_cr_cm.pdf. Cheers, RCS (talk) 06:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Included that as well. I bet there is something similar from Brussels, and I'm quote sure there would be more from Strasbourg's government. I remember hearing something a while back but can't remember when. Lets see how things develop though.- _J.Logan`^t: 08:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

The former mayoral team (Fabienne Keller and Robert Grossmann) had a rather eurosceptic background, but Roland Ries has a long history of euro-enthusiasm. We'll see, indeed. RCS (talk) 11:07, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

A eurosceptic mayor of Strasbourg? Weird. Anyway, this being Europe, we'll be waiting to see for a few decades yet.- _J.Logan`^t: 12:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Of course, they dropped the scepticism once they run for the job, but basically both Keller and Grossmann came from a political conservative background that traditionnally considers Europe too expensive, too aligned on American positions and too disrepectful of national French issues. --RCS (talk) 12:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Daniel Cohn-Bendit

http://www.lalsace.fr/article/ungersheim-cohn-bendit-relance-le-debat-du-siege-du-parlement-europeen---384659?symfony=c09d69bfdc93d41b012d11b8485ebb18. He suggests turning the EP into a European university for 15,000 to 20,000 students, entirely paid for by the EU. Actually sounds quite good, but unrealistic. --RCS (talk) 17:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

That's Danny for you. I think we already have a point on the university point. Slightly different info you've just mentioned of course. Your French is a lto better than mine though, to avoid me skewing things in a bad translation - or worse, use babel - could you give me the major points on it (unless what you just said is the only important part) or pop it straight up. I'm trying to read though it but I'm only doing French once a week now so am getting rusty.- _J.Logan`^t: 21:19, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, the major points are the 15,000 to 20,000 students and that the univ. will teach "all matters" (toutes les matières). That's the most precise definition of this project so far. I wonder why he doesn't say 25,000 to 30,000 students or something like that, though. It still sounds pretty random. RCS (talk) 05:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Put it up, thanks. Regarding the number - sounds arbitrary but he was probably making out that the size of the building could support such a number. I wonder though if they are including the satellite buildings connected to the Palace of Europe? Anyway, they'd need more than a bunch of impoverished students to convince France to surrender it. Personally, I think they should offset it by declaring Strasbourg as the EU's "Second city, and social heart" with a "Festival of Europe" held every year or two in the city around the quarter along with several other non-political organisations and buildings being based there to establish a European city without the politics of Europe, making it free from all the negativity of the EU which is impossible right now with a major body at its heart.- _J.Logan`^t: 18:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Nominate for FA?

Location of European Union institutions now certainly has a fair chance. Will you try? RCS (talk) 18:37, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Hell, i did it myself, see here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Location of European Union institutions. Cheers, RCS (talk) 18:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Great, good point. Worth a shot, lets see how it goes. Thanks for your work on it! Strasbourg would be rather lacking without you.- _J.Logan`^t: 19:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Noteworthy or not?

• Open letter by Strasbourg's mayor to Cohn-Bendit concerning the seat of the European Parliament
• (Well-made) StrasTV video defending the seat
• Some courteous bloke putting forward Pro-Strasbourg arguments

Cheers, RCS (talk) 09:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

if they present an argument not yet in the article or the involvement of a new figure then sure. Though I can't read that detail due to my poor French, so I'll leave it in your hands this time. I'll write in the details if you give the facts if you'd prefer but I can't get them out myself and be sure it is what is actually said. Thanks for the research though.- _J.Logan`^t: 22:29, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

here you are. ~Cheers, RCS (talk) 10:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Regarding the others, if you happen to find English versions we could just put them straight in the external links. Or should we perhaps put them in anyway on the off chance the reader knows French?- _J.Logan`^t: 10:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Added this one into the article. I got the same information from the horse's mouth (well, one of the horses) more than a decade ago. I mentionned it on the talk page, if you remember. RCS (talk) 10:22, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I remember it coming up somewhere else, but haven't a clue where. Very pragmatic I'd say, and interesting considering everyone things Brussels is grey and boring (if both are correct, then Strasbourg must cause you to die of boredom - not an image I got when I was there but everyone was partying because France won the semi final).- _J.Logan`^t: 10:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

It's not so boring, but what night-life there is is mostly student's night-life, so it is indeed not very thrilling for middle-aged eurocrats. Night pubs and bars for people over 25 (okay, 30) are indeed rather rare. RCS (talk) 11:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

This actually was the real reason why the MEPs shortened their stay in Strasbourg by a full day each session (which lasted until friday a few years ago): boredom. As i wrote on the talk page, it is no wonder that Cecilia Malmström is so especially vocal against Strasbourg: who if not a young woman from a country where alcohol is expensive and the people mild-mannered to the point of softness (a part on that topic) wouldn't be against a city as quiet as Strasbourg? Even suburb riots and islamist expansion are way more spectatcular in Brussels. --RCS (talk) 13:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Do remember though its not just the middle aged MEPs but all their younger staff that have to suffer the trips. I think they would be a decent force demanding better nightlife. Maybe if Parliament was there all the time the night life might develop to cater for them - but part time. Well I can understand their frustration. Still, from experience of Sweden I doubt Strasbourg would want all the Nordics drinking all night - due to the price of it in Sweden none of them can actually hold their drink. If they were as naturally inconsiderate as Brits I'm sure they'd have a worse reputation than them when drinking abroad.- _J.Logan`^t: 16:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Since when do staffers have the right to have their say in European matters? Come on! You should know better about what authoritarianism there is inside EU institutions. RCS (talk) 16:36, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Ahh but in practice those staffers have the ear of the MEPs every waking moment. Soft power remember, its not just confined to diplomacy.- _J.Logan`^t: 17:17, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

All images of Belgian buildings to be deleted?

You'd probably want to check out this - SSJ ☎ 17:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. Have commented. Would be a dangerous precedent, we need to defeat it fast. Damn Belgians and their copyright law!- _J.Logan`^t: 17:25, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Yes, the anti-panorama laws are absurd. How on earth would anybody benefit from them? Nobody except wikimedians cares about them or know that they exist. - SSJ ☎ 17:49, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Eurodistrict

Hello J, as i said i won't have time personally to enhance the article the next days, but here is a link to a website featuring several articles on the Eurodistrict: http://www.relatio-europe.eu/strasbourg-europe/eurodistrict. Cheers, RCS (talk) 06:30, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Draft report

Thanx for the link & message. Initial thoughts are:

• Point 1: About bloody time
• Point 2a: I'll contact User:Barryob: we'll need new maps for Spain (45m), Romania (22m) and Germany (82m)
• Point 2b: That'll cheer up the Catalans.
• Point 2f: The idea of a single EU constituency has been floated before in the 90's, and was shot down. It's an...interesting idea. From memory, Welsh Assembly elections are done on a similar basis, voting for a subconstituency and larger constituency simultaneously.
• Point 2g: Standing on more than one list for more than one constituency: are they nuts? What happens if the same person gets elected twice?
• Point 2i: So elections on Saturday and Sunday only? So, we're going to upset the Christians and the Jews. That'll work...
• Point 2j: May? Tricky. There's at least one Jewish holiday in May, there's the possibility of Easter, plus May Day and Beltane. So we've upset Moses, Jesus Christ, Karl Marx and Willow-from-Buffy. Ouch.
• Point 4,5,6: that'll cheer up the expatriate Eastern Europeans.

Still, it's for the 2014 elections, so no need to worry just yet.

Sorry for the lack of work recently, but I'm armpit deep in upgrading EPP-ED (see this for how it looks so far). I've tried drawing barcharts by member state and group (like your election result barchart) but it looks like an explosion in a paint factory (8 groups, 27 member states). I'll try a choropleth map, and hope nobody notices Malta is just too small to depict. Have you been following the Lisbon debate in Ireland? Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)