Jump to content

User talk:Aridd: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Rotuma
No edit summary
Line 37: Line 37:


No, the 1997 constitution puts Rotumans on a roll of their own, distinct from the Fijian roll. The Rotuman roll covers the entire nation of Fiji, and elects one member to the House of Representatives. [[User:Davidcannon|David Cannon]] 11:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
No, the 1997 constitution puts Rotumans on a roll of their own, distinct from the Fijian roll. The Rotuman roll covers the entire nation of Fiji, and elects one member to the House of Representatives. [[User:Davidcannon|David Cannon]] 11:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

== Bush Doctrine ==

so its ok for someone to says it legal for saddam to kill his people however he wants, but it isnt alright for us to invade the country? dude if u want to critisize bush thats fine, but dont tell me to get off my soapbox, that opinion in there is just as much so. should i dig up like 100,000 different people saying it was justified? that part of the article was completly unbalanced and you know it.

Revision as of 21:55, 3 September 2007

Welcome!

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  NSLE (讨论) \<extra> 05:03, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hi there I was wondering if you could help rewrite the article on the Federation credit, This article is totally inaccurate and misleading and I believe it needs to be completely redone or deleted. Since you contributed to the talk page with some useful information I was hoping you could help rewriting it. I've already put up inaccuracy and rewrite templates on the page but no one has taken any action yet. I would edit it myself but I'm afraid on this I don't know where to start as the article is just so wrong. Any help will be appreciated, thanks. --Hibernian 13:40, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

See Talk:Māori - my reponse to your question. (I moved the section to the bottom of the page as per normal practice.) Kahuroa 09:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gift economies

Please see my response to you at Talk:Gift_economy#Gift_economies_in_the_Pacific. - Jmabel | Talk 16:34, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Manden Charter/Kouroukan Fouga

Hi. My name is Scott and I'm a researcher of Africana, specifically the Mali Empire. I recently discovered you had a page up on the Manden Charter. From what I can tell, this is the same as the Kouroukan Fouga/Kouroukan Fougan (the constitution of the Mali Empire). I set up a page a while back for this subject Kouroukan Fouga and its pretty detailed. I wanted to know if you'd be opposed to deleting the Manden Charter page and maybe adding some of its details to the kouroukan fouga or possibly just make a redirect from Manden Charter to Kouroukan Fouga. I know deleting a page is rather extreme and I see you were doing a translation (very commendable btw); however, the Manden Charter has at least one serious error. Sundiata/Sundjata came to power at 1230 AD at the earliest. Most authors are pretty satisfied with the date of 1235. i've got a lot more info on the mali empire on the Mali Empire page which i've been workin my butt of at (just put up an infobox). Please hit me back and let me know what you think.

thnx 4 your time Scott Free 20:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


thnx

thnx 4 the quick reply. i'll get on it right away, take care of urself Scott Free 01:26, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rotuma

No, the 1997 constitution puts Rotumans on a roll of their own, distinct from the Fijian roll. The Rotuman roll covers the entire nation of Fiji, and elects one member to the House of Representatives. David Cannon 11:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bush Doctrine

so its ok for someone to says it legal for saddam to kill his people however he wants, but it isnt alright for us to invade the country? dude if u want to critisize bush thats fine, but dont tell me to get off my soapbox, that opinion in there is just as much so. should i dig up like 100,000 different people saying it was justified? that part of the article was completly unbalanced and you know it.