User talk:Coloane

Mediation Cabal

I am starting to mediate a case with the Mediation Cabal which you are involved in. Please see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-06-25 Developed country. Thanks! Your mediator, Greeves ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Please follow discussion at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-06-25 Developed country if you still wish to be involved in this case. Please let us know if you do not wish to be involved. Your mediator, Greeves ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

FA Candidacy for Confederate government of Kentucky

There was a response posted to your opposition to the FA candidacy of the article Confederate government of Kentucky. The response was posted on 21 July, by Acdixon. It would be appreciated if you answered the response. Thanks in advance for your timeliness. -- Steven Williamson (HiB2Bornot2B) - talk 13:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

• I don't think it is necessary, isn't it? Coloane 23:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

IQ of Australia.

In the Article IQ and the Wealth of Nations you have stated that the IQ of Australia is 96. According to Lynn and Vanhanen it is "98" http://www.rlynn.co.uk/pages/article_intelligence/t4.asp

Can you be so kind to change the table "National IQ Estimates" so that the IQ of Australia is 98.

Yours Sincerely James —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesnewc (talk • contribs) 10:21, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Portugal-related Templates

Hi, Coloane

About the Templates i'm sorry but i only partially agree with you. The CPLP template may be a little excessive given that Macau is not a member nor an observer. But about the Portuguese overseas empire template i think you're wrong. That's an history template and it was on the right section. That template was made for being put on former Portuguese territories. It's pretty much on every former territory, some not so important. Being Macau one of the most important i don't see why the exception. I put the Template:Portuguese overseas empire back in the article.

Cordially, Bluedenim 00:06, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, but you can put such a template in the article of History of Macau. This is not a situable template as nowadays Macau is currently NOT a colony under the Portuguese Empire anymore. Otherwise why not put the template of British Empire under the article of Hong Kong?? Coloane 02:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

To have a central discussion, please discuss here: Template_talk:Portuguese_overseas_empire#Incorrect_template — Indon (reply) — 08:26, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Russia FAC

Hi Coloane, wouldn't it have been better to put the your suggestion (that the history section needs to be summarised), in a "Comment" rather than going straight to "Oppose"? If I summarise the history section will you change to "Support"?--Miyokan 08:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Victoria Cross for Australia

I have responded to your concerns on the FAC page for the Victoria Cross for Australia. I hope you don't mind my quick response here, it is just that the nomination has been restarted once, and i am keen to avoid it failing due to time constraints. Thankyou. Woodym555 21:47, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Russia energy superpower

Did you even read the energy superpower article?--Miyokan 03:07, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I think this article is pretty controversial. Yes, I've read this article that you above mentioned.Coloane 05:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Russia FAC

"After the breakup of the Soviet Union, the newly-independent Russian Federation emerged as a great powerand is also considered to be an energy superpower. are you sure? the great depreciation of rouble; great cut in military part, relatively high rate of inflation after the breakup of the Soviet Union didn't make me believe it is/was a great power."

Russia was considered a great power because it retained many "superpower" aspects from the days of the Soviet Union (power is not solely measured on economic terms). For example:

• Russia covers the largest territory in the world with an abundance of natural resources (energy superpower)
• Still had the largest number of nuclear weapons in the world
• Retained huge and arguably the most powerful military after the US. Retained huge military indusrial complex and huge amounts of military hardware
• Retained a significant amount of cultural influence over former Soviet states
• Retained a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.
• Maintained, along with the US the most advanced space program

"The primary causes of Russia's population decrease are a high death rate and low birth rate.(i.e. misleading) well, maybe! but who knows? tons of Russian every year were moved to the United States, Canada, the UK (mostly for wealthy Russian) and Australia for good, to name a few. Why didn't you mention them?"

After the Soviet collapse millions of people immigrated into Russia from ex-Soviet states, by far exceeding emigration.

"The history section needs to write a bit shorter. It's too long indeed!!!"

As you can see Russia's history (mostly the Soviet period) is often controversial, and there is only so much material that can be trimmed down without having to compromise the article's quality.--Miyokan 06:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it is much better for you to depict Russia as a regional power rather than a great power. I know Russia got its legacy and retained formidable weapon from the USSR, however they are mostly outdated and not ready yet to fight and defense. I know Russia is a member of UN Security Council or G8, however Russia didn't play a vital role compare to other countries or members. It is just a symbolic figure/showcase indeed. Economic factor is still a very significant one to consider nowadays, in the period of Boris Yeltsin, it was just a mess. I think the causes of changing of population in Russia is multifactorial. To attribute to the main causes of decreasing of population in terms of high death rate and low birth rate in Russia is not that convincing indeed. Regards Coloane 06:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

"however they are mostly outdated" - They were not outdated just fall the fall of the Soviet Union. Indeed, many weapons are still top of the line. I was under the impression that we were talking about Russia right after the fall of the Soviet Union because today it is unquestionably a great power. Read the Armed Forces section [1] which details the significant rises in military spending and the $200 billion (what equals to about $400 billion in PPP dollars) Russia is in the middle of spending on development and production of military equipment between 2006–2015. " however Russia didn't play a vital role compare to other countries or members. It is just a symbolic figure/showcase indeed." - what do you base this off? Do you mean to say that France or the UK or China played more of a 'vital role' than Russia after the fall Soviet Union? Please. All the 5 members of the UN Security Council have equal power there, including the right to veto. Today Russia often dictates the course of international affairs (see Kosovo). "I think the causes of changing of population in Russia is multifactorial. To attribute to the main causes of decreasing of population in terms of high death rate and low birth rate in Russia is not that convincing indeed." - I don't think you understand. The population decrease IS due to a high death rate and low birth rate. That is how a country's population increases/decreases, by the amount of people that die, compared to the amount of people that are born, +/- immigration (which as I've pointed out, emigration from Russia is not a problem). The REASONS for the high death rate (alcohol, lack of quality healthcare, etc) are discussed in the article.--Miyokan 09:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I think for the space program that you mentioned, there are also many other small countries taking part in it. It doesn't mean Russia is a great power by giving this reason. Compare to the US, spending simply $200 billion in military is just a tip of iceberg. For the Security Council, US play the most significant role indeed. I know Russia is a member but compare to the role of USSR, is dramatically diminished. If you compare to the figures of the company PetroChina's worth (i.e. 1 trillion); it is almost equal to the figure of the GDP of Russia. Obviously Russia is not a great power, at least not an economic power in our global sense. Economic factor is an overridding one to consider without question nowadays. But I don't object that you write down Russia as a regional power in the CIS or Central Asia. Coloane 17:31, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Why are you comparing everything to the US, we have achknowledged that Russia is no longer a superpower. PS the value of a company does not count towards the GDP of a country, why did you bring that up, just becuse PetroChina has a market capitalization of $1 trillion does not mean that it contributes $1 trillion to China's GDP (PS Russia's GDP is $1.7 trillion not $1 trillion). Russia/US do still have by far the most advanced space programs. 40 years later they are still the only countries that can launch people into space (China launched a man in space only recently and won't catch up anytime soon)."For the Security Council, US play the most significant role indeed." - can you give examples of this? Once again, you are comparing Russia to a superpower, not a great power. You need to study the concept of great power because power is not measured simply by economic power, otherwise Japan would be a great power. The superpower article describes the characteristics of power [2]. Power is measured by political (NOTE: a great power does not have to satisfy these categories as strictly as a superpower - Russia has permanent seat on UN security council), geographic (largest country in the world, enormous resource, energy superpower, cultural (still influences ex-Soviet states), military (largest nuclear weapons stockpile in the world, the ability to develop advanced military technologies like the RS-24 and Topol M ICBMs, the Sukhoi PAK FA fifth generation fighter jet, T-95 and Black eagle tanks, Borei class nuclear submarine,), economic (8th largest economy in the world, will overtake France and the UK within a year or two, averaging 6.7% GDP growth for the last 8 years), demographic (9th largest population in the world, by far the most populous european country).--Miyokan 01:04, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

You are not completely wrong, however; some points are pretty doubtful. For the population, although it is the 9th largest no. in the world and by far the most populous in Europe, it will not last long because the population of Russia is diminishing very quickly due to the high death rate and the low birth rate(this is even what you mentioned). And I am personally sure that Russia will disintegrate more in future because that country is simply a federation. For the economic aspect, the GDP of Russia have risen a little bit due to mainly the oil export, but nothing else. If you look at the GDP (PPP) per capita carefully, Russia performed not very well, it is even worse than South Africa. What the weapon that you suggested above mentioned are mostly in process and it is still a question whether it will eventually lead to a mass production. For PetroChina, the net worth of that company is 1 trillion. But if you look at the nominal GDP of Russia, it is lower than this figure. What you mentioned China can't catch up the space technology, it is totally groundless. Many people in the world now recognised that China already took over the role of Russia and Soviet Union, long time ago. Coloane 01:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

PS:I will change to "weak support" in case some words in the section of history will be erased. Again, I think that the section of history is too long. It is much better for you to put some details in the article of History of Russia. Coloane 02:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The demographic problem is very bad, but serious population decline takes decades, and that is if the rate of decline stays the same for each year. Forecasts about Russia's population by 2050 are meaningless because they rely the rate of decline will stay the same. Signs of improvement are showing. The number of childbirths increased 6.5 percent in the first half of 2007, while the number of deaths fell the same 6.5 percent. As Russia becomes more prosperous it is natural that the death rate will decline and the birth rate will increase. "And I am personally sure that Russia will disintegrate more in future because that country is simply a federation." - MANY countries are federations including the USA, Australia, India, Brazil, Canada, etc [3]. Besides, hell will sooner freeze over before Russia gives up any of her territory. "For the economic aspect, the GDP of Russia have risen a little bit due to mainly the oil export, but nothing else. " - a common misconception. Oil was initially the reason for Russia's economic resurgence but since around about 2003 economic growth has been driven by other factors - "Although high oil prices and a relatively cheap ruble initially drove this growth, since 2003 consumer demand and, more recently, investment have played a significant role." - source: the CIA.[4] I will list some statistics - In January-June 2007, foreign investment in the Russian economy doubled year-on-year, reaching $60.3 billion. In 2000 total investment in fixed assets was $40 billion, giving growth of 300% by 2006. Total investment in Russia's economy in 2010 will reach $360 billion, 800% growth since 2000, a Russian deputy prime minister forecast. Investment in Russia's fixed assets are expected to double on 2006 figures by 2010 and reach $370 billion in line with a conservative forecast. In 2000 total investment in fixed assets was $40 billion, giving growth of 300% by 2006. The middle class has grown from just 8 million in 2000 to 55 million in 2006, estimates Expert, a market research firm in Moscow. Russia's GDP this year will rise by at least 7%. "But if you look at the nominal GDP of Russia, it is lower than this figure." - PPP is the preferred method of measuring the real size of an economy as it is based on the law of one price, where identical goods are given one price. The nominal method only converts currency, and currency itself is worthless. It is the tangible amount a country produces that gives a real measure of the size of an economy. China's GDP by nominal measurement is only $2.68 trillion, but its GDP by PPP is $10 trillion.--Miyokan 09:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Just letting you know that I decided to remove "Russia is a great power" altogether, let the readers decide for themselves.--Miyokan 02:35, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that you had better solve the problem of your info box and the section of history. It appears a large part of blank area. The layout need to be fixed as soon as possible. Coloane 03:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The history section has been further summarised.--Miyokan (talk) 04:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Can you show me where did you summarise by the way? anyway! your effort for improving the article of Russia is great!!! Coloane (talk) 06:12, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

User:K a r n a has been copyediting the article and the article size has been reduced from 115 kilobytes to 99 kilobytes. The history section has been reduced by about 25% from 4,400 words to 3,300 words and the prose has been improved.--Miyokan (talk) 10:30, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh! I didn't check the article size. Thanks for your reminding. 99kbs is still a big article, I think. You do need to cut more and put some unnecessary details to other articles. For this theme, it is only an introduction of Russia, isn't it? This article will be edited by somebody else in future and surely it will be over 100kbs shortly.

A rule of thumb Some useful rules of thumb for splitting articles, and combining small pages (see above for what to exclude in size calculations):

Prose size What to do

• > 100 KB Almost certainly should be divided up
• > 60 KB Probably should be divided (although the scope of a topic can sometimes justify the added reading time)
• > 40 KB May eventually need to be divided (likelihood goes up with size)
• < 30 KB Length alone does not justify division
• < 1 KB If an article or list has remained this size for over a couple of months, consider combining it with a related page. Alternatively, why not fix it by adding more info? See Wikipedia:Stub. If it's an important article that's just too short, put it under Article Creation and Improvement Drive, a project to improve stubs or nonexistent articles.

can't you give me some links to refer to so that I can take a look if the section of history has been reduced? but if you have some problems to send me this, it doesn't matter actually. Even I change my vote to support, it won't help much because it seems to me that this article will be failed to become a FA definitely. Coloane (talk) 23:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Hi! Your continuous efforts to perfectly improve the articles Hong Kong and Macau - are important and remarkable! Thank you a lot for all of your contributions there! Eliko 08:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Belarus FAC

I answered your objections and questions. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 03:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Delisting

Thanks for doing the delisting. You forgot to add the {{DelistedGA}} template to the talk pages, though. The instructions for delisting GA's can be found at the second panel on the left here. I appreciate you are not a native English speaker, and may have some difficulty following all these complicated procedures, so thanks again for your help with the GA project. Geometry guy 21:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I replied on my talk page. Geometry guy 23:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

What is this?

Excuse me, but would you mind explaining this comment? I'm not sure what I said or did that offended you this much, nor am I sure what you mean. Shiva_eVolved 20:12, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I think that nobody offended me actually, maybe you magnified this matter. My point is very clear. I prefer one who can vote over there must satisfied the following requirements in order to set up the authority of Wiki:

• With 5 - 6 years editorial experience (not only in Wiki) plus having publication/research papers in a university/college.
• With a PhD degree in the related field at least.
• It must be for an administrator only.
• Currently holding a tenure position in any college or university (this may not be necessary).
• With a good standing or record in both of your profession and Wiki.

If I get any advice from the person who have these qualification or experiece above mentioned, of course I will respect it and follow all his/her comment and make correction. If you are sick, are you going to visit school boys and let them vote if you are sick? Coloane (talk) 20:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I think Tony and I deserve a little better - and I think 99.9% of the people who have built this project (including Mr. Jimbo Wales) will fail your criteria. These people have made this place possible, and I think that deserves some respect. I hope our future interactions will be more pleasant, Shiva_eVolved 23:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Ditto; that comment of yours [Coloane] is a personal attack. And what happened to AGF? 哦，是吗？(review O) 04:48, 15 December 2007 (GMT)

Would you please kindly show me which part of my message or comment do you think it might be considered as a personal attack? Respect or honour are valuable asset. You had better earn it. However, if you don't have the basic requirements from above, your comments is worthless. I prefer comment or opinion from a related professional in a specific field. (i.e. History for historian, geography for geographer, etc) This is nothing to do with personal attack. Coloane (talk) 08:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Racism and personal attack

Seeing as how you can barely write in English, I think we should instead question your interpretations of personal attacks and blatant racism. I choose not to have account, but that does not detract from the fact that you are both disruptive and bigoted. "Semi-retarded"? There is no reason for such vitriol and you're lucky you have not been reported. You very well may be.