User talk:The Ogre/archive3

Lisbon/Porto pages

Wikipedia is a MULTIMEDIA encyclopaedia, thus your argument that images prove detrimental to wikipedia is flawed. They are not only illustrative but beneficial to the comprehension of an article's context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.188.55.113 (talk) 21:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree with this. While the Porto article was perhaps a bit too cluttered with images in the earlier edit, you removed far too many and made the ones left very small. One of the images removed was a featured image, that shows the beauty of Porto in ways that a load of words could not express, as corny as that may sound. I would like to work towards some sort of compromise to make the article as best as possible.Norman22b (talk) 00:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, the gallery wasn't necesary. From the looks of it the anon user just reverted to the previous edit, which was wrong in itself given that there were quite a few other edits not relating to images after your edits. As far as creating a compromise goes, I too am fairly happy with how the article is now. I would perhaps thing about upping the size of [this image] as well as [this one] if you agree? cheers Norman22b (talk) 16:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:Monarchs of Portugal

Maria II was made Queen of Portugal BEFORE AND AFTER Miguel. Learn our history before editing 89.155.96.45 (talk) 16:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry if I seemed too rude my friend. The way it is now is chronological correct. Stay well ; ) 89.155.96.45 (talk) 16:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

By the way, if Beatrice is considered Queen of Portugal, does her husband, Juan I of Castile, need to be in this template (like Peter III and Ferdinand II are)? I don't think that portuguese historians considered him a king, but I can answered that later 89.155.96.45 (talk) 16:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Well she was de jure Queen, so I think one can add his name in the template. Beatrice rulled the country with him and that makes him a king consort. I don't know if you can read portuguese but if you can take a look at this [1] it is about a council that rulled Portugal between Henry and Anthony 89.155.96.45 (talk) 17:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC) ps: I edited the template again. This time Afonso V renunced his title and his son, John II, replaced him, but after some days the former king decided to return thus becaming king a second time. After his death John II, again, replaced him also becaming a king a second time. If you know things like this I urged you to edit the template. Be cool 89.155.96.45 (talk) 18:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

March 2008

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you! Tiptoety ^talk 22:19, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Azerbaijan

For your information, Azerbaijan is a full member of the Council of Europe and geographically is partially in Europe, unlike Armenia which is fully located in Asia and which has likewise been associated for millennia with the Iranian and Turkic cultural milieu, but which you decided to include into Europe nonetheless. Just because the name of a country doesn't sound usual to a Western Anglophone ear doesn't mean it is geographically isolated from Europe. Modern Azerbaijan, having been part of the Russian Empire and the USSR for centuries, in fact shares a lot more similarities with Europe in terms of lifestyles than with Oman or Yemen. There is no basis in your attempts to present Georgia and Armenia as European and Azerbaijan as Asian, except your cultural prejudice. I suggest you examine this 'Countries of Europe' template before you make anymore reverts.

Spanish in Philippines

I think that is needed to paint Philippines in the spanish language map, because there are 1,816,389 speakers as a second lenguage and 689,000 chavacano speakers (spanish creole). Total: 2.450.000 speakers. Fuente: Instituto Cervantes, 1997. Some sources says that there are more than 1 million chavacano speakers. Another figure is 2,900,000 spanish speakers [2].

I know that there are only 2,658 native speakers according to census 1990, but this census also says that there are only 32,802 native speakers of english [3], and in the map of english language, Philippines is with colour. The same happens with another countries like India. There are only around 200,000 native speakers. Then, I think that it´s necesary to paint colour to Philippines in the spanish map. --Migang2g (talk) 02:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC) 99.226.143.206 (talk) 04:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Portugal

Olá. Ainda bem que verificaste isto, bem me quis parecer que aquelas alegações eram um bocado estranhas. Saudações, Húsönd 00:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Eu

Olha, afinal tenho 2,916 edits. É muito ou pouco? Velho (talk) 01:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Maud of Savoy.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Maud of Savoy.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Maud of Savoy.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Sdrtirs (talk) 14:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Suleimão

Anda lá um gajo a moer-me o juízo com a porra do Oceano Índico... Velho (talk) 01:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

A malta

Estive a corrigir à bruta e a pôr uma introdução nos Tugas. Velho (talk) 00:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Joan of Portugal

Wikipedia says Joan was born 31 March 1439,but many Portuguese sites give her birthdate as 20 March 1439.Would you happen to know which date is correct?Thank you.15:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)jeanne (talk)

Imperio colonial Francês

Achei o mapa do French colonial empires estranho. Se Portugal fez parte do império colonial francês e foi uma colónia da França tenho que queimar meus livros. 89.180.2.233 (talk) 18:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

List of Celtic place names in Portugal

Acabei de criar a página List of Celtic place names in Portugal. Talvez queira dar uma olhada nela. Em português [4]foi posta para eliminação, embora não entendi porquê já que há outras similares. Obrigado.Casae (talk) 20:11, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Neutral language

[5] Sure Sir! As you please! If the white man doesn't like it it is not neutral , isnt it??--Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 05:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Dutch Empire

Oh dear, another map-related edit war is ensuing this time on the Dutch Empire. I don't know if your interests extend to the colonies of your erstwhile enemies (at least in the 1600s) but this user has coloured half of Iran as Dutch as well as making various unsourced changes. Anyway, your thoughts would be appreciated. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t 23:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

A reference has been listed, the one above claims it is unreliable. I sincerly doubt that. He listed where he got all of his information from, and "half of Iran" would be closer to the coast of Iran. (Red4tribe (talk) 23:20, 25 April 2008 (UTC))

Thanks for your input. I think, until this has been resolved, that the map should simply be removed from the article. As I am seriously in danger of being blocked, would you care to remove it from Dutch Empire? The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t 15:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Where I am getting this information from,colonial voyage, has all of his references listed where he has gotten his information from. Now, maybe I am wrong, but how is this not credible? I am not going to buy 200 books just to make sure he interpretated the information correctly as red hat has said. Would you please explain to me how this is not credible? (Red4tribe (talk) 16:11, 26 April 2008 (UTC))

The reason why this is not acceptable is explained at WP:SPS. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t 16:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Romance-speaking states of Europe

Template:Romance-speaking states of Europe has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.--DerRichter (talk) 02:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

R1b

The latest research concerning the genetic characteristics and age of human paternal lineages indicate R1b is much younger than previously believed. Although the research doesn't indicate the precise age of R1b, its parent haplogroup, R1, was stimated to be 18,500 years old, thus R1b cannot be 30,000 years old.[6] See also: [7] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.70.30.218 (talk) 18:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

advice

Am I wrong about this and the paragraph preceeding? Can you make a constructive comment? Slrubenstein | Talk 22:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Request for favour

Hi there. You may remember me giving you a hard time over accuracies in Portuguese maps - ie, the Indonesian bits - which you handled very well. Fancy a new challenge? There is a discussion] about the VOC maps. We have a disputed map - which is not a bad start - but has some problems with the Indonesia bit. Are you aware of the history of the VOC? well, i hope the discussion clarifies where we are at. The second map in the talk page section is a bit better representation of the situation at 1800 (red bits). Could you (a) offer some advice, or even (b) do some work on this map? --Merbabu (talk) 12:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

More map stuff

Hi there Ogre. You may be interested in another dispute about the Spanish Empire map. [8] This time, it's about the extent of the Viceroyalty of Peru. I would be interested in your views, because it could be argued several ways, though I am firmly of one opinion. Thanks! The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t 12:28, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Adding some composers to your Fench people montage

Hi Ogre, I like the montage of famous French men and women you've contributed to the article on the French people, but although it contains a number of artists and literary figures I notice there are no composers in it. Perhaps you could add images of one or two of the many famous and historically significant French composers, such as Jean-Philippe Rameau, Hector Berlioz, Claude Debussy, etc? Many thanks. 90.205.92.1 (talk) 04:25, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Please see Talk:French people/Photos, Talk:French people/Pictures - a global proposal and Talk:French people/Vote. Thanks. The Ogre (talk) 13:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

So this was subject to a vote? That's ridiculous. But it doesn't really surprise me. Western culture currently has a bias towards popular music and literature, so a vote like that is likely to reflect such a bias. I thought the purpose of Wikipedia was to be objective and factual, not simply to reflect current taste. To have a list of famous French people and omit some of the most important Classical composers in history from it (Berlioz, Debussy, Ravel) is shocking. 90.205.92.1 (talk) 16:54, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Maybe. But who is to define objectivity and factuality? The Ogre (talk) 12:15, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Well it would seem that Wikipedia informally defines objectivity/factuality as 'if enough people say it's true, it's true'. Or at least, that seemed to be the criterion in this instance. Anyone who has a degree of knowledge of music history will know that there are a number of French composers who are of huge historical significance (Berlioz and Debussy in particular). There are many books, essays and conventional encyclopaedia articles which attest to this fact (indeed Wikipedia's own article on Debussy states that 'Debussy was not only among the most important of all French composers but also was a central figure in all European music at the turn of the twentieth century.'). Yet the photo-montage in the article ignores this, being simply reflective of current popular taste. Surely this is unencyclopaedic. 90.212.113.72 (talk) 17:39, 24 June 2008 (UTC)