User talk:Themightyquill

Map

Hi,

I reverted to the old partition image for the following reason: the new map was displaying the borders in a very inaccurate manner. This is especially true for the map of Bangladesh. Please compare the maps to see the discrepancy.

Can you please fix the newer SVG image to reflect accurate borders? The new image has so much more info that it is a shame the borders are incorrect in it. If you can fix the border, please update the Bengali language movement article with the fixed image. Thanks. --Ragib (talk) 18:40, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying ... but having had to draw the map of Bangladesh many times in my school days, I was able to spot the problems right away.

If you put the maps side by side and look at the borders of Bangladesh, you'll notice the errors. Here is a short list:

The entire Sylhet Division is missing from the new map.

Large parts of Chittagong Division are missing, both on the northern and southern parts.

Large parts of West Bengal appear as part of Bangladesh.

In general, almost all the details of the border are missing in the new map, leaving the map of Bangladesh as a green blob.

Once again, just put the two maps side by side, and you'll see what I'm saying. Thanks. --Ragib (talk) 18:55, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I want to add further that the Sylhet division in the north east part of the map is particularly important in the context of the partition, as that area broke away from the Assam province and joined East Pakistan during the partition (based on a plebiscite). --Ragib (talk) 18:58, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the latest map is much better ... though the outlines can be made crisper. Right now, the boundaries are slightly crude approximations of the actual boundary. If you could make your lines thinner, and use a higher resolution canvas to create the map, perhaps an acceptable amount of details will be there.

Since I have no idea of the Pakistani side, you might want to check up on that as well.

Finally, thanks a lot for taking the pains to re-do the map. The new info is useful to show the context of the partition. --Ragib (talk) 21:06, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Mediation

Accepting your request. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:54, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about having to pull out of mediation, but the long and short of it is that I think the entire article should be deleted. To my mind, Wikipedia's "voice" should never be used to label individuals or groups - especially when it is something controversial like "terrorist". What I don't want to do is get embroiled in a wiki battle. I'm thinking about asking an administrator for advice in this matter, but in the meantime I'm going to keep the page watchlisted. -- Scjessey (talk) 00:12, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll probably ask for advice from Bigtimepeace. He is familiar with this sort of topic and is very skilled at diffusing battleground editing problems. -- Scjessey (talk) 00:33, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I did talk to Bigtimepeace, but he is busy with other things at the moment. My feeling is that an AfD is unlikely to be successful, so there is little point in my proposing it. That only leaves one option - trying to improve an article which I don't think should exist. I've got lots of irons in other fires at the moment, but I will monitor what goes on and chip in if I think it is appropriate. -- Scjessey (talk) 15:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Themightyquill as a scratcher of history

Themightyquill as a falsifier of history! I am pretty shocked that somebody as a Themightyquill can have such impress on falsifiaction of history. I strongly recommend to revise all his activity on wikipedia. He hides all facts about supression of Slavic or non-hungarian and non-german nation in Europe which has taken for 1000 years. Actually he falsifies history to describes victims as criminals!!!!!! What nazi rasist chauvinist and liar! What about history of Hungary! Where is chapter about hungarian war crimes, about racial genocide of non-hungarian nations in Hungary, about original slavic residents of contemporary Hungary?!? pls. read real history: http://www.archive.org/details/racialproblemsin00setouoft racial problem in hungary by Robert Wiliam Senton-Watson

This is what I get from suggesting you make changes yourself? - TheMightyQuill (talk) 14:31, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

New West v. Fort Langley

New West has had a long tradition of asserting its "first capital" status but, yes, Fort Langley (or rather Old Fort Langley, aka Derby) was in fact the first formal capital (as declared in the proclamation of the Colony I believe). Moody as you know didn't like the site, but his REs were already surveying it for a townsite when the colonel's decision to move it to New West; the survey work was aborted....it's safe to say that New West was where the first mainland Government House, i.e. the official governor's residence, was built (that would be SFAIK also where the colonial council met, once it came into existence). I didn't want to add extra detail into there about the Old Fort Langley site not being where today's Fort Langley is....but as noted, that article needs lots of work (and lots of de-Britishizing....er, "de-Britishising").Skookum1 (talk) 19:31, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Alabama Claims

I think that may be a separate article, maybe as Alabama claims because of "Wiki-lower-case-ism" - what was in the section in the BC article can be merged there, and it coudl be mentioned in passing with the link, but it has no place in the BC article, certainly with so much high visibility/detail. The context I've heard in relation to BC re the British and Civil War/southern US is the Trent Affair, but that's a different matter. While BC may have been collateral in negotiations/ambitions over Alabama, it's not part of BC history; during the Trent Affair/Civil War, on the other hand, Baynes and Douglas wanted to invade and annex Puget Sound....annexation issues were why the mainland colony was declared, and by now you must know the story of McGowan's War, though that was opera buffa and not really an annexationist uprising, though word reached Victoria as though it was (thanks to McGowan's enemies and the hysterics of Whannell, not to any real plans to take over the goldfields for the US - a move btw which would have precipitated war between Britain and the US for sure. More pertinent were the previous creation of the irregular companies which marched north from Yale during the Fraser Canyon War and teh Snyder Treaties reach with Spintlum at The Forks (Lytton), which have disappeared into oblivion (any copy of them apparently destroyed by Douglas, as they were treaties reached by American citizens with natives and were anathema to the concept of British sovereignty, as were the miner's committees, a la California, which had begun to appear around Yale; Spintlum was soon after created a magistrate, as had been Kowpelst, chief of Spuzzum who'd faced off with the "Boatmen of San Francisco" at Hills Bar. American annexation remained a theme throughout the 1860s, though usually in the form of British worries rather than any actual agitation; as of the opening of the Civil War and contemporaneous gold rushes at Colville and in Idaho and Colorado saw most of the Americans of the early rush leave the colony (which is why the Cariboo Gold Rush was dominantly Canadian and British with relatively few Americans; prob more Germans and other Northern Europeans, in fact). There was a pro-annexation settlement among some of the non-American colonists, mostly ex-Californian miners but also others who didn't want to become annexed to CAnada; this was parallel to intentions on the part of the colony's "old guard" to see separate Dominion status. The formula remains much the same today - Confederation, annexation or sovereignty. This was reborn during the 1870s when it was clear that Ottawa's promises were not getting done (you'll see reference to "Carnarvon Terms or Separation" in images and documents from the time; Dufferin's visit in that decade was confronted with the agenda at nearly every stop; the agenda included deires to see Britain help get teh railway - or Douglas' vision of a road to Fort Garry built with British labour, Ottawa insisted on cheaper Chinese labour and hired an American to get it done, since no British Columbian could associate themselves with such a venture or face opprobrium and shunning by other colonists (Ottawa imported the Chinese and the low pay scales were Onderdonk's doing and that of Chiense labour contractors, but BC gets blamed for it....). Annexation though was only a slim issue after the initial tensions of the Fraser Gold Rush and accompanying restiveness at Rock Creek and Wild Horse Creek - gold finds a little too near the US border (Rock Creek was virtually right on it, as later was also Rossland); hence the Dewdney Trail, which was built for security reasons and to assert British control over the Southern Interior, access to which was easier from adjoining US territory (this was also the reason the Kettle Valley Railway was built during the industrial mining boom of the 1890s). We have to have a section on the issue of colonial-era annexation pressures - also independnece pressures (most Canadian histories always write it as though union with Confederation was destined/a foregone conclusion, but it wasn't); but the Alabama Claims are highly peripheral and had no impact locally, nor I submit were the colonists even aware of it, though some in the upper echelons of the colonial government may have been advised by telegram). A similar "flaw of context" is in the Alaska boundary dispute article, which deals with resentment in Central Canada but doesn't get into the actual conflicts in the disputed area, nor to BC's position re same (I've been too busy/distracted to get back at that, ditto the US-heavy content in Oregon boundary dispute and related articles).Skookum1 (talk) 21:20, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Richmond islands cat

Pls see Wikipedia_talk:Categories_for_discussion#Richmond_BC_islands.Skookum1 (talk) 04:52, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Med Cabal

Hello! There is a mediation cabal case still open in which you are a named party. It appears the other mediator has withdrawn. Is there still a need for the mediation cabal to deal with this? If so, I would be glad to volunteer and help out. Cheers! -- Lord Roem (talk) 16:17, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I will wait and see whether the other editor wishes to participate in mediation. If he doesn't now, maybe try mediation again in the future after more attempts to reach consensus have been dealt with. Cheers! Lord Roem (talk) 19:04, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

RAC "Govenors"

Actually their formal title was "Chief Manager"....the sobriquet "Governor" was adopted, often only in English, as an honorific to give them equal status to Gov Douglas and Gov Stephens in BC and OregonTerr/WashTerr, respectively. A Governor in the Russian Empire ran a guberniya, a Governate, which Russian America was not....this convention was accepted in WP:Alaska and also in WP:Russian history (now part of WP:Russia).Skookum1 (talk) 21:14, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Gracias Danke Domo Arigato

"remove prices. not appropriate" Yep I did past the full book info and missed that one. It is nice to get an occasional helpful edit rather than a deleterious (pun intended) clobber from the all-powerful admins who seem to derive sadistic pleasure from destroying hours of tedious dedicated research with instanteous mouseclicks. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikidgood (talk • contribs) 19:58, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

St'at'imc category

I'd type out its name, ya, if only it were typable; it's at the bottom of pages like St'at'imc Nation and Church of the Holy Cross, Skatin. I'm just wondering why you created it with the complex diacriticals, which represent non-English sounds and inherently are not the English alphabet, as I know well - they were created to be at variance from English usages of the same letters, in fact, and also to not look like Nlaka'pamux spellings etc...Someone recently put Category:Stl'atl'imx - non-extant of course - on the Church of the Holy Cross one, and that is in fact the spelling used by the Lower Stl'atl'imx Tribal Council and also the Stl'atl'imx Tribal Police, and I think the Stl'atl'imx Chiefs Council or whatever its name is, which embraces all St'at'imc/Stl'atl'imx chiefs irrespective of tribal council affiliation - and was the "official" spelling before the Dutch guy came along and told them they shouldn't use it and use his system instead....on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America there's an incipient and long-brewing discussion, also found in pieces on CANTALK, abou the use of diacriticals in titles and category names, and on the use of native names vs English names, and which English adaptation to use.....St'at'imc like Sto:lo is now current in BC English, notably in newspapers of course, but those are both adaptations of terms of the "official" romanizations used by linguists now....except they're not universal, as evinced by the Lower Stl'atl'imx adherence to the older form and which, other than that final /x/, is much more representative of how the name is actually said; the /t'/ is very misleading and stands for, as you probably know, [tl]/[lh] (though Sta'aticets also has /lh/ as in Ts'alalh....the "wrong" (so-called) historical "white" spelling of this word is stlatliumh, which is actually the closest of all versions, but discredited because, well, white people coined it.....similar on the cateogry on Sto:lo, the diacritical-form used for hte category name is ONLY used by one of the two tribal councils, and is not universal across the non-tribal council bands (who are many). IMO anglicizations of Halkomelem and St'at'imcets (Stl'atl'imxts) names are fine and dandy; but including the diacriticals is like using Russian characters on Category:Russia and Chinese characters or diacriticalized pinyin on Category:China.....just a heads-up, I'm gonna launch CfDs on these soon to rename them, and it's not just these two (Category:Nuxalk or rather the accent-a version used for the category name, is another, and I think there's more out there).Skookum1 (talk) 03:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:SeanLester.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:SeanLester.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 05:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for helping on J Walker page

Check this out these are very nice gizmos indeed Wikidgood (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2010 (UTC) has given you a dove! Doves promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a dove, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past (this fits perfectly) or a good friend. Cheers!

---

Spread the peace of doves by adding {{subst:Peace dove}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Wikidgood (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Was I "belligerent"??

Gee, I was trying to be polite. See User_talk:Skookum1#your_tone.Skookum1 (talk) 19:34, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Category:Persons convicted of fraud

Since you participated in the recent CfD of Category:Persons convicted of fraud I wanted to inform you that the category was recently recreated and relisted. Here is a link to the current CfD should you wish to participate. Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_February_20#Category:Persons_convicted_of_fraud. Cheers.Griswaldo (talk) 03:50, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

February 2011

Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page United Nations Commission on Human Rights worked, and it has been reverted or removed. However, if you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. See this edit which added an example table to the end of the article. This may have been an editing oversight. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 11:51, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nyan Wheti

The article Nyan Wheti has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references found only mirrors, fails WP:N and WP:V

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 16:13, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Blackbird Johnny

I just put back the translation of the Hungarian name of Rigo Jancsi in Clara Ward. The Hungarian meaning of "Rigo" parallels the color of the chocolate pastry; this may (or may not) provide a connection to the name chosen for the pastry. Tim Ross (talk) 11:39, 18 March 2011 (UTC)