User talk:Zack Holly Venturi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

How to use talk pages: (guidelines from Template:User talk top)

  • Please continue any conversation where it was started.
Thus if I have left a message on your talk page please DO NOT post a reply here.
I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.
Continue existing conversations under existing headings.
Create a new heading if the original conversation is archived.
  • Indent your comments when replying by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
  • Sign your comments automatically using ~~~~.


I like and agree with what Worldtraveller says.


Zack Holly Venturi 22:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


Hello, Zack Holly Venturi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 06:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Udo Lindenberg[edit]

Hi, I fixed the Lindenberg article. There was a missing heading from my translation of the German article (Chartplatzierungen - Place in the Charts). I've added an appropriate English heading and added a footnote for the D, A & CH headings (yes you got it right). Thanks for your interest. Ozdaren 22:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Possible misunderstanding[edit]

Greetings Zack Holly Venturi, We seem to have reached a misunderstanding at the Escher article page. I did not delete your (?) edit to the Alhambra. The only thing I deleted (and pasted on the discussion page for anyone to check out) was some (IMHO) weird reference to a rapper. Sorry if you were troubled, but I can assure you I didn't touch any ref. to the Alhambra - Escher's awe of said palace is well-documented. Regards, --Technopat 00:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Hallo, Technopat,
Yes, it seems we have, really:
  • But please check that my latest edition had nothing to do with yours. Mine just substituted the word fourteenth for fifteenth in the Later Life section, so restoring the previous writing, which had been vandalized a week earlier.
  • Now about your deletion of the trifle remark about some guy who apparently told something about Mr. Escher, I must say I absolutely agree with you. If somewhere, that trivia item should be placed in the page dedicated to the guy who told it (if he ever did, by the way).
Believe me, I am very sorry for the inconvenience.
Kind regards, Zack Holly Venturi 16:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanx for your reply. Let's hope that, over time, these guys can get their kicks out of other things - see you elsewhere sometime! Regards, Technopat 12:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Ankara University
Nick of Time (film)
John Hadley
Battle of Cunaxa
Philip Carteret
Choctaw language
A Man in Full
Samuel Ndashyikirwa
Archaeology of the Americas
Rosalie Gicanda
Wallace Carothers
French Guinea
Drina Banovina
Mercerized cotton
Indian slavery
Bibliography of the Rwandan Genocide
Politics of Kuwait
Tom Wolfe
Al Jahra
Necker cube
Add Sources
Touch typing
Christopher Moltisanti
Columbus Day
George Manuel
William Cullen
Onion dome
History of North America
Cai Lun

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 23:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Citizens for Blank Votes[edit]

It is a fact. You can see it in the official election results available from

You will notice that the number of votes cast is divided into "nulos" (void) and "válidos" (valid) votes, and that the latter are divided into "en blanco" (blank) and "a candidaturas" (to candidates).

If you insist on having a legal reference, check out

Artículo Noventa y seis.

  1. Es nulo el voto emitido en sobre o papeleta diferente del modelo oficial, así como el emitido en papeleta sin sobre o en sobre que contenga más de una papeleta de distinta candidatura. En el supuesto de contener más de una papeleta de la misma candidatura, se computará como un solo voto válido.
  2. En el caso de elecciones al Congreso de los Diputados, al Parlamento Europeo, a los Ayuntamientos y a los Cabildos insulares serán también nulos los votos emitidos en papeletas en las que se hubiera modificado, añadido, señalado o tachado nombres de los candidatos comprendidos en ella o alterado su orden de colocación, así como aquellas en las que se hubiera producido cualquier otro tipo de alteración.
  3. En el caso de elecciones al Senado serán nulos los votos emitidos en papeletas en las que se hubieran señalado más de tres nombres en las circunscripciones provinciales, de dos en las circunscripciones insulares de Gran Canaria, Mallorca y Tenerife y en las poblaciones de Ceuta y Melilla, y de uno en el resto de las circunscripciones insulares.
  4. Asimismo serán nulos los votos contenidos en sobre en los que se hubiera producido cualquier tipo de alteración de las señaladas en los párrafos anteriores.
  5. Se considera voto en blanco, pero válido, el sobre que no contenga papeleta y, además, en las elecciones para el Senado, las papeletas que no contengan indicación a favor de ninguno de los candidatos.
  • Thanks a lot, Miguel (you forgot to sign).

Your information is quite complete. I realize this business in Spain is more or less the same as everywhere else.
It's very kind of you, --Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 21:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)


Hi. I just saw that you wrote me on the talk page of Egypt. I did not see that i am sorry. No the meaning of what i wrote in my profile is the following: - My mother tongue is Egyptian Colloquial Arabic, but since the Arab wikipedia is in Standard Arabic, i cannot contribute much and i will have a hard time translating things. What i speak less than natively is the Standard Arabic, and this is because i did not finish grade school in Egypt, but moved to Europe with my family. Denmark, so thats why my danish skills is better than my Standard Arabic skills. i hope you understand now... take care :D Hamid-Masri (talk) 15:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. To some extent, I also have problems of the like, that's why I was interested in your case. In compensation, we can offer a multilateral worldview.
I appreciate your contribution.
Kind regards, --Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 18:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Your edits on Italian general election, 2008[edit]

Can you please explain this? These kinds of edits might be considered vandalism, with all the given consequences. If you do not agree with the article layout or content, please discuss it on the related talk page instead. Thanks. --Angelo (talk) 09:50, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Hi, Angelo,
Well, frankly speaking, I cannot. I was trying to fix something, but probably on a previous edition instead of the latest version. So, bang!, subsequent material disappeared. Less than a minute later I was on my way to revert my mistake, but you had already mended it, thank you. This is the first and for the moment only time something like that has happened to me, anyway I'll pay attention.
Colgo l'occasione per augurarti buon lavoro e buon divertimento nella WP.
Cordiali saluti, --Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 19:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Nazi concentration camps[edit]

I'm concerned about this edit. I see nothing wrong with changing Roma to Romani, though Roma is the term most commonly used in English. What is disturbing is that, in addition to those changes, you made a series of edits that appear to be vandalism. Changing POW to POV is the most glaring, but what appears to be the deliberate misspelling of words is also unsettling. Can you explain perhaps? --AniMate 16:34, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

  • Hi, Animate,
I'll try. Starting from your last point, about "the series of edits that appear to be vandalism", I think they belong to the kind of vandalism which could be seen as "playful graffiti". But please check they were previously done by somebody else, my reintroduction of them was an unintentional collateral effect. I admit my blunder, thank you for your prompt re-reversion. Regarding to your stating that you "see nothing wrong with changing Roma to Romani", would you kindly explain why you reverted them too then? On the other hand, I would like to call your attention that both "Roma" and "Romani" would be words equally common or equally uncommon in English, though not interchangeable ones, as "Roma" is a noun, but "Romani/Romany" an adjective. Last, but not least, a very interesting question arises, namely that of whether "Roma/Romani" is a commonly used word in English for those people. I think it isn't. According to my own experience, the way they're usually called (and they call themselves when speaking in English, if it comes to it) is "Gypsy". I've looked up both "Roma/Romani" and "Gypsy" (Encyclopædia Britannica, Webster's Unabridged, etc.) just in case, with the result that the former doesn't exist, the latter being the only entry. Is there the least possibility of a "political correctness" case? I think this could deserve a discussion in the talk page of the word. Unfortunately I'm currently too busy "in the real world". Regards, --Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 14:17, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I want to steal your user page.[edit]


Thought I'd come here and warn you before I stole your Lincoln pic and quote. HAHA.

Ok, I kid. But if it's all right with you, could I copy it to my user page? I won't tamper with the original. Just a friendly question and won't be done without your approval. Cheers! Wikifan12345 (talk) 07:44, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

  • My pleasure, help yourself. But please don’t make mistake, Lincoln was quite naive indeed when preaching freedom for all. There are billions of people who prefer to lack freedom themselves, provided they can prevent others to keep theirs, for example Hijackers in the September 11 attacks, Hamas, and the like. Take care! --Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 23:10, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Couldn't agree more! thanks again. Wikifan12345 (talk) 06:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Romano-Germanic - Latin Europe[edit]

Hi Zack, I was wondering what you think should be done with the Romano-Germanic culture article as far as what you think could be added to it. Also there are some issues with the Latin Europe article and thought maybe you could take a look at it. Do you have any clue on how much latin made its way into the Slovenian languge? Take care. --Lucius Sempronius Turpio (talk) 10:21, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Venturius Turpioni salutem plurimam dicit.
Thank you for your interest and sorry for the delay, “life is what happens while you're busy making other things”, you know.
Gee, you've realized I'm a nutty supporter of the “Romano-Germanic culture” idea. With the least intention to appear highfalutin, I'd dare to put forward that the nub of this concept is the interaction between Roman(ic) and Germanic peoples as the crucible where modern European culture has been cast. Classic Greek, Hebrew through Christianity, and minor elements have also been incorporated, though always through the Romano-Germanic sieve. The coordinate axis keeps the line drawn from Central Alps down the Rhin (Romanic southwest, Germanic northeast) into England (a notable people who has patiently taken a thousand years with the stubborn purpose of constructing an exactly half Romanic, half Germanic language, wow). As I have myself both Romanic and Germanic ancestries (“the melting pot” and all that stuff), I can't easily tell to what extent my viewpoints on this matter develop from nitty-gritty, or just from sentimental vapors.
I've had a look to the “Latin Europe” article and I'm afraid it seems more of a bizarre concoction of unsourced poppycock to me. In my opinion, full cleanup with special attention to sourcing should be done. But I'm extremely interested so I hope to be able to collaborate as soon as possible.
Unfortunately I'm as green as grass on Slovenian, being Russian my only (and little) knowledge of Slavic languages. May I remind you, however, that Slovenian appeared after de evolution of Latin into Romanic languages. Additionally, Slovenian was developped by Slavs who settled on a territory that had already been deserted by romanized people after the retreat of the Roman limes, so little contact could exist between them either. No wonder that Slovenian seems sort of unfamiliar to us, even though (or perchance because) it's written with Latin letters. As far as I get, non-Slavic influences on Slovenian come mainly from modern German and, to a lesser degree, modern Italian. Hardly any Latin.
Optime vale!
--Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 19:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
  • I have to say what you did to the Romano-Germanic culture article was very well done. I have since added a section to the article, and am gathering sources for a renaissance view on the term. Maybe you have studied Venetic Theory, many good points are brought up by many notable scholars on the subject of the modern Slovens and some latin roots. Slovenia like many other countries have been called "Latin European" in the past. In anycase thanks for the work you put into the Romano Germanic culture article, I believe one day it will be up to par. --Lucius Sempronius Turpio (talk) 05:50, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Lucius. The appreciation is mutual. The «Venetic theory» has only very recently been put forward and only in Slovenia. It seems to be a quite controversial issue, probably based more on identitarian reivindications of some Slovenian nationalists during the deconstruction of former Yugoslavia than on scientific facts. Academic standards on the matter appear to remain as before. On the other hand, that Slovenia has ever been called "Latin European" has been a complete surprise to me, I'm really very interested, would you please state who, where and when said that? Cheers, --Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 08:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


Would you be interested in being involved in a Romano-Germanic culture portal? Let me know. --Lucius Sempronius Turpio (talk) 04:51, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I would with pleasure. I'll contribute as far as I can. --Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 08:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Oh by the way Slovenia was considered Latin Europe when it was part of various states through out the middle ages such as the Holy Roman Empire, and the Republic of Venice. Western Europe was called Latin Europe especially during the Crusaides, that is how Byzantine and Muslim rulers referred to the "latin" west. --Lucius Sempronius Turpio (talk) 06:37, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Lucius,
a) I'm afraid that, for the WP, whether Slovenia has ever been (or just considered) a Latin European country should be decided on the basis of the WP Verifiability Criterion: “if it isn't sourced, it isn't”.
b) I very much appreciate your proposal that I start a Romano-Germanic portal. I felt myself honored and took my time to consider it. But I'm sorry I must decline. As you can see on my user page, I'm currently busy on things other than WP. Additionally, I wouldn't even know where to begin. Yet I'll go on contributing on this topic.
Thank you so much, really, --Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 09:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Umm Kulthum spelling variations[edit]

On the discussion page for Umm Kulthum you mention spelling variations that google produced for "ام كلثوم". I was just wondering how you managed to get this information from google.

Thanks in advance for the information.

codectified (talk) 02:47, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I've been busy elsewhere.
I just introduced those spelling variations one by one, and got those frequency figures.
Now I've introduced them again and got these:
« Umm Kulthum 63900 - Um Kulthum 10800 - Oum Kalsoum 49500 - Om Kalthoum 67700 - Omme Kolsoum 5560 - Oum Kalthum 20500 - Um Kalthoom 12200 - Omm Kolsoum 7560 - Umm Kultum 3290 - Umm Kolthoum 2720 - Umm Khultum 3860 - Om Koultoum 4040. »
As you can see, though the results returned by Google Search may vary in absolute value as a function of time, their relative proportions use to remain more or less constant. Umm/Um Kulthum (English) and Oum/Om Kalthoum (French) are the most accepted spellings in European languages.
Obviously, I'm a fan of hers. Happy if I've been useful,
--Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 20:52, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Philip Carteret image[edit]

Hi there. Are you able to verify the current image of Philip Carteret? This one is previously unknown to me I would like to find out more about it. Thanks - Imbwiki (talk) 11:34, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

No, unfortunately I'm not. My contribution to this page hasn't anything to do with that picture, which is unknown to me. Sorry I can't help. --Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 12:13, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Just a question[edit]

Hello Zack, I've seen you are very good at languages especially in Spanish (my mother tongue). If you have some time, would you like to help me out with a text I'm working on (it's in English) for a small documentary?

Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xonny88 (talkcontribs) 03:24, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Xonny88,
Thanks for your interest and appreciation.
I apologize for the delay of my answer but, as stated on my user page, I seldom visit the WP in these times. I must be very busy at work. Otherwise I'd be only too pleased to lend you a hand.
Good luck.
Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 16:50, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Latin Europe[edit]

Zack, I see your're an aficionado of languages. The Latin Europe desastre really needs a makeover, and your suggestion to kick off the revolution is perfect. Well its time to light the fireworks and you're the man to do it, just by changing the opening along the lines you suggested. Be BOLD! Provocateur (talk) 00:22, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:18, 23 November 2015 (UTC)