Did you decompress the file? You can do that with WinZip, WinRAR, or if your on Linux the appropriate commands. Make sure you keep the directory structure, and then it should show the config page.

If it still doesnt, you need to make sure PHP is installed properly.

Any more questions, feel free to ask. Rockerbaby 08:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks alot for sharing the Taalunie page. It was great.-- Buster7 ( talk) 22:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Buster7 has smiled at you!

Thank you! :-) SPQRobin ( talk) 23:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi. You've reverted my edit from

"It forms part of a language community present in Great Britain and Armorica (present-day Brittany)."
to
"It comes from a language community between Great Britain and Armorica (present-day Brittany).",

with the edit summary, "revert changes to this sentence: it should be in past". Can you explain more fully what your intention is? From my understanding, Breton does not "come from a language community" anywhere, and the sentence does not appear to make much sense in English. Thanks
-- Yumegusa ( talk) 08:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC) reply

I understand from the original sentence that the Breton-speaking region descends from a "community" where there was close contact with the Celtic nations in Wales and Cornwall. But I couldn't find any meaning what your sentence would want to say... I was also doubting whether I should add {{ clarifyme}}. Or maybe we should just remove that sentence. Greetings, SPQRobin ( talk) 08:38, 14 July 2008 (UTC) reply

I see another editor has changed the sentence to
"It forms part of a language community in Great Britain and Armorica (present-day Brittany)" which is identical in meaning to my edit that you reverted. Unfortunately the meaning of the version that you reverted to remains opaque to native English-speakers. I hope we can be happy with the latest version.
-- Yumegusa ( talk) 15:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Maybe, but I don't understand what the new version would want to say, while the old one makes sense to me... What do you understand from that sentence? SPQRobin ( talk) 15:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC) reply

The problem is that the earlier version (to which you reverted) makes no sense to a native English speaker (which I am, and I believe you are not). The fact that the sentence has been re-edited by another editor to my version (minus the word 'present', which it seems you misunderstood as contrasting with 'past'), seems to indicate that the meaning is now clear to native English-speakers. It means simply that the Brythonic language 'community' was (and is) located in both Britain and Brittany.

Your version stated that Breton "comes from a language community..."; this is meaningless in English: languages do not come from communities, but are spoken by them. It also states that this community is/was "between Great Britain and Armorica"; however, between Britain and Brittany is only salty water: there is no community there. I hope all is clear now. Best wishes
-- Yumegusa ( talk) 16:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Hello...didn't mean to step on any toes by re-editing over SPQR. He and I have met recently at Dutch(etnic Group). He and I both speak dialects of Flemish. But, I am a Native speaker of American English while Flemish is my birth tongue. I believe English may be new to SPQR. Your explanation was "right on" I saw that he had changed your meaning and tried to help. Rather than change it back, I alterred it , just a bit, in order to clarify. I think it reads better and clearer now. Take care.--Buster7 (talk) 19:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC);;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;the above sent to Yumegusa by Buster7;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;-- Buster7 ( talk) 19:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC) reply

But the current sentence doesn't say what the fact is. The old sentence meant that in the past there was a community from Welsh settlers in Brittany (and even in Galicia). The water was no barrier as you said, but allowed communication between Great Britain and "little" Britain; that communication was the community. Nowadays, the whole Europe is almost one community, so there's no community between the Welsh and Bretons as the sentence would mean. This explanation can be summarised into one image, see the right :-)

From the point of view that there's still a community (what I'm trying to explain there's no), the old sentence was indeed incorrect. But from the point of view that the community was in the past, it seems correct to me... SPQRobin ( talk) 21:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Groeten, jongens. The current version (Buster's edit) seems clear to me. The other version (SPQR's edit) is not possible to understand in English (for the reasons I outlined above), but in any case does not come near to saying what SPQR claims it means... My objection to that version is chiefly that it is not clear English. No problem with the toes!
-- Yumegusa ( talk) 21:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC) reply

@ SPQRobin... Yumegusa is correct. The old, original sentence did not, primarily, mean that "in the past there was....." a language community. It was a clear, present-tense description of the status, today, of "a language community in Great Britain and Amorica (present day Brittany)." The use of "Amorica" (a previous name for Brittany) at the end certainly and correctly implies that today's situation eminates from the past. But it is inferred, hinted at, suggested. It is not necessary to state the obvious. Also,I debated about deleting the first "present" and decided that it was un-neccesary. It was a bit redundant: it just repeated what was said before.

Not to be critical...only informative. The meaning of your sentence was "it eminates from a language community that exists somewhere between Great Britain and Armorica (but is neither one)." I don't think that is what you meant to say but that was what I read. Any English reader would do the same. But, I like your energy, Robin. I hope you don't mind mine. -- Buster7 ( talk) 00:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC) reply

You've now reverted quite a few of my recent edits, providing no valid counter argumentation or even a rationale beyond your personal opinion. I'm getting quite tired of it. I try very hard to source every statement I make, and remove it when considerable doubt can be raised, whereas you only revert because you yourself think you are correct. If that's going to be your strategy to implement your bias, I would strongly urge you to revise it. HP1740-B ( talk) 18:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC) reply

You are just removing content from Wikipedia, like on Flemish (linguistics), articles which are here since many years without any problem. You are just ignoring the existance of Flemish people and language with the argument that you have sources. SPQRobin ( talk) 18:23, 15 July 2008 (UTC) reply

This article, and others, may have been here for years, but they are poorly written( in English) , confusing, and make contradictory statements. Believe me when I tell you that HP is NOT ignoring or attacking the Flemish or their Language. Quite the contrary. Sometimes it is better to start the meal over rather than to keep adding spices to please every taste.-- Buster7 ( talk) 19:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC) reply

I remove content because it presents a false and unclear image, I do not deny the existence of Flemish people, I deny (and with me various sources and authors) the existence of a Flemish ethnicity. You provide only your opinion, no arguments to prove me or this view wrong. Also, are you even an adult, because your overall tone and demeanor doesn't tend to gives me that feeling? HP1740-B ( talk) 18:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC) reply

If you think that Flemish (linguistics) is wrong, then say on the talk page what you think is wrong instead of removing all content from that page without any previous discussion. SPQRobin ( talk) 18:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC) reply

About the ethnicity, Encyclopaedia Brittanica says it's an ethnic group, and if you browse the web, you never find a statement claiming that Flemish are of Dutch ethnicity, except your version. SPQRobin ( talk) 18:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Here's the difference between me and you, I don't 'think' something is wrong, I either know or don't. I will indeed write on the talk page, and you will be invited to counteract the inaccuracies found in it. HP1740-B ( talk) 18:38, 15 July 2008 (UTC) reply

@SPQRobin...If you really look at recent talks/discussion, think you will see that you and HP are on the same page, But, soehow, you think he is up to no g00d. Be patient. Flemish (linguistics) will return. Better than ever!!!!!!!!-- Buster7 ( talk) 18:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC) reply

This version is a version I could go with. It incorporates my previous rewrite, an (accurate) infobox, makes clear Belgian Dutch/Flemish is a spoken substandard of standard (written) Dutch, has a bit on verkavelingsvlaams as well as specific phonetics (such as h-deletion) to it, described in a linguistic matter. I think it incorporates elements we'd both like to be in the article. If you agree, notify me here or on my talk page. HP1740-B ( talk) 20:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC) reply

I'll ignore the plain rudeness you display above, by giving to responds to whatsoever to the above message, and get straight to business. The version given above is virtually identical to 'your version', with the unsourced material cut out, and the layman-style writing being changed to 'expert'-level. If you'd read it you'd know that. Therefore, pay close attention to what I'm going to say; this version will stand, if you can find any things in it you consider to be problems you'll present them on the talk page as I have done with the problematic claims in 'your version' (for which there are still no references). If you keep reverting as you have done before, you can be sure to find yourself reverted by me. En ik heb een lange adem. HP1740-B ( talk) 11:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC) reply

I really dislike that you always lie. If you'd read it you'd know that. - why do you think I even don't read your version? And why would your version be at expert level? That's just ridiculous. And my version has enough references, your version just one about the disputed issues. Anyway, I stop here and hope someone will come to these articles and write a better and more accurate article. And also, people who are smart, will first look at the edit history and the talk page - I hope they'll get a better view on Flemish that way. SPQRobin ( talk) 12:05, 22 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Because if you 'd read my article you wouldn't call it unsourced and incorrect. I didn't say my version is at expert level, I said I turned your laymen statements into expert-styled ones. HP1740-B ( talk) 12:09, 22 July 2008 (UTC) reply

I read your articles, for the second time. SPQRobin ( talk) 12:12, 22 July 2008 (UTC) reply

I that case I'll be hearing of any, what you consider, problems with it, now won't I? HP1740-B ( talk) 12:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC) reply

I said I'll stop reverting and discussing etc. (if you'd read my comments, ironically) SPQRobin ( talk) 12:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC) reply

In that case it's sad that the past days have seen such turmoil from a user who in the end drops his point as a whole. A waste of time. HP1740-B ( talk) 12:21, 22 July 2008 (UTC) reply

I don't drop my point - I have just enough of this. SPQRobin ( talk) 12:24, 22 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Your arguments in edit summaries are really worthless, so I couldn't stop myself to revert again... SPQRobin ( talk) 13:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC) reply

In that case you should go on a course that teaches you more self control, because as long as something is referenced it stays. Let me remind you that this is the English Wikipedia. Millions of people access it and expect and deserve correct information. This is a serious wiki, it not a game like so many other wiki projects you seem to be involved with. HP1740-B ( talk) 14:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC) reply

I know this is a serious wiki, and I also want people to see a correct version, that's why I do this. SPQRobin ( talk) 15:02, 22 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi. I don't really support your edit warring at Languages of Belgium, and the other version seems more right to me. He doesn't really need references for "colloquially called" per se, just something similar, if you really want to push it that is. Regardless, you should know, and this applies to other articles you're working on, that substandard means inferior or worse. It's a very negative word. See wikt:substandard, or any other dictionary. - Oreo Priest ^talk 14:39, 23 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Oh, I didn't know that. Thank you for telling me this. I though a "substandard" meant "a standard within a language", at least it does in Dutch. SPQRobin ( talk) 14:57, 23 July 2008 (UTC) reply

This is another one of "those" confusing words that just complicate the discussion. It is true that substandard means "falling short of a standard or norm". For example, it would be used to compare one product to another. "This hammer is substandard to the one on the bench." (The one in your hand is not as good as the one on the bench). "Sub" is a prefix used in the English Language to denote a lessor position. So it should be no surprise to anyone that Flemish speakers do not appreciate being , once again, considered less than. This is just one more example of the Dutch lording over the Flemish. And, with the usual rejection, the lord knows nothing about it.-- Buster7 ( talk) 05:15, 24 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Ik zal nog een keer proberen uit te leggen wat mijn bewerkingen eigenlijk inhouden, dit doe ik in het Nederlands zodat er in de gebruikte taal tenminste geen duidelijk verloren gaat.

Zoals ik al eerder zei, maak ik een verschil tussen volk, etniciteit en natie. Dat zijn drie termen die aan elkaar verwant, maar zeker niet gelijk zijn. Volk is een woord, dat doorgaans niet vaak gebruikt wordt in de wetenschap, omdat het gebruik in het Nederlands vrij vaag en algemeen is. Etniciteit en natie zijn specifieker. Wat jij en ik als Vlamingen benoemen is een natie, in doorsnee Nederlands vaak een "volk" genoemd. Een natie heeft veel zaken gemeen met etniciteit, maar is politiek van aard. Een natie is een gevoel van samen horen, vaak een gemeenschappelijke taal en geschiedenis tussen bepaalde mensen. Etniciteit heeft vooral te maken met cultuur en alles daaromheen.

Het is mogelijk dat, het is eerder de regel dan uitzondering, dat mensen met dezelfde etniciteit in verschillende naties leven. Dit is zo met Nederlanders en Vlamingen, met Duitsers en Oostenrijkers en met bijvoorbeeld mensen met een Arabische achtergrond die leven in een gebied van Marokko tot Irak. Wanneer het over etniciteit gaat betekent "Nederlands" dan ook niet 'behorende aan' of 'komend uit' Nederland. Landen en politiek staan los van etniciteit op zich. Het houd in dat een groep mensen cultureel overeenkomen.

Jouw eigen gewest heeft tot de jaren tachtig ministers van Nederlandse Cultuur gehad; en deze post hield niet in dat de minister zich bezig hield met de subsidiëring van haringkarren of het uitdelen van gratis oranje vlaggetjes. Op je gebruikerspagina staan wat sjablonen die opmerken dat je de Vlaamse onafhankelijkheid steunt; de enige partij die dat ook doet spreekt op haar website over het Vlaamse volk, maar tegelijkertijd over de Nederlandse taal én cultuur. Vlamingen zijn een volk en natie op zich, maar geen etniciteit. In het artikel over de Vlamingen kan en zou dit beide aan bod moeten komen. Als je verder nog vragen heb, stel ze. HP1740-B ( talk) 20:43, 28 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Ik vraag me af waarom je je tijd hebt verspilt met het schrijven van deze tekst... Enkele opmerkingen:

• op Dutch (ethnic group) zeg je zelf in de eerste zin "The Dutch people or Ethnic Dutch ..."
• Het is niet omdat ik voor de Vlaamse onafhankelijkheid ben dat ik ook de andere standpunten van de partij die voor de Vlaamse onafhankelijkheid strijdt steun. Als je echt wil weten wat mijn standpunten hierover zijn: ik ben het 99% eens met http://www.vlaamsmanifest.info/ (zie vooral de "vijf kernen" op http://www.vlaamsmanifest.info/deel01_06.htm)
• Om terug te komen op Flemish people waarover het ging, citeer ik even WP:V#cite note-1: When there is dispute about whether the article text is fully supported by the given source, direct quotes from the source and any other details requested should be provided as a courtesy to substantiate the reference.

SPQRobin ( talk) 21:13, 28 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Ik verspil mijn tijd op zo'n tekst omdat ik tot wederzijds begrip probeer te komen. Hierbij probeer ik je duidelijk te maken wat in het Engels blijkbaar niet lukt. Uit je reactie blijkt voor mij dat je totaal niet geïnteresseerd bent, spoken ziet; en zelfs in het Nederlands niet begrijpt waarover het hier gaat. Ik vind dit zeer jammer. Desalniettemin, hardvochtigheid alleen zal je niet helpen. Morgen zal ik mijzelf naar de bibliotheek begeven, je gevraagde bronnen en citaten zullen er komen; in overvloed. Duidelijkheid zal er komen, met of zonder jouw instemming. HP1740-B ( talk) 21:39, 28 July 2008 (UTC) reply

HP1740-B, jouw nauwe definitie van etniciteit komt niet overeen met de omschrijving die wordt gegeven in het artikel Ethnic group; de culturele component wordt daar slechts beschouwd als een onderdeel van het complexe begrip "etniciteit". Wat jij omschrijft is eerder het onderzoeksterrein van de Culturele Antropologie. In het "officiële gebruik" (wat dat dan ook moge betekenen) van "etniciteit" speelt de verwijzing naar een (veronderstelde) gemeenschappelijke afstamming wel degelijk een rol, en daarmee raakt het aan de begrippen "volk" en "natie" (dat ten minste in zijn oorspronkelijke betekenis een bloedverwantschap aanduidt). Iblardi ( talk) 21:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Ik gebruik geen nauwe definitie; in tegendeel. Natie en etniciteit en volk hebben veel gemeen, veel punten, zoals je zegt geschiedenis, oorsprong, taal enz. zijn belangrijke onderdelen van zowel naties als etniciteiten. Maar zoals ik al stelde, cultuur is vooral voorbehouden aan etniciteit. HP1740-B ( talk) 21:39, 28 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Hello SPQR...I'm sorry I have left you to defend the continued existence of our Flemish Heritage all by yourself at the Dutch (ethnic group) article...Like you, the tedium of trying to make a Flemish point to the Netherlanders is sheer WORK! And so...I went and did other stuff and really havent paid attention to the goings on. I will be on holiday for two weeks but when I return I will assist you in presenting a case for Flemish to have a presence at the article. see you soon... in two weeks-- Buster7 ( talk) 00:11, 7 August 2008 (UTC) reply

SOMEWHERE...A FEW WEEKS AGO..I Added this to a Dutch talk Page. It expresses my stand.

I'm not questioning the correctness of calling the language/dialect Flemish>>>> "Dutch" language, but in Belgium the nomenclature for that entity is Flemish! It's roots in Dutch are acknowledged, but its proper name is Flemish always.,,That designation gives a name to a people,,,,the Flemish people. Duly recognized thruout history as a seperate and recognizable people. I respectfully request that you recognize this fact and resist changing it so that it is something that solely pleases you and The Dutch. It doesnt please the Flemish, to be sure...I'll be back!!!-- Buster7 ( talk) 00:20, 7 August 2008 (UTC) reply

I tried to do as little edit wars as possible, so no problem that you didn't follow the situation. But, I'd like to say that Dutch has its roots in Flemish, and not the opposite. Flemish is a separate language, it is just not recognised, even not by its government (because Flemings have always been oppressed linguistically, by French, and that could be the reason why we think Flemish is a dialect of Dutch, although I can't see a direct relation). Even more, Afrikaans is much much younger, and it was already fully recognised as an independent language. Even Limburgish. Why does everyone think Flemish is a dialect of Dutch? It will become so if standardisation will continue and then we will be speaking Dutch sooner or later... SPQRobin ( talk) 09:39, 7 August 2008 (UTC) reply

see the Flemish Movement lead. Once again, Dutch is used instead of Flemish.-- Buster7 ( talk) 21:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC) reply

I am working on the Flemish Movement...-- Buster7 ( talk) 05:21, 31 August 2008 (UTC) reply

Yes, I saw that. Some advice: don't make too much edits, try too do various changes in one edit. Because now you are appearing many many times in the article's history. SPQRobin ( talk) 11:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC) reply

That should not be a problem, at all. With a major re-hab situation like this the changes and improvements are MANY,MAny, many. I find it is a courtesy to future editors to break-up the rewrite into small workable pieces. I appreciate your advice but I really don't see a problem. My edits are not malicious. They are intended only to better the article. I do my best to maintain the feel and even the words of the prior editor, when possible. But, we are creating an encyclopedia. The editor that is currently adding information onto Flemish Movement should have a copy-editor look over their work prior to committing it to an article. They are VERY sub-standard. I do copy-editing for a few editors and usually the process takes place in a sand-box or a temporary site. I once heard a fellow copy-editor say, "I have a big, red pen...and I'm not afraid to use it". Same for me. What you see happening at F.M. is common. I'm proud of my efforts and don't fear any repurcusions...Bedankt..-- Buster7 ( talk) 14:29, 31 August 2008 (UTC) reply

Hallo Robin, ik zal maar in het Nederlands schrijven, dat maakt het voor ons beiden eenvoudiger. Ik gebruikte het woord specified maar had beter enkel corrected geschreven. nl:Frans-Vlaams is een deel van de West-Vlaamse dialecten van het Nederlands. Ik heb jou hier en daar al zien beweren dat het nl:West-Vlaams op zich een deel is van een Vlaamse subgroep, maar dat klopt helemaal niet en je zal daar ook helemaal geen bijval bij krijgen van specialisten. Vlaams als dialect of taal in de huidige zin van het woord (dus, van nl:Vlaanderen, van De Panne tot Voeren) bestaat niet. Zelfs als je het enkel als verzamelnaam van Oost- en West-Vlaams zou gebruiken, klopt het niet. nl:Oost-Vlaams is in wezen een verbrabanst West-Vlaams en wordt tegenwoordig niet meer in dezelfde dialectgroep als het West-Vlaams ingedeeld. Vlaams in de zin van Belgisch-Nederlands, als regionale variant van het Standaardnederlands, bestaat wel, maar staat niet ten opzichte van het nl:Standaardnederlands, maar wel van de Nederlandse variant van het Standaardnederlands en is dus even Nederlands als die laatste. Hoop dat dit deze bewerking en terugdraaiingen van enkele van jouw bewerkingen verduidelijkt. Mvg, -- Hooiwind ( talk) 10:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Ik denk dat je de termen Nederlands (als taal), Standaardnederlands (als variant van die taal) en Nederlands (als adjectief voor het land Nederland) verwart. Vlaams (in welke zin dan ook: dialect, substandaard, taal) is even Nederlands als Hollands of Nederlands-Nederlands dat zijn, wat niet noodzakelijk impliceert dat die alle ook Standaardnederlands zijn. Het is je volste recht te geloven dat Vlaams een aparte taal is, maar een overweldigende meerderheid van linguïsten en taalgebruikers is het hiermee oneens. Het zijn nu eenmaal geen aparte talen (er bestaan dialectcontinua, dialectgrenzen staan loodrecht op de staatsgrens, er bestaat eenzelfde standaardtaal enz). Die mening is dan ook moeilijk vol te houden hier op een site die zich als encyclopedie wil voordoen. Ik zou je dan ook willen vragen om alstublieft zo weining mogelijk Vlaams te gebruiken (wegens de vaagheid van de term), maar dit te vervangen door West-Vlaams, Belgisch-Nederlands of Nederlands, naargelang wat het beste past. Al de rest is helaas POV. Groeten, -- Hooiwind ( talk) 07:31, 18 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Hallo. Ik ben Kiran maar here op wikipedia ben ik Blacky98. Het is heel leuk om a Nederlans persoon op wikipedia te zien. Dank U en a leuk daag veder.

Blacky98 ( talk) 18:50, 20 September 2008 (UTC) reply

You can find more Dutch-speaking people in Category:User nl, and there is a Dutch-language Wikipedia, see nl:.

U kunt meer Nederlandstalige mensen vinden in Category:User nl, en er is ook een Nederlandstalige Wikipedia, zie nl:.

Groeten, SPQRobin ( talk) 20:34, 20 September 2008 (UTC) reply

See Talk:Flemish. My response to kazim.-- Buster7 ( talk) 07:04, 25 September 2008 (UTC) reply

BTW...I just reread your explanation re:Flemish....it is as good an explanation (short and sweet) as I have seen anywhere. Goed gadaan, maker!-- Buster7 ( talk) 12:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Dank u :-) SPQRobin ( talk) 17:28, 17 October 2008 (UTC) reply

I, again, replaced Flemish where appropriate at Partition of Belgium Article/Flemish Movement. Can you check to see if I am accurate. My history knowledge of my homeland is only recent. bedankt, eh!-- Buster7 ( talk) 12:27, 21 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Good, I clarified it further, because Flemish is the unofficial name, while le flamand was the (more-or-less official?) name given by the French rulers. Now, only recently, it is called Dutch officially. That's a little summary :-) SPQRobin ( talk) 17:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC) reply

ik hon vlooms prebeeren. eimand es mij ont vroegen over wa dannek seg in Partition of Belgium...kudde hij wa help jeaven. meishen sennik verkeert!--ahiljk 'tis op mein (mijn..?)Talk page. Buster7 ( talk) 12:16, 24 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Ge zijt over 't algemeen wel just (en 't is lang :p). Ma 'k zen ni zo zeker over uwe zin this will also lead to a new language consciousness. omdat de mensen ier vooral un identiteit (er)ontdekken voor tegen de Fransen te "vechten" [figuurlijk] (en ook voor onafankelijkeid te willen) maar nie voor tegen de Nederlanders te kunnen zeggen da we een andere taal praten... De meeste mensen kunnen nie anders dan denken da we dezelfde taal praten: niemand schrijft iets op in 't Vlaams. Gevolg is: groeiend bewustzijn maar niet elemaal op taalkundig gebied... Btw, kende al de website http://vlaamsetaal.info/ ? Da moette ne keer lezen. Verstade mijn Vlaams? Do you understand my Flemish? I can repeat it in English if you want.. SPQRobin ( talk) 15:31, 24 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Ik pies dannek it kan verstaan...mor mischien nie. Can you translate into English so that I am sure that I understand? I will move a copy to my talk page. Thank you very much!-- Buster7 ( talk) 12:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Translation: I think you're correct in general (and it's long :p). But I'm not so sure about your sentence this will also lead to a new language consciousness. because people here re-discover their identity to "fight" [figuratively] against the francophones (and also to want independence) but not to be able to say to the Dutch that we speak another language... Most people can only think we speak the same language: nobody writes in Flemish. Consequence: growing consciousness but not linguistically... Btw, do you know the website http://vlaamsetaal.info/ ? You should read it :-) SPQRobin ( talk) 17:00, 5 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Do not repeat edits like this one. I can repeat this infinitely, but bring sources when editing or stop editing. Facts you don't like are facts non the less. If you want to create your personal dreamworld, do it on web pages you own. HP1740-B ( talk) 11:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Very funny. (Btw, you didn't give sources for it either.) Anyway, I answered on Talk:Dutch (ethnic group) (that is a more general place). SPQRobin ( talk) 16:46, 5 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Hello SPQR... I have an idea (see light bulb above my head). Instead of arguing with good faith editors at the Dutch (ethnic group) article, why not create a seperate Flemish (ethnic group) article. When a reader searches for Flemish in the Main list of Ethnic Groups the closest he/she can get is Dutch.

I don't mean to point an accusation but I think the Dutch have a difficult time understanding the position of the Flemish. It has to do with their self-proclaimed feelings of superiority, IMHO. I have left a copy of this message about this idea to Fram for his thoughts and input.-- Buster7 ( talk) 20:51, 6 November 2008 (UTC) reply

This article already exists at Flemish people. However, all information about the ethnic group was removed. Btw, the article title of Dutch (ethnic group) should be Dutch people but they like to emphasize the importance of the "ethnicity"... SPQRobin ( talk) 21:29, 6 November 2008 (UTC) reply

But...the article, as titled, will not show up if a reader searches for Flemish Etnicity, let's say. And that is the point. If we are not, by our own understanding, included in the Dutch article....and....we don't show up in a readers search, well then, we are limiting our ethnicity to a minor role in history (and the present). We are choosing a role that can be manuvered (and decided upon) by the Dutch or the French or The Spanish or anyone that wants to. Is there an article about Dutch people? -- Buster7 ( talk) 22:12, 6 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Answer---No! The reader/researcher is sent to Dutch (ethnic group). The same should happen for Flemish people. Either we are a seperate ethnic group, entitled to our own article, properly titled, or we are not.-- Buster7 ( talk) 22:17, 6 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Also, I asked SomeHuman about the above since he seemed to be involved when the article was retitled....see...'Flemish' article, or 'Flemish' as disambiguation page + 'Flemish (terminology) at SomeHuman's talk page...-- Buster7 ( talk) 23:17, 6 November 2008 (UTC) reply

I need your advice. Please refer to the Dutch (ethnic group) article/Modern Era section and one of my edits of Nov 7th . Would it not be factual that those Belgians that fled into The Netherlands spoke various Flemish dialects rather than Dutch. Am I wrong to think that at the time of the First World War, the fleeing Belgians spoke Flemish, not Dutch. This is the kind of pretentiuosness of Dutch-oriented editors that prevent a simple mention of anything remotely Flemish. Months ago, I had a very lengthy and uncomfortable confrontation with the editor that reverted my attempt at clarity. I don't want to start another if I am off-base (wrong). Thank You.-- Buster7 ( talk) 23:00, 7 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Hello, Robin. Can you take a look at the above and my suggestion of today? I believe it is a better explanation and clearer Lead. I feel it is necessary to inform the reader of the subtle and yet important difference between Flemish and Dutch. The "Dutchification" of everything Belgian/Flemish is difficult to explain to the casual visitor.-- Buster7 ( talk) 14:44, 22 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Upon your return, see above. Our POV is challenged.....again! LOL.-- Buster7 ( talk) 13:23, 24 November 2008 (UTC) reply

-- Buster7 ( talk) 13:21, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Goedemiddag. Ik heb gezien dat u Energy in Belgium heeft geschreven. Bedankt om dit geschreven hebben. Ik ben enkele wijzingen toegevoegd. Maar er is nog veel werk aand de winkel, bv samenvatten de GEMIX rapport of de beleidsnota 2009-2014. Als u vragen, suggesties of kritieken heeft aarzel niet. Een fijne weekend.-- Youssef ( talk) 14:01, 31 October 2009 (UTC) reply

Gelukkig Kerstfeest and Niewjaar......-- Buster7 ( talk) 12:20, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Gij ook hé :) SPQRobin ( talk) 16:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi. The issue was that for speakers of British English, "government" means the cabinet only. This was news to me too. To avoid this confusion, we use the "politics and government" term. Hope that clears things up. Oreo Priest ^talk 03:05, 23 June 2010 (UTC) reply

Well, it makes sense to have everything in one place; it really is one complete subject, and the branches of government are subtopics. So we should keep it as is, or expand the parliament article. Oreo Priest ^talk 07:08, 23 June 2010 (UTC) reply

The "edit war" was because we didn't realize that "government" meant different things to different people. I really think it's important to have all the info in one place with appropriate subarticles for the branches of government: see Government of Canada for an example of what I mean. So I think that rather than cutting the parliament out of that article, it makes more sense to make a separate article about the executive branch when and if there is enough information available. And the template doesn't really work right now, because "government" doesn't mean the executive branch only outside of the UK. Oreo Priest ^talk 15:40, 24 June 2010 (UTC) reply

Great that the distinction exists in Dutch, it should be easier to discuss that way. A few comments: I don't have much faith in the "Applied to many countries in continental Europe (when using English), the British usage is common." claim from Wiktionary. I'm a native English speaker, and I'd never heard of any such thing before editing that article. I notice your template itself uses the word "government" in both ways as well: the title is overheid(s) and the next line is regering(s). Maybe we should rename the regering articles "executive"? At least it's unambiguous (I think). Anyways, like I said, I think it's important to have an article on the overheid, but I see the difficulty with the template. Potential solutions, all messy: a) create a bunch of overheid articles by duplicating content from the two (technically more) sub-articles; b) duplicate the executive branch stuff into an "executive of BCR" article or c) leave things as is until there's enough content to flesh out all the combinations. I think c) is probably the best bet. Oreo Priest ^talk 06:22, 25 June 2010 (UTC) reply

I like the changes you made to the template. I moved all the articles on the executive to something appropriate. Thoughts? Oreo Priest ^talk 19:20, 25 June 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank You for your help on the Belgium subdivision's cabinet make-up templates. I really couldn't figure out how to do a nav bar! Thanks alot for the help and correcting all those little mistakes! Happy editing!! :) Outback the koala ( talk) 01:24, 14 July 2010 (UTC) reply

Yeah, I was looking for a template with such links.. Then I found the navbar :-) And btw, thank you for creating those templates. That's easier to work with (then we don't have to update each page). Regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 01:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC) reply

On my talk page you state that my edit on the Flanders article pressure for independence is a bit vague. This phrase was in the introduction. The pressure is well defined by others in the body of the article. I edited the declarative sentence that Flanders is considered the country of the Flemings to reflect the broad spectrum of feelings between a regionalized Belgium or an independent Flanders that I find amongst my Flemish family and friends. My sentence also leads into the present-day statutes. The full body of my edit (as I mentioned in the discussion) is

...For centuries, Flanders has served as the crossroads between the French, German, and English civilizations. To the English speaking peoples, Flanders meant historically (from circa 1000 AD) the land situated along the North Sea from the Strait of Dover to the Scheldt estuary. The southern borders were generally ill defined.[1] Over the last millennium, it was mostly the southern and western borders that receded to give the present day borders within northern Belgium.

Flanders has figured prominently in European history. Between the early 17th century and 1945, the political outcomes of modern Spain, France, Britain, The Netherlands, Germany, and Austria were often decided by battles on the plains of Flanders. Even earlier in British and Irish history, the Flemings or Flemish were important allies of the Normans in their conquest of England (1066) and invasion of Ireland (1169–1171).[2]

In contemporary Belgium, there is pressure to consider Flanders as the 'country of the Flemings' rather than just a region of Belgium. ...

The former introduction went straight into the present day political struggles. This does not fit the mold in the English Wiki where an historical view should be given first, and this view should be relevant to the widest possible audience, and to the English speaking world. I have done my best to do this, but some sentences on the historical boundaries of Flanders that are still at the end of the intro need to be moved up to the front where they belong. Going straight into present day political struggles of a region/country is a sign that the en-wiki is being used as a billboard for extremist groups. There is definitely a place to register these struggles, but not in detail in the introduction of a region/country.

BTW, you really should confine the foreign language discussions above to their own foreign language wikis or you should translate them into English. All of us still have to follow the rules on our assigned en-wiki talk pages.

You asked me a question on my talk page. I answered it. Please do not post any more questions or comments on my talk page Cheers. Laburke ( talk) 18:49, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Buster7 ( talk) 18:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC) reply

 —  Amakuru ( talk) 11:58, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Ethnically the same I thought.... Outback the koala ( talk) 23:24, 8 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Oh and here's the revision I'm talking about; [1]. Outback the koala ( talk) 23:24, 8 January 2011 (UTC) reply

I have expanded the list of sources and written my thoughts on my user page, so I'd like to refer you to User:SPQRobin#Ethnicity as proof not to include Flemings under a Dutch ethnic group. I just want to add that the lead sentence/paragraph does not mention Flemings, so that itself is a reason enough not to include it in the infobox (the article should've been consistent). At the moment I am not going to correct/change the rest of the articles "Dutch people" and "Flemish people", because I have already gone through endless discussions about the very same subject about one/two years ago. Regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 02:58, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks for answering. I understand your opinion, though I disagree. Outback the koala ( talk) 03:21, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Hmm, that makes me curious.. Could you explain your opinion a bit? SPQRobin ( talk) 03:32, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply

I guess my position is that is the article is about Dutch people meaning people that are from the Netherlands, then we should rename the article(or create a new article) called Citizen of the Netherlands, or something like that. Whereas the article is about a ethnic/cultural identity that transcends political boarders. They are a separate subject I do not consider linked. Outback the koala ( talk) 06:04, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply

btw I took a userbox of yours and cannibalized it to my own design

This user supports the unification of Flanders and the Netherlands.

I hope you don't mind. Outback the koala ( talk) 06:07, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Actually, the userbox on my userpage had been taken from something like this one :) SPQRobin ( talk) 20:16, 10 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Sorry for the unforgivably late response. Normally, I would have loved to do this. If you ask my opinion, the traditional Perso-Arabic based Kashmiri (not Urdu) script should be the default as it can handle many important features of Kashmiri like half-vowels - but this has poor software support in general. To be honest I cannot devote much time to it as I am committed to other pursuits on non-English Wikipedia of late. Both Hindi, Urdu and West Punjabi wikipedias are all way behind the curve and I want to help them since they have an enormously greater reader footprint than Kashmiri (much as I love Kashmiri). Do you have others who have agreed to contribute substantially to it? If not, maybe I'll message you again about a year from now, once I feel like I've made a dent in these other places? -- Hunnjazal ( talk) 20:03, 10 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Also, I forgot to thank you for your initiative. I really value what you're doing in promoting Kashmiri. It is highly appreciated. To explain a bit more about my motivation, I experimented in contributing to Hindi, Urdu and West Punjabi. Kashmiri seemed too complicated with the two scripts and everything - though one thing we could do is split it into Kashmiri-Nastaliq and Kashmiri-Nagri with members keeping the two in sync - what else to do when two scripts are the norm? Then I realized that if content is created in any one of these languages, it is extremely easy to translate to the others. Many articles I created in Hindi were translated very quickly by others into Nepali and Gujarati. It's like there is this ecosystem that needs critical mass of content in any one language and that will result in the others taking off eventually. Hindi seems like it's the closest to this with about 99K articles. Ideally there would have been a wikipedia in Hindi-Urdu aka Hindustani which would have resulted in technical term usage that could port unchanged with all these languages, i.e. 99.99% of the time only script transliteration would be required. It would have the same two-script issue as Kashmiri but bots and working groups could be developed to keep the content identical. Maybe that's more detail than you wanted. -- Hunnjazal ( talk) 20:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC) reply

See the Ethnologue entries for Western Punjabi ( pnb) and Eastern Punjabi ( pan). While there are similarities between the languages, Ethnologue identifies Western Panjabi as one of the Lahnda languages ( lah), which falls under the Indo-Aryan Northwestern zone. "Eastern Punjabi", on the other hand is classified under the Indo-Aryan Central zone. The original version of the article made a note of this. utcursch | talk 13:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Yeah, Ethnologue's population numbers and maps are messed up. "Eastern" Punjabi certainly has more speakers in Pakistan. Punjabi language#The_.22Lahnda.22_construct and Punjabi language#Classification_by_Ethnologue partially cover this issue. utcursch | talk 14:29, 25 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Fair enough. I apparently I misunderstood the constitutional situation in the eastern canton. For some reason I thought French had more possibility to be used for official purposes than in the other facilitated districts. Concerning the coloring of the map, it seems you are right. Maybe someone should change it so that all facilitated districts show cross hatching, but then that might also be controversial! Can we have different gradations and styles of cross hatching? (And a new style for the new BHV agreement! Perhaps with animation? LOL) -- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 07:32, 20 September 2011 (UTC) reply

I saw from your user page you might be someone able to comment on the validity of Limburgism. I came across it because I have been working on Limburg related articles, but it would be good to get a second opinion. To me it looks like a bit of Hollands folk wisdom.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 16:15, 25 September 2011 (UTC) reply

Yes, I also thought there might be a possibility of a better article. But merci and chic coming into Dutch from Limburg?-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 20:02, 25 September 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi SPQRobin. Are you the operator of the Babel AutoCreate bot? It recently created 500 or so Babel categories but it failed to categorize them and create the corresponding structure of container categories. One unfortunate result is that these 500 or so empty categories are now clogging Wikipedia:Database reports/Uncategorized categories. I'd appreciate it if you can fix this (not that it's very urgent of course) or point me to the bot operator. Thanks, Pichpich ( talk) 23:07, 3 October 2011 (UTC) reply

The userpage explains it. It's not a bot, it's part of the Babel extension. The software adds the categories when a user uses it via {{#babel}} and adds them as if Babel AutoCreate added it. You can customize MediaWiki:babel-autocreate-text-levels and MediaWiki:babel-autocreate-text-main. I added the possibility to use respectively $3 and $2 as the language code, it will be available next week. Thanks, SPQRobin ( talk) 23:41, 3 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Ok, thanks. I'm not sure I understand the fine distinction between a bot and a user account controlled by a piece of software, though. In the end, there's still someone writing the code and someone responsible for any malfunction of this process, right? Of course, it's not like that account has committed a horrible crime against en.wiki but it did create five hundred empty, uncategorized categories. Who should I get in touch with to solve this problem and make sure it doesn't persist? Best, Pichpich ( talk) 16:23, 4 October 2011 (UTC) reply

A bot is a normal user account that performs automatic tasks using software. Babel AutoCreate (like User:MediaWiki default) is faked through the software: the software edits a page itself and acts as if it was a user account (the fact that Babel AutoCreate can be blocked is not self-evident). It's similar, but different. As for who is responsible: RobertL originally wrote it, User:Siebrand/ User:Catrope deployed the extension, and I fixed some software issues and was/am helping to provide some information/support, like now. The problem about the 500 uncategorised categories appears on all wikis were auto-categorizing is enabled, so this is more or less a bug. It's be possible to add categories to the respective system messages so it will properly categorise in the future (but the language code parameter is not yet available). SPQRobin ( talk) 22:13, 4 October 2011 (UTC) reply

I have some issues of my own with this bot (or whatever you want to call it). Perhaps you can shed some light to the Bugzilla report I filed here, as the other contributors don't seem to understand why I've filed the report, and frankly I don't fully understand why I filed the report there instead of dealing with an on-wiki issue on-wiki, but your edit of the user page said to file any issues I found there. Thanks, VegaDark ( talk) 22:26, 6 January 2012 (UTC) reply

It's not really an on-wiki issue, it's a technical issue/bug which can only be fixed in the software by disallowing the "bot" to re-create protected pages (it can do anything unless you explicitly restrict it). SPQRobin ( talk) 23:03, 6 January 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks for assigning it to the person who is responsible for doing those fixes. Just curious, but how long do you estimate can I expect to wait? I see some open bug reports that are months, even years old on Bugzilla. Not thrilled if it's going to be months before I can finally enforce a couple G4 deletions.

The assignee is by default, but he's not active. Unless someone else takes care of it, I'll fix it in February, if not earlier. SPQRobin ( talk) 12:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC) reply

Best to you and yours this Holiday Season. Just like the seperation of Church and State (USA policy) is important (to me) so is the seperation of Flemish from dutch. Now that we are both more experienced veteran editors, perhaps we should re-open that can of worms sometime in 2012. Stay in touch. Buster Seven Talk 19:49, 28 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Dag SPQRobin, ik liep me af te vragen of jij dit bent. Prettig Nieuwjaar gewenst. Lotje ツ ( talk) 08:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC) reply

Ja dat ben ik.. Normaal gezien zijn alle 'SPQRobin's van mij. Gelukkig nieuwjaar, -- SPQRobin ( talk) 12:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. When you recently edited Public Centre for Social Welfare, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page German ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:01, 8 January 2012 (UTC) reply

Many thanks for your answers to my comments on the talk page of List of Wikipedias. Interesting to see that you knew I used the Google Chrome web browser - mind you, I do make this obvious on my userpage! Good to know that things are looking forthcoming for the Lakota Wikipedia. I suppose we will be able to add that one to the list when it has an active editing community. Again, thank you for your help, ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 09:10, 26 January 2012 (UTC) reply

No problem. And btw, I did take a look on your userpage but didn't find anything. Now I see you're in a category of Google Chrome. However, about Lakota, it doesn't have much of an active editing community, these are the recent changes. SPQRobin ( talk) 02:40, 28 January 2012 (UTC) reply

I see you renamed Free County French back to its correct name, Franc-Comtois. The change is like déja-vu all over again; I reverted the same move by the same editor in Jan 2012. Any idea why this editor is so persistent with this move? Thanks, Dave ( djkernen)| Talk to me| Please help! 21:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC) reply

I don't know. "Franc-Comtois" is derived from "Franche-Comté" which means literally "Free County", so he wants to "anglicize" the name (even though it is never used in English I suppose), but *why* I don't know. I see the same happened on simple wiki. His edit summary makes clear that the IP is French. Probably the same one doing these edits/moves here. SPQRobin ( talk) 21:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC) reply

Saw this and thought of you. Hope all is well. ``` Buster Seven Talk 12:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC) reply

Nice to meet you in the flesh! Your work on Wikimedia Incubator is just great! Keep up the good work. Nataev ( talk) 03:28, 12 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Where are you bro? Nataev ( talk) 15:15, 15 July 2012 (UTC) reply

The article Fañch Broudig has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい) 16:40, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello Robin! How are you? I found out that in Cyrillic Uzbek the letter "э" is used only at the beginning of a word. It makes our job easier. Would it be possible to convert the Latin character "e" at the beginning of a word to "э" in Cyrillic? For example, ertak should be эртак (e → э), but kecha should be кеча (e → е). Look forward to hearing from you brother. Nataev ( talk) 15:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi Nodir! I'm back home, it takes some time to adapt to the different time zone, but I'm fine :) How are you? I changed the converter so it will change " e" into " э", i.e. when the "e" is after a space. This works mostly fine, but not when the word is at the beginning of a paragraph, because then there is no preceding space. In the other direction, "э" is always converted to "e", that's easy. Regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 05:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC) reply

It's working just fine! Great job! Nataev ( talk) 12:40, 16 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Awesome :-) SPQRobin ( talk) 22:55, 16 September 2012 (UTC) reply

I hope you don't mind my uploading this photo! Nataev ( talk) 08:05, 17 September 2012 (UTC) reply

No, that's ok :-) Thanks! SPQRobin ( talk) 20:19, 19 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Wazzup?? Hope Flanders is doing fine and you are safe. I had a closer look (and did some thinking) about the language search box on the main page and really like the design. The wording is however either not good English or maybe even wrong. I can't really seem to think of a perfect text so maybe we should ask more people, but possible alternatives would be "Find Wikipedia in a language", "Find Wikipedia in another languae" "Find a Wikipedia language" etc. The current version is missing at least an article.

Cheers, -- dimi_z ( talk) 07:58, 25 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi Dimi! I'm fine, hope you are too. De Panne is far enough so I'm safe :-) About the portal, I had a similar comment on my blog post. I deliberately excluded the article, but since you're the second one, I've now changed it to "Find Wikipedia in a language". Regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 15:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Howdy. Good work on your extensive improvement of the article Flanders. I just now finally fixed something I've been meaning to do for years: I cleaned up the train wreck of a lead, which was suffering from a serious identity crisis. Care to take a look over it and let me know what you think? Cheers, Oreo Priest ^talk 16:21, 1 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thanks, the article was too much focused on the history while it is linked from various topics of present-day Flanders. The Dutch article ( nl:Vlaanderen) is still even much longer (maybe too long). Anyway, very good that you rewrote the lead, that was highly needed. It's difficult to decide what is most important to mention in the lead, but in any case it is much better now, thank you for the rewrite! SPQRobin ( talk) 18:34, 1 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Howdy. You're right that the 'castle' problem is quite widespread. It's made even more unfortunate by the fact that in both French and Dutch there's one word for both ' château' and ' castle', so it never occurs to the majority of Belgians that there might even be two different words in English. As a result, most locally-made webpages refer to whatever château they're advertising as a castle. I also recognize the unfortunate fact that the word 'château' is obviously of French origin, so it seems like I'm favouring the non-local French, which we both know is a very touchy subject in Belgium.

Nonetheless, a château is not a castle any more than your own home is a star fort, so we really cannot call Arenberg or any other château/kasteel a castle, even if well-meaning locals do translate it like that. Specifically with Arenberg, you'll notice I moved the page to Arenberg Château, and not Château d'Arenberg, which is the French name. Perhaps to clarify we could also put the French translation after the Dutch one in the first line? Another option would be to call it something like Arenberg Manor, but I'm worried that that would be a bit too much of a neologism. If you're still unhappy with château, we can ask a random sampling of English speakers by doing a WP:RFC.

You're absolutely right that it is a widespread problem on en.WP, and List of castles in Belgium is particularly problematic. I can't really move the page to 'list of châteaus in Belgium' because a number of the things on there are true castles like the Gravensteen. And I can't deal with all the pages individually because I don't have the time these days. Cheers, Oreo Priest ^talk 13:05, 2 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Regarding Arenberg, good idea. I just changed it. The the Royal Palace of Laeken should probably also be moved; let's do that shortly. Before we do change all the entries, which, you're right, will probably be easier than we made it out to be, I want to make sure that other people (especially English speakers, no offence intended) think that this is a good idea. I'm opening a request for comment at Talk:List of castles in Belgium so we can get a broader range of opinions. Let me know what you think of my summary of the issue. Oreo Priest ^talk 17:44, 3 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. Please read WP:NOTLINK and WP:STUB. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{And the horse} 07:07, 5 September 2012 (UTC) reply

... thanking me. Butwhatdoiknow ( talk) 02:02, 6 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi there! Today my blog about the Uzbek Wikipedia was published in the Uzbek version of RFE/RL. I told people about your help! Is it possible to change "uz-latn" to "lotin" and "uz-cyrl" to "кирилл"? That would be helpful for many people. Thanks! Nataev ( talk) 08:41, 2 October 2012 (UTC) reply

You're awesome! Thank you! Nataev ( talk) 17:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Lol, you noticed before I could even write a reply xD So as you now know you can change it on the pages "MediaWiki:Variantname-[CODE]". Oh, and me mentioned in a news website? Wow :O :P SPQRobin ( talk) 17:47, 2 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Yes, I noticed it right away! And yes, you were in a news website! You did a great job. Thanks again brother. Nataev ( talk) 22:25, 2 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension.

Happy Holidays. ``` Buster Seven Talk 15:02, 12 December 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks! Happy holidays! :) SPQRobin ( talk) 16:26, 20 December 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Unauthorized bot? Babel AutoCreate. Thank you.   Ryan  Vesey 18:26, 27 December 2012 (UTC) reply

Urgent!

Please see User talk:Kwamikagami#Flemish. Can the move be undone ASAP? The Dutch took our Art (Many Flemish masterpieces are now listed under "Dutch Art" in new anthologies) , now they want to take our Language (what little we have left). Readers will search for Flemish, which exists in only in Belgium. With this move, they will now be transported across the border to Holland where Flemish is NOT spoken. Completely unexceptable and without merit or discussion. Your attention is appreciated!``` Buster Seven Talk 20:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC) reply

This is really a non-controversial move. There is not a lot of history now at the new title, but it will still require a history merge. I think listing it at WP:RM as a technical request would be the best thing to do, no? Apteva ( talk) 03:07, 8 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Indeed, it's a non-controversial move, it's just a technical move. I don't think a history merge is the correct thing to do, but that has been done now, so well... SPQRobin ( talk) 10:01, 8 May 2013 (UTC) reply

	The Endangered Language Immersion School Bus Pass
	You've earned a free pass on the Endangered Language Immersion Schoolbus of your choice-- this one is Montana Salish-- for all your work at the Incubator! Djembayz ( talk) 01:36, 20 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Cool, thanks! :-) I'm less active there now, MF-Warburg does most of the work nowadays, he deserves one too :-) SPQRobin ( talk) 21:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Home rule in the United States, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Washington and Georgia ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:05, 6 June 2013 (UTC) reply

– Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 00:45, 5 July 2013 (UTC) reply

I see that you contribute a lot to LGBT-related content. I am not sure if you are familiar with (or even interested in) Wikimedia user groups or thematic organizations, but I thought I would direct you to Wikimedia LGBT at Meta-Wiki. This is a proposed organization that would promote the development of content on Wikimedia projects which is of interest to LGBT communities. I just thought I would point you in that direction to take a look when you have a few moments. If you are interested in participating, feel free to indicate your support. Otherwise, keep up the great work here at Wikipedia! -- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 22:33, 29 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Yeah, I know of thematic organizations and more or less heard of Wikimedia LGBT (I remember passing by the room at Wikimania 2012, I should've walked in :p) but I didn't know it was that active nowadays. Thanks a lot for pointing me to it, I'll support where I can! SPQRobin ( talk) 23:03, 29 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Great! Thanks for indicating your support. We are still trying to get the group up and running, but I think there is a lot of potential here for some great projects. -- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 17:21, 30 October 2013 (UTC) reply

BTW, we have yet to do a major outreach campaign for groups like WikiProject LGBT studies, etc., but feel free to invite any other Wikipedians who might be interested in participating. -- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 17:22, 30 October 2013 (UTC) reply

I have pondered at length your edit on Same-sex marriage in Oregon but still can't understand what it is intended to change. The revision of the wikiformat of the citation is not helping. In the future, would you please provide an edit summary which explains either the intent of your edit or summarizes it changed? Thanks. — EncMstr ( talk) 04:53, 25 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Well, I didn't put an edit summary because it's several tiny changes and no real noteworthy changes: my original intent was to add the missing "url=" in the Nike citation. Then I moved that citation to a more appropriate place in the following line. Then I removed some unnecessary whitespaces/newlines. I know, the diff looks as if I did way more. SPQRobin ( talk) 05:24, 25 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Actually, it's common practice to have single articles for a jointly-held election. Already this year we've had

• Honduran general election, 2013
• Malagasy general election, 2013
• Zimbabwean general election, 2013
• Ecuadorian general election, 2013
• Paraguayan general election, 2013

There are also three examples already of Chilean general election articles ( 1932, 1989 and 1993); I was planning to merge the other couple but hadn't got round to it yet. Cheers, Number 5 7 20:07, 25 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi Robin! How have you been? I haven't heard from you for a while. I just noticed that the one can read the articles on the Kazakh Wikipedia in three scripts. Uzbek is also written using three scripts. Afghanistan's Uzbeks use the Arabic script. As far as I know, there are millions of Uzbekis in Afghanistan. So, I think at some point we need to include the Arabic script to our converter on the Uzbek Wikipedia. Do you think you could help us with it? There's one problem: none of our active editors knows the Arabic script. Maybe we can find someone who does. At this point it's just an idea but I decided to ask you what you think. Nataev ^talk 14:39, 5 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi Nodir! I'm fine, time goes fast :) How are you? Well, having a converter with the Arabic script is quite difficult (conversion is likely not 1:1 and the writing direction will probably be an issue), and the converter system is still hacky. I'm also not really active anymore with coding in MediaWiki. But we can try to add the Arabic script to the Uzbek converter when there is an editor who knows it. Regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 19:26, 16 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, SPQRobin. I'm Мурад 97, an active user of Azerbaijani and Russian Wikipedias. In Azerbaijani Wikipedia we have a problem with articles written both in Latin and Arabic scripts. I've found out from colleges from Uzbek Wikipedia, that you were the one who created a converter for them to avoid problems which we now have in Azerbaijani Wikipedia because two alphabets are used there, but there is no converter. Is it possible for you to create a converter for Azerbaijani Wikipedia similar to the thouse that they have in Uzbek and Kazakh Wikipedias?

Thank you in advance, -- Мурад 97 ( talk) 03:10, 7 January 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello Robin. I gather that you're quite active in developing the babel extension, so I thought that I ought to let you know that I've blocked User:Babel AutoCreate. The reason is to stop it from creating duplicate categories at the wrong capitalisation, e.g. Category:User Yi instead of Category:User yi. (Ignore my comment in the block log about the account not creating parent categories; I have since fixed that at MediaWiki:Babel-autocreate-text-main.) I've filed bugs about this at bugzilla:61993, bugzilla:61994 and bugzilla:61995, if you are interested. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 12:28, 27 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi Stradivarius, I have indeed been active in developing the Babel extension. The system is not ideal and there have been issues in the past as well. I'll see if I can fix the bugs if I have time. Thanks for letting me know, SPQRobin ( talk) 03:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi, re this edit. The content doesn't matter so much, what matters is the attitude of the editor who makes edits like this. Not only is their knowledge of how Scottish law operates somewhat flawed; but it's the same troll as this, and they are in the habit of making a plausible edit as an excuse for posting an objectionable edit summary. When myself and a few others find such edits, the practice is to restore the text to what it had been before, whether that was good or bad by comparison. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 20:46, 31 March 2014 (UTC) reply

I completely understand, but I had seen the same change been made several times, so I figured it would be better to make it just say the date is not set yet, instead of vague estimates that don't give much more information. It's annoying to see the same (useless) change be made and reverted several times. Regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 00:49, 1 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm WheresTristan. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Peeters II Government, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Wheres T ristan 00:25, 19 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited European Parliament election, 2014 (Luxembourg), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frank Engel ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:57, 15 June 2014 (UTC) reply

I see you deleted my contributions about the leader's seats on Belgian Federal elections 2010 and 2007. Your stated reason is not entirely correct, for example Elio di Rupo and Didier Reynders did not run on the senate lists. I do believe that "leader's seat" is not very accurate for Belgian elections, it's a typical Anglo-Saxon term for elections in single member districts. Would it not be better to say "Leader's electoral district/college" or "Leader's municipality" or delete the section "Leader's seat"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deavenettel ( talk • contribs) 18:26, 19 July 2014 (UTC) reply

Yeah, a lot of the political information is based on the English language terms and on the presidential system. The problem is wider and we probably need some standard. For example, for the Belgian regional elections, 2014 the person who reached the highest number of preference votes per party appear to be used in the infobox (and the leader's seats are not mentioned there). As a start I think it makes sense to just remove the "leader's seat". SPQRobin ( talk) 19:58, 19 July 2014 (UTC) reply

Can you add navbox and infobox codes from eng wiki to incubator common.css? Ceas08 ( talk) 20:35, 25 July 2014 (UTC) reply

I've answered you there; please keep purely Incubator topics on the Incubator (or even Meta is better). Thank you, SPQRobin ( talk) 15:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC) reply

Hey Vriend! Please check out this diff from Belgian Revolution [2]. Have you ever heard of this? ``` Buster Seven Talk 02:56, 26 July 2014 (UTC) reply

Hey Buster7! I have never heard of it; I see you already added a citation needed tag, which is good. I would even consider removing it entirely. Regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 15:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC) reply

 Done TY. ``` Buster Seven Talk 19:05, 28 July 2014 (UTC) reply

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For your help determining a pattern of disruptive behavior from a POV editor on a large number of LGBT related articles.-- Mark Miller ( talk) 20:40, 24 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Nice, a barnstar :) Thanks! SPQRobin ( talk) 21:05, 24 August 2014 (UTC) reply

I understand if you're too busy to improve these maps but... could you please color Florida gold on this map [3], color Florida gold and add a marriage ring for Boulder County on this map [4], add Colorado (lightest red) to this map [5], remove Florida from this map [6], and add Florida to this map [7]? Also, this gif needs updating [8] as well. I'm sorry, I know it is a lot to ask for..! Prcc twenty-seven ( talk) 07:26, 28 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi, it's not really that much work, it mostly depends on what the SVG code looks like :) I've done the SVG maps except the world marriage equality map since that is a complicated one (I might give it a try later if nobody did so yet). I also haven't done the GIF since I have no experience editing GIFs unfortunately. Could you perhaps improve the file descriptions? Since some of them reflect current availability of SSM (those with gold) while others reflect what the courts have ruled regardless of whether they're stayed (those about the constitutional bans). Regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 12:15, 29 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Hey, could you also stripe Yucatán with red on the North American ssm map and possibly stripe it on the Mexican same-sex marriage map as well please..? It looks like a new color would be added for the Mexican map. [9] Prcc twenty-seven ( talk)

Also, Ohio's striping looks weird. I think the cream stripe should be on top... but that's just something minor I noticed. Prcc twenty-seven ( talk)

Could you please add Indiana as recognition on the world maps and the North American maps..? Also, could you add a recognition ring on Palm Beach, Florida for an individual case on both world maps? Prcc twenty-seven ( talk) 09:47, 5 September 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi, I hope I'm not bothering you but could you change the svg map so it matches the png version I made File:State recognition of same-sex relationships (North America).png (I made Nevada more evenly split medium blue/red wise; I fixed Wisconsin's slope so it matched that of CO and NV; and I striped Yucatán for banning same-sex marriage)..? Also, If you're up for it could you add recognition rings to Arizona and Florida on the world maps; I understand that you indicated it's hard to update the world maps so I guess that's fine if you decide not to do so. Prcc twenty-seven ( talk) 07:34, 19 September 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi, I would gladly do it but I'm not that good at advanced editing of SVG maps. (Maybe you could ask e.g. Dralwik to update it?) What I would really prefer in any case is to have only one map i.e. no duplicates. So if you agree, I would like to have File:State recognition of same-sex relationships (North America).png deleted so we can keep File:State recognition of same-sex relationships (North America).svg up to date. It's used on many more Wikipedias. Btw, about something else: you removed this example: afaik the issue is still present, so isn't it better to just change the example state from California to a state where SSM is still illegal? Regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 22:16, 21 September 2014 (UTC) reply

I just uploaded an SVG version to the SVG map (even though we aren't supposed to use inkscape). Sorry for all the reverts, (I didn't see this until after I re-added the PNG version) but I guess adding an updated svg map using inkscape version is better than using the png map..? I will re-add the svg map. Prcc twenty-seven ( talk) 07:48, 4 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi SPQRobin. I reverted your change to Brazilian general election, 2014. Although it is of course a general election, with the election of multiple bodies/posts, it is standard to have the infobox for the presidential election (the most important one) at the top of the page - see other examples at Brazilian general election, 1998 Brazilian general election, 2002, Brazilian general election, 2006 (and for other countries - Chilean general election, 2013, Paraguayan general election, 2013, Uruguayan general election, 2009). Cheers, Number 5 7 15:32, 6 October 2014 (UTC) reply

As I have received a copy of the full poll results from Market, I changed your edit. It's the newest poll out there and the question clearly asks if you "strongly support/somewhat support/somewhat oppose/strongly oppose" gay marriage in Austria.

/info/en/?search=Recognition_of_same-sex_unions_in_Europe#Opinion_polls

-- The Pollster ( talk) 09:48, 7 January 2015 (UTC) reply

I had looked for full poll data but did not find anything on the internet. So thanks for your effort to get the full data. The actual question indeed looks like asking about gay marriage support. The media's interpretation (73 Prozent befürworten [...] grundsätzlich für gleichgeschlechtliche Paare eine der Ehe gänzlich gleichgestellte Verbindung. Knapp die Hälfte ist sogar ausdrücklich dafür, dass nicht nur eine rechtlich untergeordnete Verpartnerung vorgenommen, sondern wirklich geheiratet werden sollte.) sounded as if there were separate questions: one for "separate but equal" recognition, and one for marrying. But the actual question is decisive. I added the poll to Recognition of same-sex unions in Austria as well. Regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 13:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Yes, the media often makes these kinds of mistakes. I assume they interpreted the poll findings in a way that only the 48% who "fully support" gay marriage would also do so in a referendum. But in fact 73% support it, with 25% just "slightly". The poll also only has a sample of 400 people asked, that leaves a big margin or error. Which means the actuall support could also be as low as 68% (5% margin of error). The poll was to my knowledge also the last since Conchita Wurst won the Song Contest and the poll was taken slightly before her win. It would be interesting to see how support changed since then. -- The Pollster ( talk) 08:46, 8 January 2015 (UTC) reply

I think your latest edit might have an unfortunate side effect, but I'm hopeless with templates. Could you please take a squint at the template talk page? Thanks -- Dweller ( talk) 16:08, 12 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for notifying me. My edit was unrelated, but I fixed the code causing the error, see the template talk page. Regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 18:04, 12 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Nice one, thank you! -- Dweller ( talk) 09:11, 13 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. There is a dispute in regard to Slovenia at Status of same-sex marriage‎ and Same-sex marriage‎. Ron 1987 ( talk) 00:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

An RfC has been started on Same-sex marriage in the Pitcairn Islands (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). FYI. Me-123567-Me ( talk) 20:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi, it depends on if you mean a "a suburb of" (as in "a part of") or "a suburb of" (as in "outside of"). That's why we have different views in this case. I wouldn't consider any of the 19 municipalities as suburbs of the Brussels-Capital Region. Machelen and Wemmel, for example, though I would, since they are not in the Capital Region. Calle Widmann ( talk) 06:42, 21 November 2015 (UTC) reply

@ Calle Widmann: Hmm, you're right; I didn't look at "suburb of" in the sense of "outside of". I guess given the possibilities it's better to link to the main article. But feel free to change/clarify it. SPQRobin ( talk) 10:17, 21 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi,
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) 16:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC) reply

User All4peace ( talk) has initiated a discussion, on the article talk page on English Wikipedia about how we present MOE.

I would very‐much appreciate your participation ! Info por favor ( talk) 22:29, 25 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Recognition of same-sex unions in Austria page, your edit caused an archiveurl error ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:23, 1 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Belgian general election, 1919

added a link pointing to Arrondissement of Neufchâteau

Belgian general election, 1921

added a link pointing to Arrondissement of Neufchâteau

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:40, 23 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Subs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Zombie Nation. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 31 December 2015 (UTC) reply

I got into an edit conflict with you. I am trying to add a cite, here: <ref>{{cite news|work=Associated Press|url=http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2016/by_state/PA_Page_0426.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS|date=April 26, 2016|accessdate=April 27, 2016}}</ref> Bearian ( talk) 19:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC) reply

I added it to the page. Sorry for the edit conflict. Bearian ( talk) 19:17, 27 April 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hawaii Marriage Equality Act, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ken Ito. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:47, 15 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Don't be rude. I fix people's mistakes, usually 250-350 articles a day. I hate people that say I can't make a mistake, like you. It was a manual edit and NOT an automatic tool. I made a mistake while correcting somebody's mistake, it happens. It happens to you too. Just don't get all snippy when it does happen. Bgwhite ( talk) 08:50, 17 August 2016 (UTC) reply

@ Bgwhite: Wow, sorry if I came across as rude. Don't take things so personal quickly; I merely wanted to inform you of the error. I never said you can't make mistakes; I'm just not a fan of people who do a large amount of edits per day, which carries a relatively high risk of creating errors or other imperfections, especially because the edits are often made very quickly without double-checking (this one was an obvious, very visible error). That's why my comment might've been a bit abrupt, but it was certainly not intended as anything more than just making you aware of it. What I find rather rude is removing someone's comment. Kind regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 08:58, 17 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi SPQRobin, How would you translate Deelgemeente into English? Pyrusca ( talk) 17:01, 22 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Oh and quick question. I see you went to Ghent University. What did you study there? I Know that the microbiology department is really good there. Pyrusca ( talk) 17:05, 22 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi @ Pyrusca:. It's difficult to translate, but there is even an article on it: deelgemeente. I think the best term in English would be "municipality section", analogous to the French term. And yes I went to Ghent University to study public administration (still finishing; I also previously tried a year in law). Biology wouldn't be my thing at all :-) Where are you from, if I may ask? SPQRobin ( talk) 18:04, 22 November 2016 (UTC) reply

New Jersey, USA. I studied French. I asked because I did study abroad at the University of Liege. I did environmental science at Rutgers. Pyrusca ( talk) 18:06, 22 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Oh I see, interesting. SPQRobin ( talk) 21:50, 22 November 2016 (UTC) reply

oh btw, you're from the Dutch-speaking portion of Belgium, if im not mistaken. Is it spoken along side French there? Pyrusca ( talk) 14:01, 23 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Indeed I am; I live north of Brussels. And no, language is very much restricted to geographical areas (and this has historically been the sensitive thing in Belgian politics/society): see Language legislation in Belgium and Communities, regions and language areas of Belgium. Some French is spoken in the Brussels Periphery (so there are occasionally French speakers in my area), but generally the Dutch-speaking area is unilingual. Brussels itself is officially bilingual, but French is the lingua franca (or English, in some international neighbourhoods). See also Francization of Brussels. Switzerland also has its languages divided geographically, whereas Luxembourg is multilingual in a functional way (e.g. French for laws, Luxembourgish among citizens, ...). SPQRobin ( talk) 19:44, 23 November 2016 (UTC) reply

...for your nice expansion of the Synopsis section I started for the film Where to Invade Next. Did you get all that detail from the film itself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paj60wiki ( talk • contribs) 23:58, 13 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks :) I simply watched the film and whenever a new topic or person was shown, I paused it and noted it down, and looked up which links where most appropriate to add. I thought it would be quite useful. SPQRobin ( talk) 00:18, 14 December 2016 (UTC) reply

( Charles R. Knight, 1922)

Thank you for all you did for this project in 2016, SPQRobin. May your house be safe, and may you and those having the privilege of your company enjoy good health in a Happy New Year 2017! Kind regards, Lotje ( talk) 05:39, 4 January 2017 (UTC) reply Pass on! Send this greeting by adding {{ subst: User:Sam Sailor/Templates/HappyNewYear}} to user talk pages. Automatic level-2 heading and auto-signing included.

Thank you, Lotje! Happy new year to you too :) SPQRobin ( talk) 12:58, 4 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello SPQRobin. Thank you for correcting my error. I was tasked with updating the /info/en/?search=State_attorney_general#/media/File:Party_affiliation_of_current_United_States_attorneys_general.svg to reflect the New Jersey Attorney General as an independent (the state should be yellow). I cannot make minor change due to restricts on the account(account must be 4 days old and have 10 edits to complete the change). Can an established account, such as yours, complete the minor change update prior to the four days? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpalpsa ( talk • contribs) 17:39, 8 February 2017 (UTC) reply

@ Lpalpsa: No problem, I changed the map so New Jersey is marked with the color for independent. I would've done it already but didn't find clear sources saying the NJ AG is an independent. Regards, SPQRobin ( talk) 20:07, 8 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Beste Robin.

Het heeft me wat verbijsterd dat je tot overmaat van ramp betaald bent voor deze (overdreven geef ik toe) "wanprestatie", terwijl er zoveel vrijwilligers bij de Vereniging Wikimedia Neder;and (ook niet-leden!) zijn die het met alle plezier gratis doen. Ik heb zelf ook wel stukjes van WMF in het Nederlands vertaald of geholpen deze te verbeteren. Dat ga ik nu niet doen, zoals in De kroeg (ik kan daar niet reageren, omdat ik geblokkeerd ben) reeds gezegd soor anderen. Het zal me verbazen als anderen dat wel gaan doen: de vereniging heeft contributiegeld gewoon verkwist door jou daarvoor te betalen: zondegeld. Je hebt ongetwijfeld je best gedaan, maar vrijwilligers hadden gratis een zelfde of een beter Nederlands stuk op kunnen leveren. Trouwens: is betaald bewerken van een door vrijwilligers gedragen naslagwerk en alles wat eromheen hangt, niet wat tegenstrijdig - op zijn minst ongewenst?   Klaas `Z4␟`  V 08:09, 17 May 2017 (UTC) reply

Beste Klaas. Gelieve reacties met betrekking tot mijn werk bij dat account te houden, maar goed. Ik ga niet zeggen dat mijn vertalingen perfect zijn, maar het Engelse origineel is voldoende vaag dat het moeilijk is de betekenis te vertalen in plaats van letterlijk te vertalen. Ik heb dit ook doorgegeven aan het team, ze werken nu aan aanpassingen. En dit is een wiki, vertalingen zijn niet per se "af" of definitief. Vrijwilligers mogen wel degelijk meehelpen; bekijk het positief als je dit toch zo erg vindt: wat een vrijwilliger doet, daar word ik al niet meer voor betaald. En de job stond trouwens open voor iedereen; er waren maar enkele anderen die zich aanmeldden. Je hebt trouwens meer impact als je dit via de strategiediscussie of aan Wikimedia meldt (wel jammer dat je geblokkeerd bent op nl.wikipedia, maar er zijn genoeg andere wiki's waar je terecht kan). Met mij persoonlijk aan te spreken bereik je niet veel. En ten slotte: een van de verrassende voorstellen was net om betaalde redacteurs in te schakelen op ons door vrijwilligers gedragen project. En voor de duidelijkheid: dit is volledig door WMF geleid, de Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland houdt enkel discussiemomenten op het kantoor en zit er voor de rest voor niets tussen. En wat mij betreft zijn er zaken geweest die meer verkwisting waren (technische functies ontwikkelen die daarna niet uitgerold of teruggedraaid werden). Groeten, SPQRobin ( talk) 11:58, 17 May 2017 (UTC) reply

Spread the WikiLove; use {{ subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

De allerbeste wensen voor het Nieuwe Jaar ― Buster7  ☎

Bedankt! Voor jou ook de beste wensen. SPQRobin ( talk) 15:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC) reply

As there are usually quite a few parties winning seats (almost as many as in the Netherlands), do you think it would be better to use {{ Infobox legislative election}} like the Dutch elections? It would certainly be more compact (e.g. Dutch general election, 2017). Also pinging Joseon Empire as you're busy with this at the moment. Cheers, Number 5 7 15:44, 22 October 2018 (UTC) reply

I've always thought we definitely need a better-suited infobox for multi-party elections (not only for Belgium). The basis of {{ Infobox legislative election}} is indeed better (I also like the similar although less compact French one, see e.g. fr:Élections législatives fédérales belges de 2014). Whichever template is chosen, in my opinion the infobox serves as a summary of the article and should only have parties with a notable amount of votes/seats. As for Belgium, that's two up until 1894 and three from 1894 until around the World Wars or maybe even the 1970s. SPQRobin ( talk) 16:02, 22 October 2018 (UTC) reply

I'd say that's the case when you have parties winning majorities on a regular basis. However, when you have a system where majorities are rare and coalitions are common, I think all parties that win seats should be represented as they show the overall makeup of the chamber (and even very small ones are sometimes included in coalitions). Cheers, Number 5 7 18:09, 22 October 2018 (UTC) reply

I agree that generally it's a good idea to show all parties that have won seats, but I also think there is a general problem wherein we don't often show what the resulting coalitions are made up of in an easy to access format (usually just as a footnote in the article). A graphic to show this could help a lot (for example with a Hong Kong LegCo style dividing line?) on the election page itself, possibly? Also SPQRobin brings up a good point in that usually these systems switch from one format to another, ie Belgium from majorities until the 70s and Germany with relatively few parties after the 30s. I'm not really sure of a solution to keep it uniform (if we should at all). Joseon Empire ( talk) 07:39, 23 October 2018 (UTC) reply

Template:Finnish parliamentary election, 2015 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Hhkohh ( talk) 23:19, 25 March 2019 (UTC) reply

Template:Belgian chamber election/top has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym ( talk) 12:51, 15 April 2019 (UTC) reply

Hello SPQRobin kan je eens een kijkje nemen naar de tabellen? de kleurencombinate SPA/Spirit ziet er "weird" uit. Thanks. Lotje ( talk) 11:23, 2 July 2019 (UTC) reply

An article you recently created, 2019 Belgian government formation, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. ( ?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed ( verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CASSIOPEIA^{( talk)} 09:45, 19 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

-- User:Martin Urbanec ( talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Hello. Could you add a source for the data you added to the results table? If someone looks these additional seat numbers up in the Sternberger book, it will appear that the table may have been falsified. Cheers, Number 5 7 22:40, 19 December 2020 (UTC) reply

I don't have access to the Sternberger book, but it seems to be simply a short summary and thus incomplete. As I've been doing a while back, I'm adding data based on what I'm putting together (list of elected members and their Dutch Wikipedia article information, information on preceding elections, ...), so I don't have a single direct source. SPQRobin ( talk) 22:25, 22 December 2020 (UTC) reply

		* Happy Holidays 2021, SPQRobin! *
		Vrolijk Kerstfeest en een Gelukkig Nieuwjaar! Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! Joyeux Noël! Bonne année! Frohe Weihnachten und einen guten Rutsch ins neue Jahr!    -- Lotje Lotje ( talk) 15:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC) reply

An article you recently created, 2024 Belgian local elections, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. ( ?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed ( verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ... discospinster _talk 03:17, 22 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:16, 23 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, SPQRobin. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2024 Belgian local elections, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 04:01, 22 December 2021 (UTC) reply

I have nominated List of European Union member states by political system for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 01:39, 28 December 2021 (UTC) reply

Template:BE party c has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym ( talk) 11:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Template:BE party c/t has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym ( talk) 11:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Template:BE party c/n has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym ( talk) 11:17, 4 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, SPQRobin. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " 2024 Belgian local elections".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:21, 22 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Hi SPQRobin, I was hoping you might remember the source for the fact that the Belgian election of 1864 was a snap election caused by the death of Cumont? Could really use this for a piece of research I'm doing. Thank you! 82.39.239.169 ( talk) 10:36, 25 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Hi, I don't remember which other sources I found, but I added a link to the parliamentary proceedings: https://www3.dekamer.be/digidocanha/K0007/K00071847/K00071847.PDF SPQRobin ( talk) 17:30, 28 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, SPQRobin. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " 2024 Belgian local elections".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:37, 29 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, SPQRobin. Thank you for your work on 2024 Belgian local elections. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello my friend! Good day to you. Thanks for creating the article, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 14:17, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply