User talk:Lexicon/Archive alpha

Welcome!

Hello, Lexicon/Archive alpha, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! , SqueakBox July 4, 2005 15:45 (UTC)

1-up mushroom image

Hi, I've replaced the 1-up Mushroom screenshot you uploaded (Image:1upmushroom.jpg) with a PNG version (Image:1upmushroom.png). The new file is 99% smaller and is losslessly compressed. I've listed the original for deletion, hope this is OK. Mysid (talk) 11:47, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The same applies to Image:Independentist Flag of Chechnya.jpg which is up for deletion and has been replaced with Image:Independentist Flag of Chechnya.png. –Mysid 07:19, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CMU isn't a "university" but a seminary.

And the Government of Ontario considers Masters College and Seminary a private-degree granting "instutition."[1] Just because it uses the name University doesn't make it so. Ardenn 19:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't see why you insist that it's not a university. If the Government of Manitoba considers it a university, who are you to say it's not? CMU grants at least one common university degree, the Bachelor of Arts, and is considered by its governing authority (the Government of Manitoba) to be a university. What type of learning institution Ontario considers a school in its jurisdiction to be is totally irrelevant (in addition, the only Bachelor degrees offered by the college you mentioned are religious in nature--not so for CMU). Osgoodelawyer 19:26, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And the Government of Alberta[2] wouldn't recognize it as a University, but as a "Private College accredited to grant degrees." We have one standard on Wikipedia, not one based on the whim of one province. Ardenn 21:26, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "whim" of a province? It's a Canadian province, not some backwater country. Let's say that we should have some kind of a standard independent of the competent government bodies that make these decisions in the "real world". Explain why your standard is the correct one. Maybe a broader definition is in order--I mean, if bodies such as provincial and state governments are granting charters for the creation of universities that some Wikipedians do not currently consider universities, then perhaps we need to re-evaluate our understanding of the word. If not, someone will, of course, have to change all the references in the CMU article from "university" (aside from the name) to "private college accredited to grant degrees". Osgoodelawyer 22:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this, because I'm not going to argue about it with you. Dispute resolution is a good start if you still don't like it. --Ardenn 22:37, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but one final word: If we went by Alberta's rules for universities, a large number of universities the world over (including, to take three examples Duke University, the University of Notre Dame, and Brigham Young University) would not be considered universities if they were located in Alberta, seeing as they are privately funded and operated. We clearly cannot go by that definition. Osgoodelawyer 22:43, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Canadian Mennonite University

Remember to always sign all of your posts on talk pages. Typing four tildes after your comment ( ~~~~ ) will insert a signature showing your username and a date/time stamp, which is very helpful. Ardenn 00:25, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, it was a simple oversight. Osgoodelawyer 00:28, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a Directory

You're probably right, my apologies for marking it as minor. Ardenn 15:34, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Lodge of Ivory Coast

UGLE calls it Grand Lodge of Ivory Coast. --Ardenn 17:28, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Our own page on Ivory Coast is now correctly in English. Ardenn 17:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:IAR, WP:BOLD. Ardenn 18:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Ardenn, you win. Let's quote the rules when it suits us and a very sketchy "ignore all rules 'principle' when they don't. Osgoodelawyer 18:39, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be a dick.. Ardenn 18:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can't help it--it's in my blood. Although if it wasn't my nature, you'd sure help nurture it. Osgoodelawyer 19:03, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The fact remains that if you Google it, you get more correct hits on "Grand Lodge of the Ivory Coast" than you do on "Grand Lodge of Cote d'Ivoire". Furthermore, you don't see "Ireland" redirecting to "Eire" or "Japan" redirecting to "Yamato" or "Nippon", so I would have to say that there's a real good chance that the English name is official at least as far as the English-language Wikipedia is concerned. As a matter of fact, the native language name should be referenced at the beginning of the article. I'd also wager that Ardenn's change was entirely in keeping with the style guidelines. MSJapan 03:02, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Profanity?

Nothing you or he said was profane, I was using his own edit summary. If someone removes my messages from their talk page, I do the same in return. Ardenn 19:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did not remove your messages from my talk page, which is frowned upon. I archived. — WCityMike (talk • contribs) 00:57, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Both Arden and yourself have indicated that this comment had nothing to do with my disagreement with Ardenn, and, looking at the time, I should have known this. With respect to this particular misassumption (but with respect to no other element of my disagreements with you, Ardenn), I apologize. — WCityMike (talk • contribs) 01:51, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links

I will not edit war with you, I'll simply dispute it. One link != links. Talk:York University Ardenn 20:32, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. Ardenn 20:51, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Noticeboard Comment

Hey all, Osgoodelawyer (the non-admin) chiming in here. I wasn't aware of all that had gone down before InShaneee blocked Ardenn, but from the reason given by InShaneee on Ardenn's talk page, it didn't seem like there was real justification to block him—certainly not for a full two days—and that's why I made the comment I did on InShaneee's page. However, I was unaware of some of the earlier things said, including the "STFU" comment noted above (which I actually can't find, but which I assume is somewhere), and I agree that's certainly deserving of a block. I've had my share of problems with Ardenn myself, but I've been trying to help out a bit, knowing that he's also done a lot of good. Perhaps, though, a good 48 hours away from Wikipedia will help cool his head. -- OsgoodeLawyer 13:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

See here, or, alternatively, go here and look at the seventh line under the 'Discussion' section. — WCityMike (talk • contribs) 15:57, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I found the comment afterward. That kind of behaviour is obviously not kosher. -- OsgoodeLawyer 17:49, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page

Removing comments from a talk page is considered vandalizm. Check out ArbCom rulings for precedent. Ardenn 21:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Going through someone's contribution list could be considered wikistalking. Ardenn 21:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not as defined by Wikipedia. — WCityMike (talk • contribs) 23:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NWHL

Hi there. I don't follow the league very closely, to be honest, but did create the Ottawa Raiders page as part of creating articles on all things "Ottawa". I do have a small interest in the NWHL, and wouldn't mind helping you in your endeavours. -- Earl Andrew - talk 06:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've never been to a game either. They should really do some better marketing, and try to get some of the game's bigger names. I know you have a few in Brampton, but as you can see there are no big stars in the Ottawa line-up. Also, getting the Clarkson Cup awarded sometime (for whatever) soon might help. --

Earl Andrew - talk 17:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Masonic Grand Lodges

Thanks for fixing that up, I don't know how I missed it. Ardenn 23:15, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to mark your edits as minor only when they genuinely are (see Wikipedia:Minor edit). "The rule of thumb is that an edit of a page that is spelling corrections, formatting, and minor rearranging of text should be flagged as a 'minor edit'." -- Ardenn 20:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, but you didn't mark it as minor. As for archiving, I have no plans to do so. There are many, many people on Wikipedia who don't archive their talk pages. Ardenn 20:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll keep it in mind. Ardenn 20:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chechnya

The seccessionist movement has declared its independence as a state and does actually operate with some control. As far as I can see the page refers to all states which have been declared independent (and have a population of substantial number) but have not got international recognition. What other states were you thinking of? Maybe they should be added to the page as opposed to Chechnya being deleted? --Horses In The Sky 19:56, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Intentional double-redirect

Hi,
You're right; there isn't much reason to keep a double redirect in my pocket, but I did originally make it for a good reason. Someone posted on the Village Pump or somewhere like that, not understanding that they don't work, and I decided to demonstrate. So I made that page. --Smack (talk) 04:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Nomination Regular Grand Lodge of England

I've nominated the article Regular Grand Lodge of England for deletion under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Regular Grand Lodge of England satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. I have explained why in the nomination space (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regular Grand Lodge of England. Don't forget to add four tildes (˜˜˜˜) at the end of each of your comments to sign them. You are free to edit the content of Regular Grand Lodge of England during the discussion, but please do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top). Doing so will not end the discussion. Ardenn 05:29, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Prhizzm

I have just been reading the deletion review thread for this article - in the AfD, I voted for a weak delete. I think you should know that Benbecula Records is currently under AfD and the notability of the label is therefore in dispute. Despite this, if Prhizzm was relisted, I would change to a keep based on the additional information you have brought forward in the deletion review (although it may be a weak one due to the lack of a full-length or any evidence of a touring schedule). Ac@osr 17:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Riding names

Hello, I have reverted a few page moves you have made. The en-dash, em-dash distinction is an important one in Canadian riding names. An em-dash is used to separate the names of two cities or regions as in Ajax—Pickering. A normal dash or en-dash indicates a multibarreled name for a francophone city, as in Saint-Lambert. For a riding name such as Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles the different type of dashes are important as they indicate that the riding name mentions two rather than four communities. - SimonP 19:42, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you confusing a hyphen and an en-dash? I'm changing to en-dashes, not hyphens, and I've done it to a ton of pages. An em-dash is for other purposes entirely. I think we'd better talk before any more moves are made either way. OZLAWYER talk 19:43, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The best place to discuss this would be at Wikipedia:WikiProject Electoral districts in Canada, though others have debated this issue in the past and the general consensus supports the status quo. - SimonP 19:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For some background, the original discussion where the current naming convention was reached can be read at Talk:List of Canadian federal electoral districts - SimonP 19:56, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No trouble, I'm sorry that you spent a bunch of time and effort on something that was reverted. - SimonP 20:03, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Labflagconst.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Labflagconst.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:TerroristAttacksAlQaeda.png

Thanks for uploading Image:TerroristAttacksAlQaeda.png. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 17:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

List of countries

I added Serbia and Montenegro, but am now doubting about successor or succesor. We were editing at the same time, I didn't intend to conflict with you. Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 20:04, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article 60 of the Constitutional Charter of SCG (pdf) deals with succession. -- ran (talk) 21:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not appreciated

My edits are not appreciated by who? you only? wikipedia's becoming a very sad place. So i made a mistake. don't bite my head off over it. User:Raccoon Fox - Talk 18:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if i sounded like a dick as well....i'm just tired of people griping at me or vandalising my page or saying my contributions are vandalism or not wanted... User:Raccoon Fox - Talk 02:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zehrs and Brampton

I removed your readdition of Zehrs (and the footnote), and added Loblaw Companies Ltd., which is what's located in Brampton (and which includes Zehrs). Oz Lawyer 21:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thank you, I didn't realise that all of the Loblaws chains were headed from Brampton. Thanks! -- Zanimum 12:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Newfoundland and Labrador

Certainly, where do I sign up. There seems to be a number of us with NL interests to make it a good project. Count me in. HJKeats 17:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I dropped names of NL Wikipedia users on you, would like to field the questions and the requests to become part of the project? HJKeats 17:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Besides the NL Wikipedians, you may wish to try the following:
DMighton
Tolivero
AshleyMorton
MattFisher
Jcmurphy
Skarredmunkey

Your Nltowninfobox

I noticed that you were making a new infobox for your wikiproject. Would you like help creating conditional fields in the table?--SomeStranger^(t|c) 17:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I basically finished it. If there is anything I left out let me know.--SomeStranger^(t|c) 18:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, now it is completely finished. I suggest you move it to "Template:Infobox NLTown" to keep in line with the rest of the Infoboxes. If you want I can still make the timezone and governing body slots optional.--SomeStranger^(t|c) 23:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see if I can explain how I did the template. To sum it up quickly I used m:ParserFunctions to simulate conditional statements and inside of those conditional statements created the table and formatting.

<table align="right" width="300px" class="toccolours" border="2" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="margin:0em 0em 1em 1em; border:3px solid #AAA; border-collapse:collapse;">

Here I just created the table which would hold the entire thing. (Same thing that you did). By default this table is always going to have something inside of it so we create it no matter what.

<tr><td colspan="2" align="center"><font size="+1">'''{{{name|{{PAGENAME}}}}}'''</font></td></tr><!--

Here I create the table space which holds the template name. In wikipedia templates, variables should be indicated by the three brackets surrounding the name of the variable. If you want to set a default for the variable (the value that it will be set to if the user chooses to not define one) then it should be placed inside of the brackets and after the name of the variable, seperated by a "|". In the code above I create a variable "name" and set the default to the name of the page. If the name of the page is not the name of the actual location, then the user can set the name to something else, otherwise, it is better to not define it. The "". All text in between the start and finish of those two markers is ignored by the parser, and therefore can be used to format the text in the edit window, but still maintaining the integrity of the template when in use.

-->{{#if: {{{image|}}}|<tr><td align="center" style="background:#efefef;" colspan="2">[[Image:{{{image}}}<!--
-->{{#if: {{{imagesize|}}}|{{!}}{{{imagesize}}}||}}]]</td></tr>||}}<!--

In this line I create the image. Variables should be treated as if they were the actual text which is entered into the variable. (I created it exactly the same way as you might create an image except replacing the image name with the variable requested. In order to make the image size an optional variable I used a nested if statement (an if statement inside of another one) to check if there an image size had been defined. If it had been defined than the size is added it to the page (The {{!}} template creates a "!", it is a workaround), otherwise it is ignored and the image is not resized.

-->{{#if: {{{motto|}}}|<tr><td align="center" colspan="2"> <font size="-2"><i>[[Motto]]:</i>{{{motto}}}</font></small></td></tr>||}}<!--

In order to make the font smaller, the <small> tag was not functioning because the text that was being input was a variable. Therefore in this case the <font> tag had to be implemented.

-->{{#if: {{{location|}}}|<tr><td style="background:white; border-top:1px solid gray;" align="left" colspan="2">[[Image:{{{location}}}|center|250px|Location of {{{name|{{PAGENAME}}}}}.]]||}}<!--
-->{{#if: {{{censusnumber|}}}|<tr><td>Census Division</td><td>{{{censusnumber}}}</td></tr>||}}
{{#if: {{{area|}}}|<tr><td>[[List of the 100 largest cities and towns in Canada by area|Area]]:</td><td>{{{area}}} km²</td></tr>||}}<!--
-->{{#if: {{{founded|}}}|<tr><td>Founded:</td><td>{{{founded}}}</td></tr>||}}<!--
-->{{#if: {{{incorporated|}}}|<tr><td>Incorporated:</td><td>{{{incorporated}}}</td></tr>||}}<!--
-->{{#if: {{{population|}}}|<tr><td>[[List of population of Canada by years|Population]]:</td><td>{{{population}}}</td></tr>||}}<!--
-->{{#if: {{{density|}}}|<tr><td>[[Population density|Population density]]:</td><td>{{{density}}}/km²</td></tr>||}}<!--
--><tr><td>[[Time zone]]:</td><td>{{Template:Time_Zone_is:{{{timezone|NST}}}}}</td></tr><!--
-->{{#if: {{{postalcode|}}}|<tr><td>[[Canadian postal code|Postal code]] span:</td><td>{{{postalcode}}}</td></tr>||}}<!--
-->{{#if: {{{coordinates|}}}|<tr><td>Coordinates</td><td>{{{coordinates}}}</td></tr>||}}<!--
-->{{#if: {{{elevation|}}}|<tr><td>[[Elevation|Elevation]] span:</td><td>{{{elevation}}} [[1 E0 m|m]] [[Sea level|MSL]]</td></tr>||}}<!--
-->{{#if: {{{highway|}}}|<tr><td>Highways:</td><td>{{{highway}}}</td></tr>||}}<!--
-->{{#if: {{{waterway|}}}|<tr><td>Waterways:</td><td>{{{waterway}}}</td></tr>||}}<!--
-->{{#if: {{{mayor|}}}|<tr><td>[[:Category:Lists of Canadian mayors|Mayor]]:</td><td>{{{mayor}}}</td></tr>||}}<!--
--><tr><td>[[:Category:Government of Canada|Governing body]]:</td><td>{{{governingbody|{{PAGENAME}} Town Council}}}</td></tr><!--
-->{{#if: {{{website|}}}|<tr><td>Website:</td><td>[{{{website}}} {{{weblabel}}}]</td></tr>||}}<!--
--></table>

The rest of the template is repetetive parserfunction use. If you want the "if" parserfunction to function as a check to see if the template is blank then you should do as follows: {{#if: variable is defined|then do stuff|otherwise do other stuff}}

I hope that covers everything. If you ever have anymore questions feel free to ask :). --SomeStranger^(t|c) 00:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits on Freemasonry

Hello Osgoodelawyer, You recently made a large number of formatting edits on the Freemasonry article. First, I want to say thank you. However, I do have a request: could you make such edits in one lump edit instead of doing them one at a time? In the past, we have had difficulty with vandals hiding substantive (and objectionable) changes to the article in among a mass of small formatting edits. Thus, to protect the article against vandalism, it means that someone has to go through each edit one by one, to make sure they were indeed the minor formatting changes they claim to be. It also makes it difficult to keep your positive edits if a revert is called for. If we had to revert, all of your good work would be lost. Whereas, if you do it in one lump edit, it is fairly easy to cut and paste your changes and add them back in. Thanks Blueboar 23:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries... just raising the issue. Blueboar 23:50, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Freemasonry Wikiproject

I love the idea, I had wondered too why there wasn't one yet. I don't know enough about the subject to start one myself. However, I'll be happy to help out where I can. Thanks again! Ardenn 15:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rklawton

Thanks. Rklawton 19:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Murder"

It is biased, and in my opinion highly offencive. A Murder is a random killing that a fanatical person does. If someone is killed, by an executioner, who is being ordered to carry out the execution by a goverment, that by defination is an execution.

What's going on is that some people in the article want the "murdered" word to stay because it has emotion tied to it. What they aren't realizing is that by saying "murder" it puts the deaths of the hundreds of thousands of holocost victims on the same level as a random gangland drive by shooting.

An execution is carried out by a goverment, by govermental employees, carring out death sentences that were given out by legal means. In this case hitler ordered the executions, which was within his legal power to do so, the executioners were simply following orders, they weren't being malicious.

History and the Neurenburg Trials back me up. The people who were convicted during the trials were not the actual executioners, it was the people who ordered the executions that were convicted.

To me it's both extremely biased, and highly offencive to call the holocost camp killings murders. Imagine if 20 years in the future someone looks at the current US death penalty and starts saying that all those people were "murdered" by the goverment. It's the same exact idea, only on a much grander scale. Seraphim 18:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh also I just noticed something. Removing POV tags because you disagree with them is vandalism. Don't do it again. The tag doesn't mean that the section is biased, it simply means that an editor feels that the section is biased and that there is an active discussion about the section. I suggest you read up on WP:VAND about how dispute tag removal works: "Do not remove them unless you are sure that the dispute is settled" the dispute is not settled, therefore the tag must stay. Seraphim

I'm not telling you what to do as far as dispute tags go, i'm merely stating wikipedia policy. There is an active dispute about the pov-ness of the section therefore a tag is 100% appropriate. If you want, go post on the policy pump about changing how dispute tags work, that's outside of the scope of this discussion. The debate on the legality of the nazi regime is irrelevant, they abused the system to get into power, everyone knows that, however they did manage to attain power, and hitler was the legal dictator. I love how you are basing your argument on the statement "In addition, there is higher law--not just international law, but unwritten constitutional and other law that any modern nation must adhere to in some manner." if a so called "law" is unwritten, guess what, it's not a law. Also you say "Finally, one who orders a killing but who does not carry out that killing himself is, in very many jurisdictions, charged with murder.", that is very true, however that's talking about a person acting on his own, not a goverment. Seraphim 18:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Responce

You: The debate on the legality of the nazi regime is irrelevant, they abused the system to get into power, everyone knows that, however they did manage to attain power, and hitler was the legal dictator.

Unless I'm completely mistaken, even Hitler's powers were in theory curtailed by some legal machinery. This machinery was very often, but not always, complied with by Hitler. Any orders which did not comply with this machinery (even though it was completely controlled by Hitler anyway), would not have been legal in Germany. Add the issue that international law doesn't care if your actions are legal in your country, so long as they are illegal internationally, and you have the internationally illegal killing of innocent civilians. Murders, one might call them.

This is all 100% irrelevant. Hitler ran his goverment, which was in control of the areas. He through the legal process that his goverment supported ordered the executions of hundreds of thousands. It was done by a goverment, which makes it an execution.

You: I love how you are basing your argument on the statement "In addition, there is higher law--not just international law, but unwritten constitutional and other law that any modern nation must adhere to in some manner." if a so called "law" is unwritten, guess what, it's not a law.

Really? That's an interesting interpretation. One that I could have a hundred lawyers at your door disputing. For instance, nowhere in the Constitution Act, 1867, the document which defines the governance of Canada, is there a single mention of a Prime Minister. I assure you, however, that a Prime Minister is, and has always been, legally, the leader of my country. That's just one example. Both municipal and international law systems are filled with unwritten law. You: Also you say "Finally, one who orders a killing but who does not carry out that killing himself is, in very many jurisdictions, charged with murder.", that is very true, however that's talking about a person acting on his own, not a goverment.

Your giving a really horrible example. Sure the PM isn't outlined in the constitution act, but the goverment that the act put in place sure as hell has outlined the position of the PM. "Constitutional conventions form part of the Constitution, but they are not legally enforceable. They include the existence of the Prime Minister and Parliamentary Cabinet, the fact that the Governor General is required to give assent to Bills, and the requirement that the Prime Minister call an election upon losing a vote of non-confidence." it's all written down clearly for people to see.

Governments, like corporations, can be considered "people" in the legal sense. This is a collateral issue, though, since by the "Nazis" we're speaking of the individuals who ran the regime, and when we say "murdered" we mean "by those who gave the orders." OzLawyer 19:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Corporations are able to be considered people in the legal sense, that is true, however that is not the case with goverments. Seraphim 19:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm getting you, you're dismissing my argument that Hitler may have done things against the law of Germany at the time by saying that, as an action of the government, legally or not, that makes it an execution? Let's say I was to agree with you that it was an execution--which it obviously was in one sense--that does not mean it was not also a murder.

Something cannot be at the same time an execution and a murder. An execution is a killing done through legal means, and a murder is a killing done through illegal means. They are mutually exclucive.

No, it's not written down. Well, it is, but not in a legal document, and therefore, it's unwritten (what makes one non-legal document different from another? Nothing). That's why it's called the unwritten constitution. There are plenty of other examples. Customary international law, for one.

"No, it's not written down. Well, it is, but not in a legal document, and therefore, it's unwritten" if it's written down, it's written down. Nazi Germany was a soverign nation, they made their own laws, and executed people under those laws. It was done lawfully. The fact that this can even be contested proves that murdered is the wrong word.

Now, how about addressing the fact that we are obviously speaking of those people who gave the orders for the killings when we're referring to "murder"? OzLawyer 19:39, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

They did it through legal channels, it was not murder. There is really no wiggle room here, murder is illegal, executions are legal. The post-war trials did not convict any of the executioners of wrongdoing. That shows that they were executions, not murders. Seraphim 19:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Immediate removal of talk page messages

Technically it's not against the rules so I couldn't really list it. But as a comment it would work :p Seraphim 16:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The merge

My apologies. You never specified which article you wanted the material to go into. Zos 17:24, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fm-stub

Hi. ive just taken fm-stub to Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. it wasnt officially proposed or debated at WP:WSS/P, which is the way we make sure that stub template names arent ambiguous and couldnt relate to things like FM radio, and also where we make sure there are plenty of stubs existing before the template is made. in future please propose new stub types before making new ones! BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 00:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brampton Infobox

There's no real reason. At the time that I created it, I wasn't aware that "standard" infoboxes existed. I kinda like the one I put up there, but feel free to change it to the standard if you like. - pm_shef 22:46, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NFLD Red Ensign

The Newfoundland Red Ensign was an unoffical flag of the Dominion, but it was to be used for commerical shipping only. Using this flag to represent the country is incorrect. It was never adopted by the parliament as an offical flag and therefore its use should be restricted to a Civil ensign as per the British Red Ensign. 134.153.36.198 17:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I never stated anything about using the tricolour, I simply stated that using the Red Ensign as the flag of the country is incorrect as it is a Civil ensign only and therefore its use is restricted to being flown from a ship. 134.153.36.198 17:21, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As for which flag is least incorrect, the Red Ensign should certainly not be used as a flag of the Dominion. It is a Civil Ensign and should only be flown on a ship! The tricolour is more appropriate as it was used as the flag of Newfoundland in the 19th century and used by the Boyle administration and flown over Government House. 134.153.36.198 12:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flags of Newfoundland

Great work on the articles you have created depicting the flags of Newfoundland. HJKeats 00:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have the book (The Oldest City The Story of St. John’s, Newfoundland (2003) ISBN 0973027126) by Paul O'Neil, he devotes two pages to the tricolour. I'll have a read and add any new info. HJKeats 00:25, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For reference to add additional context to the article on the Newfoundland Tricolor, I have transcribed verbatim text (here) from the Encyclopedia of Newfoundland and Labrador for your consumption. When you have extracted the items you wish included in the article I shall remove it. Any items you use from that you may wish to add a reference to ISBN 0969342217 Encyclopedia of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Is there any background information you wish researched? I put in an article for the Native's Society to bolster the origin of the flag; I have a bit more to add before the article is complete. Are you ready to have the article Newfoundland Tricolour nominated for DYK? HJKeats 15:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The quote

“

The tricolor was flown at Government House during the Boyle and Murray administrations at the turn of the 20th century and was shown on 19th century flag charts as the flag of Newfoundland.

”

came directly out of the Encyclopedia, it just lists references at the end of the article and not tied specifically to statements within the article itself.

I can give you another from Paul O'Neil's book (The Oldest City The Story of St. John’s, Newfoundland (2003) ISBN 0973027126 p. 516)

“

"It was flown at Government House by Governor Boyle, as well as from the staffs of private homes, commercial concerns, public buildings and from the mastheads and sterns of Newfoundland vessels at sea. As late as 1907 an official mail steamer entered the port of St. John's flying the pink, white and green.

”

HJKeats 15:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can't give any substantiation of the references contained in the Independent, except for the North American reference that I mention on the article talk page, that come directly from Paul O'Neill's book. Here's the reference

“

The Bishop was familiar with the flag of the Native's Society, and had been presented with one in 1837. This is the first authentic knowledge we have of the flag's existence.... The Union Jack did not assume its present form until 1848, about a dozen years after the introduction of the first Native's flag.

”

Can't help you with the formatting, sorry... HJKeats 16:16, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just to clarify a couple things on the flags from Paul O'Neill's book, The Oldest City.

The woodhauls was a voluntary event to cut and bring wood to supply churches, schools and charity institutions for firewood and the like. These were mostly sealers from various outports waiting around St. John's for the vessels to leave for the ice flows. The stacks of wood was decorated with flags and bunting as a sort of competition between rivalry religious groups. Bishop Fleming tried first to encourage brotherhood amongst them by sending a thank you letter to the Protestants thanking them for their contributions of timber, this attempt failed... The white in the Tricolor flag was a peace offering between the two groups taken from the banner of Scotland in respect for Flemings Scottish friend, William Carson.

A character which resembled Miss Liberty clad in a flowing gown of vertical stripes of ping, white and green appeared on stage at the Casino Theater in 1901 when the first authorized public performance of Boyle’s Ode to Newfoundland was given. Next day the colors appeared on the cover of the music sheet published by His Excellency. The colors were also seen on the masthead of Colonial Commerce, an important local periodical for over 25 years. HJKeats 23:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Newfoundland Tricolour

Nomination for DYK done, see here. Good luck... HJKeats 16:47, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A big thank you

Shucks... as he shuffles his feet, I try my best. I'm about the biggest promoter also, had an interview with the local CBC reporter but he didn't air the article about Wikipedia and how it can be used to promote the province. I have also spoken with Bert Riggs at the Centre for Newfoundland Studies trying to get him to add/edit articles to Wikipedia. Understandably he isn't in a position to do that while chief archivist at CNS. I'm working on a means of getting some of the valuable old photographs and memorabilia held by CNS to be used in Wikipedia. Stay tuned... HJKeats 01:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Canada Day!

Happy Canada Day, friend. Ardenn 23:36, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grats on the skydiving. I wanna do that sometime, myself. It's off and on rain, so we may go to fireworks, but some locally. The hill is too crowded. Ardenn 23:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:BuchananCrest.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:BuchananCrest.gif. However, the copyright tag you've used is deprecated or obsolete, and should not be used. This could be because the tag is inaccurate or misleading, or because it does not adequately specify the copyright status of the image. For a list of copyright tags that are in current use, see the "Public domain", "Free license", and "Fair use" sections of Wikipedia:Image copyright tags.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:04, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Confederation of the Equator

Thank you for helping me with the Did you know that? nomination. OMEN 08:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Confederation of the Equator, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions, especially helping get the nomination sorted out! ++Lar: t/c 15:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Again, thanks for all your help. Now I have to go back to editting Military history of Brazil. OMEN 19:03, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Cooke Manuscript

I'm not so sure that it is a stub. It's more likely all the information currently available, unless you have more? -- Avi 05:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]