User talk:Mareino/Archive 3

Image Tagging for Image:Irvis.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Irvis.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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 User talk:Carnildo/images. 17:27, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Userify

Actually we already have a template by what was the common name for the procedure of moving pages to the userspace. This template, Template:Userfy (note the missing 'i'), is supposed to go on articles that need userfication. Perhaps you can rename yours to something like Template:Userfy user or something similar to indicate it should go on the user's talk page. If you want to discuss this further, please go to User talk:MacGyverMagic (I was too lazy to log in) :) - 131.211.210.14 08:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glad I could help. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hi

Shadin 14:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gay

I believe the Castro street picture was removed in response to this request [1]. You might consider removing it again. -Seth Mahoney 19:44, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done as requested. :)--M @r ē ino 19:54, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Get the facts straight

Get the facts straight and I would not have to keep editing information. George Remus is not a fictional character, many of the UC alums did not actually graduate and cannot then be considered alumni and Steve Logan was not the college basketball player of the year. Kenyon Martin was.

Get the facts straight 2

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2002/01/08/tem_the_jazz_bird_fact.html

Tuesday, January 08, 2002 The Jazz Bird: Fact vs. fiction Text removed as per Wikipedia:Copyrights

http://www.enquirer.com/bearcats/2002/03/30/uc_logan_duked_out_for.html

Saturday, March 30, 2002 Logan duked out for AP honor Text removed as per Wikipedia:Copyrights

user:207.164.171.148

Given the activity today, do you feel that its likely that this IP address will get blocked? Stude62 21:51, 28 March 2006 (UTC) -I think I got my IP's mixed. let me go back and check edits. Sorry for the intrusion. Stude62 22:53, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

red rain

Please see discussion section on official finding

Maz and Forbes

I had a hunch someone more right-brained than I would improve the Mazeroski article. Regarding the Forbes Field article, I am thinking I might post a standard photo of the ballpark under a fair-use argument, put it in the box, and move my photo elsewhere in the article. Wahkeenah 16:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Check it out when you get the chance, alter as needed. d:) Wahkeenah 22:42, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome Barnstar

Thank you for the happy star! Waikiki!!! --ElectricEye 04:37, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Honesty Company

hi, i edited the honesty company entry to make it entirely neutral, using the Hallmark and American Greeting card entries as templates. i've never used wikipedia before. do you have any more suggestions for me? i'd really appreciate it! thanks~ kimberly (User talk:Hoco)

north american eagle

what isnt verified

Pune Changes

I'm a serious contributer to the Pune page,if you look at my contributions page you will see I have written most of the article. I was editing parts of it so that the page is up to standards set by the WikiProject Indian cities.

Akshay

Be careful

Your edit effectively accusing South Korea of being an apartheid state in Hines Ward was pretty offensive. But I guess it's to be expected of one 'proud to be politically incorrect'.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.48.58.195 (talk • contribs)

I only said it because it's true. Quoting directly from the source, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, "This is a centuries-old problem that predates the Korean War and the subsequent military presence there, something that gave rise to Hines Ward Jr. in 1976. South Korea is a nation with a vise-tight social registry and a blood-is-destiny conviction. Mixed-race children there continue to find doors shut in their different faces. And their numbers continue to rise, as women flee rural areas for the cities and cause farmers to marry natives from once-rival Asian nations, such as China and Vietnam. Fifteen percent of South Korea's babies in 2005 were of mixed parentage."--M @r ē ino 13:47, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstars for funny edits

You left one on my page. You think that was funny? Check this out. ==ILike2BeAnonymous 04:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ROFL--M @r ē ino 04:04, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rusty Joystick

I just counter-edited your article change at http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/The_Rusty_Joystick - I may hve changed something unintentionally! HawkerTyphoon 20:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ringed teal.gif

Hi, you sent me msg * Oh, one more thing: if you got Image:Ringed teal.gif off of a website, please add the URL where you found it; if not, please edit the page to indicate that it's not available anywhere else on the internet. It will be useful for when the legal editors check to confirm the image's copyright status. --M@rēino 22:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC) I took the original image but it is avaliable on a few sites including my site at http://www.btinternet.com/~palmiped/waterfowl.htm other sites... http://www.feathersite.com/Poultry/NDG/Ducks/Teal/BRKRingTeal.html http://www.camacdonald.com/birding/sauruguay.htm

please advise as to what to put on Ringed teal.gif page

Palmiped 23:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Zimmerman

Thanks for the clarification. I wasn't sure where to put the template, since WP:BIO states: "If the article doesn't make any claim of notability, you can add the {{nn-warn}} notice to their article or user page" and that's why I put it on the article page. Maybe that should be updated. Rishodi 06:23, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

christian rappers

If you're going to use this category, please don't put groups in it. Create a new category, like category:Christian hip hop groups. thanks, --Urthogie 16:01, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transhumanism

Sure, let's talk about my decision. My reasoning is this. In case you didn't know I deleted that template along with it's counterpart Template:User anti-transhumanist. What happened was I saw one of them on a user page, checked WP:UB and found that there was a pro- and anti-transhumanism userbox. The existence of the two, seen side by side, was convincing evidence that they served a polarizing (or "divisive" as the CSD is worded) existence. Neither of them helps to generate encyclopedia content, so, whle I don't claim that holding either point of view is offensive, I do think that since, as you say, it is a controversial issue which makes both of them divisive, and encouraging the possible promotion of harmful editing blocs. In fact, I think that if you really feel you must express your opinion on the matter, you can just put the text on your userpage, not in a template, and it's at least better then the userbox. I hope this makes sense. :-) Dmcdevit·t 02:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done, hope that's where you wanted it. Thanks for your understanding. :) Dmcdevit·t 02:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dmcdevit forgot to tell you that the very deltion of the userboxes is controversial in itself, and that there is a way to request their undeletion. Please see and vote at: Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Userbox_debates#Template:User_transhumanist_and_Template:User_anti-transhumanist.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 23:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How does this differ from any userbox... such as the division between male and female, those who like the Frog and those who dont? Dmcdevit... your logic would suggest ALL of these other userboxes, and potentialy any user box (as the purpose of any user box is to state a choice and thus seperates you from those who dont agree with that choice) Enigmatical 00:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Including a dangerous userboxes like 'this user is an admin' (divisive! not everyone is!), 'this user is a Wikipedian' (99,9% of Earth population is not!), and 'this user is a content creator' (not all Wikipedians are content creators...). Need I go any further?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 04:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- This was a very unwise action. We've just been through a bitter war over this very issue of mass deletion of userboxes that express religious, political, philosophical, etc., viewpoints. There is no need to begin the war again. Metamagician3000 02:31, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - The person who did it seems like someone who is normally sensible. I wonder whether it is worth having another attempt to reason with him/her. E.g. "User feminist" recently survived. But someone could easily create "User anti-feminist" (and this may well have happened in the past for all I know). I don't see how the non-aggressive statement that you subscribe to a particular philosophical position, such as feminism or transhumanism, can suddenly be divisive just because someone creates a userbox saying that they oppose that position. The latter act might be divisive but I just don't see how the first one is. If it were, many accepted userboxes would now have to be considered divisive. Metamagician3000 02:05, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I've now done so here. Metamagician3000 05:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Family Guy

My "sources" are in the episode guides! By God, have you even watched that show before? TMC1982 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Americans (ethnic group)

The article about Americans as an ethnic group belongs on Wikipedia just as much as African Americans does as an ethnic group. 1028 03:47, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What? Why are you telling me this? What did I do? --M @r ē ino 12:56, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dreadnaught

Thank you -

Bob Lord www.dreadnaughtrock.com

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.51.180.37 (talk • contribs) .

Huh??? What factual errors???

Reminder...

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template.

— Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 02:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Looks pretty good man. I like it much better now. Once again, thank you.UberCryxic 04:10, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes

Avoid controversies about userboxes. Jimbo is on the side of the deleters. Fred Bauder 21:02, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to the header of Falkland Islands

Thank you for the edit, I think it is correct and useful, but as the article has experienced many edit and revert wars, and a strong "pact" was agreeded, we had to revert any edit in the header that hadn't any written argument deffending it, and because your edit wasn't supported by a note in the talk, i had to revert it, please don't intend this like a personal attack, but i think it was necessary to keep "peace" (or let an ultranationalist to start trolling you because of your edit). I encourage you to write something in the talk--Argentino (talk/cont.) 21:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User No Recycling

G'day Mareino,

thanks for your polite query. I deleted the template {{User No Recycling}} because I believe, a) it adds nothing to the encyclopaedia, b) it is unnecessarily divisive and inflammatory, c) it does not belong in the Template: namespace. The template clearly falls within the speedy deletion criteria, so I deleted it. Yes, it has been restored in the past: first, in early January, when there was no policy defence for deleting userboxen and admins were out deleting and restoring everything under the sun, and then again in March. The March restoration was carried out by Guanaco (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), who was brought before ArbCom and de-sysopped as a result of his behaviour restoring userboxen inappropriately. I don't think either case is relevant to this one.

You mention that the template has led to some discussion of recycling issues, with the net result being an improvement of our recycling-related articles. That's great, and evidence that userboxen aren't completely useless. Good show. I suspect a userbox written to refer directly to editing (rather than a statement of one's politics) would, however, be more useful in this sense. Have you considered "This user is interested in recycling issues" or "This user participates in recycling-related articles" or something along those lines as an alternative? I believe this would give you all the benefits of the current userbox, with none of the drawbacks.

Of course, if, at the end of the day, you absolutely disagree with me and want the userbox back as-is, feel free to take it to DRV. Thanks, fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 16:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Future Engineers

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Future Engineers, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-{{prod}}ed, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still feel the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Mango juice^talk 15:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Separation Template

You said separation&action=history in your recent revert that "according to WP:CSD, 'the second criterion is disputed by many users and may not reflect consensus.'"; unfortunately, the exact same thing could be said about the first criterion. :) Both were forced upon the userbase with absolutely 0 discussion, with no attempt to gather consensus, and with no adherence to usual policy-establishing process: both were merely added by anti-userbox admins and kept there through sheer force and persistence. The only difference between T1 and T2 is that Jimbo has specifically endorsed the first, but most of Wikipedia's policies haven't been specifically endorsed by Jimbo.

In the end, though, while I agree with you that it's unfair, I'm afraid that there is simply no choice here. If you don't want {{User:UBX/separation}} to be altered slightly, it will be deleted. The only reason I edited it was to avoid that inevitability by simply rewording it. If you'd rather it was simply gone forever, then I won't fight you over it. -Silence 23:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I reverted myself.--M @r ē ino 01:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Thanks. Better than a delete. And once things are up and working with raw-code userboxes, hopefully we'll be able to put the original version up on the page in untemplatified format, since it's not the POV-expressing userbox's appearance, but the raw code (i.e. the non-substed template, especially when it's in Templatespace), that most people object to. -Silence 01:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

check out the editions on theta beta potatoes

Mareino- thanks, as you can see there potata was cover in a number of newspapers etc. what do you think? - user:xsxex

THETA BETA POTATOES

Mareino - yes it was covered in numerous sources. If you clicked on the links below you would see the scan of the Cedar Rapids / Iowa City - Icon Newspaper also the house was covered in the Daily Iowan

http://www.dailyiowan.com/media/storage/paper599/news/2002/08/23/UEdition/A.Musical.Palette.Of.Many.Tones-262330.shtml?norewrite200605191551&sourcedomain=www.dailyiowan.com

what happened to this article.. i noticed it has been deleted - xsxex

Im still at a loss as to what needs to happen. I thought i had sent you documentation. There are two articles so far.. one in the cedar rapids Icon , and one in the daily iowan .. there was another in the des moines daily .. who do i need to show the articles to? - i dont get why the article just gets deleted. I mean are you guys gonna delete the punk house article? - the only reason i thought to put it on there was because that article reminded me. - please let me know. - xsxex

X-Men: The Last Stand

I cited my Wikipedia guideline re: film critics on the Talk page. Nex time please check such things before making broad changes to an article: Talk:X-Men:_The_Last_Stand#Critical_Response. Per Wikipedia guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Films#Article_body I'm rv'ing the edit. -- Tenebrae 17:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

You said my article on manatees needed verificability, or whatever, but I provided several websites...Additionally, my article on Hongwei Liu the Messiah is a local thing, local to my high school that is. I don't think it should be considered vandalism if I am posting something minor. Additionally, my article on Evropa ties into my article on Hongwei Liu the Messiah. If I re-verify my sources, and you'll take my and about 600 other student's words for it, will you undo my vandalism warning and let me post my story? Mubote

greatings

it thanks you that you took kevin spacey of the category gays out. :)

Userbox Public Transit

According to Wikipedia:The German solution, here’s a a tip for you: {{User:Olve/Userboxes/Public transport}} (in lieu of the blanked template:User Public Transit). -- Olve 22:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Link not working

I tried searching for Harry Evanson before I posted my question. That link doesn't seem to exist! I sure wish it did! StephenSS 00:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User:Winhunter/Userboxes/recycling

I created User:Winhunter/Userboxes/no recycling, but since I cannot trace users who used the original template, I can't distinguish them from the current support recycling template thus it's really up to the users to make the switch themselves. --Hunter 09:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did You Know

Thanks for the comments -- perhaps I should have said "encyclopedia articles don't say "Did You Know..." ;) --Rehcsif 19:41, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorist etc

Thanks for your comment on the cfd. You said "Proposal: Redirect to. That will end this debate and allow people to focus on the new, hopefully more tightly defined, debate.--M@rēino 18:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)"

I didnt undertstand. Were you going to add something? AndrewRT 01:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching that -- I was missing a colon, so the text didn't show up right. It's fixed now.--M @r ē ino 03:30, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dozens of Edits

I saw your comment about "making dozens of edits" to the Ann Coulter article. Good work. Maybe you can help me with something related: I'm fairly new, but IMHO I make good contributions to the work. Often I will make a large edit to an article, carefully previewing my drafts until everything is as I want it. Then I click Save Page and review the final article. Sometimes I'll discover a typo or something tiny like that, and fix it. At that point, only the correction of the typo shows up on my watchlist; the larger edit is no longer shown. That's fine by me, but I'm wondering if others also only see the most recent (tiny) correction. If so, nasty people could make big controversial/vandalizing changes, then camouflage them by making a tiny uncontroversial one.

I've been wondering how this works, and maybe you can shed some light on it. Lou Sander 14:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gun (name)

File:Gun Hellsvik.jpg

Gun Hellsvik

I saw that you tagged Gun (name) with {{verify}}. What is it you need verified? // Liftarn

As I understand Wikipedia rules on verification, you should have a source or two verifying the deriviation of the name and verifying that the people named Gun who don't have a Wiki article about them actually exist. --M @r ē ino 20:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The list was copied from the Swedish Wikipedia. Gun Hellsvik exists. I have a photo to prove it! English sources seems to be hard to find. When I google for "swedish names" I get a lot of "what should we name the baby" sites and for some reason (wonder why) they don't list Gun. There are Swedish sources[2][3] and I found in English for the related name Gunhild[4][5]. Also see Wikipedia:Articles for creation/2006-02-03#Gun (name) // Liftarn

Citing to the Bible

As a recent participant in the TfD dicussion on whether {{Bibleverse}} and {{Bibleref}} should be deleted, I wanted to make sure you were aware of the new discussion at Wikipedia:Citing sources/Bible. The goal of these discussion is to resolve the concerns raised re GFDL, use of an external cite, etc. Additionally, this page should serve as a location for recording research about the different websites that provide online Bible information. Please edit the summary and join the discussion - thx Trödel 15:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An Incovenient Truth

I have added a line in the article, "Currently, every version of this documentary that can be downloaded online is fake," in order to stop people from trying to download this film online. If they do download them and find them fake, they may be so tired that they would not be willing to know anything more about this film. It is also important to know that those fake files contain viruses. Letting people know that the files are fake is a way of protecting them. (See User_talk:ILike2BeAnonymous#Message_for_you...)

Commons

You stated on User talk:Samguana:

Are you familiar with Wikipedia's sister project, Wikimedia Commons? Since you are the creator of Ceiling Cat, you could upload the image there. Wikimedia is not concerned with whether content is "encyclopedic", only with creative works of all kinds "that is created and maintained not by paid-for artists, but by volunteers."

Please note that Commons is not a dumping ground for random images and other media. File uploads there must be usable in some Wikimedia project (see Commons:Project scope). Thanks. howch e ng {chat} 16:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

why do you keep changing my updates. they are correct and you keep changing them. its annoying —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.111.91.130 (talk • contribs)

No, I don't. See your contribs list:[6]. All I changed was that silly bit about pierogis.--M @r ē ino 13:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from CFD

Hi there Mareino. With regard to your comments on Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_June_18#Category:Multiracial_people, I think you misunderstood what I meant. I didn't say that the U.S. census was unverifiable, but instead that the use of such criteria was arbitrary "and this is unverifiable."

I wasn't so clear on what I meant by "this": what I meant was not the census criteria, but the application of these criteria to the subject of a Wikipedia article. In other words, it might be difficult to verify that the subject of a Wikipedia article qualifies as "multiracial" under U.S. census criteria.

By "arbitrary", I meant that I felt that the use a U.S.-government specified definition of "multiraciality" was non-neutral. Though it's too late now, I do agree that your proposed definition (Americans who are listed in two distinct "race" categories in Wikipedia) is neutral enough.

As to your comments about trying to improve the category before deleting it, I do see your point, though at the time I couldn't conceive of a suitably neutral definition (as you did in your reply). --Saforrest 23:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That makes much more sense -- I'm a little embarrassed that I didn't interpret your reasoning correctly the first time around. I wasn't around for the last time that there was a general review of the guidelines on racial categories, but it seems like it should be reviewed again. Any CFD on the issue generates lots of ill will that I think would be greatly lessened if we could just agree on how to apply the basic principles of research to this socially sensitive area.--M @r ē ino 23:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Effulgent thanks!

I, Badbilltucker, award you the **Rescue from Deletion Barnstar** for your work in keeping the *Category:People from Barnstable, Massachusetts* from being deleted.

I have been creating a number of new categories of people from the various metropolitan areas in the United States, and have, regretfully, been making only token inclusions in them, until I have them all in place. Your quick action in preserving the Barnstable category is greatly appreciated. And, yes, I regret to say that the barnstar you are receiving here is someone else's work too. My own computer graphics skills don't extend as far as stick figures, so I went through the list to find one. I regret to say that I would probably be criticized for including ALL the awards you no doubt deserve, but imagine that they shall be eventually be forthcoming as well. Thanks again.Badbilltucker 18:11, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fact

Thanks for your input! With respect to the speedy, please see my reply on TfD. dryguy 20:16, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Yinzer (Yinz)

Good call on the in-line reference. --Chris Griswold 22:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Savran

It was Savransky, as you can see from his HS Hall of Fame listing. His parents were Jack and Marilyn Savransky. He dropped the last three letters when he started in radio.

Uruguay

Listen, Im Uruguayan and I know the history of my country. According to our constitution there is no motto. And the national anthem is called: "Himno Nacional".

You want sources? Ok, here is for the offical name of the National Anthem http://www.ejercito.mil.uy/simbolos2/himno.htm. The cnstitution is here: http://www.rau.edu.uy/uruguay/const97-1.6.htm

Next time try to learn a little bit more from our country, before changin the information.--Uruguayo 22:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem. The sources you cite actually prove MY view, not yours. --M @r ē ino 22:08, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

eh?? In this web http://www.ejercito.mil.uy/simbolos2/himno.htm from the goverment the official name of the anthem is "Himno Nacional, which means "National Anthem". The constitution of 1997, shows that the goverment has no motto. --Uruguayo 22:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Furthemore if you do not know the official name of Uruguay is Republica Oriental del Uruguay, which means Eastern Republic of Uruguay, whatsoever the name used by Uruguay and all the latin american countries is Uruguay.--Uruguayo 22:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First off, your sources are in Spanish. Please see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Sources_in_languages_other_than_English. Second, you seem to fail to distinguish between titles and objects. To give an analogy, the national anthem of République française is La Marseillaise. See how that sentence carries more information than the sentence "the national anthem of France is the National Anthem of France."?--M @r ē ino 22:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aja, but in Uruguay the national anthem do not have any other name, it's just "Himno Nacional".--Uruguayo 22:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Prove it.--M @r ē ino 22:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The official web from the goverment: http://www.ejercito.mil.uy/simbolos2/himno.htm State that the name is "National Anthem". Other links..

1- http://www.enlacesuruguayos.com/Himno.htm 2- http://www.worldcupcollections.com/articulos/uruguay/html/htme/himno.htm 3- http://enciclopedia.us.es/index.php/Himno_nacional_de_Uruguay 4- http://www.mundomatero.com/estampas/himno.html 5- http://www.tiwy.com/pais/uruguay/himno_nacional/esp.phtml --Uruguayo 22:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All those sources are in Spanish, first of all, and none of them says that that the title of the song is "National Anthem", just that the song is the national anthem. --M @r ē ino 23:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chupa Chups

Hey, the spanish familiy sold last month the 100% of the company to the Italian group PERFETTI VAN MELLE.

I suppose you want sources..., well here it is: La familia Bernat vende Chupa Chups a una empresa italiana http://www.elmundo.es/mundodinero/2006/07/03/economia/1151908425.html . Again, before editing you should learn more about Spain and Latin American. --Uruguayo 22:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So should you. Re-read the news, the company is staying in Spain. --M @r ē ino 22:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is staying in Spain, but now the capitals are not spanish, isntead they are italians. Like Coca-Cola, in every country there is a Coca-Cola factory, even though the company is multinational, and not from the country where the factory is.--Uruguayo 22:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's not the right way to think about it. This is a better analogy: Coca Cola UK is a British company owned by an American company. Chupa still has all the rights and obligations given to non-person Spaniards under Spanish and EU law.--M @r ē ino 23:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MFD keep

I've replied to your Keep at this MfD. Perhaps you'd like to change your decision? --Andeh 12:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied to your input at the MfD I nominated over here.--Andeh 19:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Breaches of policy

Accusing people of racism for disagreeing with you on a categorisation matter is a very serious breach of Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Choalbaton 01:17, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]