Jump to content

Talk:Herman Van Rompuy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Better Picture?

[edit]

Is there no better picture that can be used? The current one makes him look like Gollum. 128.243.220.22 (talk) 05:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually he look like a white mongolian —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.103.65.216 (talk) 07:25, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

he looks fun to me. no seriously, he looks like a new yorker editor on it. --94.69.66.12 (talk) 19:55, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why need better? He is also known as - beautiful :D

Pronunciation

[edit]
  • I have doubts about the IPA pronounciation which is provided. In particular relative to both R : is it r or ʁ ? could someone more familiar with IPA make a check ? Hektor (talk) 10:20, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And is the <v> really right? Shouldn't it be <f>?--Barend (talk) 13:32, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Both <r> and <ʁ> are used in Dutch, both in the Netherlands and in Flanders. The pronunciation <f> for v is however exclusive for (certain parts of) the Netherlands. MaartenVidal (talk) 21:02, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • To help prevent the world (which is generally IPA illiterate) from adopting a completely wrong pronounciation of "Van Rompuy" (some British correspondents already have pronounced the "uy" as in the French "Guy"), I have inserted a comparison with the vowel of the French word "feuille", which sounds exactly the same. I had to resort to French because the vowel simply doesn't exist in English. If someone would know an English word with the same vowel pronounciation, please replace "feuille". (Tavernsenses (talk) 11:38, 20 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Why is this needed? There is a sound file that has the correct pronunciation. Snappy (talk) 15:41, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. If there were a set English pronunciation we could give that as well, as per the MoS, but I doubt that one could have emerged so soon. Incidentally, what is transcribed as [ɾ] in the IPA sounds like [r] in the sound file to me, but I don't speak Dutch so I can't say how much that matters. Though according to Dutch phonology both are in use. Lfh (talk) 15:47, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The pronunciation in the sound file is correct. I speak Dutch and hail from the Flemish community, and it's pretty much spot on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.190.253.144 (talk) 17:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"uy" is a diphtong sound. Try to hold the "u" in the word "but" a bit longer and then add a /j/: that's about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zapspace (talk • contribs) 20:33, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Information, Content and Scope Needed for Article

[edit]

Herman Van Rompuy has climbed the online betting ladders (cite Paddy Power) to become one of the top 3 runners for the First Permanent President of the European Counsel. Yet this article discusses almost nothing about his known politics, issues, views or opinions. It simply lists his party and positions held. For a man that in 30 days maybe the First Permanent President of the European Counsel we know nearly nothing about him. Please help me extend this article posthaste. I will begin adding what information is available about him from news articles and books, if everyone else pitches in maybe we can pull together a good article before he is crowned "President of Europe" as the press put it.OrangeCorner (talk) 03:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I came here for the same reason yesterday when I saw | this article. But his selection is still uncertain, looking at how EU politics work. Just look at Jean-Luc Dehaene's proposal as EC president. More info is always welcome but don't assume his selection is any more than speculation at this time. I recommend you ask for assistance at Wikipedia:WikiProject Belgium. --Triwbe (talk) 07:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Triwbe, Thanks for the suggestion of tapping the WikiProject Belgium for additional content and information about Van Rompuy. Indeed I agree that it is too early to call who will be the winner of the EC President post, however as of now Rompuy has become the most favored candidate on Paddy Power and give those odds I think it only makes sense to dig up what useful information we can on this person who may soon fill a very important position. OrangeCorner (talk) 16:52, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC calls the position the "EU" president, as opposed to European Council president, I'm not sure what the difference is; and says that it is a brand new position, therefore he is not succeeding anyone. In the video of his speech Rompuy himself says it is a new position. I'm not going to edit though, until someone corroborates. Video:http://video.aol.co.uk/video-detail/new-eu-president-confirms-new-world-order-desire-19nov09/17989978 Crookedvulture (talk) 22:20, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Crookedvulture, the easy way to explain the difference between "President of Europe" as the media calls it and "President of the European Counsel" is that the former is jargon and the later is the official title. There has been a rotating 6 month President of the Counsel since the founding of the European Coal and Steel Community, however the Lisbon Treaty changes this rotating system over to a system where one person is elected for 2 and a half year term with one possible reelection for a total of 5 years. Herman Van Rompuy is now this First Permanent (vs rotating) President of the European Counsel. There is also a President of the EU Commission (currently Borruso), and a President of the European Parliament. So technically speaking there are three different "Presidents of Europe" one for each of the branches of government, the parliament, the commission and the counsel. As for succession, technically President of the European Counsel is an existing position so he is succeeding Sweden's Prime Minister who is the current President, but he is the First Permanent (2 and half years instead of 6 months) President. OrangeCorner (talk) 07:07, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Accomplishments in Politics

[edit]

I'm creating a new section to add in accomplishments during Van Rompuy's political career. Initially I'm adding a quote from Bloomberg on the amount he helped reduce the Belgian deficit by. Other contributions in other areas are welcome as we try to build a better scope and larger amount of relevant content to the article.OrangeCorner (talk) 08:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At least parts of the section titled "President designate of the European Council" are copied straight from a news article

[edit]

I edited the last sentence of that section to remove the word "tonight" before wondering why it was there in the first place. I then copy-pasted the last sentence of that section into google [1] and saw that it matched an LA Times news article [2]. I don't care to compare the section as it currently is to the article to see how much was plagiarized, but someone else can do that. Just FYI, since the front page of the English-language version of wikipedia links directly to this section of the wiki article. tildetildetildetilde

"President"? I thought presidents were elected, at least in most parts of the world. This position was filled by appointment rather than a democratic election. He's also been labeled a "negotiator", although his opinions on the possibility of Turkey joining the EU do not reflect that (POV- I'm not too keen on Turkey joining the EU, either, but then again I am not trying to pass myself off as either a president or a negotiator).212.149.205.113 (talk) 07:22, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photographery issues

[edit]

There seems to be something wrong with the present photograph that one ought to resolve. It appears to be? —Preceding unsigned comment added by I like my sugar with coffee and cream (talk • contribs) 21:26, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can somenone explain

[edit]

can someone explain why Sources coming from the UK show only about a "fear in Turkey about him" while if you go to google.news turkey you see it barely mentioned? it stinks propaganda machine of the anglosaxon axis. --94.69.66.12 (talk) 21:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That one is easy to answer! The United Kingdom culture (generally as a group - though it does depend on the individual) dislikes bigotry because it makes them feel uncomfortable. The UKs culture is based on fair play (cricket anyone?), if someone is ruling out access to opportunities based on diversity (i.e. being Muslim and from Turkey) and then makes a sweeping statement about diversity being the EU's wealth! Then s/he will look and be portrayed as a bigot and a hypocrite in the UKs media. If there is a sniff of bigotry in the air the media pushes it down the UKs throats because it sells papers, and since the UK culture (which is not all anglosaxon) defaults to fair play, it will side with the under dogs, i.e. those that are excluded. Hence it will not surprise me if the UK (in general) backs Turkey's membership to the EU even more now, as more and more of the UK citizenry are disgusted by his comments. After all, if he is a hypocrite how can the UK trust him to be a fair mediator at the international level, when some of the worlds crises can happen in the middle east? There is no propaganda machine here, these unfortunately are quotes! The man has damaged his reputation in the UK before he started the job.--92.26.252.140 (talk) 22:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reflecting on this point a bit more, it kind of suggests that the media should be excluded from deriving supporting quotes for this page without detailed analysis of the sources they are quoting. They won't be objective, once they start to spin the quotes they will begin to build on each other. I'm not happy with Herman myself, but how can we be sure that is what he meant without analysis of the wider context of the debate in which the quotes are referenced? I think we as a community need to keep track of the general sentiment in the UK and across Europe as it develops over the next few days to see how divisive to Europe Herman's appointment by the council of head of states appears to be. The sentiment, if it materialises, is in itself note worthy of a encyclopedic entry. I move to ban all media reports both positive and negative from this page without analysis of context.--92.26.252.140 (talk) 23:08, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

His views on Turkey's Europeanness would pretty much be echoed by most of the British population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.49.54.43 (talk) 14:48, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey position

[edit]

HVR's quote on Turkey's accession to the EU was slightly but significantly mistranslated by the EUobserver, as is mentioned in this Flemish article: [3]. Later on, other media, just took over this translation. He actually says that Turkey is not Europe(an) and that Turkey will never be Europe(an). This is different from: Turkey will never be a part of Europe/EU. While he is most likely against the accession of Turkey, he did not threaten to (try to) block its accession, but said merely that Turkey is not European (e.g., culture-wise or geographically), and that Turkey will never be European. Secondly, the quote was not made during his prime ministerial function, so it does not belong in that section. In fact, his position was formulated, as a member of the opposition to the Belgian government, briefly before European leaders agreed to open negotiations with Turkey. Sijo Ripa (talk) 08:54, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To read the exact declaration about Turkey, please consult the Wikipedia in French [4]. We have worked to find the official text and give references. Thank you very much (and sorry for my faults in English). --Égoïté (talk) 22:32, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Date of entry into force of Lisbon Treaty and begining of presidential term

[edit]

As is widely known, the Lisbon Treaty will enter into force on December 1, 2009, and, according to several sources quoted in the article, that's when the term of office of the President of the European Council will start. However, some vandal has been repeatedly changing the date of the beggining of Mr. Van Rompuy term as President to January 1, 2010 without any explanation. And now, even the date of the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in a footnote of the article has been changed to January 1, 2010, which is a complete absurdity. --189.4.208.67 (talk) 03:24, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I again reversed edits that claimed Mr. Van Rompuy would take office as President on January 1. I did so based on the following statement contained in the official website of the European Union (more precisely, in a webpage dedicated to the 19 November 2009 Summit on appointments for the new top offices): The candidates are due to take up their posts when the treaty of Lisbon enters into force on 1 December [see http://www.consilium.europa.eu/showFocus.aspx?id=1&focusId=416&lang=en]. As always, the person claiming that Mr. Van Rompuy will not take office on that date has failed to discuss his/her claim in this talk page.--189.4.208.67 (talk) 09:25, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The official site is a primary source and is irrelevent. I've put up five independent sources including AFP, Irish Independent and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. If you want deeper digging, I'm sure we'll find sources telling you that he's taking office in January to give Belgium time to work through its hoops and appoint a new prime minister. Instead of bluntly disregarding the refs, you should try reading them. Therequiembellishere (talk) 13:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You mean the official source is a primary source and in entirely relevant. The press agencies and media that repeat them are secondary sources and cannot have priority over the primary source. --Red King (talk) 15:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nevertheless, what the primary source actually says is The formal decisions on these appointments will be taken once the Treaty of Lisbon has entered into force, on 1 December 2009.. Which certainly does not say that they will begin on 1 December (or indeed 1 January, for that matter. The Parliament might not ratify - unlikely but certainly possible). --Red King (talk) 15:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, the primary source does say that "The candidates are due to take up their posts when the treaty of Lisbon enters into force on 1 December", and the reference is provided above. Secondly, there is no vote by the European Parliament on the appointment of the President of the European Council. You accuse me of not reading secondary sources but I suggest you should read the Treaties. The European Parliament's approval is only necessary for the appointment of the High Representative. The Parliament has no voice in the appointment of the President of the European Council. And it is the website of the European Council itself that says that the appointees will assume their duties on December 1st. Finally, and as an aside note, we all know that the Copenhagen climate summit will take place in December, and surely the EU's new officials will be there to represent the Union. --201.33.30.202 (talk) 17:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've gotten a tad tired of this horse-trading so I called the Swedish Presidency and am expecting an email some time tomorrow morning. Until then, it is clear that reliable, independent, secondary sources have tacked his assumption date on 1 January and it should be left there until then. I hope that the email will go to the right place and be sent as speedily as needed and I'll place it here for anyone once I receive it. If you still have a problem, I'll forward it straight to you. Therequiembellishere (talk) 17:53, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now its official: Today, December 1, the European Council assembled for the first time under the Treaty of Lisbon, that is now in force, and formalized the election of Mr. Van Rompuy as President of the European Council effective immediately. A press release was issued by the European Council reporting on the meeting and it is clearly stated that Mr. Van Rompuy's term as President starts today: [1].--201.33.30.202 (talk) 16:46, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mister Van Rompuy declared on his official website [5] that he will officialy take up his position on the first of january. As I understand it, his term starts technically on the first of december, but he himself will only start fulfilling it officially starting from the first of january. The source is in French, but in the last sentence of the first paragraph you can read the following sentence: "je n'entrerai officiellement en fonction que le 1er janvier 2010." Which translates to something like: I will not take up the function before the first of january 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Metasepia (talk • contribs) 16:44, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/111607.pdf

Bilderberg Group speech

[edit]

I thought the Bilderberg story was a conspiracy thing...but a recent article published in Telegraph.co.uk reports that: "Mr Van Rompuy, 62, who was appointed to the newly-created £320,000-a-year post at last week's special EU summit, set out his stall on direct Euro-taxes during a private speech at a recent meeting of the Bilderberg group of top politicians, bankers and businessmen. The group officially meets in secret, but when selected details of his remarks leaked out, his office was forced to issue a public statement on his behalf." pasted from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/6622886/Herman-Van-Rompuy-Europes-first-president-to-push-for-Euro-tax.html I can not find this "public statement" but clearly this might interest the reader investigate further this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davedawit (talk • contribs) 09:46, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Taxation is entirely outside his competence as President of the Council, so his opinion is not particularly relevant. In fact, taxation is one area that member states have not delegated to the EU, so it is entirely hypothetical. --Red King (talk) 15:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haiku

[edit]

We should note his personal interests like haikus. Newspapers in my country write "we don't know much about Herman Van Rompuy, but he likes haikus". See this: [6] [7] [8] --Ysangkok (talk) 19:21, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Herman "van" or "Van" Rompuy

[edit]

Is his name really written with a capital Van. I know that in the Netherlands this would be highly uncommon. Well, he is not from there, so I do not know, but it surprises me t see his name spelled like this. Tomeasy T C 07:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Belgian names are generally written with a capital 'Van'. DDSaeger (talk) 09:37, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. Tomeasy T C 09:49, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the Dutch Wikipedia about tussenvoegsels (yes, the English Wikipedia also call it a 'tussenvoegsel') in people's names:

In Dutch (in the Netherlands) you spell the 'van' with a lowercase v, if the persons first name is preceding it. Otherwise it is written with a capital V. e.g. Herman van Rompuy (in the Netherlands) or Mr. Van Rompuy. In Dutch (in Flanders) you spell the 'van' with an uppercase v at all times. "In contrast, according to Dutch orthographic rules in Belgium, tussenvoegsels of surnames always keep their original orthography, as in meneer Van Der Velde, meneer P. Van Der Velde or Peter Van Der Velde." so in Flemish Dutch it would be Herman Van Rompuy.

Up to you all to decide if it should be in Dutch Dutch or Flemish Dutch, but I would say Flemish Dutch as he is Flemish after all. Woodcutterty (talk) 13:01, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt whether this difference in spelling between Flanders and the Netherlands that Woodcutterty explains, is accurate. For 2 reasons: - Although Dutch sounds a bit different in both regions, and although the vocab is not always the same, the spelling rules are exactly the same (which is not the case in Am and BR English for example) - Imho most v's like in "Herman Van Rompuy" (just like the d's in f.e. "Karel De Gucht") are spelt with a capital , and if they are, they are always spelt that way. The only exceptions are names with a 'noble' descendancy, these names are spelt with a small 'v' or 'd', and if they are, they are always. So if Herman's id-card says Van Rompuy, it will never be written with a small v, regardless of the grammatical construction. The spelling of a Flemish name has nothing to do with the grammar used. 81.88.110.49 (talk) 10:37, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In most Flemish surnames, consisting of two parts (such as 'De Gucht' or 'Van Rompuy'), both parts are spelt with capital letter. But this doesn't have to do with spelling rules, it's just individual use for the holder of the name. Name spelling with lowercase 'van' or 'de' also occurs in Belgium but not nearly as much as in the Netherlands where it's mostly lowercase spelling. Flemish people sometimes change to lowercase spelling for a certain effect or to look more "Dutch", i.e. identifying with Netherlands and its culture, as opposed to being Flemish (regional, rural, ill-mannered, ...). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zapspace (talk • contribs) 14:04, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.88.110.49 (talk) 10:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Takes office on 1 Decmeber

[edit]

Swedish Presidency:

Isn't this the most authoritative source pertaining to the question when he takes office? I think so, and we should improved the simplistic and wrong information presented in the lede. Tomeasy T C 07:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've received my email that states quite the opposite.
I would be glad to personally send this email to anyone who questions its validity. Therequiembellishere (talk) 16:42, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think your Swedish friends are jumping the gun: Parliament still has to approve and, as Baroso knows already, that cannot be taken for granted. The more authoritive Parliament press office says

The whole EU can "now focus more on the crucial issues facing our citizens" according to the Parliament's President Jerzy Buzek. He was speaking after the appointment of Herman Van Rompuy and Catherine Ashton to the top two posts created by the Lisbon treaty. The latter will have to appear for a Q&A session before Members of the European Parliament before she can take up her post, a procedure now foreseen for January.

Buzek welcomes appointments for top EU posts

(which seems to suggest indirectly that Van Rompuy escapes Parliamentary scrutiny?) --Red King (talk) 20:34, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe he does. He was appointed by the European Council, Parliament has no say. Therequiembellishere (talk) 20:40, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting email. It seems that the Swedish themselves do not know (or at least not everyone who works there) what happens when. We could dive into a discussion weighting the opposing sources, but that would be tedious. Could you answer this email, linking to the page of the Swedish Presidency and asking for clarification of the obvious contradiction? Tomeasy T C 06:53, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Under the Treaties, the European Council President is appointed by the European Council alone, and the Parliament has no vote on the matter. The Parliament does have a vote regarding the confirmation of the new High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. Now, from the conflict of primary sources (and I'm assuming the authenticity of the e-mail), it does seem that the Swedish Presidency itself is struggling to find out when Mr. Van Rompuy's term will start. Their website says December 1, the e-mail says January 1. In the mean time, the King of the Belgians has already nominated Mr. Van Rompuy's successor today, paving the way for Mr. Van Rompuy to be out of national office and ready to assume his new EU post by December 1. --201.33.30.202 (talk) 12:06, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would imagine that nobody has the right to decide when he will start until the Lisbon Treaty takes effect, and that the Swedish presidency jumped the gun. Personally, I wouldn't write that he will start on 1 December without confirmation from another reliable source. But I also wouldn't write that he will start on 1 January. I suspect that there will be an official decision on 1 December or shortly thereafter (when the Lisbon Treaty will have given someone the authority to make the decision) using a formulation by which he takes up "active service" on 1 January, but perhaps "is appointed to the the post with postponed assumption of duties" (or something nebulous like that) - possibly with no official authority but full pay and an office - as of 1 December. If the council itself makes the decision, that would presumably be made at a meeting chaired (at least at the beginning) by the Swedish president. So I also would avoid writing anything suggesting that he will not start on 1 December. --Boson (talk) 22:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to the Europan Council website at http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ , Van Rompuy is the president as of December 1. --Hapsala (talk) 14:45, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The official press release issued today, December 1st, by the EU, on the "implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon", announces that the European Council has met, and has formalized Mr. Van Rompuy's appointment as President, effective immediately. A press release was issued by the European Council reporting on the meeting and it is clearly stated that Mr. Van Rompuy's term as President starts today: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/111607.pdf.

It is clearly stated that the European Council decided "To elect Mr Herman Van Rompuy as President of the European Council for the period from 1 December 2009 until 31 May 2012".--201.33.30.202 (talk) 16:50, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph

[edit]

Is there honestly no better picture of this goofy bastard that doesn't make him look like Chester The Molester? Hiberniantears (talk) 04:10, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


LOL!!!!!  T24G  01:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Farage and undue weight

[edit]

I'm not convinced that the speech by Farage is of sufficient importance to be in this relatively short article according to the terms of the undue weight clause of the NPOV policy. Press coverage of it focused on Farage's rudeness, not on any questions he may have tried to raise about Van Rompuy's legitimacy. So it certainly belongs in the Farage article, but not here. I propose removing that paragraph. Chick Bowen 01:48, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since there were no objections, I have carried this out. Chick Bowen 20:20, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Farage is literally the only reason anyone will ever know of this man outside incredibly niche circles of study and his name is now only mentioned once in the entire article. If thats NPOV I have no idea what is.2A02:8084:4EE0:6900:85CA:169B:49BD:5A8 (talk) 19:10, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not really a President

[edit]

Throughout the article no remark is made that in fact R is not a real president. He is appointed 'Chairman of the European Council'. This is commenly refered to as 'president' but is not his official title. Furthermore, he is not elected, but chosen by the council. By leaving out these rather important facts, the impression is given that R has a position simular to that of e.g. the president of the US. This is not the the case. It would at least be politically correct to mention this.82.169.113.174 (talk) 14:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As we are a tertiary source, we use the terms used most commonly in reliable secondary sources, which in this case is "president." But I don't think calling him a president implies anything; Giorgio Napolitano's powers and responsibilities are nothing like those of the president of the US, but we call him "president" anyway because that's his proper title. Chick Bowen 02:30, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Van Rompuy gets annoyed when you call him "Mr. President" or "President Van Rompuy" (as has been noted in many of the interviews in Flemish newspapers, magazines and TV shows. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.119.206.232 (talk) 08:07, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Green tax claim

[edit]

As this seems to have been denied, I've removed it, see [9] Dougweller (talk) 21:12, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship with President Barroso

[edit]

This seems to be totally without citations; is anyone able to find a reputable source for this? If not then I propose removing it until such a source is located.

Any thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theadder (talk • contribs) 08:54, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Herman Van Rompuy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:11, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Herman Van Rompuy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:44, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Herman_Van_Rompuy&oldid=1209217046"