User talk:Bluedenim

Welcome!

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! The Ogre 15:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Gaita-de-fole brux.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Gaita-de-fole brux.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Telly addict 17:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Flag proposed by Association Réunionnaise de Vexillologie.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Flag proposed by Association Réunionnaise de Vexillologie.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands 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. 15:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:French Guiana Liberation Movement.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:French Guiana Liberation Movement.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands 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. 12:06, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Flag of Kobe (Japan).gif

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Flag of Kobe (Japan).gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia by creating the page Gfdgfdgfdgfd. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --Finngall ^talk 19:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flags

In short, both flags are redundant and put an unnecessary strain on the servers. CloudNine 16:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes

I have used some of your userboxes, and I also want to make some of my own. How do I do that? Savie Kumara 07:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is, those instructions confuse me. I don't know how or where to start, or anything. Savie Kumara 00:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I figured out how to make a userbox, and you know what? It WAS easy! I was just too chicken to click on the "Create Userbox" button. Savie Kumara 05:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rule of Tincture

Hello! Your userbox is lovely, but it violates the rule of tincture, and it hurts my eyes to look at it. The background is a wonderful shade of green. You should use a shade of white or yellow for the text for better visibility. Thanks! Isaac Pankonin 03:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:Flag proposed by Association Réunionnaise de Vexillologie.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Flag proposed by Association Réunionnaise de Vexillologie.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portuguese Empire and Nova Scotia

I don't think NS was ever part of the Portuguese Empire. Can you reference this? Andrew⁶⁴⁷ 23:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seen. Thanks for pointing that out. Something new I learned! Andrew⁶⁴⁷ 01:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dejima Portugese colony?

I posted the following at Dejima talk:Dejima, but it may have escaped your notice:

I don't see how Dejima could be understood to have been a Portugese colony; but if there were some source which supported that perceived construct, the discovery would be a real eye-opener. Frankly, I'd rather be wrong than right on this one. Bluedenim added Dejima to the category of Former Portuguese colonies; and I reverted that edit.

(cur) (last) 17:37, 16 October 2007 Ooperhoofd (Talk | contribs) (29,451 bytes) (Undid revision 164938299 by Bluedenim (talk)never a colony--see Dejima talk page) (undo)
(cur) (last) 12:30, 16 October 2007 Bluedenim (Talk | contribs) (29,491 bytes) (added Category:Former Portuguese colonies) (undo)

In the undo-edit summary, I invited further discussion here. --Ooperhoofd 17:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Portuguese first arrived in Japan in 1542 (on the island Tanegashima). Later they were allowed to set up a trading post on the island Hirado (in front of the southern island Kyushu). The Portuguese sent each year a ship from their Chinese settlement Macao to this island, trading silk for silver. Their missionary work brought them in conflict first with Toyotomo Hideyoshi and later his successor Tokugawa Ieyasu. The Dutch ship "De Liefde", chartered by the Flemish merchants Pieter van der Hagen and Johan van der Veeken, arrived in 1598 in Japan. The English helmsman Will Adams could convince the shogun that the Dutch had a different religion than the Portuguese. Portuguese trade was restricted in 1603. Several missionaries were executed. Quaeckernaeck, captain of de Liefde obtained a trade permit from the shogun in 1605. The English also obtained a trade permit in 1613 but withdrew in 1623. The Spanish, who operated from Manila, also stopped trade with Japan in 1624. The Portuguese came under strict control in 1623. The shogun ordered in 1634 the construction of Dejima, an artificial island in the bay of Nagasaki to house the Portuguese. After the quelling of the Shimibara rebellion in 1637, all trade relations with the Portuguese were forbidden. From then on, the Dutch moved to Dejima. During all these years, the Portuguese could never claim to possess a colony in Japan. On the contrary, the Portuguese were strictly controlled by the shogun. JoJan 20:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JoJan -- yes. That was an excellent and remarkably concise summary of the history of Portugese trade. You have indeed delivered a perceptive narrative of well-accepted facts; but it happens that Bluedenim is a Wikipedian from Portugal. Our understanding of Kyushu's chronology of historical events is coherent, plain, accepted; but I suppose it may well be that there were those in Portugal or Rome who -- in the 16th-17th centuries, perhaps -- did construe something they called a "colony" at Nagasaki ...? If so, wouldn't you rather be wrong than right on this one -- if only for the sense of astonished surprise? Do you see my point?

This sounds a little bit like the kind of "counter-historical" exercise Niall Ferguson proposed at Oxford a few years ago.

See: Counterfactual history

On the other hand, it's probably nothing more than a simple mistake. I dunno. In any case, this edit did capture my imagination a little bit.--Ooperhoofd 21:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The fact-of-the-matter is that I'm really interested in this ... --Ooperhoofd 21:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portuguese Empire template

Please discuss here: Template_talk:Portuguese_overseas_empire#Incorrect_template. — Indon (reply) — 08:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

José Correa de Serra

I wonder if this tangential Portugese connection with Dejima will be of interest to you?

Isaac Titsingh was one of the VOC men in the far east who returned to Europe in the late 1790s after the Napoleonic Wars had effectively destroyed the company. For a time, Titsingh had headed the outpost at Dejima. When Titsingh arrived in London, he was invited to join the Royal Society. It happens that the founder of a similar scientific society in Lisbon, José Correa de Serra, joined others in nominating Titsingh for membership. --Ooperhoofd 13:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flag Marbella

I was reading the discussion page of Marbella (Wikipedia in Spanish), and one user said that Marbella, does not have a flag, only the shield. Ok, thanks Louis Du Pasquier —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.18.142.48 (talk) 14:13, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Sporting Clube de Portugal.png

Image:Sporting Clube de Portugal.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flags whose reverse differs from the obverse

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Flags whose reverse differs from the obverse, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Flags whose reverse differs from the obverse. DS2434 (talk) 03:25, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flags whose reverse differs from the obverse

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Flags whose reverse differs from the obverse, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 03:29, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flags whose reverse differs from the obverse

I think this would be better done as a category than as an article. Caerwine Caer’s whines 17:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it has potential as an article, there is obviously text to be written on that subject. --Bluedenim 18:26, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing that says that there couldn't be an article and a category, with the article having a few examples and discussing why some flags have different sides, but leaving the listing of all flags that have this distinction to a category. Caerwine Caer’s whines 18:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Portuguese Ceylon

Hello! There is a discussion going on at Talk:Portuguese Ceylon that may interest you. Thank you! The Ogre (talk) 17:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:User:Bluedenim/Portuguese Colonial War

A tag has been placed on Template:User:Bluedenim/Portuguese Colonial War requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:User:Bluedenim/Portuguese Empire

A tag has been placed on Template:User:Bluedenim/Portuguese Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dejima/Nagasaki harbor

FYI: You have exchanged messages with me before. I was formerly known as User:Ooperhoofd, but I changed my name to User:Tenmei. This only makes sense the context of Japanese era names, but I am finding myself spending an inordinate amount of time focusing on various aspects of this subject -- so it makes sense to those who have been following my progress in developing the Wikipedia nengō articles and links.

Some time ago, you may recall that Ooperhoofd questioned the inclusion of Dejima in the Portuguese Empire context ...?

I had hoped that over time you might uncover one or more Portuguese sources which verified this fact. Have you anything to share? This past weekend, I did discover something I only scanned quickly -- something about the Japanese ceding some part of Nagasaki to Jesuit control? Alas, I seem to have mis-placed the paper on which I made notes; and I'm embarrassed to admit that I can't now remember which book .... In due course, I'll find it again, of course; but for now, I can only report tantilizing, but inconclusive findings.

A second aspect of a broader question, for me, is whether or not the Portuguese template is properly appended to that article on Dejima island. When I re-locate the mis-placed citation, you will be able to respond effectively to any critics who don't yet understand that the template is likely justified for Nagasaki -- but this yet-to-be-cited "proof" would only apply to a pre-1640 Nagasaki. As you may know, the artificial island of Dejima was created in the late 1630's and it was occupied exclusively by the Dutch after 1641. So, I'm guessing that the ultimate consequence of my research will be that I argue for the removal of the template in that one location. For now, I'm just letting you know where my casual research seems to be leading. More later. --Tenmei (talk) 16:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Permission to copy one of your Userboxes

It has recently come to my attention that I should ask permission before copying a Userbox from a Userpage to use on my own Userpage. In checking my Userboxes, I found one that I must have copied from you at some time called User:Bluedenim/Autumn. I apologize, but may I continue to use it? Thanks. Thomprod (talk) 18:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thomprod

You didn't have to ask permission to use the userboxes, i created them precisely for that; to be used by all Wikipedians. Not only you can use them, as you are welcome to use them. I'm happy you liked some of the boxes i created. If there's anything you like here, just pick, you can use them as you like. Enjoy it and happy editing.

--Bluedenimtalk 19:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Thomprod (talk) 20:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Emma Starr

An editor has nominated Emma Starr, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emma Starr and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 14:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question about a userbox

Hi. I have a question about one of your userboxes. I'm using {{User:Bluedenim/Centrism}} on my user page, but I can't get it into the correct horizontal alignment. It sits several pixels above the other boxes and throws everything off. I feel sure that it's an issue with the template code but I don't know nearly enough about that stuff to know how to fix it myself, so I don't know what to do other than ask you.

I appreciate anything you can do or tell me to help me out, and I thank you for any time that you give toward rectifying the problem. -- edi (talk) 23:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from my talk page for reference:

Hello EdiOnjales

I don't know if your problem is already solved, but i've checked your user page and everything seems to be aligned. Anyway i can't help you much, i just copy the box code and fill in the blank spaces. Hope everything is in order now.

Stay well --Bluedenim (talk) 00:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Xenocidic has been helping me with my formatting issues and I think we have it worked out now. Have a great week. -- edi (talk) 01:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Bluedenim/Brunettes & Blondes

User:Bluedenim/Brunettes (& blondes), a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/August 4 userboxes and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Bluedenim/Brunettes during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. –xeno (talk) 16:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Anita Blond

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Anita Blond, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

No reliable sources. No Assertion of WP:Notability. Fails WP:PORNBIO.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. David in DC (talk) 15:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiBirthday

I saw from here that it's been exactly two years since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interwiki =

You did not provide any revision history so why it did whatever it did, is hard to tell. Might be a conflicting interwikilinks, an article that got deleted, or an article who links to to disamb.page. Please remember to sign your posts, thank you. AndersL (talk) 22:34, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UBX for discussion

An article that you have been involved in editing, User:UBX, has been proposed for a discussion. If you are interested, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. – imis^☂ 00:36, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 05:15, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I love flags

Flags are indeed great! :D --SomeDudeWithAUserName (talk with me!) 22:31, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, thanks for the comment :D --SomeDudeWithAUserName (talk with me!) 21:13, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Thank you !

) ठिस बुढा (talk) 19:13, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Outer space themed songs has been nominated for renaming

Category:Outer space themed songs has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 21:52, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of sovereign states in 1143 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of sovereign states in 1143 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of sovereign states in 1143 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 03:21, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]