User talk:Danielsp
| Welcome!
Hello, 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! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the time stamp. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my Talk page. The Community Portal can also be very useful. Happy Wiki-ing! - Sango123 00:44, May 15, 2005 (UTC) |
EU project
[edit]Hi, thanks for your message. I've had a look at the article and it seems you're off to a good start at Wikipedia. The topic of the article isn't something I know much about, so I can't offer any detailed input on it I'm afraid, except to say that it all looks fine. The EU Wikiproject is fairly new and most of the contributors involved in the big articles like European Union or the articles on the various institutions probably aren't keeping an eye on it yet. If you have a look around some of the other EU-related articles you may well be able to find some experts to discuss with. We do have a peer review section but that's more for articles that are being improved with the goal of featuring them on the main page, and depends on having people there who know the field covered by the article. My only other advice would be to look around the wiki and see how things are done, which you seem to have picked up well (including citing your sources which plenty of new users don't do). Thanks a lot and welcome to Wikipedia! — Trilobite (Talk) 6 July 2005 15:40 (UTC)
Hi there (and welcome to wikipedia!), thanks for the message. I'm not sure why it's not appearing in a search yet, it's right at the top of Special:Allpages/Open_Method though. The wikiproject is a bit neglected at the moment, I'm going to be working on it in the next few weeks to get it together though, hopefully! I wouldn't worry about lack of comments on the talk page, it's quite a complex subject (which I don't know much about either i'm afraid) - one tip though, make sure that all the relevent articles link to the article though, so people interested in the topic will be able to find it .-- Joolz 6 July 2005 16:39 (UTC)
Thanks for your message. I was very encouraged by it and am glad that you will be contributing to the EU section. There is some major work that needs to be done in this area so it's great to have your help. Parmaestro 6 July 2005 18:55 (UTC)
Preferred form for title of Directives articles
[edit]I have opened a Request for Comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject European Union on consistent titling - your comments would be welcome. --Red King 08:58, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
For Wikipedians interested in Literature
[edit]I am currently working on a wiki trying to provide free etxts from Austria. More information here. Hope I did not disturb you with this message - if so, apologies! Cheers, --Gego 07:46, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
Linguistic imperialism
[edit]Daniel, I issued an apology on the hot-and-heavy Linguistic Imperialism talk page. Sorry if my notion of lively debate comes across as harsh. I continue to maintain, however, that NPOV is not synonymous with balance. And I still think the main problem with Linguistic Imperialism is that the term itself is prejudicial and suggests a polemic or agenda rather than serious research. Of course, controverial subjects, such as anti-semitism and terrorism and linguistic philosophy, qualify as articles, but these are generic terms each of which is a whole universe of discourse. But stuff like Linguistic Imperialism, no matter how august its advocate, is no more than a polemic, so that what you get in seeking "balance," are opinions about an opinion. I'm looking at this purely from the editorial side, and at a certain point, editors must be arbitrary. Linguistic Imperialism may be a fascinating subject to talk about, but I'm sure you'll agree that "fascination," while perhaps ok for TV or newspaper, should not be the criterion for inclusion in a reference work. — J M Rice 19:28, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for the appology. However, I maintain my position that - while I do not agree with the theory - it is worthwile including and discussing linguistic imperialism.
- I hope to improve the article together with everyone interested in collaborating
--danielsp 17:26, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
New European Union collaboration
[edit]Hi Danielsp, this is just a note telling you that I have created the European Union collaboration (the first collaboration is Eurobarometer). I'm looking forward to your contributions! Talrias (t | e | c) 12:10, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Steph Swainston 3
[edit]Hi Daniel. Amazon.co.uk now has a page for The Modern World. Can't recall if I found any other source for it, I'm afraid – just got back from a long, relaxing vacation! —Serein 09:46, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Project European Union
[edit]Hello Danielsp, you are member of the project European Union. I try to create a new project page for the project. You can see it at here Because this should be the project page for all it´s members, please tell me, what you think about it. Please leave your comments on the talkpage of the project.--Thw1309 11:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Modern world.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Modern world.jpg. 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 04:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Swainston.jpg
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Swainston.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en
wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en
wikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ronhjones (Talk) 00:13, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
The article ISTAG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- No independent sources about this "body". Does not meet WP:GNG.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Crusio (talk) 13:05, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ISTAG 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/ISTAG until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Crusio (talk) 19:51, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
The article I2010 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Another EU project article without any independent sources but lots of lofty promises. Does not meet WP:GNG.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Crusio (talk) 19:11, 23 October 2011 (UTC)