Jump to content

User talk:Markussep/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Hi there. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions on Hungarian counties. Looks like good stuff. I hope you like it here and stick around. If you want, you can drop us a note at Wikipedia:New user log to introduce yourself.

Before you start doing a lot of editing, you'll want to take the Tutorial. It gives all the basic info you'll need as you start contributing.

You can sign your name on talk pages by using " ~~~ " for your username and " ~~~~ " for your username and a timestamp.

If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Help desk. You can also drop me a question on my talk page.

Happy editing, Isomorphic 15:28, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)


Town Categories

Greetings! Just to let you know these categories are available:

and that

  • Category:Towns in Hungary may be better for places with fewer than 100,000 inhabitants. (There is a distinction between Towns and Cities on that basis elsewhere in Wikipedia.)

You might consider making a Category called something like Hungarian Comitatus, and filing it under Hungary; that would clean up Category:Hungary.

Best, Bill 11:06, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Redirect you created at "Waasserbëlleg"

Hi, you created a redirect from Waasserbëlleg to Wasserbillig, but there is currently no article at Wasserbillig. (It may have been deleted since the redirect was created.) Wikipedia policy is to get rid of redirects to non-existent pages, and someone listed Waasserbëlleg on WP:RfD If you want the redirect to stay, you will need to create something at Wasserbillig (even a stub will do), or else the redirect will go away. If you do create the target, you don't have to do anything on WP:RfD (we'll eventually notice the target is there), but if you do, just delete the entry for Waasserbëlleg. Thanks!

PS: Wikipedia style is that people generally reply on the User_Talk: page of the person who wrote a message to them (that way, someone doesn't have to monitor a whole long list of User_Talk: pages - one for each person whom they are having a "conversation" with), so please leave any messages for me on my talk page (above); if you leave a message for me here I probably will not see it. Not everyone on Wikipedia uses this style (they would rather keep all the text of a thread in one place), I but I simply can't monitor all the User_talk: pages I leave messages on. Thanks! Noel (talk) 05:01, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)


Ragusa

I think we may have both been editing the same aricle at the same time, perhaps it would be best if all the information for province and city were in the same place, as perhaps Ragusa, Sicily, with a redirect from Ragusa, Italy. Ragus on its own could be a disambiguation page. There is insufficient information for Ragusa city to be anything other than a stub, so I think it is better with the province. Regards Giano 22:06, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I don't agree. With some cleaning up (there's only architectural information about the city right now) I think it's better to have separate pages for city and province. I'm making pages for all the Italian provinces right now. There is already an ambiguation page for Ragusa (it's also the old name of Dubrovnik in Croatia). Regards, Markussep 22:15, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
OK Good luck! I have heard of Dubrovnik, its one of the reasons so many people assume I speak fluent Serbo-Croat! Regards Giano 22:23, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Luxembourg stubs

Hi Markussep - I notice you've been starting several articles about places in Luxembourg (good!). Just thought you should know that they now get Template:Euro-geo-stub, rather than just a plain Template:geo-stub. Loads of countries now have their own geo-stubs, and most of those that don't have continental geo-stub templates. There's a full list at the top of Category:Geography stubs (don't worry - no-one would be expected to learn the lot, but knowing the one or two related to countries you work on is a good idea!). Anyway, keep up the good work with the articles, and if you can, please use the more precise stub messages! Cheers, Grutness|hello? 02:54, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Administrative divisions of the Kingdom of Hungary

Hi Markussep, currently there are variants like "X (county)", "X county" and "X (Hungarian county)". Why not harmonise it uppercase (like in X River)? This would only apply to Counties where the word "county" is needed. In case a historic county now part of another country need to be referenced, like above mentioned "X (Hungarian county)", I suggest to name it "X County, Hungary". see also Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Subnational entities#Current use . Tobias Conradi 02:52, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi Tobias, it's even more complicated, we also have plain X, without county. The contents of the articles is not the same either, some also contain information about the homonymous (usually capital) city, and some about a current Hungarian county, or a current Slovak region. But I agree it would look better to synchronize the brackets and upper/lower case. Is there a rule about when to use lower case and upper case in English? Markussep 10:40, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
could not find any rule, but I think its time to create one. I allready changed some names in other countries to uppercase, because the mayority I found allready was uppercase. Especially the word county almost allways was uppercase (only exception I remember right now was Croatia).
As I understand there may in future be seperate articles for Pest County? One for current one for historic? Maybe it is better to have historic than like "X County (historic)", a version that also can be applied to Slovak, Romanian etc. historic Hungarian counties.
first step could be to move all non-plain-X counties to X County. further dividing and fixing the rest later. Tobias Conradi 16:09, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I see you're also involved in the Vuoksi river discussion. I don't really care about upper and lower case for the words county and river (as someone pointed out, they're usually not really part of the name, unlike Yellow River or Columbia River, I guess). I like the idea of only using "river" or "county" as a disambiguation, and otherwise use plain X. And as a disambiguation, the brackets are not so bad, see for instance Hanover (state). Actually, for counties like Sopron, Veszprém, Nitra (that are named after a city) I like the brackets better. So I'd rather move the non-bracket counties (all Slovak) to brackets. The county Pest has already been split into a current and a historic one (Pest-Pilis-Solt-Kiskun). Markussep 15:18, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Can understand you. But I do not like bracket stuff, because nobody uses brackets in articles
can you maybe help by posting a counterargument at to
if "X english" is allowed in text, why not use it for title?
at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Subnational_entities/Naming. I think it's better to have pros and contras structered than to discuss it here. best regards Tobias Conradi 19:23, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

River naming

Moved the discussion to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rivers. I stopped moving articles, let's see what the discussion leads to.

finally someone put his name in the list of naming methods. :-) thank you :-) Tobias Conradi 22:42, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I have just edited a couple of your articles. Please check them and note the changes I made in the use of definite/indefinite articles, prepositional phrases and capitalization. Weiße Elster was one of them. Rmhermen 15:29, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

Brabant

I've tweaked your edit to make the sequences of Brabant's division clearer. Please have a look that it's still perfectly accurate. Only one link for each nation is usual. --Wetman 22:09, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean with your last sentence. About your edits: they're not completely accurate. The split-off of present North Brabant became official at the Peace of Westphalia (1648). The rest (now in Belgium) kept the name Duchy of Brabant until the French occupation in 1795. Then it was split into Deux-Nèthes (which became Antwerp province around 1815) and Dyle (which became Brabant province around 1815). Actually I meant the little list North Brabant/Flemish Brabant/Walloon Brabant as a kind of disambiguation. I think it's clearer when I move it to the end as a "See also" block. I'll rewrite it a bit, see if you like it better then. Markussep 13:33, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Forêts

Dear Markussep, I saw that you contributed a lot to the article Forêts. As we in the lb-wiki also started to work on that one, some questions suddenly arose, as we found that the cantons listed in the English article differ from those in the French article (actually there are listed the chef-lieux, but anyway) and both differ again from what we found in the Arrêté Joubert of September 11, 1795. May I ask you which source you used for the cantons listed in your article? --Otets 08:06, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

My source for all the former départements I did (including Forêts) was the Almanach Impérial of 1812. You can find that on http://gallica.bnf.fr under "Recherche", mots du titre "almanach imperial". In the 1812 almanach, Forêts is on page 404. The canton seats are the "chef-lieux des justices de paix". Before 1805 the almanachs were called "Almanach national de France". I think the number of cantons varied considerably, probably the ones in the French article are from an earlier date. Beware of spelling mistakes, misprints, translations of place names etc.! I checked the years 1803 and 1807, they give the same capitals as 1812. 1801 (page 261) gives the same list as in the French article (except Chenogne/Sibret), but it says "ci-devant cantons". Some administration reform around 1801? Markussep 12:18, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you a lot. I did not think about the Gallica. It seems indeed that there were many administration reforms, with cantons renamed, chef-lieux transferred etc. We will dig that, but I foresee that it needs some time, given the complexity of the matter. I will keep you posted with respect to our final results. --Otets 15:00, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Alps

Hi! Are you currently working on a cleanup of the structure of the various ranges of the Alps? The reason why I am asking is that it seems to me that the your recent edit IMHO has made the page less clear than it was before, especially with respect to the Eastern Alps, where there already are pages on the Northern Limestone, Central and Southern Limestone ranges. The incomplete list of subdivisions in the Eastern Alps that is there now (with useless pages such as The Alps of Bavaria, the Vorarlberg, and Salzburg) is only misleading. Of course, the whole structure of the Alps pages (except for those three Eastern Alps subpages which I translated from the German Wikipedia) is still strongly based on the 1911 Britannica needs severe cleanup. Martg76 16:39, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

You're right that the Alps aren't perfect right now. The 1911 structure ignores the difference between limestone and central alps, so that's obviously something to get rid of. The 1911-based subpages are little more than lists of peaks and passes (with 1911 road conditions), I'm going to start with the Western Alps to fix that. If you have suggestions, let me know. Though I really like the German maps, I'm afraid the structure of German wikipedia is too fragmented. Do you think there's a way to group some of the minor ranges? Until then, I think I'll remove the Eastern Alps sub-subdivision from Alps. What I also miss is clear categories "Peaks of the Alps" and "Ranges of the Alps" (Mountains is too ambiguous I think). Markussep 16:59, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
I think it looks much better now. I agree that de:Alpen looks a bit confusing, but it has a lot of geological information, which we should try to get maybe for Geology of the Alps (which is a mess). However, personally I don't feel really competent to translate that.
Category:Ranges of the Alps and Category:Peaks of the Alps are very good ideas. If I have time I might start work on that during the next couple of days. I would suggest that we make appropriate subcategories such as Category:Ranges of the Northern Limestone Alps etc. Martg76 12:06, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
I just had a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mountains. Apparently, there are no categories for mountain ranges and mountain peaks for systems like the Alps (e.g. Rockies, Andes, Himalaya) yet, it's all divided by country. Of course that doesn't mean we can't start something like that, it obviously has advantages. The ambiguity of "mountain" is not so bad as I thought, there are just a few miscategorized articles, we should check that. So, I propose Category:Mountain ranges of the Alps and Category:Mountains of the Alps, as extra categories besides the country categories. I'm not sure whether we need subcategories, but every article should contain info about in which range it is. About geology, I can't judge the accuracy of that. BTW, I think Tödi Range should be moved to Glarus Alps. Markussep 12:22, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Subnational entities

  • NL: I extended counties of the Netherlands. 17 Provinces says nothing about a Zutphen County, maybe you know more.
  • LV: Google seems to show that once there were okrugs in Latvia. I know it is not necessary but I would prefer/like one translation for all raions of former USSR. I know this is not easy to achieve. Good that you remove genitives in Latvia, I supported Talsi.
  • HU: I think you once disliked to move the counties from "X (county)" to "X County". still the case?

best regards Tobias Conradi (Talk) 20:43, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

  • NL: your words put in County of Zutphen.
  • X County only as disambiguation, same for me. Would be same rule as for "X River". With Joy I already discuss HR: X county -> X County. I will see what comes out there. At the end I do not think that people who work on specific articles should be the only ones that decide how to name them. There knowledge is biased. Like for Ukraine, where some people insist on oblast' instead of Province. Fortunatly finally someone made them at least uppercase and without ' Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:29, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Maybe you like to have a look at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (provinces). Tobias Conradi (Talk) 23:33, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm a bit worried about the tone of discussion there. Did you just move all of them without discussing it with people who wrote the articles first? I think your remarks about bias were pretty offensive, you might like to tone that down in the future, if you want support for your (usually constructive) ideas. And you're not going to move all the historical Duchies and Counties of X to X Duchy and X County, are you? That would only make a little bit of sense if people would ever browse through wikipedia alphabetically. About Italian provinces, I started most of them, but I don't really care whether they're Province of X or X Province. Markussep 09:34, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Hi, I came here to tell you a vote here [1] has elected for the titles of the Italian provinces to be reverted to their original "Province of X"; but I see you already knew. I didn't contact you before as I was keen not to be seen canvassing votes. As you say, you created many of them, but I note you have no strong opinion either way on their naming so assume you won't mind their reversion. Regards Giano | talk 16:04, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Szatmár

Hi! What I think we should do is list all the districts (járás) and urban districts with no link to them, and then list the capitals of all these districts with parenthesis of what the current names of the capitals are. Here's how you can find out what the capitals are. Go to this link, then scroll down to were Szatmár is, or you could just go directly to the image. Anyways, it has the districts and their capitals there, and so we could have something like this for Nagybánya district: (This is how they did it in Máramaros)

  • Nagysomkút district, capital Nagysomkút (Romanian: Şomcuta Mare)

---User:Hottentot

I didn't know that site, it looks nice! I totally agree with your proposal. Markussep 17:34, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for editing you page so much, but you could also see this link

I know that one, I used it for most of the counties I "did". My preferred layout would be like this Nagysomkút example, so the Hungarian name for the district and capital, and the link under the present official name.Markussep 17:54, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Ok, good idea. --User:Hottentot
Hey Markussep,
I think that table look great. Do you think we should have this same sort of thing for all counties (megyék)? --Hottentot
Of course I know that there's a project page---I made it! (Under a different account, Dagestan). --Hottentot
Ok, what should we do first exactly? --Hottentot
Ok. --Hottentot

Transliteration of Greek into English.

This looks like a useful article. I must admit I've been a bit puzzled as to how to transliterate Modern Greek (and official Greek Government sources seem to be inconsistent). Why do they still (I think) put HELLAS rather than ELLAD(H)A on their stamps?

A few suggestions:

  • I think you need to reflect the rough and smooth breathings in the classical transliterations, but mention that they're discontinued in Modern Greek (in the current article you mention the spiritus asper but only for rho).
  • Again if you're covering Classical Greek perhaps you should include the iota subscript
  • I don't think ντ and μπ ever occurred in Classical Greek at the start of a word.
  • I was surprised not to see gh in either of the modern transliterations.
  • Altogether, the modern transliterations don't do a very good job of representing Greek; for instance if a word starts with g in the BGN transliteration this could represent either γ or γκ, with quite different pronunciations.
  • it would be interesting to know which (if either) of the modern schemes is more commonly in use

Best of luck! rossb 11:31, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestions. My primary interest was modern Greek, but well, why not cover classic Greek as well. Some answers:
  • spiritus asper, lenis and iota subscripts, OK. I don't know how iota subscripts are transliterated, though.
  • ντ and μπ: I've never seen them at the start of a classic Greek word either, I'll remove it.
  • There are many more transliteration and transcription schemes, but the one using "gh" for γ is not often used. Apart from the "WML" column in Pederson's table, I haven't seen it.
  • You're right, γ is a fricative, γκ a plosive. The UN/ELOT system separates them: g and gk.

Markussep 14:25, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Bulgarian language

Thanks for the contribution to the standardising of the transliteration of the Bulgarian articles here!! VMORO 23:21, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

Carpathians

Since you seem to be interested in the division of the Carpathians, maybe the following links could help you: the modern geomorphological division of Slovakia at sk:Geomorfologické členenie Slovenska (and the old orographical one at sk:Orografické členenie Slovenska). Juro 2 July 2005 20:32 (UTC)

There are several ways how to divide mountain ranges. I am not an expert, but since I have written e.g. the German Carpathians article I have become an expert on this. The only "scientific" division of mountains is - as the name suggests - the geomorphological one, therefore it is used in e.g. in the Slovak article (it is based the newest version of the 90s) and thought at universities as the only modern system. The same system is used in Czechia, Austria, and Germany (at least). Then there is the orographical, physiogeographical etc. division, which is - again as the name suggests - is more "practical" (descriptive) and "geographical". Now, I did not check it, but as far as I remember, what you say about the differences seems to be exactly the old (orographical) system, which was abandonned in Czechoslovakia in the 1970s, because - as I have found in an encyclopaedia - it was not "scientific" enough. (This does not mean that one cannot divide the Carpathians in more than two vertical units Carpathians, but if one goes into details, the system cannot be used systematically.) Also, the Slovaks know their own mountains (Western Carpathians) better than anyone else, I assume... If you insist, I think I can find the modern system for the whole Carpathians in a certain book (which I do not have here now). Juro 3 July 2005 22:09 (UTC)

P.S: (1)I have checked the Polish page quickly and it uses definitively the old system (even the names of Slovak and Czech mountains are not correct anymore), so I would not use the system, for territories outside Poland at least. (2) As for Poloniny, this is the Slovak equivalent of German de:Waldkarpaten. At the time Carpathian Ruthenia was part of Czechoslovakia the whole Eastern Carpathians were alternatively called Poloniny. The problem is that the eastern border of "anything" in Ukraine is disputed, so that I cannot tell you whether Hoverla is still "there". Another problem is that the Ukrainians call another (smaller) part of the Carpathians "Poloniny". (3) ad: Hungarian circles. I'am afraid I do not know which "circles" you mean. Could you give a link or so? Juro 3 July 2005 22:31 (UTC)

Defunct Napoleonic-era départements outside of present-day France

I'm not sure if you've edited non-English Wikipedias; but the Dutch, German, and Italian ones sorely lack articles on these former départements now located in Germany, Benelux, Italy, and Switzerland(just a couple dedicated articles for Mont-Tonnerre and Ourthe in German Wikipedia plus Forêts in Luxembourgish Wikipedia, none at all so far in Dutch and Italian).Just a heads-up suggestion...Ranma9617 4 July 2005 05:43 (UTC)

Chi

both kh and ch are used in English when transliterating χ: kh is less ambiguous, because readers unfamiliar with Greek will assume that ch represents the church sound of Enlish ch. dab (ᛏ) 17:08, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I know, but it's more common for Greek to use "ch". Achaïa is not meant to be the pronunciation, but the official romanization of the Greek name, see Transliteration of Greek into English, UN/ELOT column. Markussep 17:14, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
ok, well, if you like. I have been using ē and ō in combination with kh all over Wikipedia, though. Maybe it's time for some guidelines (Wikipedia:Wikiproject transliteration?) dab (ᛏ) 17:20, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
I couldn't agree more, see discussion at Talk:Greece. Markussep 17:30, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Greek language

There seems to have been a nationalist orgy going on there in the last couple weeks, especially on the talk page; I tried to put in a word of sense to the effect that Homer and Demotic weren't perfectly mutually intelligible, and was ignored. Care to look in? Septentrionalis 18:37, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Mesta River

You were working on a doublet-article resulting from non standarding naming. [2]

I merged you contributions into Mesta River. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:58, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

That's funny. Mesta (river) has been there for ages, with link from Mesta. The person who created the link (User:Valkov) to Mesta (river) created Mesta River a few days later. BTW I'm not so convinced anymore that all parentheses must be eradicated. Markussep 14:07, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Provinces of Greece

The provinces of Greece are not prefectures or departments or even regions or states or other provinces like Argentina and Finland, they are like districts (like Japan, not as prefectures) or counties. Some people refer to Elis and Corinthia as provinces but not prefectures but in Wikimedia and other communications including newspapers and in Greek, they are prefectures and provinces like the province of Elis or Ilia and Parnassida is like a (low-level) district, not a department of a prefecture which the Ilia Province covers nearly half of the prefecture. They are not disbanded, they are at the quaternary level, not the tertiary level like the prefectures. They administer minor roads. Pumpie, 18:45, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

They have powers but not as strong as the prefectures, regions or rarely municipalities, they also probably have elections but not with the municipalities or the prefectures, I'm not sure what part of the four-year they use or the regional (peripherial) elections, they administer countryside roads that are not residential but links with villages, some towns and communities. Pumpie, 19:03, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

asking for support

Hello, since you are interested in goegraphy I thought hat you might support our letter to Centre for Cartography, Vilnius University. We are asking to release their maps found at www.balticdata.info under GFDL licence so they could be used in articles about Lithuania. So far we got 14 people to "sign" it. The draft in very very rough English is available at user:Renata3/letter. If you decide to support it, I'll need just your first and last names together with your user name. You can leave it on my talk page or send it via email: just attact @gmail.com to my user name. Renata3 22:31, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

"Populated places"

I recently spent a great deal of time and effort making all the "list of communities...in Greece" articles consistent. I've just discovered that you're changing them all. That's not necessarily a problem, but there are two worries: first, "populated places" is extremely vague, and sounds rather odd in English, and secondly, the articles are all lists, and their titles should therefore be of the form "List of.." (as they were). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:59, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

The thing is, though, that "community" is an ordinary English word that lacks the specialised meaning of "κοινότητα", whereas "populated place" isn't really very English at all ("settlement" would be better, as it encompasses cities, towns, villages, and hamlets).
"Stand-alone lists, or 'lists of links' are entries consisting of a list of links to articles in a particular subject area, such as people or places or a timeline of events. The title of these entries always begin with list of or timeline of. The title and bullet style or vertical style is common for this type of list. These Wikipedia entries follow the Wikipedia:Lists (stand-alone lists)." (from Wikipedia:Lists#Types of lists) --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:35, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
"List of settlements in the X prefecture" looks fine to me. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:38, 17 September 2005 (UTC)


about greek cities

From Makedonas. hello,i am Yiannis from greece and my favorite hobbys are geography ang foreign languages.i m not very good at english:)About the list of greek cities,i correct my first list because the first time i wrote the population of the cities with the suburbs(althought many of these place in the list are suburbs of Athens and Thessaloniki).My sources are http://www.statistics.gr and http://www.ypes.gr/kapodistrias/index.html. I hope you like it. Aboute the estimate for 2005 i havent found any reliable source.thanks for the comment:)

Hello from Makedonas

Hi,well i think we use the same source but i use it in greek: http://www.statistics.gr/table_menu.asp?dt=0&sb=SAP_1&SSnid=Στοιχεία%20Πραγματικού%20-%20Μόνιμου%20-%20Νόμιμου%20Πληθυσμού table 6 . There are 3 populations for every city.1. the population of the "municipality" (this one include the suburbs/villages of every city) 2. the population of the "municipale department" of the city (which include some neighborhoods of the city which are not autonomus suburbs/villages) and 3. the population of the central part of the "city" without these neighborhoods. For the big cities municipality,municipal department and centre of city is the same thing.For the other cities we usualy use or the population of municipality(city with suburbs) or the population of municipale department to express the city without the suburbs.I used the second one.I thing you used the third one,thats why there is a little difference.That is for now.for any question i m here...

Hungarian counties

Hi! I'm planning to split all the counties and comitatuses that have the same name into 2 articles. Békés and Csongrád are already done, which leaves Fejér, Heves, Nógrád, Somogy, Tolna, Vas, Veszprém and Zala, I'll split them too in the near future. I think 1950 should be the dividing line because the present county system was formed then. Alensha 18:51, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Alpes-Maritimes

Just to say thanks for spotting my slip of the brain re "Alpes-Maritimes" in the 130 départements. You'll note that I referred to the "County of Nice" in the colour key, and yet I still somehow managed to miss it! Cheers, Silverhelm 01:21, 8 October 2005 (UTC).

Weißenburg in Bayern

Hi Markussep!

I've seen your interest in other ß-related votes and thought you might be interested in this one: Talk:Weissenburg in Bayern. Currently there are four votes for moving to Weißenburg in Bayern.

- Haukur Þorgeirsson 22:04, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

List of cities in Germany

Thank you for doing a lot of the work I needed to do after moving this page over (I will still try but it can be a bit time consuming). I hope you agree that the German Wiki's version is better than the incomplete and spread out version we had earlier. I also think it is at the very least important that the German Wikipedia's titles all be redirects on the English Wiki. Best, Tfine80 00:32, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Weißenburg in Bayern

hello there, terribly sorry to disturb you with this topic, but there is a new vote Talk:Weissenburg in Bayern on finally renaming it to Weißenburg in Bayern and since you have shown previous interested, I just thought I'd let you know what is going on... with kind regards. Gryffindor 22:46, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Luxemburg

Thanks for providing the location maps of the munic. of Luxemburg on Commons. If you want a up to date database of pop, surface per muncip message me. Today I added the 118 munic. to Wiki-nl (see e.g. nl:Bech). nl:gebruiker:Michiel1972

List of country names in various languages under attack !!!

Dear Markussep,

The List of country names in various languages, List of European regions with alternative names, List of European cities with alternative names, List of European rivers with alternative names, and others, have come under attack by a certain Mikka, who, having just stumbled into all these lists, having found them of little use to himself, and having repeatedly ridiculed them and their users, has then promptly filed a petition to delete the lists in question.

Please cast your vote to keep these valuable, informative, and indeed fascinating lists at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of country names in various languages.

Thanks! Pasquale 16:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Trentino-South Tyrol

hello there, there is a discussion about renaming the current Trentino-South Tyrol into Trentino-Alto Adige. maybe you care to take a look. Since you also wrote the article Talk:Eisack-Isarco maybe take a look there too. with kind regards Gryffindor 11:45, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

RfA for Halibutt

Hello Markussep! In case you are unaware, Halibutt is going through the administrator vote process. I believe that any input you could provide would be valued. Olessi 08:08, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. WikiThanks.
Thanks. WikiThanks.
I would like to express my thanks to all the people who took part in my (failed) RfA voting. I was both surprised and delighted about the amount of support votes and all the kind words! I was also surprised by the amount of people who stated clearly that they do care, be it by voting in for or against my candidacy. That's what Wiki community is about and I'm really pleased to see that it works.
As my RfA voting failed with 71% support, I don't plan to reapply for adminship any more. However, I hope I might still be of some help to the community. Cheers! Halibutt 05:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

1469

Dude. Look at the Lower Left hand corner of the painting. It sez 1469 there.--Ewok Slayer 22:18, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Greece

  • X (island) probably is better than X Island. I don't know how exactly anglophon people handle this. I prefer "X" to be a dab page, so accidental linking can be discovered faster and corrected to what you really want. (BTW I don't care much if Rügen is called Rügen Island - if this would be english... but yes, use parenthesis, maybe we can write a guide about that)
  • whether the provinces are significant or not, I think they deserve (in the long run) short entry. Population-data, size, admin seat, map ... And better start now, thus to assure correct wikilinks from all the different places ... (province infobox template is needed)
  • some thought: the bottom nav templates need to be improved. restating the prefecture name several times within the temp is of not much use. "Municipalities" vs. "Municipalities of X" if the head already says "divisions of X"

regards Tobias Conradi (Talk) 11:29, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

translation of names

arab: Ash Sharqiyah, long discussion at Talk:Ash Sharqiyah Province. I until know favoured keeping subnational entities worldwide in the local language. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Markussep/Archive_1&oldid=1141098824"