User talk:Montemonte

Talk:Shenzhou 7

A message awaits you at Talk:Shenzhou 7. —Politizer^{( talk • contribs )} 22:26, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded to your comment at Talk:Shenzhou 7. Please provide a direct link to the naming convention you are talking about, or I will not be able to respond any more. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 23:07, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi, I hope you enjoy your time here and please also consider joining WikiProject China. Thanks! --Techfast50 (talk) 23:29, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think I am interested in this project? Montemonte (talk) 22:44, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He thinks you're interested in the project because you've been contributing to lots of China-related articles. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 23:04, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did I? Montemonte (talk) 19:31, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PRC vs. China

Please do not make sweeping changes to naming conventions across multiple articles without getting consensus. You already brought this change up at Talk:Shenzhou 7 months ago and no one supported these changes. If you think the naming convention should be changed, please discuss your changes at the article talk pages before you edit the articles themselves, or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China. Thank you, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There have been endless discussions. None has made its way to change the existing set of naming conventions. What have been successful is to keep the dispute tag there. Montemonte (talk) 23:04, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the "endless discussions" have not changed the existing naming conventions, that means that there is not support for your proposed changes to Shenzhou 7. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 18:41, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting logic. The endless discussions have never succeeded to gather enough support to modify the existing naming conventions. In other words there are support to defend the existing naming conventions (which my proposed changes to Shenzhou 7 are based on) from being modified. Did you actually read and see what had happened there? Montemonte (talk) 22:24, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Grammar schools

A question regarding your recent edit of Category:Grammar schools. Your edit is much cleaner but not may not be better. The category is a United Kingdom and related countries category. For those in the US, Grammar schools would be a redirect to elementary schools, while Grammar schools in the UK would be secondary schools. I am wondering if it would be better to revert back to the previous, or at least include the information that this is secondary school sub class. Dbiel ^(Talk) 00:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are English-speaking countries other than the UK and the US. In some of these countries grammar school has roughly the same meaning as in the UK. Montemonte (talk) 23:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very true, as was mentioned above by using the term "and related countries". My question is more of, should there be some sort of definition in the category or links to other categories which would be:

Category:Elementary and primary schools

Category:High schools and secondary schools

With grammar schools being more closely related to Category:High schools and secondary schools than to Category:Elementary and primary schools

Just not sure how it should be handled. Dbiel ^(Talk) 03:17, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would making it a subcategory of Category:Secondary schools be an option? Montemonte (talk) 22:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a good idea, so I when ahead and added it. Thank you Dbiel ^(Talk) 03:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome. Montemonte (talk) 22:27, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stub templates

Hello, I found that you recently created many Hong Kong related stubs. Just to let you know, you have to notify Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals before you create them. I know it's kind of lame but it's to let them keep the stubs organized. But upmerged templates, like the ones you created, usually will get approval from them! Keep up the good work, and thanks for changing the Taiwan stub templates according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions! :) impact F = 23:02, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thanks. Montemonte (talk) 22:27, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unparliamentary language

Thank you for adding the Hong Kong section to the Unparliamentary language article; I really enjoyed the to-and-fro about the meaning of "foul grass grows out of a foul ditch"; it's every bit as comically poetic as the New Zealand ones below it. You also added a thing about "仆街 (stumble on street)", but (without context) it's not clear why that should be unparliamentary (or really what it means at all). I wonder if you might find a transcript for that discussion also, or provide a sentence or two in the article by way of explanation. Thanks. 87.115.166.150 (talk) 23:05, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's not yet published in the hansard. Montemonte (talk) 10:19, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! I see you have recently created one or more new stub templates or categories. As it states at Wikipedia:Stub, at the top of most stub categories, and in many other places on Wikipedia, it is recommended that new stub types be proposed prior to creation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals. This helps to reach consensus about whether the new stub type is already covered by existing stub types, whether it is named according to stub naming guidelines, whether it is otherwise correctly formatted, whether it reaches the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type, and whether it crosses existing stub type hierarchies. Your new stub type is currently listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Discoveries, where comments are welcome as to any rationale for this stub type. Please, in future, consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! Grutness...wha? 00:44, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of largest cities by the end of each century that did not exist by the beginning of that century

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of largest cities by the end of each century that did not exist by the beginning of that century, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

unencyclopedic, unmaintainable list

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. RadioFan (talk) 18:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of List of largest cities by the end of each century that did not exist by the beginning of that century

I have nominated List of largest cities by the end of each century that did not exist by the beginning of that century, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of largest cities by the end of each century that did not exist by the beginning of that century. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Scjessey (talk) 19:24, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the first thing to do is to work on something similar on a user page; let the naysayers win the battle on this particular list. I understand the concept and I can envision different ways that it could be re-packaged. I totally understand the concept-- what had been a fishing spot on Lake Michigan in 1800 was the second largest city in the U.S. by 1900, and a location deep in the rain forest in 1900 was a national capital with several million people in 2000. The big question is how to illustrate it, and how to defend it, since there are people out there who enjoy to nominating things for deletion. The topic of the growth of cities is definitely encyclopedic (one of my favorite sections in the World Almanac was a table called "How the Cities Grew"), and in those cases where a city grew dramatically, it's worth noting. If you want more advice on how to present a topic, let me know. You've learned the same lesson that I did on the first article I ever had deleted-- an unusual title will get a negative reaction. Mandsford (talk) 19:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, user space problem solved. I tried to create a user page for you so that you can work on the project at your convenience-- unfortunately (or maybe fortunately) a person cannot use another user's name for a user page. Anyway, click on this-- User:Mandsford/Fastest growing cities -- rename it (click "move" or undo the redirect) as User:Montemonte/whatever --and there's where you'd work on the topic. The other thing that comes in handy is to look at an article with a table of information in it, copy the format, and then experiment with it. Type in "fastest growing" or "growth of cities" or whatever into google or google books, and you'd be surprised at how much is out there. Mandsford (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of ethnic groups with a larger diaspora population than their countries of origin

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of ethnic groups with a larger diaspora population than their countries of origin, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Unsourced, Original research

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. Passportguy (talk) 16:00, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of ethnic groups with a larger diaspora population than their countries of origin

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of ethnic groups with a larger diaspora population than their countries of origin, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of ethnic groups with a larger diaspora population than their countries of origin. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. DMacks (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of 'Kowloon peninsula'

I am seeking to change our definition of 'Kowloon peninsula'. See that talk page.
Earthlyreason (talk) 06:36, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ROC-politician-stub and ROC-university-stub

If the article mentioned both Taiwain and mainland China, I tagged them with both China and Taiwan templates. If it only mentioned one, I only tagged the article with that one. Looking in my contribution history, National Southwestern Associated University and Tien-Min Li appear to be the only two articles I retagged. -Mairi (talk) 21:41, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I've earlier mentioned, these articles are more likely to be edited and improved by editors from Taiwan, where the Republic of China has been resided for more than half a century. Nevertheless they are not immediately related to Taiwan. How can the problem be resolved without a set of ROC templates? And meanwhile there are apparently more than two articles previously tagged with these two templates. Montemonte (talk) 21:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:ROC-party-stub

A tag has been placed on Template:ROC-party-stub requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an unambiguous misrepresentation of established policy.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 20:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First ethnic & minority rights in England

When was the first ethnic & minority rights (culture education political language rights) declared in England? Don't confuse it with immigration and citizenship laws/acts! Can you write me? Many Thanks! mail: stears333@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.2.100.11 (talk) 07:05, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of MTR Light Rail Route 705/706 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article MTR Light Rail Route 705/706 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/MTR Light Rail Route 705/706 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 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. Jc86035 (talk | contribs) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 14:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People's Republic of China articles missing geocoordinate data has been nominated for discussion

Category:People's Republic of China articles missing geocoordinate data, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or 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. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:17, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]