User talk:Nightstallion/ρ

KFOR

NATO troops have ransacked and robbed several stores in North Kosovo, also stealing thousands of dollars.

The Serbs demand investigation. This will cement bad relations with the KFOR as well... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:02, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Huh? Why did the troops do that? —Nightstallion 18:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

A terrible isolated incident.

Also, (FY)ROM has reached a compromise, the Albanians' points will be fulfilled, save for recognition of Kosovo independence, which they agreed to leave out.

The (Serb) Deputy Prime Minister resigned, but the Prime Minister rejected his resignation, so for now it's stable. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

So Macedonia will recognise later? —Nightstallion 22:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. The compromise was to set no deadline. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 09:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds fair enough. —Nightstallion 09:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

---

Serbian Defense Minister went to Algiers where he got confirmation that the country will never recognize Kosovo and to affirm military connections between the states. After the 17 March tragic events, the Europists abandon their policy of NATO membership. The Minister stated that "membership in the Partnership is enough". The Supreme Command of the Serbian Army officially stated that the connecting and cooperation with the US forces that began in 2006 will end and that military connections with the United States will be severed. Serbian Foreign Minister went to Vietnam to assume an economic link between the states and gain support for an international appeal using the UNSC announcing a "legal offensive".

As you can notice, the policy slowly "shifting" (note: the two ministers to the up are from DS) if you know what I mean. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:55, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

DSS Minister for KosMet jeopardizes the government greatly. He completely independently negotiates with the UNMIK without the Serbian authorities. He has also independently proposed a plan to divide internally Kosovo and sent it to the UN with "Government of Serbia" as signature. He practically proposes to give him exclusive control over the Kosovo Serbs. While the NATO is trying to create a state on the Balkans, a Minister within the Serbian government wants to create a feud of his own. :) The government, even as technical and in resignation, faces the same difficulties as before. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Serbian government adopts new Fund for Kosovo-Metohija: 16 million Euros (the largest ever). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

P.S. Heard about Clinton and Bosnia? :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

sighs Well, we'll see how it goes...

It's not like the Serbian government actually has that much money for long, is it?

Yeah, I heard. Absolutely ridiculous... —Nightstallion 23:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not that poor.

BTW, I see that there are support for Tibetan independence - but has there actually been such a call? So far I've heard only call for autonomy. Next to that, can it legally achieve independence?

This boycotting of products the Tibetan diaspora tries to enforce is useless (only makes them look angry and aggressive), just like the Serbs want boycott of merchandise from countries that recognized Kosovo... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but with the added uncertainty over the Kosovo issue and thus reduced investments, it's not that rich, either, is it?

Well, the Dalai Lama knows that the PRC will never accept independence, so he's trying to get the best he can, which is autonomy -- but the Tibetans certainly want and (in my opinion) certainly deserve independence.

Yeah, boycotts rarely work. —Nightstallion 12:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Well negotiations will obviously suit to follow (some day) on the level of autonomy, but can they achieve independence? What's the legal (& historical) status? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:35, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't share your optimism; Tibet, East Turkestan and the other occupied territories will only become autonomous once the PRC has become democratic, and THAT will take a LONG time.

What do you mean with "can they achieve independence"? Size and population is very obviously not a criterion for independence, and historically, they were independent just sixty years ago (from about 1912 to 1950). Then, PRC occupied them, claiming that they had "always been part of China" (nonsense). —Nightstallion 14:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

In legal terms, just like East Timor for example (which's independence no one sane could've really opposed in the end). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Yep, pretty much. Like West Papua and Western Sahara and so on. —Nightstallion 17:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

---

Serbia officially brings the case to the ICJ, which is expected to accept it. Serbian analysts claim this will slow down the wave of recognition of Kosovo independence, and in the case of a favorable outcome for Serbia possibly halt it.

Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic is going on a "major diplomatic initiative" starting from Vietnam across the world. His intention is the following UN General Assembly session, for which he claims a pro-Serbian majority is possible.

Czechia decides in the end not to recognize independence of Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

An ICJ opinion on this will be highly interesting... Until when has Czechia postponed the recognition? —Nightstallion 17:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Indefinitely. President and most Ministers oppose, including vast majority of the Parliament, while Foreign Minister and several other Ministers support. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

From what I've read, ODS and Greens are in favour, which would be almost half of parliament already, so I think "vast majority of parliament" is a bit of an overstatement. ;) —Nightstallion 19:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

No, the Civic Democratic Party has expressed objection now too. The following weeks shall decide, but it'll certainly be after 2 August. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:09, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh? Sorry, must have missed that. Have you got a source for ODS opposition? And why after 2 August? —Nightstallion 22:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

90 countries accumulated so far. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

You mean for the referral to the ICJ for an Advisory Opinion? BTW, have there been any reports or analyses on what the ICJ is likely to state? —Nightstallion 20:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

To support a request for an ICJ case. This should be majority, which means it'll probably happen. Serbian (neutral ones) expect a ruling in Serbian favor, but they're Serbian so...none other yet. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:09, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

The Serbian state doesn't have enough funds to sure all 33 states individuals, nor does it have the time and the technical difficulties make some even impossible. In case of a ruling in favor of Serbia, Serbia will sure selectively only some of the bigger states that recognized Kosovo individually afterwards, previously dispatching a request (ultimatum I'd say) to withdraw recognition. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

To clarify again: This will not be a "case", as a case has to be filed against another party; this will be an advisory opinion, just like the International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons or the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on Western Sahara.

Yeah, but have there been any analyses on what the ICJ will actually say in its Advisory Opinion? —Nightstallion 22:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Got it.

Not yet to my knowledge. Time will reveal. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:03, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Glad I could help, just thought it might be important to know the difference. :)

Mh, okay. I think that this will be one of the most important actions for the future of the whole issue. —Nightstallion 00:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

What outcome do you anticipate? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Three scenarios:

1. Worst case 1: The court decides it does not have jurisdiction, or releases an ambiguation Advisory Opinion. Nothing changes, it would continue to go on as slowly as it does now.
2. Case 2: The court states that the DoI is illegal and so's recognition; new negotiations ensue, and this time, there's some pressure on the Kosovan Albanians to concede; Kosovo gets large-scale autonomy, possibly the right to a referendum after a decade or two, case resolved.
3. Case 3: The court states that in this special case, the right to self-determination trumps the the right of territorial integrity; almost all states fall in with the recognising faction.

What do you think? —Nightstallion 11:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Between case 1 and 2, possibly closer to 2, but I don't expect that outcome. I expect it to end up like the Nicaragua vs. United States, the USA simply won't care about ICJ's advisory opinion. Although, there might be change if Obama wins. Also, if the Europeists win, they could perhaps reign together with the minorities, in which we'll have an ideal situation for the world scene over here. In that case, case 2 not only seems like a good solution, but also probable. But the problem is that there won't be any change in Pristina's authorities (Hashim Thaci). Veton Surroi (the most reformist politician of Kosovo) failed to pass the census and Ibrahim Rugova is, very sadly, dead. And if del Ponte is right and both Seselj and Haradinaj get released from the Hague...I can only expect yet another deadlock. I do not think that Case 3 is a possibility (according to both Western and Serb/Russian analysts).

BTW, Camp Bondsteel has become a component part of the patriotic forces' electoral campaign. ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Too bad, I was rooting for case 3. ;) —Nightstallion 13:27, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Moral or rational (or any similar) decisions have any influence for law. Serbia points out that 8 of 15 judges come from countries that oppose independence of Kosovo (7 of which quite).

Yesterday Kostunica started his campaign in Belgrade, he spoke for 30 minutes about Bondsteel. ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Still, the judges needn't share the POV of their governments -- and moral arguments *do* have clout in deciding whether the principles of self-determination apply or not. ;)

And, will it help him? —Nightstallion 13:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Of course. You know all the conspiracy theories circling around it, check the article if you don't. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah, I know, NATO only bombed Serbia to establish a US base in Kosovo. sighs Any new polls? —Nightstallion 14:27, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I've uploaded it to the article.

BTW, the principle of self-determination generally refers to former colonies. An argument less for the Kosovar side when compared to the Basques or Tibetans is that - the Albanians already have their nation-state, and that is the Republic of Albania. It's not that there's no chance that the ICJ might find it in accordance to international law - but if it does, there is absolutely no doubt it won't be classified as a unique case and will be "implemented" into precedent law as a precedent, because there is little or none at all legal argument for that. The doubtfulness of option 3 comes from the fear of further support to separatism, especially since the very last session of the Russian Duma officially supported the aims of Abkhazia and South Ossettia.

Also, I think that PRC has indeed progressed in the past few years (private ownership). Communist dictatorship will remain, but its form will change (or better said, is changing) to the Social-Market style of SFRY and in general, PRC will "move together with the world" (If there was a Wikipedia in the late 1970s, it would've been POV to write that it was an undemocratic dictatorship). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I think if they go for case 3, they'll try to codify what specific provisions would need to apply for the precedent to apply, but I suppose they'll hesitate to go there...

Yes, it's progressed a bit on market freedom, but political freedom is abysmal. (Don't quite know what you mean with the last sentence...?) —Nightstallion 16:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't mean to but in here, but you guys might be interested in Serbia's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence. Cheers, BalkanFever 11:27, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! —Nightstallion 13:27, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Moving articles

I have proposed that the articles “foreign relations of the Republic of Ireland; civil service of the Republic of Ireland and public service of the Republic of Ireland" be renamed in each case by deleting the words “the Republic of”. As you’ve previously discussed this issue, I thought you might wish to know that this is being discussed here. Very few have participated in the discussion so far. I'm not sure how widely the discussion forum is used. Redking7 (talk) 22:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Strange deletion in it.Wiki (continued)

Now they're trying to delete it:Unione per la Repubblica (Union for the Republic). --Checco (talk) 10:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Censorship?

Some users are trying to remove a sourced allegation that probably they don't agree with, be it only an allegation or not.[1] Maybe you can find the name of the book? Thanks, --TheFEARgod (Ч) 10:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I haven't found it yet, no. —Nightstallion 18:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Council roll call

Hi there. You are receiveing this message because your name appears on the WikiProject Council participants list. The WikiProject Council is currently having a roll-call; if you are still interested in participating in the inter-project discussion forum that WT:COUNCIL has become, or you are interested in continuing to develop and maintain the WikiProject Guide or Directory, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Participants and remove the asterisk (*) from your name on the list of participants. If you are no longer interested in the Council, you need take no action: your name will be removed from the participants list on April 30 2008.

Melon‑Bot (STOP!) 22:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 24th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 13	24 March 2008	About the Signpost

Single User Login enabled for administrators	Best of WikiWorld: "Clabbers"
News and notes: $3,000,000 grant, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Banner shells tame talk page clutter	WikiProject Report: Video games
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Patriotic shame

There is an ongoing campaign, the SRS all the time present their purity and the corruptness and affairs of the democrats. Well, now, all DS and G17+ presented their property cards, invited journalists for coffee to they homes and fully presented all their properties. Some of them are wealthy, but none are rich and the accusations have fell down to the water. In a counter-accusation, NS and SRS refused to present their property, on the argument "The Thief always says: 'Get the Thief!'". Hm...I wonder what this means... ;)

Russian diplomacy now maintains close relations with the patriots. The leaving Russian ambassador held a conference in the SPS-PUPS-JS chamber, where he received gifts from the Socialists. Today, very amazingly - he didn't leave from Serbia at all. He was discovered in the HQ of SRS, were he practically supported the political party in the forthcoming elections. His resignation might be connected to this (he's no longer an official diplomat so he can't be held responsible)... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:50, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Ouch. —Nightstallion 18:03, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

New mass protests scheduled for 1 May (will be misused for patriotic electoral use). --PaxEquilibrium (talk)

Obviously, yeah. —Nightstallion 17:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the ICJ case, Kostunica is against it, it's waiting too long, so in case of a patriotic victory, suing France, the Netherlands, Germany will go on as originally planned. This is yet another thing on which the technical gov is divided, as the DS-G17+ majority refused to approve the project "Kosovo is Serbia" propaganda campaign, upon which millions were supposed to be invested in propaganda posters, films, individual projects, lobby, etc... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, that'll be interesting, then. ;) —Nightstallion 22:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks - keep me up to date for such things. Cheers. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Btw, he makes a good point on division - the judges will be greatly influenced by their countries. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:34, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, naturally. Looking at the current composition, at least five judges are assured to be pro-Kosovo from their nationalities, with about as many against... We'll see, I suppose. —Nightstallion 22:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

---

Elections will be held also in Kosovo, it was decided. But the insane Minister for Kosovo-Metohia is preparing local elections too. Serbs will no longer cooperate with UNMIK and NATO and form parallel municipal institutions - including a Parliament of Autonomous Province of Kosovo-Metohija in Kosovska Mitrovica. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

sighs Ouch. Are the Kosovan Serbs really going to let them be made into political instruments like this? —Nightstallion 14:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The greater (non-SLKM) part of them, sure. Boris Tadic is against violating UNSCR 1244, which is Serbia's best argument as well (anyone can participate in Serbian national elections, but local ones fall down to UNMIK). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

And by violating UNSCR1244, aren't they risking a lot? —Nightstallion 15:02, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. The definition given is that the 17 March has put a final drop and that UNMIK has to "grow up" and learn to face the consequences of its acts and that it can "never, ever be trusted again". However they won't violate it directly, the Minister stated that the Serbs will continue to acknowledge UNMIK and KFOR, but just won't cooperate with it, rendering the local self-government "unofficial" to Kosovo (but official to Serbia).

Second act of violence on the "other side" since independence. The police forces were multi-ethnic as part of an UNMIK program for Kosovo, so in an ethnic Albanian village in the north there were policemen of Serbian ethnicity. They were shot at by angry villagers.

All investigations against Milo Djukanovic archived and charges dropped (recently-achieved political immunity). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:02, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, we'll see how that works...

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Yeah, I've read about that. —Nightstallion 20:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

IDPs in Vojvodina and Central Serbia will be able to vote at their homes as if their in Kosovo. Montenegro has also approved that for refugees on its soil. This boosts to almost three hundred thousand potential voters from Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Mh. —Nightstallion 00:22, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The Kosovo-Metohian Minister and the President continually attack each other. The President thinks about sanctioning the Minister's wild behavior, but the 'technicalness' of the gov is an obstacle. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Meaning he can't sanction the minister or dismiss him, because government is already dismissed? —Nightstallion 13:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Bingo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:06, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Btw, negative campaign had already started: LSV vs LDP. While Nenad Čanak and Boris Tadić were throughout their political activity the same, Čedomir Jovanović was veering to the right and had some national conservative views during the nationalist 1990s, so LSV uses this as an argument against him. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hell, he was in his twenties back then, everyone makes some mistakes... sighs Why can't they fight the common enemy instead? Ah well. —Nightstallion 13:18, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

That's standard political fighting. Also, B92 and LDP uncover polling frauds, the polls are falsified to approve both DS and SRS and then mysteriously one is "picked" and published over the other. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Tadic was an ultra-left social-anarchist in his 20s. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

How do you mean "falsified to approve"? —Nightstallion 10:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Make both and then wait for one of the two parties to pay. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Ouch. And, who paid? —Nightstallion 11:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

---

The investigation was hidden in MNE from public eye. Although everyone outside the country new about it, Milo's authorities have successfully propagated that there is no ongoing investigation and that it's a lie from the opposition. Now, it was carefully hidden as well, but Italian agencies "leaked" this event to the Montenegrin public.

It turned out that this wasn't voluntary as it was thought - he had 20 days to make his statement.

It is also dangerously suspicious why he finally admitted regarding the ongoing criminal investigation when he became PM and received political immunity. It is also highly suspicious why he rushed to run for President upon finishings of the investigation, as well as that after warnings from Europe - he immediately rushed to the post of Prime Minister. Also, he called upon his immunity. To me, I think that he looks more guilty than innocent. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Think that'll hurt Filip? —Nightstallion 11:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Urgent help needed

Hello Nightstallion, contrary to a reached consensus there is a splitting going on instead a merging: http://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Talk:Kosovo#Split_completed --Tubesship (talk) 04:46, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Party or movement?

Two Sicilies independence movement is in fact a political party with no relevance (I would not oppose a deletion) and I don't like the title of the article. I moved the page to Two Sicilies (political party), but another user opposed strongly the idea, using arguments I found difficult to understand. What do you think? What title is better? --Checco (talk) 09:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Uhm... as the "movement" is a union of groups and parties, the current title could work well, but I don't think that the issue deserves an article in en.Wiki: it is nothing more than advertising. How can I propose the article for deletion? --Checco (talk) 09:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

You follow the process explained at WP:AFD. —Nightstallion 10:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I decided not to start the deletion process for now anyway, even if the notability of the article is not clear to me. Moreover the article has no references or external sources speaking about the movement.

I would like to ask you a courtesy. Can you delete Image:Trentino-Lega Nord.jpg so that I can upload the image again without making the mistake I did when I uploaded it for the first time? --Checco (talk) 11:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

What mistake did you make? I don't see any... —Nightstallion 11:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The page will be deleted in seven days because of problems retated to the copyright. This happens only because I made a mistake. I did not write "logo" when uploading. See the difference with Image:Sud Tirolo-Lega Nord.jpg. --Checco (talk) 11:58, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem, you just delete the deletion message and you're fine -- the info's there NOW, after all. Did it. —Nightstallion 12:07, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! --Checco (talk) 13:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Help!

Please help me with my new page , it's up for deletion and i need your help! it's called 'List of countries whose flag has a star' - please help or at least stop it from deletion! thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bezuidenhout (talk • contribs) 09:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion in en.Wiki (this time)

I wrote a concise article on the newly-formed Venetian People's Movement, but it was suddenly proposed for deletion. If you want you can state your opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Venetian People's Movement. --Checco (talk) 21:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. —Nightstallion 10:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Just a quick clarification- how can someone ascertain that a subject meets WP:N or even that the sources/content listed satisfy WP:RS in English Wikipedia when all of the references are in another language? Burden of proof is on the article's creator insofar as WP:RS, and that would include ensuring source info is accessible in an appropriate format for other editors of the English Wikipedia. Given that I see consensus forming, I have already withdrawn the nom, but I'm just curious about your reasoning. Thanks for the help. Cheers, --- Taroaldo (talk) 17:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

If no English sources are available, I'm afraid people who don't speak any of the languages in which the sources are will have to accept the word of those people who do speak those languages -- at least that's my line of reasoning. —Nightstallion 19:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletions in it.Wiki (again)

This time it is the turn of:

• United Democratic Christians (see it:Wikipedia:Pagine da cancellare/Democratici Cristiani Uniti)
• Popular Italy (see it:Wikipedia:Pagine da cancellare/Italia Popolare – Movimento per l’Europa)
• Free Foundation (see it:Wikipedia:Pagine da cancellare/Free Foundation)
• Popular Liberalism (see it:Wikipedia:Pagine da cancellare/Liberalismo Popolare)
• We Blue Reformers (see it:Wikipedia:Pagine da cancellare/Noi Riformatori Azzurri)
• Circles of Reformist Initiative (see it:Wikipedia:Pagine da cancellare/Circoli di Iniziativa Riformista).

Tell me if you don't want me to inform you on deletions in it.Wiki any more. --Checco (talk) 08:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No, it's good that you're telling me, keep doing that! —Nightstallion 19:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

All these proposed deletions will be approved in the end. It's time to take the interesting information from these it.Wiki articles and put it in the en.Wiki articles. --Checco (talk) 07:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Good idea, yes. —Nightstallion 16:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

One more:

• Party of Social Democrats (see it:Wikipedia:Pagine da cancellare/Partito dei Socialdemocratici)

--Checco (talk) 17:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Toma

...softened and will let Kostunica be Prime Minister in his government. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Isn't that going to hurt both of them a bit? —Nightstallion 19:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I actually think the new government is close to its completion. Today, SPS stated that not any sort of cooperation with DS because of its partners like LSV is possible. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I've read that, too. Well, Serbia will have to see what good a government mainly composed of SRS and SPS will do it... sighs —Nightstallion 22:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

1.7 million Euros (140 tons) of assistance sent by Russia to the Kosovo Serb enclaves. Putin claims this is just a start. Kosovo Albanians enraged. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting... —Nightstallion 16:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

---

(Czechia) The Foreign Minister's proposal failed yesterday, as expected. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. —Nightstallion 16:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

---

The DS reveal their "Anti-Russian" policy, they stop the initiation of the Gas pipeline in the government - under the argument that it's a technical government. The Patriots will probably vote that in the parliament, and if they do, that will bring them closer together - while weaken the Europeists further. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

nods Still they're right. ;) —Nightstallion 15:50, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Ramush Haradinaj

..acquitted. Bye, bye Europe for Serbia and justice for Kosovo... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, that much for the chances of the DS in this election, then. —Nightstallion 16:17, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I am actually more worried by the fact that he is indeed guilty. The ICTY doesn't hide that, and the reason of the acquittance is that the witnesses were forced by Haradinaj's links, possibly including those in the UNMIK, to suddenly change their thought in the end. Three witnesses were killed under mysterious circumstances, one witness fled from Kosovo to Montenegro, thinking his life was in danger. He also killed.

Carla del Ponte warned that there can be no doubt that Ramush is guilty, but that he and his allies are systematically exterminating all witnesses and personally threatening to the ICTY judges. As she said months ago "The vicious gangster with the blood of many innocent in his hands" will probably have to be released due to this, and the conscious ignoring or even support of these events on part of UNMIK and CIA.

P.S. Several extremist political leaders stated the possibility of a war with the Kosovo Albanians some time in the future cannot be excluded. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

sighs —Nightstallion 16:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Even traitor Nataša Kandić and all the Serbian traitorous NGOs, as well as other circles of the pro-civic and European traitors spoke out against this verdict. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

nods Well, as I've said -- there go the last chances of a non-SRS victory. —Nightstallion 21:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm actually far more worried about the actual credibility and functioning of the ICTY. It seems as if better the people were tried in their own domestic countries. This is not the first scandalous verdict (but for this one, we can't really blame the ICTY - but those who hunted down the witnesses), remember the Vukovar Trio? Then there are also a lot of potential war criminals wandering around, about which's atrocities even the BBC speaks, like Atif Dudaković. I am also worried by the fact that Vojislav Seselj might get acquitted, or at least get only several years. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but they're working under VERY difficult circumstances -- imagine trying to get witnesses for war crimes who AREN'T intimidated... :( —Nightstallion 21:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

“ [..]We attacked the Serbs constantly and murdered them every day. On every single spot. Day and night. Without hiding... ” — Ramush Haradinaj, Story of War and Freedom

This to the up is an excerpt from Haradinaj's personal autobiography, now viewable to the public eye. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Ouch. Not sufficient evidence, though, I suspect... —Nightstallion 11:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

good that you are discussing this, both. Some related censorship actions are going on ([2] and [3]) --TheFEARgod (Ч) 11:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 14	31 March 2008	About the Signpost

Wikimania 2009 to be held in Buenos Aires	Sister Projects Interview: Wikisource
WikiWorld: "Hammerspace"	News and notes: 10M articles, $500k donation, milestones
Dispatches: Featured content overview	WikiProject Report: Australia
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 21:38, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXV (March 2008)
Project news The Crusades task force has been created. The main project talk page is now automatically archived; MiszaBot II will archive any sections that have had no comments for 21 days. The contest department has completed its twelth month of competition, which saw 13 entries. The top scorer this month is Woody, with 22 points, followed by Dreamafter with 13 points, with Ed!, jwillbur, Redmarkviolinist and Borg Sphere also fielding entries. Blnguyen remains the overall leader, with 188 points in total. You are encouraged to submit articles you're working on as entries. A Sources section has been added to the Logistics department, for help tracing and locating JSTOR articles and other source material. A Linguistics section has been added to the Logistics department, for help with non-English language sources and translation of snippets. It supports 19 languages so far. An Administrators section has been added to the Logistics department, for help with admin related tasks. Administrators willing to help out are cordially asked to list their names in the section. Reminder: Editors are always needed to review various military history articles at all levels.	Articles of note New featured articles: Æthelred of Mercia Cannon HMAS Melbourne (R21) Huldrych Zwingli Timor Leste Defence Force USS Bridgeport (AD-10) New featured lists: List of countries without armed forces List of foreign recipients of the Knight's Cross List of Medal of Honor recipients for the Battle of Iwo Jima List of Victoria Cross recipients of the Royal Navy New featured topics: Atlantic campaign of May 1794 New A-Class articles: Armia Krajowa Heuschrecke 10 USS Siboney (ID-2999) William Stacy
Awards and honors Kirill Lokshin has been appointed coordinator emeritus to reflect his on-going involvement in the project. The appointment ends concurrently with the other coordinators' terms in September 2008. The following editors have been awarded the Content Review Medal for their work on reviews at various levels of military history articles: Carom, Cam, Blnguyen, Howard C. Berkowitz, Kevin Myers, Maralia, MrPrada, SoLando, and Wandalstouring. Similar awards were made last December to: Buckshot06, Cla68, Eurocopter tigre, Hawkeye7, Ian Rose, Jackyd101, JKBrooks85, Kyriakos, LordAmeth, Nick Dowling, Roger Davies, The Land, TomStar81 and Woody, most of whom are still active reviewers.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo

Could you please look into the edit requests at the International reactions page? Thanks. BalkanFever 16:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Will do. —Nightstallion 16:14, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Serbia

The Director for the West Balkans of the European Commission for Enlargement was a guest to Belgrade today. He confirmed, after Kostunica's official questioning, that the same SAP will be signed with Serbia - including confirming Kosovo as a part of it (article 135). He stated that the Kosovo status process is separate from this. I guess this is a big + for Tadic and disappointment for Kostunica. ;)))

In response Kostunica has found another thing. He has officially requested the European Union to declare itself upon Haradinaj's case, to the Serbian public he stated that EU's response will determine Serbia's European Integrations. Javier Solana responded with full respect of the ICTY. Not receiving in the SAP, Kostunica has "saved his but" and found what he ha needed in this alternative.

LDP makes a pre-electoral promise that Haradinaj will find itself within bars if it wins. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

nods Interesting developments... —Nightstallion 08:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Čedomir Jovanović accused the incompetence of Kostunica for Haradinaj's release and stated that he will not allow him and Nikolic use this, in their traditional meaner, just as for election propaganda; he condemned this sentence, calling it hypocrisy and one of the greatest scandals of the international community. --16:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Will that help the LDP? —Nightstallion 17:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Macedonia and Kosovo

Sorry to bother you again, but I'm starting to get confused here. I believe the International reactions article is grossly incorrect in regards to Macedonia. It seems the only source is a 2007 document, which is completely and utterly out of context. I made an edit request on the talk page, but there is still nothing happening. Actual post-declaration sources need to be brought in for Macedonia. IMO, the previous version was pretty precise, saying that they have not recognised Kosovo. This needs to be fixed as soon as possible. BalkanFever 09:43, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd tend to agree, but I prefer not to get involved in that article as long as the environment is that hostile... —Nightstallion 09:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand, but the article is fully protected. There is no way to change anything without an admin, and it seems to me that none of you want to touch anything. Macedonia is a very obvious decision - please consider it. To give the readers the correct info. BalkanFever 09:51, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

MNE

Filip Vujanovic spent 700.000 Euros, Nebojsa Medojevic 650.000 and Andrija Mandic 250.000. Srdjan Milic seems will also just for a couple of Es cross the limit.

They were granted 140.000 Euros. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:58, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Will they have to face any repercussions for that? —Nightstallion 12:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Of course not, this is Montenegro. ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

---

Today when the Medojevic couple went to vote, a terrifying scandal has occurred. Nebojsa's wife, who has voted continually since reestablishment of multi-parliamentarism, has been deleted. She is simply not in the electoral list anymore, so she couldn't vote. Nebojsa was very angry, he suspects the authorities conducted systematic removal of known political opponents (there's a saying in Montenegro "Montenegro is Small, Small" if you know what I mean). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I've just seen that Vuja has won. :( —Nightstallion 11:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah...did you expect Medvedev's defeat? ;)

Mandic's result is a result of growth of Serb nationalism.

Very bad for Meda. For his policy of cooperating with both sides, he actually didn't gain much from - only the statement that the pro-Serbian doors are forever closed for him, and now Milo has thrown him away like toilette paper, after using him for the Constitution. He has proposed an unofficial second round between Fića and Meda, claiming he will even lose, "not able to surpass even a third place". The government also said that it will disregard Medojevic and Milic as opposition representatives and will treat Mandic as the "true, sole" opposition leader, announcing opening a dialog with him regarding ongoing problems.

I still can make no judgment for Srdja. Running now, he has seized in his hands a part of his dying out electorate. ;-) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

;p I was hoping... —Nightstallion 15:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting... —Nightstallion 15:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

---

Local self-government in Montenegro; red represents the municipalities in which the ruling DPS governs and blue are administered by the pro-Serbian opposition

Just made this. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. Why the red block in the NE, and why the blue batch in the SW? —Nightstallion 17:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

The NE is populated also by Bosniacs-Muslims and Albanians.

The SW, that is the Bay of Kotor, was included only in 1945 and the people there have never ever asserted any sort integration for Montenegro. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for explaining that. —Nightstallion 22:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

..and the fact that in most municipalities the difference is 51%:49% so that they are very prone to change over the years, like at the north... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. Which direction is it going towards? ;) —Nightstallion 22:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

None. ;-) That's why in the evening Berane the mayor raises Serb tricolors, talks about Greater Serbia and reunification with Serbia, and on the next day after preterm elections the new mayor spits at neighboring Serbia full of hatred in the morning. :-) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

grins —Nightstallion 23:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Defence of the wikipedia in ancient greek

There is a discussion about it, with a passional defense of our proyect in the board of language subcommittee titled Latina Wikipedia closing and hellenic wikipedia opening that is currently continued in the list of wikimedia title Allow new wikis in extinct languages?. if you want to susbcribe to the list enter here. you can help providing good arguments to get a reconsideration —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.40.202.182 (talk) 01:33, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #15

Number 15, April 5, 2008

The Hurricane Herald

This is the monthly newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The Hurricane Herald aims to give a summary, both of the activities of the WikiProject and global tropical cyclone activity. If you wish to change how you receive this newsletter, or no longer wish to receive it, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. This newsletter covers all of March 2008.

Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve monitoring of the WikiProject's articles.

Storm of the month

Cyclone Jokwe

Cyclone Jokwe was the first tropical cyclone to make landfall in Mozambique since Cyclone Favio struck in the previous year. The tenth named storm of the 2007-08 South-West Indian Ocean cyclone season, Jokwe was first classified as a tropical depression on March 2 over the open Southwest Indian Ocean. It tracked west-southwest, crossing northern Madagascar as a tropical storm on March 5 before intensifying into a tropical cyclone on March 6. Jokwe rapidly intensified to reach peak winds of 195 km/h (120 mph), before weakening slightly and striking Nampula Province in northeastern Mozambique. It quickly weakened while paralleling the coastline, though the storm restrengthened as it turned southward in the Mozambique Channel. Late in its duration, it remained nearly stationary for several days, and steadily weakened due to wind shear before dissipating on March 16.

The storm caused minor damage in northern Madagascar. In Mozambique, the cyclone affected 165,000 people, and left at least sixteen fatalities. Cyclone Jokwe destroyed over 9,000 houses and damaged over 3,000 more, with the heaviest damage in Angoche and the Island of Mozambique in Nampula Province. The storm also caused widespread power outages and crop damages.

Other tropical cyclone activity

• There were no named tropical cyclones in the South Pacific ocean, though a tropical depression developed near Vanuatu in the third week of the month.
• Late in the month, Cyclone Pancho developed in the Australian region, reaching peak winds of 90 knots. In addition, Cyclone Ophelia lasted from late February through early March.
• In addition to Cyclone Jokwe, there were two named tropical cyclones in the Southwest Indian Ocean; Cyclone Kamba became an Intense Tropical Cyclone over open waters, and Tropical Storm Lola formed and dissipated near Mauritius late in the month.

Member of the month

Cyclone barnstar

The March member of the month is CapeVerdeWave, whose first edit was to a tropical cyclone article, back in January 2006. CapeVerdeWave has been a steady and active member of the project, writing several articles on Category 5 hurricanes as well as working on the often forgotten older hurricanes. The user also has contributed to some older season articles, and recently helped update the project after the recent hurricane re-analysis. We thank him for his continued dedication.

New members

Southern Illinois SKYWARN Milk's Favorite Cookie Somerset Squall Stormtracker94

WBOSITG Jj137 Joan97

New and improved articles

• There were 6 new pieces of Featured content : Typhoon Paka, List of wettest tropical cyclones in the United States, Effects of Hurricane Ivan in the Lesser Antilles and South America, List of retired Pacific typhoon names (JMA), Tropical Storm Vamei, and List of New York hurricanes
• New Good articles include: Hurricane Beulah, Hurricane Ione, Hurricane Isidore
• New storm articles include: 1945 Southeast Florida hurricane, Hurricane Fox (1952)
• New non-storm articles include: Effects of Hurricane Dennis in Florida, List of North Carolina hurricanes (1900-1949)

Main Page content

• Today's Featured Article: 1933 Atlantic hurricane season appeared on the Main Page in the Today's Featured Article on March 27
• Entries from 1 article: 1917 Pinar del Río hurricane appeared on the Main Page in the Did you know column during March.

Storm article statistics

Grade	Dec	Jan	Feb	Mar
FA	33	33	36	38
A	9	9	8	8
GA	112	114	123	130
B	86	99	96	91
Start	208	214	216	211
Stub	6	3	6	9
Total	454	472	485	487
ω	2.98	2.98	2.96	2.94
percentage Less than B	47.1	46.0	45.8	45.2
percentage GA or better	33.9	33.1	34.3	36.1

Project News: Updates on the Best Track - Atlantic and North Indian Ocean, and more
In February, the Hurricane Research Division released its reanalysis for the Atlantic Ocean from 1915 to 1920. Highlights include the addition of eight storms, as well as the removal of one storm. The winds in the 1919 Florida Keys Hurricane were increased to 130 knots, and the 1916 Texas hurricane was increased to a Category 4 hurricane.

According to an email sent to the India Meteorological Department, there will be an online version of the North Indian Ocean best track from 1877 to 2006, scheduled to be released in two months; it is unknown if it will cost money to access.

In unrelated news, the project was featured on the Signpost; Mitchazenia was interviewed, and talked about the past, present, and future of the project.

At the end of the month, there were five different Featured content candidates (FXC's) by five different editors; two were featured article candidates, two were featured list candidates, and one was a featured picture candidate. The have been a few times in which there were four FXC's from four different editors, most recently in February and early March of 2008.

♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Image: Logo Ulivo 2006.png

At Talk:Democratic Party (Italy)/Archives/2019#Fair use rationale for Image:Logo Ulivo 2006.png there is a warning concerning this image. What can we do about it? Can you fix the problem? --Checco (talk) 07:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. —Nightstallion 11:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! --Checco (talk) 11:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Flags on your page

I'm not urging you to add those, but want to hear your thoughts on these oppressed people: Palestinians, Kurds, Burmese, Koreans in DPRK.--TheFEARgod (Ч) 11:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, yes, yes and yes, but I've only got so much room on my page... Longer answers:

• Palestinians are partially responsible for their fate, but Israel (and the US supporting them) are to blame to a large extent.
• While the fate of the Kurds in Iraq seems better now, and it appears that it's also slowly improving in Turkey, there's still much to do (especially in Iran and Syria, but also in Turkey and Iraq); ultimately, they deserve their own state, too, in my opinion.
• The Burmese should finally be freed of the military dictatorship (why the US don't finally invade there... sighs) and live in a highly federal democratic state...
• Korean reunification with strong economic support from the international community should take place as soon as the dictatorship in the north can be dismantled, but it seems to be holding on despite constant scarcity of food and water and all kinds of supplies...

Your thoughts? —Nightstallion 11:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe not fully agreeing on the 1st I agree on the others. Another contributor to the plight of the Palestinians is Jordanian and Egyptian peace with Israel. That seems like a stab in the back. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 12:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Nightstallion: can I ask you why you propose "a highly federal" state for the Burmese? --Checco (talk) 13:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe because 8 ethnic groups comprise it? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Where can I find a list of these 8 ethinc groups? --Checco (talk) 15:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Precisely, because there are at least eight major ethnic groups in Burma, most of which have strong secessionist movements. If they don't get a HIGHLY federal state, there's no chance in hell that Burma won't disintegrate. —Nightstallion 15:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

However, ethnic segregation is a doorway to new problems almost as much as it is a solution.

Maybe you have a specific form of decentralization on mind? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I didn't. —Nightstallion 17:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It's strange how army and police elements didn't side with protesting monks in Burma, isn't it? --TheFEARgod (Ч) 11:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

You mean it's strange that noone broke ranks? —Nightstallion 17:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

don't understand that term. Probably that's what I meant --TheFEARgod (Ч) 19:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

"to break ranks" = "not to act together with other members of a certain group". —Nightstallion 06:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Question

Serbs in Hungary (mostly modern-day Vojvodina) have had 47 elections and sessions for their special parliament, where/should I put this? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Mh. No idea, actually... Their own template? —Nightstallion 17:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I know we made a lovely compromise for +/- on parliamentary elections (just the seats and the political parties, and not lists, count), but I have come to a a problem. SDPO has fractured into two currents. The Party will not run in the Populist Coalition, which decided to remain 'clean' with just the two parties (DSS & NS), next to its policy in collision with SDPO's liberal-democratic stances. However, one of the two Co-Presidents - and also probably the most important figure of the party (Mayor of Kragujevac) fractured away and has received a guaranteed seat on G17+'s list witih the pro-European Coalition of Boris Tadic. Should I count SDPO's seats from 2007 together with DS, SDP, LSV and G17+'s - or not? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Mh. I'd say no, actually. —Nightstallion 23:02, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

BTW -- Montenegrin results? —Nightstallion 23:04, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

They were/are in the article, I just forgot to update "preliminary" to "final". ;)

Political analysts say the opposition has forever wasted all and many a chance to replace Djukanovic's alliance. The pro-Serbs forever defeated at the referendum, the liberals dried out political end by the regime and Medojevic, sadly, lacking the true need of political genius. No were match for the political mastermind of Milo Djukanovic; as you can see he has outlasted everyone. MNE has progressed from a nearly crime state to very close to a European nation, and indeed DPS is to be thanked for that. Political analysts say troubles during EuroAtlantic integrations, which are doubtful to arise, are the only other chance - and only for the national conservatives - before the natural death of Djukanovic. Neutral watchers have judged that the presidential election was a bit flawed by DPS CG domination and political influence and have secured regarding that alleged vote-buying incident at the north - concluding that the election falls under the limits of democratic ones. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:26, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I've put them in the template, but we need some more numbers (and a source...).

Mh. Not much to be done about that, but it'll take a couple of decades that way... —Nightstallion 23:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Requested Move

The page Watcher currently serves as a redirect page for Watcher in the Water. There is a [[Watcher {disambiguation)]] page. The term is generic and is not exclusive to the Lord of the Rings article. Would you move [[Watcher {disambiguation)]] to Watcher. Thank you. Kyros (talk) 21:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Archives  |  Tip Line  |  Editors The Novels WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXIII - April 2008
Project news Elections are now taking place for coordinators of the project for the next three months. Any editors interested in seeking a coordinator position, or who want a say in who is selected, should indicate as much here. Member news The project has currently 381 members, 69 joined & 0 leavers since the start of March 2008. Other news The project's long-time lead coordinator, Kevinalewis, has announced he is not standing as a candidate for another term in that capacity. We would like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to him for the extraordinary work he has done for this project. To Kill a Mockingbird was promoted to Featured Article status on April 3. This brings our FA count to 13! It has been suggested that WikiProject Sword of Truth be merged into WP:NOVELS, perhaps as a task force. Task force news Two inactive projects were converted into task forces, so Chronicles of Narnia task force and Lemony Snicket task force have been created. People interested in the aforementioned subjects are encouraged to support the new task forces. (Thank to Wassupwestcoast for the tip) Novel related news The science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke died on 19 March aged 90. Current debates There is a discussion regarding further task forces for other genres of fiction now taking place here.	From the Members Welcome to the Twenty Third issue of the Novels WikiProject's newsletter! Use this newsletter as a mechanism to inform yourselves about progress at the project and please be inspired to take more active roles in what we do. We would encourage all members to get more involved and if you are wondering what with, please ask. Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk), Initiating Editor Collaboration of the Month This month's Collaboration has been selected by popular vote and is A Farewell to Arms. Newsletter challenge Last month's challenge (South Wind) was completed by member User:Blathnaid with a nice starting stub. The first person to start the article is mentioned in the next newsletter. This month's article is Kate Christensen's 2008 PEN/Faulkner award winner The Great Man.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Templates and columns

I have a problem with columns in the templates at Italian general election, 2001 (Veneto). As you can see, columns with data should be all moved to the right. Can you fix it? --Checco (talk) 17:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. —Nightstallion 17:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! --Checco (talk) 18:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:Governments of Veneto: another template I am not able to fix by myself. I would like to have all the information in single rows without hyphens. Can you do it? --Checco (talk) 08:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

What exactly do you mean? —Nightstallion 06:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I would like to see the content of the two last columns on the right in a single row. --Checco (talk) 07:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

... like this? —Nightstallion 15:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

No, like it was before, without hyphening (to hyphen = andare a capo in Italian). I simply would like that all the content is in a single row, not two as it is now. Do you understand? --Checco (talk) 15:40, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah. ("hyphen" is a "–" in English.) Like this? —Nightstallion 15:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

No. "Hyphen" is "–" but "to hyphen" means going into the next row. I don't know how to explain you it in English and I unfortunately don't speak German. I simply would like to have all the content of every template row in a single row and not in two rows, as it is now for the dates. --Checco (talk) 16:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I understood it now, just wanted to explain my prior misunderstanding. For me, it's in single rows now... —Nightstallion 16:13, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Uhm... the problem is my bad English. Take the first row, "Tomelleri I Government". You see that in the sixth column "1970-" and "1971" are in two "rows". Can we have "1970-1971" on the same level? --Checco (talk) 19:16, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

It is in one row for me -- and normally, a – keeps the two years from being hyphened... —Nightstallion 20:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. I will try to fix it alone. Thank you! --Checco (talk) 22:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Problem fixed. Thank you in any case! --Checco (talk) 22:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Gladly! —Nightstallion 22:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Last last question (for today): I would like to shorten the first column and enlarge the last two columns, how can I do it? --Checco (talk) 22:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

You need to remove the width tags from the lower entries and simply set the width through the tags of the title row. —Nightstallion 22:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you and good night. --Checco (talk) 23:25, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Maps & Serbia

I've put up a voting map on the Montenegrin presidential election, 2008. Check out also the one over at Montenegrin parliamentary election, 2006. An interesting difference is if you also see the Montenegrin parliamentary election, 2002, before the referendum. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The Patriots have enforced their policies in an effort to remove the minorities from political life, because they will likely support the 'other side'. It seems the first phase of removal of positive discrimination had only begun - their electoral body are primarily ethnic Serbs. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Ouch. —Nightstallion 06:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

This is the greatest division, 2001.

I guess Macedonia'll have preterm elections after all?

The recently adopted Constitutional proposal for Kosovo distances itself from the Ahtisaari plan, originally the Declaration of Independence calling upon it. Serbian legal experts are opening up a case specifically on property, 58% of which belongs to Serbia or the Serbs, which will all on 15 June become Kosovan. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks. Why did the opposition succeed back then?

Yeah, but not over Kosovo... ;)

Mh. Why's that, and how precisely does it differ? —Nightstallion 21:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Because that's when Milo Djukanovic woke up one morning and said "Uhm, wait a minute...we're not Serbs! In fact, let's brake the state with Serbia!" only a day after he sang Serb nationalist songs and gave a vow Montenegro will never secede from Serbia as long as he lives; because the depression greatly hit the regime (no wages anywhere, strikes, crime basic form of life...) and because it was damaged by the sex-slave scandal.

It guarantees the Serbs 10 seats in the parliament, but in every single other spot regarding provisions guaranteed by the Ahtisaari plan, it will be "..regulated by corresponding laws..". What do you mean why?

P.S. The Presevo Albanians are negotiating with the US ambassador to Serbia 'regarding the forthcoming election'. The Serbians find this increasingly suspicious and very angering. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

What scandal?

I meant "why are the Kosovan Albanians deviating from the plan, since fulfilling it would be the best chance of being seen as cooperative"?

Negotiating over what? —Nightstallion 07:48, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

High-ranking DPS CG officials bought a slave girl from Moldova and raped her.

Who knows. Selective choice from the Ahtisaari plan to get only what suits. Maybe to punish the Serbs for not accepting their compromise? Also, there are a lot of media reports (from the West too) about dragging rumors how now the aim is to irritate the Serbs and provoke them to create a mess, in an effort to speed up their depart.

Whether to run or boycott. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 09:38, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Ouch.

Mh, strange.

And, what will they do? —Nightstallion 09:52, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Whatever the US ambassador advices them.

Also all ethnic Hungarian political parties, strengthened by their leader's result at the presidential election, will now run with this platform. This is no longer some dragging rumor/possibility, they all now run with this in the program of the Hungarian Coalition, calling for a referendum. --10:06, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. —Nightstallion 10:13, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

It's actually disappointing all Serbian political parties find this unfavorable (it reminds them about Kosovo). As you know, I share a mixture of the two conflicted opinions - territorial integrity should be an uncrossable point in the spirit of stability, whereas internal reform can be done in any manner (Hungarians could get an Autonomous Republic in my opinion, if they negotiate for it). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:02, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

nods Yeah, I agree. —Nightstallion 18:33, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiData & DataWiki

Here is an interesting development...—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting... —Nightstallion 15:25, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Non-collapsible templates

Dear Nightstallion, even today I need your help. I edited some templates and I would like to transform them into the non-collapsible form, thus without "show"/"hide" buttons. The templates are:

• Template:Elections in Veneto
• Template:Venetian governments
• Template:Politics of Italian regions
• Template:Elections in Italian regions

If you show me how to fix just one of them, I will fix the remaining one by myself. Thank you, as always. --Checco (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't know whether it's possible -- you should ask at Template talk:Navbox. —Nightstallion 21:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem, thank you. --Checco (talk) 22:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Election in South Korea

Do you know where I can find the results of the last election in percentages in the Internet? --Checco (talk) 09:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

If I did, they would already be in the article... ;) —Nightstallion 09:57, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. I was a little bit surprised by the rise of new parties and I would like to know better, in particular I was surprised by the result of the Democratic Labour Party. As you know tomorrow and Monday is election days in Italy: on Thursday you will have all the percentages, but there is a lot of work to do and a lot of articles to update. I would like to see in the future all the red links in Template:Elections in Italian regions and Template:Politics of Italian regions edited. For now, as you know, I worked hard on Politics of Veneto, Elections in Veneto and derivates, while I just started Politics of Sicily. --Checco (talk) 10:09, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

nods —Nightstallion 10:13, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo-Montenegro

Milo Djukanovic accused the opposition for identifying its own national interests with that of the former country's (-2006), but also conferred the Government's opinion that Montenegro doesn't recognize Kosovo because its in its best interests, and because Kosovo's secession could not only destabilize heavily only Serbia, but the entire region too. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. I thought he was certain to recognise...? —Nightstallion 11:15, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, most people say that next to the 90% moralless political demagogy, there actually still remains some sort of 10% national conservatism in him... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Wonderful. sighs —Nightstallion 11:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

---

Trade with Kosovo (Serbia's) has been minimized. This is very troublesome, as Kosovo revenues up to 300 million annually to Serbia just trading. Serbia is losing a lot of money and Russia is hopping in buying everything, while Kosovo is seeking alternative trade links. Political analysts say it is wrong even on the political plane itself, because Serbia and Kosovo compose one compact economic basket - of which the latter is dependent primarily on the first - and that this is generally segregating further and actually removing further away Kosovo from Serbian influence. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:57, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

nods Sounds logical. —Nightstallion 21:21, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

---

After receiving an affirmative response from the EU that article 135 will remain in the SAP treaty, Kostunica sent a new official request to the EU. He asks it to add to it a specific sentence at the article's end saying that the EU 'reaffirms the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Republic of Serbia'. When it's added, he says that he will have no quarrel in supporting the treaty. According to his words, some further warranty is needed, because despite UNSCR 1244 from 1999, the Serbian people was tricked into it - so that this way it might also get tricked into the EU without Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

What does article 135 state? —Nightstallion 15:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

It mentions that Kosovo is temporarily administered by the UNMIK impending final solution of the status, that the treaty will not relate to that territory of Serbia in specific (a separate process with the UNMIK) and that the treaty in no way influences its current or future status. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:34, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, that sounds fair enough on its own. —Nightstallion 06:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

---

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has majority to initiate an investigation of the mass grave(s?) in northern Albania. This was a Russian motion, which now presents vastly Russia as "savior of Serbia and protector of the Serbian people" in the campaign. There were discussions over Kosovo too, but no agreement; in Serbia it was depicted as if the pro-Serbian cause was louder than the pro-Albanian.

Del Ponte's successor Serge Brammertz confirmed in Belgrade that Haradinaj's release is outrageous and the previous rumors about the possibility of lodging an appeal (almost never happens in the ICTY). He is satisfied with Serbia's cooperation on Zupljanin's case, but requests more work in Mladic's, Karadzic's and Hadzic's. He has also commended the immense work Serbia did so far, but asked that further cooperation is continued (144 of 168 ICTY requests fulfilled so far). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds fair -- how is Brammertz seen in Serbia? —Nightstallion 15:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

They've only just met him. ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

And, what's their first impression? —Nightstallion 21:44, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Based on that above, what do you think? ;) No guarantee it won't deteriorate after a political option that doesn't recognize the ICTY (anymore) wins soon, or after Brammertz starts criticizing or introducing this to the political sphere like before... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

nods Well, at least something... —Nightstallion 08:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

---

Hashim Thaci stated that after the elections in Serbia, there will be new Belgrade-Pristina negotiations. After once again asked whether he will apologize to the non-Albanian victims in the name of Kosovo, he again stated that not a single KLA fighter has ever committed any atrocity, let alone a crime, and that only Serbs committed crimes in the Serbo-Albanian conflict, therefore an apology can and should come only from them (Tadic, 2006). In a poll over 70% of Kosovo's citizens declared in support of Vojvodina's independence. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

New negotiations don't sound like a bad idea... —Nightstallion 21:44, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you really think the Kostunica-Seselj alliance will want them? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Of course not, no. —Nightstallion 08:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Renaming Levon Ter-Petrosyan's page

Hi. I wrote in Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Other_proposals and in Talk:Levon_Ter-Petrossian#Renaming_the_page this:

• Levon Ter-Petrossian → Levon Ter-Petrosyan. Three reasons for that:
  1. Accordingly with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Armenian), his name must be transcribed by Levon Ter-Petrosyan;
  2. Levon Ter-Petrosyan is the English transcription, while Levon Ter-Petrossian is the French one;
  3. Levon Ter-Petrosyan is far more usual than Levon Ter-Petrossian (and Levon Ter-Petrosian with one s).

Feel free to express your creativity. :o) Švitrigaila (talk) 11:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Ivorian election

Sure, I have no objection to splitting it. Everyking (talk) 17:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The only problem I see is that most of the content in the article so far applies to both elections equally, except for the final date of the presidential election... Any ideas? —Nightstallion 17:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it might be better to wait until more information is available specifically about the parliamentary election before splitting. But either way is fine with me, really. Everyking (talk) 17:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Then I'd prefer splitting it now -- but what should we do with the content? Duplicate it in both articles and let them develop differently from then onwards? —Nightstallion 17:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

There's some content that applies specifically the presidential election, but most of it applies to both. The stuff that applies to both should of course be copied into both articles. Everyking (talk) 17:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, fine! If you could do it, that would be great, but if not, then I'll get to it some time tomorrow or so. —Nightstallion 06:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTD

As a past voter with a current nominee, I am reminding you that there are over five days remaining at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/voting/200805 to cast your votes.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! —Nightstallion 06:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll probably need your help again

On Umaru Yar'Adua. It's User:Cindy larkin from the Thein Sein page. I didn't notice the IP similarities until she mentioned it. I've been trying to be more civil with others lately, but still. [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]

What can I do to help? —Nightstallion 06:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you know if silobreaker.com is a reliable source? Or possibly if another source has given his birthdate? Therequiembellishere (talk) 06:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't know... —Nightstallion 06:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Protests & other

The extremist Kosovar NO NEGOTIATIONS - SELF-DETERMINATION! movement will prepare on 9 May a massive protest (to the style of that Serbian one) in Kosovo, aimed against the pending elections. Let's hope the great presence of NATO and peacekeeping forces will be able to maintain peace and protect the consulates of countries opposing Kosovo independence...and the Serbs. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

nods —Nightstallion 23:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

21 indictment for terrorism & vandalism suspects of the rioters that destroyed the border crossings and checkpoints released by the KPS. It contains the Kosovo Serb political leaders and representatives on it. Milan Ivanovic (amongst the indicted) renounced the charges, accusing them as a common part of a continuation program of terror and ethnic cleansing. KPS in North Kosovo builds up local organization as a totally separate one from the remainder of Kosovo.

UNMIK offered scheduling local elections and co-holding it with the Serbian government in the 5 Serb municipalities, but in case they are delayed. The UNMIK claims it's not yet ready for such an operation and that stability and peace in Kosovo is jeopardized right now. It claims that, in accordance to UNSCR 1244, Serbian officially can freely hold the national parliamentary election (on pre-1999 electoral posts, as it was before) - but local administration is in its hand, and not of the Serbian government's. The Serbian government wants UNMIK to schedule general local elections, and the Serbian government to hold them (in UNMIK local administration). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 09:17, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I've read about the elections, yeah... —Nightstallion 10:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.

Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 08:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 15	7 April 2008	About the Signpost

April Fools' pranks result in temporary blocks for six admins	WikiWorld: "Apples and oranges"
News and notes: 100 x 5,000, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Reviewers achieving excellence	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 16	14 April 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Interview with the team behind one of the 2,000th featured articles	Image placeholders debated
WikiWorld: "Pet skunk"	News and notes: Board meeting, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Featured article milestone
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Italian parties' templates

I updated Template:Italian political parties. For now I left The Left as a separate coalition (even if it is very likely that it will break apart and despite the bad result). I left also all the parties forming PdL, even if PdL will act as a single party in the new Parliament. My sense is that it is better to replace all the parties simply with PdL now. --Checco (talk) 16:11, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd replace them, yeah. Any idea what to do with the 2007 template now? —Nightstallion 16:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

My idea is to delete it or, at least, to put it in your sandbox...

There is a user who is deleting liberalism from the ideologies of the People of Freedom. As liberalism is not the same thing as liberal conservatism and the party has many prominent liberals (classical or conservative ones), what can we do about it? Do you agree with me? --Checco (talk) 16:27, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Still, I think it's a good idea to have a template listing all parties currently notable in any way, I just don't know how to format it...

I'd say yes... —Nightstallion 16:28, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

On the template: now it is almost empty and we could replace coalitions with the parties ordered by number of MPs (as I did in List of political parties in Italy).

On People of Freedom: can you block the article or should I continue to rollback, rollback, rollback... at least state your opinion in talk page. --Checco (talk) 16:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Moreover Daisy, PATT, SVP, RV, RS and PPS are allied with PD and PdL only at the regional level, so that coalitions are formed only by three parties each at the national level, and coalitions are only electoral alliances without a particular name: one more reason for changing the structure of the template. The more I think about it I don't find any reason to maintain the template as it is now, divided in electoral coalitions: why not using the same format used in many other templates on parties for the other countries? --Checco (talk) 16:35, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Please state your opinion at Talk:People of Freedom on the removing of "liberalism". --Checco (talk) 16:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

You may have a point there, yes... —Nightstallion 17:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

We need to fix this so... any ideas?

In what sense PdL would be a fascist party? I think that this is not correct and very POV... --Checco (talk) 17:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, not right now -- you?

PdL obviously has a fascist current, as Social Action joined it. —Nightstallion 18:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Uhm... probably you are not well informed about Social Action. The party was a national-conservative one, although Mussolini held many socially liberal views, and was allied with some neo-fascist group (not fascist, neo-fascist). She herself is not a neo-fascist and, since the allians with those far right groups was ended and her party disintegrated, she was re-joining National Alliance. At that point came the People of Freedom. I don't think that we can consider fascist by any mean a party because just one of its members has some (arguable) neo-fascist roots.

On the template, I will think about how re-shaping it and then I will let you know. --Checco (talk) 18:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I realise that Italy has some very creative ways of determining party denominations, but be assured -- every European politologist would agree that Mussolini and her party are neo-fascist. —Nightstallion 18:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Italy is undoubtely strange but I acknowledge that many thigs about Italian political parties are not understood from the outside. One example is Lega Nord, considered by many to be right-wing, when in Italy it is perceived by most voters as a centrist party, sometimes pandering to the left, sometimes to the right. Ms Mussolini is a more strange case. She had never been neo-fascist and was considered to be one of the more moderate elements of AN when she decided to break with Fini and to form a bizzarre alliance with some neo-fascist groups, in contradiction to almost everything she supported before (she even was pro-choice, in favour of civil unions, of gay rights...). Now she is simply what she was before and will be an obscure member of the new party. In any case, even if Ms Mussolini were to be neo-fascist, she alone would not be able to influence the ideology of the party. In the PdL there is a large group (10% or more) of social democrats (whom I tend to describe as liberals or social liberals), but I wouldn't define the party as social-democratic. --Checco (talk) 18:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Hrm. Okay, fair enough. —Nightstallion 18:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

If you agree with me, please state this in the talk page of PdL because I think that your comment is a little bit ambiguous and I would like to prevent the anonymous user from writing that "fascism" is one of the ideologies of PdL in the template. Thank you! --Checco (talk) 18:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at my second proposal at Template talk:Italian political parties. --Checco (talk) 11:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Nightstallion, we're waiting for you in order to upload the new version of the template which C mon and I approve. --Checco (talk) 08:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

In my talk page you can find a detailed description of the current situation of the Italian far left. What does it mean "free al-Qeida"? Are you joking or is there something I don't know or understand? --Checco (talk) 13:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the description; see User_talk:SeNeKa#Vandalism regarding the (now undone) change at the top of the page. (Vandalism.) —Nightstallion 13:13, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

As the flag has been there for days, I thought that it was you decision to put it there and I was not able to explain such a decision! <irony>Better for you, anyway... I couldn't live with such a friend!</irony> But, is that user your friend or simply a vandal? --Checco (talk) 13:17, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Nope, they have been here only for three hours or so -- and (s)he's a vandal. —Nightstallion 13:21, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Kostunica-Seselj

Kostunica will receive the seat of PM, Slobodan Samardzic will be Minister for Kosovo-Metohija, Predrag Bubalo and one other Minister for NS shall remain. The rest of the ministries are SRS', Tomislav Nikolic will be parliamentary Speaker.

Both lists still deny that this is signed, but we have an official confirmation that Kostunica and Seselj negotiated across the phone link. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:17, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't you think that including the Radical Party in governmet posts is the right thing to do in order to contain it, as the Austrian Populars did with Haider in 2000? Seselj is defenitely worse than Haider, as I read from your debates, but I do think that it is not a bad idea to include the Radicals in the sphere of government. Don't you? --Checco (talk) 14:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

How are the last opinion polls' figures for the election? --Checco (talk) 14:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

The decision by the ÖVP to include the FPÖ in government did not help at all. The FPÖ simply got rid of Haider, put up a new post-nazistic leader, and they're slowly approaching the 20% mark again. sighs Either way, I see only two options for Serbia: 1) A pro-European government which manages to make some reforms, resulting in a decrease of the SRS' popularity, or 2) a anti-European government which finally shows that the SRS are not fit to govern. —Nightstallion 14:34, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I would prefer the second option, but as I don't live in Serbia I can't have a clear opinion. I rarely endorse any party or candidate outside Italy... Anyway, I do always consider that it is better not to exclude permanently any party from governmet, be it the Serbian Radicals, Austrian Freedom Party, French National Front or the Italian far left. I know that you probably disagree with me, but I think that democracy should be inclusive. Serbian Radicals and especially Austrian Freedom Party are definitely extreme parties, but I don't think that they are a threat for democracy. Do you agree on this? --Checco (talk) 14:45, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

They're very much on the borderline, both of them. I'd say the FPÖ is probably more harmless than the SRS. In general, I don't think every party has to be included at some point -- that's precisely what helped Hitler come to power, for instance. —Nightstallion 15:03, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, but NSDAP was clearly anti-democratic. I don't think that the Freedom Party, for instance, is anti-democratic. Definitely, from my Italian perspective, it has dangerously shifted to the far right after the spilt led by Haider (I know that you don't agree with me on this), but is still a democratic party. In any case, as I don't live in Austria, I'd better talk only about Italian politics... --Checco (talk) 15:18, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Anyway, we mostly agree on Serbia. I'm very interested to listen the opinion of PaxEquilibrium now. --Checco (talk) 15:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

It may not be anti-democratic yet, but it advocates outlawying mosques, for instance, which is absolutely horrible in my opinion. (I'd prefer everyone to be areligious, personally, but non-sectarian religions should be free to build their praying houses wherever they wish, just like everybody else.) —Nightstallion 15:31, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

As you say, nods. --Checco (talk) 15:42, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Any place where I can find opinion polls for Austria? --Checco (talk) 15:42, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

If you want, I can let you know whenever I see one, but there isn't a central database like in Italy. —Nightstallion 15:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm very interested in Austrian politics, thus an update would be great for me. How was the last opinion poll you saw? And the last one about Carinthia? --Checco (talk) 15:47, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Approximately 32% ÖVP, 31% SPÖ, 16% FPÖ, 14% Greens, 4% BZÖ; don't know about Carinthia, but it may interest you that SPÖ/ÖVP/Greens/FPÖ will change the electoral law there -- currently, you have to gain 10% in one of the regional districts in order to enter the Landtag, that's why the Greens only made it for the first time in 2004. As, however, Greens and ÖVP and FPÖ would be very close to failing that threshold, they'll likely finally change the ridiculously high threshold. —Nightstallion 16:08, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

In practice they will loosen the treshold to 5%? Could some other party support Haider's party in the case he does not win a clear majority? --Checco (talk) 16:16, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Likely something like that de facto, though they can't do that de iure; technically it's a procedural change in the distribution of the secondary mandates in the d'Hondt method. I doubt it -- the only one who might do it would be the ÖVP, but I doubt they'll do it. —Nightstallion 16:21, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Woah, I just logged in. :)

First of all, the SRS today could not be quite called undemocratic. They have huge support from the Rusyn and Slovak national minorities, while they have even support amongst some Romani and Hungarians. They are the only political party that stated it will open talks regarding the Hungarian Regional Autonomy proposal. They stand for respect of all religions, they have financed the repairing of a mosque damaged during civil unrest in 2004 and the head of the Islamic Community of Serbia is a close friend to their leader. Even LDP commended the reforms and changed and didn't exclude the possibility to cooperate with SRS in several decades. However, they are also incredibly deep ultra-nationalists and hard core conservatives, among other matters also supporting unification of all Serbs into one Country. And this is precisely the most dangerous combination.

Second of all, what do you think they have been continuously doing over the past 8 years? While all the other options have compromised themselves, they have continuously over the years worked on creating the very best political infrastructure in eastern Europe. After Seselj went to the Hague, they even got rid of him and introduced intense reforms - Tomislav Nikolic is no longer very really fond of him. So actually, I'd much rather agree to Nightstallion, comparing the situation to the Weimar Republic. The Radicals are widely seen as the most experienced, uncorrupted and, essentially, "pure" if you know what I mean. Most (neutral) political analysts in the region (e.g. some of the most famous Croatian ones), claim that they are completely certain the SRS will come to power and turn into HDZ in Croatia or DPS CG in Montenegro, or at least half-way to them. This really means that if they win power now - we can only expect that they'll snatch it for a pretty looong time. Compare that to the 2003 Croatian parliamentary election, in which Tudjman's political party defeated the democratic coalition that set forth with the democratic changes in 1999 and 2000. However I am indeed more worried by the presence of the Kosovo issue problem - this means that the SRS will not trade the EuroWestern path, but most probably the other way around. Like I said a billion times, the situation in Serbia is almost identical to that of the Weimar Republic.

As for polling, here's the last one:

SRS: 39%

EU: 37%

DSS-NS: 10%

LDP: 6%

SPS-PUPS-JS: 6%

Sorry for such a long post. ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for such a long, detalied and balanced post! --Checco (talk) 06:50, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

---

What could be extremely worrying is the future Minister of Defense - a General who, while holding that post up to 2000, authorized the intervention of the Army during the 2000 Bulldozer Revolution. And the request the new Government would send to the Hague, to allow him to defend himself from freedom and give him privileges of practicing politics (he might restore his party to the old extremist path of the 1990s). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

nods Yeah... —Nightstallion 10:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Ideology of parties

An anonimous user is continously inserting "national conservatism" as one of the ideologies of the People of Freedom, while cancelling "christian democracy" from the ideologies of National Alliance. As there are no sources of any kind (no source speaking of any ideology referring to those parties), should we leave the ideology section in the infoboxes blank? I don't know if you agree with me on these issues, but your help is definitely needed to stop this edit war. --Checco (talk) 19:40, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

He even inserted "islamophobia" as principal ideology of Lega Nord. Everyone is free to think everything he wants, but, when writing in Wikipedia, he should be neutral. I think that this user is fairly biased. --Checco (talk) 19:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Nepal

I read somewhere that the final result should be declared tomorrow. One constituency of FPTP votes is still not officially declared. I reckon there are still around 3-400 000 uncounted PR votes, expecting that the number of FPTP and PR votes would be more or less the same. I cannot find info on any threshold, but a 1,6 divider is used with Saint-Lague method. --Soman (talk) 17:42, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

nods So we should be getting preliminary final results this week? Interesting that there's no info on the threshold... Theoretically, Sainte-Laguë is more proportional than d'Hondt, BTW, so if there's no threshold we should be seeing a lot of parties in the Constituent Assembly. —Nightstallion 19:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but (i'm a mathematical idiot so i just repeat what others tell me) the 1,6 divisor would make it harder for small parties to get a seat, compared to say sweden (sl system, 1,4 divisor). Can't really judge myself what would be the minimun amount of votes needed for a single seat. --Soman (talk) 20:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

That's true, but a d'Hondt system with a divisor of 1.4 would likely be worse for small parties than SL with a divisor of 1.6... —Nightstallion 20:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Latest news is that the result will be out tomorrow, [11]. --Soman (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I've read that, too. —Nightstallion 21:44, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Another issue is how to do with the FPTP vote comparisions between 1999 and 2008, since there has been quite some splits, mergers and permutations of Nepalese parties in the last 9 years.:

• CPU(UML) split in 1998, forming a splinter CPN(ML). The majority of CPN(ML) returned to UML in 2002. Should the UML vote be compared with UML+ML vote in 1999? And how to do with the splinter CPN(ML), should it be compared with the 1999 ML vote? Likewise there were two RPPs in 1999, should the RPP vote be compared with the combined vote of the two RPPs in 1999?
• NSP split into NSP and NSP(A). NSP later merged into NSP(A). I think it would be fair to compare the NSP(A) vote with NSP votes in 1999.
• SJM and RJM merged into Janamorcha Nepal. JNM later split into three, JNM, Rastriya Janamorcha and Communist Party of Nepal (Unified). Should JNM vote be compared to a combined SJM and RJM votes?

--Soman (talk) 12:11, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes on all counts, if you ask me. When will we be getting seats for the proportional results? And are you going to tally the FPTP votes? —Nightstallion 12:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm tallying the fptp votes. as per the pr seats, since the total vote is out, i can't see why the actual seat distribution is delayed. it should take about 1 minute with correct software. --Soman (talk) 12:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Great! And that's rather strange, I agree with you... —Nightstallion 12:48, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[12] PR results out it seems. The numbers differ somewhat from the calculation I made, don't know what i did wrong. --Soman (talk) 14:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

The first meeting of the CA will be held on May 20, [13]. The nominated seats ought to be nominated ahead of that. What will happen now is that the PR result is presented, and now the parties have two weeks to select whom out of their PR candidates will represent the PR seats of the party. Plenty of infighting to await. Notably, Ram Sharan Mahat (NC minister and heavy-weight) has stated today that NC should retain the lead of government, a line that could lead to a complete breakdown of the entire peace process. Both UML and NC leaderships are under pressure from grassroot sectors to confront the Maoists, although I suppose there will in the end be a pragmatic understanding of consensus between the big three parties. --Soman (talk) 22:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Any idea about a possible referendum on the draft constitution? —Nightstallion 22:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, one should never say never, but I say that it is highly unlikely. The groups that have publicly raised demands for referendum on constitutional issues are the royalists (who are extremly discredited at the moment), and there's no immediate reason for the major parties to respond to that demand. All major parties have stated that they favor republican status, most have stated that they prefer a ceremonial presidency, and there is probably a broad majority in the CA for federalism. UML, Maoists, JMN, CPN(Unified) and other groups favor federalism. For the MJF, TMLP, SP and some other minor parties (Sanghiya Loktantrik Rastriya Manch, Nepa Rastriya Party, Dalit Janajati Party, etc.) federalism is their raison d'être. Inside NC there are strains of anti-federalism, but those sectors will probably keep mum for the sake of political survival. So on the issues of federalism and republicanism, the CA will probably find a referendum superfluos. The key issue of contention what type of autonomy will be given to the Terai, but that's an issue that will be technically difficult to bring to a referendum. --Soman (talk) 22:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I was not really referring to a referendum on specific single issues, but rather to a referendum approving the whole constitution, as it happens quite often when a country gives itself a new constitution. Not likely, either? —Nightstallion 22:52, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

i haven't heard anything on a referendum. rather, i think the idea is to go for consensus between parties. --Soman (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! —Nightstallion 23:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I haven't seen any detail on the nominated seats nor any speculations in media on who they would be. However, do note the protests of the Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NEFIN) on the failure of parties to give seats to janajatis. Apparently there are 20 small ethnic groups not represented as of now, and I'd suppose that the NEFIN protest was intended to push the government to use the 26 nominated seats to accommodate them. On the issue of who's going to be PM, I'd suppose a deal would be struck 30 minutes before the CA would convene... --Soman (talk) 11:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The term of the CA is 2 years from the date of its first meeting. It can be extended 6 months if there is a decision in the CA and a state of emergency. Regarding the 26 nominated seats, the Interim Constitution says: "Twenty-six members nominated by the Council of Ministers on the basis of consensus from among distinguished persons and persons from among ethnic and indigenous groups who fail to be represented as a result of elections under sub clause (a) and (b) who have made significant contributions to national life." I can't find a definative wording specifying if its the current govt or the one elected by the CA that will do the nomination. I think a 2/3-majority is needed to adopt the constitution. --Soman (talk) 15:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Some clarity, at last: [14]. --Soman (talk) 15:00, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, i'm having some problems following the chain of events. [15] and other newsposts indicate that there could be a consensus govt formed prior to the first sitting of the CA. The CA will convene May 20 (or 21, can't remember well). --Soman (talk) 09:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

As do I... Thanks for the info! Let's just try to keep things up-to-date between the two of us, then at least one of us is likely to notice new events. ;) —Nightstallion 10:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

It seems we are not the only ones who are confused, see [16]. --Soman (talk) 06:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

www.nepalelectionportal.org/EN/news/details.php?id=1780 indicates that the nominated seats would not be used for parties. --Soman (talk) 16:36, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

More on the struggle for the nominated seats; [17]. --Soman (talk) 09:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Greater Slovenia

Take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greater Slovenia (2nd nomination). Should this article be deleted or renamed. Please convey your thoughts and participate in the discussion. -- Imbris (talk) 23:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

If this is not among the topics you usualy edit, please say so. This way I would know not to expect participation. I thought that you as an Austrian Citizen would be interested in the matter, but maybe I am wrong in my presuming so. -- Imbris (talk) 21:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Frankly, I really do not know whether this is a notable topic or a soapbox article -- sorry I can't help with this debate. I haven't heard anything about this yet, and I'd be surprised if Jörg Haider would not yet have pounced on any shred of evidence of a movement like this, but I can't be sure... —Nightstallion 21:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Why deleting when the article has sources. Greater Austria has even fewer but it still exists. -- Imbris (talk) 21:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Apples and oranges. Greater Austria was s historical concept for reform of the Habsburg Empire; Greater Slovenia appears to be a irredentist and nationalist movement supposedly still active. —Nightstallion 06:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Why not allowing this article to exist, Greater Austria is based on one source, and probbably other sources which citted that orriginal source. See what I have found in one day only Talk:Greater Slovenia#Some of sources. -- Imbris (talk) 21:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Because it's effectively a POV WP:FORK of United Slovenia. —Nightstallion 22:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

It is related, but in the second when treaties which limit the United Slovenia were signed the continuation of this programme becomes a greater nationalist programme. The two are just related and as such may be mistaken for FORK. The question of POV can be raised but the article has been balanced out by Slovenian editors, what more could you expect from an article in progress. -- Imbris (talk) 22:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo and Montenegro

In Serbia they repeat the opinions of ex international experts in Kosovo, who all coincidentally oppose independence of Kosovo, in the Kosovo is Serbia campaign: the French ex KFOR commander, the ex US ambassador to FRY and the ex UN humanitarian envoy for former Yugoslavia from Czechia (the last one being most extreme, advising Serbia never to recognize independence of Kosovo).

[Montenegrin presidential election]. Vote rigging finally openly busted in one place. ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

sighs That'll help.

Wow! How much and where?

BTW, still no article on Hungarian Coalition? ;) —Nightstallion 18:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Several dozen in a town outside the capital.

When I get time... ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

;) —Nightstallion 18:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Mugabe

How likely would be an AU intervention in Zimbabwe?--TheFEARgod (Ч) 20:31, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Difficult to say. As long as Mbeki keeps protecting Mugabe, forget it. If the (very strong) faction of the ANC which wants to get rid of Mugabe succeeds in gaining the upper hand, who knows... —Nightstallion 20:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo - Bangladesh

ICJ will only give an advisory oppinion, this oppinion cannot nullify the Republic of Kosovo. It is a fact. Serbia can only go to court and sue every state which recognized Kosovo because the ICJ is a Court that has states as its clients. UN behaved very badly towards Taiwan, Danzig issue, Cyprus is a by product of it unsuccessful policy. I think that Kosovo is a hot potatto which will lead only to a more European presence in the South-Eastern Europe (even President Tadić said in one of his speeches that we need de-balcanization of the region). Pakistan has been a part of the UN and Bangladesh left, what happened - nothing? Your thoughts. -- Imbris (talk) 22:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

However, you forget that the result of the Bangladeshi War was in its independence was recognized by Pakistan in 1972, in an agreement with India (check Kosovo's status back in 1999). And yes, if viewed from the side of recognition of some countries, it's the precedent, and not Kosovo. But then again there were recognitions of separatist entities before (Hungary recognized the Banat Republic for example). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:47, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

We'll just have to wait and see, I suppose. —Nightstallion 06:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTD

Congratulations! A list you have been involved with was selected a WP:LOTD for May. You may want to add the {{ListoftheDayheader}} or {{ListoftheDaylayout}} templates somewhere in your userspace. Other template options are at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/templates. Your list will appear as WP:LOTD twice. If you have any date preferences in May let me know by April 25th.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Edvard Benes or Edvard Beneš

See Talk:Edvard Beneš#Edvard Benes or Edvard Beneš --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 09:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer review

Peer review on List of political parties in Italy at Wikipedia:Peer review/List of political parties in Italy/archive1. You may be interested in expressing your opinion. --Checco (talk) 11:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

RfD nomination of FC Dallas (MLS)

I have nominated FC Dallas (MLS) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. michfan2123 (talk) 15:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 17	21 April 2008	About the Signpost

BLP deletion rules discussed amidst controversial AFD	Threat made against high school on Wikipedia, student arrested
Global login, blocking features developed	WikiWorld: "Disruptive technology"
News and notes: Wikimania security, German print Wikipedia, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Monthly updates of styleguide and policy changes	WikiProject Report: The Simpsons
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

ICTY

The Serbian authorities openly admitted to Brammertz that hunting down accused war criminals isn't that priority. Brammertz is furious and will request not to give in to European integrations to Serbia, although he lacks the influence of Carla del Ponte and isn't expected to be successful.

Today two new indictments have been raised by the ICTY against the former Kosovo Minister for Culture and another close associate of Haradinaj. The appeal's adoption will greatly depend on the outcome of the two's trial. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:24, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

nods —Nightstallion 22:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

They're indicted for obstruction of justice and persecution and intimidation of witnesses on Haradinaj's case. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:57, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like it's good news. —Nightstallion 00:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Montenegro

...shall recognize Kosovo among the last, which possibly also means never (if the quota of recognition doesn't reach two thirds of the international community). The parliament has been greatly divided, as the Albanians demand recognition of independence - including the minor part which is taking part within the Government. The Liberals are protesting that Montenegro should be one of the last countries in the world that recognizes independence of Kosovo, claiming that its reintegration into Serbia is not really expectable, but that also Kosovo's secession is equally a result of Greater Albanian ultra-nationalism and revisionism, and is a threat to the shaken peace and stability in the Balkans. Milo is worried - and glad that this occurs after the presidential election. If the pro-Milo Albanian leaves, it'll still be 41:40 in his favor in the parliament - because the Croat also supports him. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 10:50, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting... —Nightstallion 15:22, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

People of Freedom 2

Unregistered users continue to make strange changes to People of Freedom. I would lik you to think about blocking the article for unregistered users. --Checco (talk) 11:23, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandals continue to vandalize the page. Don't you think it's the time to intervene? --Checco (talk) 13:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Now at least we are talking about something concrete. Please look at this change. The user changed a sentence you put in the article. Do you think it is ok or that we should revert it? --Checco (talk) 17:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC) I probably prefer "primary election" as you did. If you agree, please revert that edit. --Checco (talk) 17:32, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I've protected it now. —Nightstallion 18:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your intervention. Please state your opinion in talk page (especially on the first edit of the anonymous user: on this I have mixed emotions) and revert the last edit which is definitely uncorrect. --Checco (talk) 17:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

No idea? --Checco (talk) 18:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I ask you one last thing. Can you do yourself the rollback to anonymous's last edit because I don't want to be considered again as an arrogant. What about his first edit (the one I linked you)? I really don't know what is better. If you think that also that edit is to be reverted, revert it. --Checco (talk) 18:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I can't do it right now, too little time, but I think your version is better. —Nightstallion 06:23, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Italian regionalist parties

Two more questions:

• Do you know why Valdotanian Union was expelled from the European Free Alliance in 2007, as it is written in the article about it?
• Can you translate this de.Wiki article for me? I don't think we need the entire article but at least part of it as a en.Wiki article.

--Checco (talk) 19:32, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Here also other parties are mentioned. They all had elected members in the Provincial Council of South Tyrol. Can you do some reasearch in German about them or at least translate their names in English for me? They are:

• Partei der Unabhängigen 1973-1978, 1983-1988, als Freiheitliche Partei Südtirols 1988-1993 (danach in der Union für Südtirol)
• Soziale Fortschrittspartei Südtirols 1973-1978
• Südtiroler Heimatbund 1988-1993, vormals als Wahlverband des Heimatbundes 1983-1988 (danach in der Union für Südtirol)
• Tiroler Heimatpartei 1964-1968

Also de:Die Freiheitlichen and de:Union für Südtirol contain many more information about these parties. Would you like to translate at least what is important to know about the birth of these two parties?

Thank you. --Checco (talk) 19:37, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Names: Party of Independents, Freedom Party of South Tyrol; Social Progress Party of South Tyrol; South Tyrolean Homeland Federation, Electoral Federation of the Homeland Federation; Tyrolean Homeland Party. Regarding the other things, remind me later, too little time right now. —Nightstallion 06:23, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletions in it.Wiki 3

This is the time of it:A Manca pro s'Indipendentzia (see it:Wikipedia:Pagine da cancellare/A Manca pro s'Indipendentzia). In the meantime, I started the article on the party in en.Wiki: To the Left for Independence. One question about the title? Do you think it is better "for Independence" or "for the Independence"? --Checco (talk) 11:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

The current title's fine. —Nightstallion 15:22, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: FM Delevic

Yes, I got that. ;)

And what if Serbia doesn't want to get into the EU? Remember always the division on the European and Patriotic blocs. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I doubt that Serbians would turn anti-European. —Nightstallion 00:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

The Patriotic forces are either openly anti-European (Radicals), or condition European integrations by specific guarantees from the EU that it considers Kosovo a part of the Republic of Serbia and not a separate state from Serbia (Populists).

Besides, remember that Serbia will not recognize independence of Kosovo as long as Tadic is President - and that he was frustrated by the recent traditional pre-electoral campaign fights to openly declare would he choose a Serbia completely surrounded and outside the European Union with Kosovo, over a Serbia without it. He confirmed. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 01:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Still, remember that despite the Kosovo issue, the vast majority of Serbians favours EU entry. —Nightstallion 10:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but what do you think if Olli Rehn comes and states "Uh, I know we said we're gonna do that, but we really need you to recognize independence of Kosovo". Do you really think the 70% will remain unchanged? Also, remember that the greatest asset of the European Bloc is that Europe is not conditioning Serbia regarding Kosovo.

(regarding the SAA) Neither good, nor bad. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

The point is precisely that the EU won't demand the recognition, but will simply wait until Serbia does it by itself. Frankly, I expect the majority of the Serbian population to be fed up with hearing about the Kosovo issue within a decade -- even now, the LDP enjoys almost 10% of support, so why shouldn't that part of the population grow as Serbians realise that the loss of Kosovo is final and that they'll actually do better without it, economically? —Nightstallion 11:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Because the path Serbia is right now approaching is the one of the late 1980s and not early 2000s. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

You think so? —Nightstallion 18:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm telling you, I practically have not doubt that the Patriots shall win the election. So far we have the following reactions - this practically united the Populists and Radicals, the Radicals stated practically that they will wait him at the airport and lynch Tadic before, but now confirmed that the first thing the Patriotic government will do when it's formed is nullify the SAA and start an interpelation process to depose Tadic from the position of President, comparing the SAA to the Anti-Commintern treaty the Kingdom of Yugoslavia signed in 1941 with the Axis (it didn't last 24h as there was a coup d'etat); the Populists call him a traitor and a Judas. Only the Liberals greeted this, and the Socialists are worried by the 'unclearness' meaning that some could misuse this and claim that Serbia had given up on Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

They'll never manage to dispose him, there are no legal grounds for that. —Nightstallion 06:24, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Of course they won't - but then we're back at the lousy 2004-2007 period when the President comes from the opposition! Everyone has seen too well just how is that functional (and back then it was only the division within the Democrat Bloc - look which is now).

P.S. Numerous prominent DSS individuals abandon the party and either give up politics or switch to DS, as a disappointment of the newly-established political course. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 07:38, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I still think Serbia will survive this period.

Well, that sounds like good news, doesn't it? —Nightstallion 17:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Reminder

People of Freedom

The user made two edits:

1. first edit: Are you ok with it? I have mixed emotions. If you think that it was better before, do the rollback.
2. second edit: That is definitely uncorrect. Please do the rollback.

--Checco (talk) 09:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

You need to explain your position and to intervene. As of now the article still includes the wrong sentence inserted by anonymous user, who is again trying to convince us that he is right. --Checco (talk) 12:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. —Nightstallion 17:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. When you have time answer to me about regionalist parties. --Checco (talk) 18:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I personally don't agree with the move of "People of Freedom" to "The People of Freedom", as there is nothing sure about the use of the article or not. Moreover most sources cite the party without "The". In any case, until the party is officially founded, I'm afraid that I would be able to bring you evidence of this. --Checco (talk) 08:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Compare Alliance '90/The Greens, The Greens – The Green Alternative, De Grønne, The Greens (France), The Greens (Luxembourg), The Greens (Netherlands), Ecologist Party "The Greens" -- all of them have the article as part of their name and logo, and their article also includes the definite article. Same here, as "Il" is part of the logo, the official website etc. pp. Okay? —Nightstallion 09:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

This is not the case. The article in the name is not official and most sources in Italian and English don't use it. In any case we need to wait until when the party is officially launched. --Checco (talk) 09:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Mh, fair enough; let's wait until the official launch. BTW, does Berlusconi still plan to hand over to Fini once he's elected president in a few years? —Nightstallion 09:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that Berlusconi ever thought of Fini as his successor and I am sure that the next leader of the centre-right will be chosen in a primary election. In any case the current presidential term of Napolitano ends in 2013! --Checco (talk) 10:03, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Before or after the next election? —Nightstallion 11:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Before! --Checco (talk) 13:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

So Berlusconi is likely to make himself president shortly before the next election, then. —Nightstallion 13:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

It is possible, but remember that as of today the President has no real power and I don't know how Berlusconi would like a ceremonial role for himself. --Checco (talk) 13:47, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Besides, we don't know yet whether the Lega Nord really will guarantee a stable government for the full five years, do we? —Nightstallion 15:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Everything can happen, but, as Lega Nord has been the staunchest ally of Berlusconi in 2001-2006, it will probably guarantee stability. In fact Lega Nord is the most stable and well-organized political force in the coalition, while PdL has many internal tensions which will probably come out. --Checco (talk) 15:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm more thinking along the lines of what happens if there are no sufficiently federal reforms which would suit the Lega. —Nightstallion 15:47, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

In that case not only Lega Nord but all the North would break with Berlusconi. Something is already happening now. In my region, Veneto, the Democrats sometimes hint that they could enter in alliance with Lega Nord at the regional level and there are crescent rumors that Giancarlo Galan, President of the Region for FI/PdL, will soon set up his own regional party. --Checco (talk) 15:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

As you can imagine, I'd love that to happen. ;) —Nightstallion 15:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Why? What? Do you like regionalism in Veneto or an alliance between the Democrats and Lega Nord? --Checco (talk) 16:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, neither of that very much -- but it would break the stranglehold Berlusconi has on Italian politics through his exclusive alliance with Lega Nord. And as you know, there's little I dislike about Italy more than Berlusconi, except the mafia. ;) —Nightstallion 16:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

It is very difficult to explain what Berlusconi is to foreigners but I find difficult to understand why he is so disliked from the outside. However this is something we talked about a very long time. What do you mean with "exclusive alliance"? Anyway Berlusconi has no particular stranglehold on Italian politics. He is simply at the head of a large coalition, which is always voted by the majority of Italians when it is united, and this won't end with Berlusconi's exit. --Checco (talk) 17:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Regionalist parties

Two issues here:

1. Do you know why Valdotanian Union was expelled from the European Free Alliance in 2007?
2. There are many articles about South Tyrolean political parties which need expansion or to be written from the beginning in en.Wiki.

It would be very useful to translate into en.Wiki articles:

• de:Südtiroler Volkspartei (see South Tyrolean People's Party)
• de:Union für Südtirol (see Union for South Tyrol)
• de:Die Freiheitlichen (see The Libertarians)
• de:Süd-Tiroler Freiheit (see South Tyrolean Freedom)
• de:Südtiroler Heimatbund (no article yet in en.Wiki)
• de:Grüne (Südtirol) (see Greens (Province of Bolzano-Bozen))

Morever, there are other parties without an article both in de.Wiki and en.Wiki (Partei der Unabhängigen, Freiheitliche Partei Südtirols, Soziale Fortschrittspartei Südtirols, Wahlverband des Heimatbundes and Tiroler Heimatpartei), while Social Democratic Party of South Tyrol and Democratic Party of South Tyrol need expansion.

It would be great if you would be able to translate the articles mentioned above. I think that we need at least short articles in which it is clearly explained how, when and by who all these parties were founded. --Checco (talk) 09:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

1. Haven't found anything, and I've just checked the complete news archive of EFA and Google News. —Nightstallion 22:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

That's very strange. Maybe we should cancel "expelled in 2007" from the article on EFA... --Checco (talk) 08:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Mh, I don't know -- I suppose it really was on the website until some point in 2007 when it was removed... —Nightstallion 09:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

So, we can leave it as it is. --Checco (talk) 09:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd say so, though I really don't like the fact that we haven't got a source. —Nightstallion 09:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Even I don't like it. --Checco (talk) 10:03, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Can you assure to me that someday you will fix those articles about South Tyrolean parties by translating them from German? --Checco (talk) 08:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Could you remind me in about a week or so? —Nightstallion 10:42, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Thank you. --Checco (talk) 10:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

strange Spanish pacific islands claim

In the German-Spanish Treaty (1899) it is written that "Nominally, Spain currently owns four tiny, uninhabited Micronesian islands which were not included in the archipelagos of this treaty." This contradicts all other Spain articles that I have seen... Anyway, I will also ask the user that added the phrase (if it is not a IP). Alinor (talk) 07:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

He is IP and refers to the spanish wikipedia page about Micronesia... I don't speak/read Spanish, but it looks to me that it is just a Micronesia page without any "Spain ownership" claims, but maybe it is some small note in the text? Alinor (talk) 07:19, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

No, there's nothing on the issue there. Revert it. —Nightstallion 12:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

You were faster :) Alinor (talk) 06:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

European Integrations

Kostunica shows a little (!!!) shame and repent for his anti-European opinions and supports the SAP. He also responded to the SRS's call that there can be no support for its abolition, or to sanction Tadic for the act. The SAA will also be ratified by the parliament. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

... seriously? Good news. The only question I've got is -- why is Kostunica behaving this way? Is the SAA *that* popular that he'd lose a lot if he continued to support the SRS on this? —Nightstallion 17:21, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, he is one of those politicians that simply keep losing and dying out, his actions are bent on political survival.

Yes, after the statement of the Russian Foreign Minister greeting the SAA signing and European perspective of Serbia - and saying that recognition of Kosovo would've even further been hampered if the treaty was signed before (referring to Europe in precise). 78% of Serbian citizens support EU admission, a huge bonus for the European coalition and the Radicals are very, very quiet, while Kostunica is amending his statements.

In essence, everyone knew that the SAA treaty signing was just symbolic - but after this statement by Lavrov (Kosovo) everyone massively jumped into its support. I guess it's good news now, and not neutral. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

:) —Nightstallion 20:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

With this asserting fact - and Kostunica's actual admitting (!) - the Europeists are suddenly no longer 'traitors', and the guilt for Serbia's lack of advancement and Kosovo's secession is put on Kostunica. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:30, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

:) :) :) So the Europists are now more likely to do well at the election? —Nightstallion 21:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Quite positive that he said that. Yeah, he's a troll (my Romanian friend compared their President to Kostunica, using that term)> ;-) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:27, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, in the myths, even trolls could be killed. ;) So, just to clarify -- he did eat his words and say the SAA was good for Serbia, and B92 is just not up to date? —Nightstallion 21:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, after several Russian nationalists stated that this treaty is a capitulation (joining countries that recognized independence of Kosovo), he "upgraded" his opinion - B92 is up to date, yeah. He still thinks the SAA treaty should've been signed long, long ago, but will obviously abolish it. :D --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

sighs Sometimes I really, really wish they hadn't assassinated Djindjic back then but Kostunica. (Yes, I know, politically incorrect.) —Nightstallion 22:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

sorry to interupt, but can someone find a link to the SAA text? I want to see what the fuss is all about - the real treaty (with all annexes and protocols), not some declarations like "EU future", "Doom to Serbia", etc. Also, I am missing the all other SAAs (Albania, Bosnia, Croatia, Montenegro) besides the Macedonian [18]... Mostly strange for the Croatia-SAA that is already in force... Alinor (talk) 06:31, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

You can't find the Bosnian yet, it's not published as of now. Ask again at the end of May. Regarding the others:

• Albania: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:300:SOM:en:HTML
• Croatia: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2001:320:SOM:en:HTML http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:L:2005:026:SOM:en:HTML
• Montenegro: not yet published, check here regularily
• Serbia: not yet published, check here regularily

Hope that helps. —Nightstallion 10:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I checked on the same places. And my mistake - I haven't noticed the "fine print" - the Croatia agreement [19] and [20]. But for Albania there is only "Council Regulation on certain procedures for applying the Stabilisation and Association Agreement" and no fine-print with the SAA itself... Or I missed it again? It seems that they publish the agreements in the Official Journal when they get ratified... So we will have to wait 1-2-3 years for the Montenegro and Serbia SAAs :( Alinor (talk) 16:26, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Oops, my mistake, it seems you're right, sorry! —Nightstallion 16:31, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Here [21] - Serbia SAA text! Now only Montenegro and Bosnia are missing... Alinor (talk) 16:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool! And Albania, too. —Nightstallion 16:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

This brings some results in the beginning. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

---

Javier Solana seams to be the greatest asset of the Patriots. Recently he had greeted the finishing of construction of the Serbian little "Wonder" - the Avala tower. Kostunica used it to state the hypocrisy of Solana - "the Tower which he destroyed 8 years ago killing innocent children along and committing horrible war crimes for which he is not yet set to a rightful trial, showing no remorse but only self-lie as he recently wrote-in his biography and statements how he no longer led the NATO in 1998, in an attempt to diminish his atrocities, is now greeting the reconstruction of the remains of his aggression and destruction". The Patriots claim that EU cannot be a good thing, the best proof being that a man such as Solana is in charge, and that it is a highly unmoral group of societies that are ripe to freely rob, destroy, murder and spread chaos and instability under the wake of Washington as mere puppet-states. The Patriots claim that the Axis forces were once defeated, and that so shall be the NATO.

The very image how Tadic smiled and hugged him recently is a serious blow to his reputation. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:23, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

That's very regrettable, as Solana is actually doing a very good job... —Nightstallion 20:33, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I warned you before regarding the public opinion in Serbia regarding him and how this would happen...

Anyways, I myself have extremely reserved opinions about him. First a nationalist and Euro-skeptic conservative, then fearsomely pro-American, and then of course there's the bombing (simply cannot look with good eyes on that I'm afraid) and now a European reformist and excessively pro-EU... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:26, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know that.

When was Solana ever a eurosceptic conservative? He was against Franco since the 1960s... He's always been pro-American, true enough, and I can understand why the bombing is a difficult subject, but you cannot deny his reputation as a "discreet and diplomatic politician", as the WP article puts it... —Nightstallion 09:07, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, sure.

But, he was strongly anti-American before, I am not sure when I am know for sure (1970s and/or early 1980s) and extremely against the NATO (long time ago I read some of his writings, it's as if those standard skeptics in eastern Europe talk). It is only paradoxical that he later became the very leader of that "evil institution" which he deemed Spain should never be a part of. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 10:27, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Mh, interesting. —Nightstallion 10:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

---

Ah, he explained himself. He says that EU has intentionally prolonged to sign the SAA after Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence, so that it won't be a boost against Kosovo independence. He stated that Brussels needs to ask itself rather than Belgrade and that the ICTY was just an excuse. He complained that Ratko Mladic was not arrested in the meantime - and that the SAP treay was signed after all. He also stated that in the meantime two ICTY indictees were arrested, one in Bosnia and another in Montenegro, reminding that only Serbia is conditioned and that there is no such thing for Bosnia, as well as that the Montenegrin one was arrested only short time after it signed the SAA.

P.S. Velimir Ilic: We will find partners with the Radicals. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:39, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

And, how were his statements seen by the public? —Nightstallion 11:46, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Matching. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:59, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

So now he's popular again. —Nightstallion 12:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

The country is overflowing with posters of Tadic and Djelic tagged traitors and calls for an assassination against them. The infamous Society of Chicago Serbs (allegedly hiding Ratko Mladic and maintaining underground links in Chicago and threatening various individuals in Serbia) has now death-threatened Tadic as well. There is a poster in which Javier Solava as Devil stands, his right hand being a demon-like Hashim Thaci (the Human Rights Watch confirmed Del Ponte's allegations that KLA kidnapped 400 non-Albanians, dissected them and sold their organs to black mafia in Albania recently, as well as Tirana's and Pristina's lack of cooperation on the matter) next to him, with a Wormtongue-like (Lord of the Rings) Boris Tadic bowing before them. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:37, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Ouch. sighs —Nightstallion 15:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

---

Ivica Dacic: If Kostunica keeps on this way, then coalition with DS. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:36, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

:) That would then be enough for a majority, together with LDP and the minorities, right? Would the SPS work together with the minorities (especially LSV) and LDP? —Nightstallion 15:46, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

That's not a big problem. SPS does not deal national, but social policy. CeSID's research revealed a shocking report as well (research of electoral bodies of parties). It showed that the Albanian national minority gives the greatest support to SPS. It also showed that DSS and SRS supporters are almost exclusively Serbs (with a few Montenegrin), that DS has a multi-ethnic electorate and that LDP has only a tight majority of ethnic Serb supporters. The problem is convincing LDP - which is very clear: never ever cooperation with SRS, DSS and SPS. Another fact is that LSV already notified Tadic that in case of cooperation with SPS or DSS, he will abandon the coalition and join the LDP opposition. SPS stated that it will simply not cooperate with LDP, LSV and G17+ but the opinion is obviously slowly changing - the other way around? Never. The only possible solution is that the Socialist Coalition gives minority support. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

But LDP and LSV *might* accept support from SPS, right? Because not doing so would be very stupid. —Nightstallion 16:46, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Eh. This is Serbia. In it there are - like in Montenegro the division right before the referendum - on two worlds. One World is the "Europe Has Got No Alternative" and the other "A Million Messages - Kosovo is Serbia". The country really is splitting into two halves. Hell, in Serbia people regularly death threat each other or even kill (Djindjic). International political analyst organizations have found that for the last year the so called Serbian "parliament" is the mockery of human civilization. Besides, check out the Belgian minister's statement. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:38, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Niue

Sorry, all I can find is the same links Gadfium had. --Lholden (talk) 03:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Strange. —Nightstallion 09:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

President of the Council of Ministers of Italy

Would you mind moving President of the Council of Ministers of Italy to Prime Minister of Italy? Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Mh. Why? —Nightstallion 20:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, why? That would be not correct. --Checco (talk) 08:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

See talk. Therequiembellishere (talk) 15:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXVI (April 2008)
Project news Tag & Assess 2008 launched on 24 April and will run until 4 July. We have around 60,000 articles to check, so all assistance is very welcome. As usual, there are barnstars galore and service awards for contributing editors. The project scope has been amended to include specific reference to historically accurate video games. Songs and music with long military associations are also now included. The Contest department has completed its thirteenth month of competition, which saw 27 entries. The top scorer this month is Ed! with 37 points, followed by Cam with 22 points. Woody, Howard C. Berkowitz, Redmarkviolinist, Nousernamesleft and Outdawg also fielded entries. Blnguyen remains the overall leader, with 188 points in total. You are encouraged to submit articles you're working on as entries. The coordinators have "adopted" task forces to act as prime point of contact. A list of which coordinators have adopted which task forces is here.	Articles of note New featured articles: 1960 South Vietnamese coup attempt 1962 South Vietnamese Independence Palace bombing Lazare Ponticelli Maximian Peterloo Massacre The Third of May 1808 USS Orizaba (ID-1536) USS Siboney (ID-2999) New featured lists: List of Irish Victoria Cross recipients Order of battle at the Battle of Tory Island New featured portals: Portal:American Civil War New A-Class articles: 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team (United States) Battle of Bonchurch Battle of Tassafaronga Early thermal weapons HMS Cardiff (D108) USS Comfort (AH-3) USS Orizaba (ID-1536)
Current proposals and discussions An interesting proposal to set up teams to deal with specific tasks, like taking the Top Ten most frequently read military history articles to featured articles status is here. The coordinators are exploring ways of developing and improving our fifty or so task forces. More information is here. All editors are invited to contribute to a discussion about the naming of military operations in an endeavor to reach consensus.
Awards and honors Congratulations and kudos to the four top-performing editors in BCAD: CAM (1st); Legotech (2nd); Harland1 (3rd) and Smsarmad (4th). They helped assess 4303 B-class Milhist articles. Well done! To belatedly commemorate the first anniversary of the Contest department, the overall annual winner, Blnguyen, has been awarded the Chevrons and the March monthly winner, Woody, and runner-up, Dreamafter, each receive the Writer's Barnstar.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 06:50, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Lightmouse

Do you agree with the contributions of User:Lightmouse (see contributions)? I don't think that what he is doing with dates is ok. Do you? --Checco (talk) 08:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Which part of his activity do you dislike? —Nightstallion 10:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Unlinking dates. --Checco (talk) 10:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, AFAIK only 29 April and 29 April 2008 should be linked normally, so I suppose he's right. —Nightstallion 11:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but why shoud be incorrect to link years as 1956 or 2008? This is what he is doing: delinking years. --Checco (talk) 11:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't ask me, but AFAIK, it's in the manual of style that it shouldn't be done (since we should only link to articles if they're relevant). —Nightstallion 11:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

European Parliament groups

User:Anameofmyveryown has done a lot of work about political groups of the European Parliament, but as you can easily notice a lot of this work is to be checked and rewrote. I fixed a little bit Template:European Parliament groups (see how it was before) and I moved some of the articles he wrote, as you can see in my contributions. In general I think that there is a lot of work to do to fix his edits and that it would be useful to check all his activity, which is very precious but definitely not well-done. --Checco (talk) 11:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I agreed more with his characterisation of the parties (for instance, the three groups you label "heterogenous" are CLEARLY national conservative). —Nightstallion 11:06, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

That was not the biggest problem. The problem was that he linked a repetition of links, partitioning periods, titled articles with three-lines long titles and so on. All the articles he wrote are very well referenced but written in a very bad English. --Checco (talk) 11:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Ps: How can those groups be "CLEARLY national-conservative" if they have not a single national-conservative party in its ranks? --Checco (talk) 11:15, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Rally for the Republic and Fianna Fáil are often described as national conservative. At the very least, those groups were conservative, not heterogenous. —Nightstallion 11:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I defenitely think that "national conservatism" is not a correct classification for RPR (which was simply conservative) and above all for FF (which, coming from the left-wing, is a centrist party). In any case the classification of those groups is not as important for me as the rewriting of all the articles User:Anameofmyveryown wrote. --Checco (talk) 11:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, it's not something I feel *that* strongly about -- as long as the current parliamentary groups are absolutely correctly classified, I'm fine. —Nightstallion 12:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Even for me it's not something I feel that strongly about. What is important for me is to fix all these articles. Do you know the name of the project working on the European Parliament? I would like to leave in its talk a message so that users who are keener on the subject may work on those pages. --Checco (talk) 12:19, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd try Wikipedia:WikiProject European Union. —Nightstallion 13:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. Can you move European Democratic Union Group to simply European Democratic Union? --Checco (talk) 14:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

(indenting) Thank you for the messages left above concerning the European Parliament groups. Since this is an oft-neglected part of Wikipedia I welcome further input and particularly User:Checco's knowledge of Italian politics. Unfortunately, during his good faith edits, he made at least three errors of fact in Political groups of the European Parliament, at least five questionable changes to Political groups of the European Parliament, at least ten inconsistent changes to Political groups of the European Parliament, at least two inconsistencies between Template:European Parliament groups and Political groups of the European Parliament, at least three errors of fact in Template:European Parliament groups and at least two questionable changes to Template:European Parliament groups. Additionally, User:Checco rendered Political groups of the European Parliament incompatible with nineteen other templates, one gif, six pngs and six other pages. For your convenience, I have listed those problems here. Ironically, given his comments above, he also committed at least seven cases of very bad English. Which are also listed here. Similarly, "...written in a very bad English..." should be "...written in very bad English..." and "...a lot of this work is to be checked and rewrote..." should be "...a lot of that work is to be checked and rewritten...".

I have therefore reverted User:Checco's changes to Political groups of the European Parliament and Template:European Parliament groups, temporarily. This is not to dismiss his changes (his point about Fianna Fail is plausible, although he may be surprised given FF's concern during the '70's to pursue an agrarian agenda via the EP) but to ram home the point that changes should be consistent with themselves, other pages, sources, and the real world. Additionally, he may want to consider that a group may be deemed by sources to have a complexion inconsistent with its members: it's not as simple as saying "Well, X is center-left and 75% of the group, so the group is center-left, not regionalist" - precisely this situation happened to the European Radical Alliance, which sources say is a green/regionalist group but was in fact 75% Energie Radicale.

Leaving aside User:Checco's wilder errors (his stance that that the Socialist group, (which has been in existence since 1953), has never been socialist is just plain silly and indicates either a genuine lack of knowledge of the subject or a very, very bad case of recentism), this is a symptom of a wider problem which will only get worse as the 2009 elections approach: Europe is home to a multiplicity of political thought and many Wikpedians will hold sincerely held beliefs about how each group should be classified, but lacking coherent pan-european terms ("conservative" means something different in Denmark to Germany, "liberal" means something different in Italy to the Baltic states, "right wing" means something different in the UK to Poland and to Italy), those beliefs may be contradictory. Whilst this is a manageable problem for member-state based articles on national parties, it can cause major problems with the groups (for example, Identity, Tradition, Sovereignty is characterised in its article as simply "right-wing" even though it was one of the furthest-right groups ever in the Parliament)

In an attempt to prevent this problem happening again and again, I have opened a discussion on Talk:Political groups of the European Parliament. Having regard to the "friendly notice" clause of WP:CANVASS, I have posted notices on Talk:Elections in the European Union and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject European Union requesting input, and also to the knowledgable but uninvolved editors User:C mon, User:JLogan, User:The Tom and User:Ssolbergj. Please take this message as said notification to you, User:Nightstallion and you, User:Checco.

When consensus is achieved, I will make the necessary changes to the twenty templates, one gif, six pngs and six other pages that have to be kept in sync with Political groups of the European Parliament. Until then, please do not reinstate the changes.

As this discussion involves User:Checco, I will leave a notice on his talk page, which is the polite thing to do.

Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Great work

Thank you. I’m trying to kill all those red links. That’s my weakness: I hate them. : ) Kober^Talk 17:38, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

United States congressional elections

I noticed that almost all the articles about United States congressional elections are unreferenced. I would like to ask if you know where I can find the complete results of congressional election in the Internet. --Checco (talk) 19:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, no idea... —Nightstallion 20:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem. --Checco (talk) 20:47, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Great News

Stanko Subotić Cane arrested at the Moscow airport finally! Let's hope that Russia hands him over to Serbia so that another page of crime and the 1990s can be closed. Investigation shows that all this time he was hiding in his villa in Djukanovic's estate. Milo promised him a secret safe passage to Russia, where he could like many ex Yugo criminals hide more safely, stating that he can't for long give him protection in Montenegro. However, the attempt failed and he was arrested at the Sheremetyevo International Airport. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Never heard of him, but sounds like good news! —Nightstallion 09:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Ex Yugoslavia is full of people who have "mysteriously" become millionaires during the 1990s. Bogoljub Karić, Filip Cepter, Miroslav Mišković and Stanko Subotić. You'd reckon Serbia a poor country - and some of Europe's richest men are from there. Eradication of this mafia is crucial for revitalization of economy. Actually many are skeptic about this, since it might bring bad relations to Montenegro, which doesn't recognize Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 10:32, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

nods —Nightstallion 10:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #16

Number 16, May 3, 2008

The Hurricane Herald

This is the monthly newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The Hurricane Herald aims to give a summary, both of the activities of the WikiProject and global tropical cyclone activity. If you wish to change how you receive this newsletter, or no longer wish to receive it, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. This newsletter covers all of April 2008.

Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve monitoring of the WikiProject's articles.

Storm of the month

Typhoon Neoguri on April 17

Typhoon Neoguri was the earliest tropical cyclone on record to strike China. It formed on April 13 to the east of the Philippines, and once entering the South China Sea, environmental conditions allowed for quick strengthening. Neoguri attained its peak intensity of 150 km/h (90 mph) as it approached the island of Hainan, though rapidly weakened due to unfavorable conditions. The system made landfall in southern China on April 19, causing three deaths and moderate damage totaling over ¥296 million (2008 RMB, $42 million 2008 USD). The typhoon left 40 fishermen missing in the South China Sea.

Other tropical cyclone activity

• A weak tropical depression formed near New Caledonia in the South Pacific ocean early in the month, and another tropical depression developed in the basin later in the month.
• Two named storms formed in the Australian region during the month, including Tropical Cyclone Durga, which was the first ever cyclone named by the Tropical Cyclone Warning Centre in Jakarta, Indonesia. Tropical Cyclone Rosie co-existed with Durga for much of its duration.
• Cyclone Nargis developed in the North Indian Ocean late in the month, and reached its peak intensity early in May; further details will be covered in the next newsletter.

Member of the month

Cyclone barnstar

The April member of the month is VOFFA. Though not officially a project member, VOFFA is an important user to the project, having maintained and updated the talk page archives on tropical cyclones worldwide; activity includes adding warnings and discussions for all storms. The user is particularly active during the off-season of the Atlantic basin, when article activity on tropical cyclones typically declines.

New members

Chetblong Qst

Cyclonebiskit Pilover819

New and improved articles

• There were six new pieces of Featured content : Cyclone Elita, List of North Carolina hurricanes (1900-1949), Tropical Storm Barry (2007), List of North Carolina hurricanes, Lists of North Carolina hurricanes (FT), and Image:KatrinaNewOrleansFlooded edit2.jpg
• New Good articles include: Tropical Storm Fay (2002), 2006 Atlantic hurricane season, 1939 California tropical storm
• New storm articles include: Hurricane Ileana (2006), Hurricane Madeline (1998), Hurricane Lester (1998)
• New non-storm articles include: Hurricane Ivan tornado outbreak, Timeline of the 2008 Pacific typhoon season

Main Page content

• Entries from 9 articles: Effects of Hurricane Dennis in Alabama, Effects of Hurricane Dennis in Georgia, Cyclone Jokwe, Effects of Hurricane Dennis in Mississippi, Tropical Storm Arthur (1996), Cyclone Gamede, Cyclone Glenda, Hurricane Cosme (2007), and Typhoon Neoguri (2008) appeared on the Main Page in the Did you know column during April.

Storm article statistics

Grade	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr
FA	33	36	38	40
A	9	8	8	8
GA	114	123	130	131
B	99	96	91	103
Start	214	216	211	208
Stub	3	6	9	9
Total	472	485	487	499
ω	2.98	2.96	2.94	2.92
percentage Less than B	46.0	45.8	45.2	43.5
percentage GA or better	33.1	34.3	36.1	35.9

Project News
There is discussion on the status of articles on non-notable storms in the Merging page of the project. Comments are welcome.

A Wikipedia traffic counter was launched earlier this year. In the month of February, the article on Hurricane Katrina was viewed just over 200,000 times, making the article the 496th most viewed article on the English Wikipedia during the month.

During the month, Hurricane Camille was demoted from GA status, continuing the trend of good articles degrading in status on notable storms; other occurrences include the FA removal of Cyclone Tracy and 1900 Galveston Hurricane. If anyone has any ideas how to fix the problem, feedback and ideas are appreciated.

♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:59, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Euro topics

Greetings... I'm trying to find a home for some information contained in Maltese euro coins that does not belong there, such as "Design selection process". Other information seems to fit nicely into Introduction of the euro, but not this specific information. I thought of perhaps creating an article called Process of euro adoption or Euro adoption process that would be a nice all-round container for all of the information we are trying to re-locate. Do you think a new article should be created, or should we stick to integrating the wayward information into Introduction of the euro? Alternatively, is there already an article of which I am unaware which details the euro design selection process for all or individual countries? Thanks for your help! Cheers. The € • ^T/_C 08:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I see no reason not to have the information on how Malta selected its euro design in the article on its euro design... —Nightstallion 11:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Joseph Haydn Gold Euro Coin

Hi there, as a favour, can you please visit Talk:Joseph Haydn? I am putting a simple reference there to the Joseph Haydn Gold Euro Coin and it turns to be a huge argument with only one editor. If it is not too much to ask, please contribute. Thanks! Miguel.mateo (talk) 06:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pitching in, the final goal was achieved. Miguel.mateo (talk) 00:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

People of Freedom 3

The only official source (the website of the Chamber of Deputies), as PdL is for now simply a parliamentary group, calls the new political force "Popolo della Libertà" without article (see http://www.camera.it/organiparlamentarism/239/260/documentoxml.asp). I urge you to think about moving The People of Freedom again to People of Freedom. --Checco (talk) 07:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Mh. For now I see more sources in favour of "The" (the logo, the website, ...), but I'm not certain... —Nightstallion 08:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Let's wait then, but I can assure you that no Italian newspaper uses the article and observe that this is an official source. --Checco (talk) 09:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

nods Duly noted. —Nightstallion 10:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Belgian

...Foreign Minister stated that Belgium signed the SAA with Serbia without Kosovo, the first one advocating the interpretation that by this signing Serbian authorities gave up Kosovo.

Game over. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, then we'll finally see how good the SRS is at actually governing instead of making noisy statements. Serbia will survive that, too. —Nightstallion 11:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

And what if they're good at that? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, then Serbia has a problem in my eyes, but we'll see -- after all, the majority of Serbians still want EU accession regardless of what happens to Kosovo, and the SRS will have to deliver on that sooner or later, as well. We'll see, I suppose -- I can only wish Serbia the best of luck. —Nightstallion 11:36, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Let's hypothesize what happens. A SRS-DSS-NS-SPS government is formed. The first thing they do is abolish the SAA. What reaction will come from Brussels? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:40, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

BTW, according to CeSID - 41% DS's electoral is ready to turn completely anti-European if Kosovo is considered as lost and 46% of SRS's electorate wants to get into the EU regardless of what happens to Kosovo.

And around 53% of Serbian citizens supports the SAA signing. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Good question -- probably they'll publically state their regret and state that the EU is ready for Serbia whenever it wishes to continue talking, I suppose.

Sooner or later Serbian politicians (apart from LDP, I mean) will have to start selling the fact that Kosovo *is* lost to the public... —Nightstallion 11:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

And then the government (whether Kostunica or Nikolic as PM) states that it does not give up on European future and integrations of Serbia, calling Brussels to send a negotiating team to Belgrade to negotiate. What then?

Let's not talk about what happens in years, but what happens in days / weeks / months. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

P.S. How to on Serbian parliamentary election, 2008 at the polling template put the "250" covering over all three fields. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, as the damage is done by then, I suppose the EU should by then also start negotiating about SAP with Kosovo. —Nightstallion 15:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I think if you put colspan="3" in there, then you can't sort the table any more... —Nightstallion 15:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Then realize also that we should be talking about decades and not years.

A good thing, is that the Belgian government changed the Minister's statement. They stated that the SAA treaty is neutral on Kosovo in every way, and that he just crossed his government's opinion, which sees Kosovo as an independent country from Serbia. Slovakia has recently signed an economic treaty with Serbia and its government stated that the treaty actually confirms Serbian sovereignty over Kosovo, Tadic also received a notification from the Czech authorities that the Czech Republic opposes independence of Kosovo and sees the future of Serbia in the EU, with Kosovo reintegrating into it - similar messages coming recently from Portugal as well. This could counter Belgium - as well as the statements of that Harvard professor on BBC yesterday. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, let it be decades, then -- even the Irish accept that Northern Ireland is for now a part of the UK... —Nightstallion 20:35, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Did Ireland have specific problems when it was entering the EC?

Latest news: the Patriots amongst the Kosovo Serbs have filed official suites against Tadic for Treason. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

As the issue was burning in the 1920s and 1930s, and they joined the EC in the 1970s -- no. There were some bilateral tensions with the UK until the Good Friday Agreement, IIRC, but nothing major -- just that they claimed Northern Ireland as a part of Ireland for the better part of sixty or seventy years.

No chance in hell they'll succeed, though, right? —Nightstallion 06:18, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

European Free Alliance

I did not understand this edit by C mon. Do you?

First, listing non-member parties is fairly useful to make the article more complete: examples help! Second, EFA has generally limited its membership to progressive parties, which are the majority of the party, but there are also conservative parties as members, notably Liga Fronte Veneto and Bayernpartei. Third, the sentence has no meaning and, however, EFA never expelled xenophobic parties because no xenophopic party ever joined it. Fourth, why does "observer members" is not ok? --Checco (talk) 06:50, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:C mon#Reverts is our discussion about making some examples of leading regionalist parties which are not members of EFA in the article. --Checco (talk) 07:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you agree with may proposal of listing those parties which have a consistent share of votes in their region (20-25% would be fine), or which have a notable share of votes nationally (above 3-5%), or that have an important role in the government of their region or the whole country? Let's continue the discussion in C mon's talk page. --Checco (talk) 10:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Discussion continues... --Checco (talk) 13:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Please help us in finding a compromise. --Checco (talk) 16:46, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

News

Bozidar Delic former General and current SRS candidate for Minister of Defense refused to testify on Haradinaj's case, as a result of non-cooperation with the ICTY policy probably. He was a crucial witness.

The technical government has reached a compromise. It will ratify both the Gas treaty with Russia (the Europeists will support) and the SAA with EUrope (the Populists will abstain). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

So Delic is to blame if Haradinaj walks free? Idiot.

Fair enough. —Nightstallion 11:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Well anyway I hear an official appeal already lodged and a new case preparing against the three by the ICTY... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Which three? —Nightstallion 14:15, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Haradinaj, Balai and Limaj.

It was discovered that another one, a retired Serbian officer, refused to answer his call to testify against Haradinaj. I must say, this is all getting increasingly and increasingly...illogical (let me remind you, Delic is now an SRS candidate for Minister)???

(Unrelated) The Neo-Nazis today supported the DSS-NS list. Their leader stated that Kostunica is the one and only true Serb Patriot in the world. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Very strange, yes. Might that hurt their campaign in the last few days?

Yeah, I read that. —Nightstallion 15:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Most certainly should it come to the public that they were bribed. :))) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, then I know what to hope for. ;) —Nightstallion 16:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

---

I have discovered from my reliable contacts in Washington that Obama doesn't support independence of Kosovo, but is only 'bound by the US reality'. I have launched this in Belgrade. It will far from be possible (too far away) affect Obama's campaign in any manner, but will greatly affect the Serbian election. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. Well, I suppose legal scholars are generally uncomfortable with... "liberal" interpretations of customary international law... —Nightstallion 08:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

---

Nikolic promised at his end convention that an emergency force of 999 heavily armed and trained professional soldiers will be prepared for Kosovo if he wins. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 01:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Ouch. —Nightstallion 08:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

European Parliament election, 2009

Hi, I'm wondering why did you revert my edit, which (you must have forgotten it as you look very busy) deleted a date with no reference (11-14 June 2009). It looks better to say "early June", like were the past EU elections, than betting on a random date! But the best is yet to come: did you know that the german wikipedia argue the date of June 7th... with a source coming directly from the Bundestag website?

82.240.207.81 (talk) 23:00, 8 May 2008 (UTC) (I didn't got letters in my name, but I've got a brain)

Well, this should be source enough, right? Bulgaria and Luxembourg want to hold their elections at the same time (increase turnout and so on), and both will vote on 14 June... —Nightstallion 10:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for consensus

A question has arisen concerning classification of groups in the European Parliament. A discussion has opened up in Talk:Political groups of the European Parliament. Your input is requested there. This is a neutrally worded notification sent to a small number of informed, but uninvolved, editors and is intended to improve rather than to influence the discussion. This notification falls under the "friendly notice" clause of WP:CANVASS. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I did not understand how to answer to this Request. Please go and see if I did it correctly. I put my answers in the table. --Checco (talk) 06:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Democracy is Freedom

Democracy is Freedom – Daisy was moved to Democracy Is Freedom – The Daisy, then I corrected the new title to Democracy is Freedom – The Daisy. Do you agree with that? I personally prefer the previous title. --Checco (talk) 06:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Mh, actually, the new title seems better to me. —Nightstallion 10:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that the use of all these articles make titles too much Italianistic. In English you'll never use an article in that case. --Checco (talk) 14:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't agree with that, there's lots of parties in English with a leading "The". —Nightstallion 17:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Bolivian vote of confidence referendum, 2008

Err, I don't think there is a date yet - it just said "within 90 days", i.e. by 9 August. Correct me if I'm wrong. Cheers, пﮟოьεԻ 57 10:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Oops, that should read 7 August. пﮟოьεԻ 57 10:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

You're absolutely right -- my mistake, sorry! —Nightstallion 10:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

GUE/NGL

Hi. I don't agree exactly. NGLA is not a 'Euro-party', and does not work within the structures of the EU. 2 of 5 of its member parties are in GUE/NGL. The linkages between the European left are perhaps more complex than those of socialists, liberals and greens. PEL and NGLA are not the only forums that could be mentioned as structures in which GUE/NGL members are active, there is also the New European Left Forum (founded prior to PEL and NGLA, encompassed parties from both structures), European Anti-Capitalist Left and United European Left (a PACE group), not to speak of the fact that several GUE/NGL parties are active in the International Conference of Communist and Workers Parties. --Soman (talk) 11:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't agree there -- the PEL and the NGLA are clearly the two European parties (and yes, I know the NGLA is legally not a party) of which the GUE/NGL consists; I'm fairly certain C_mon, Checco and the others would agree with me, but you can ask them, if you want more opinions. —Nightstallion 17:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

HELLO, NIGHTSTALLION!

1. Congatulation! V-Day!

2. Lok at this! [22] As it followed to wait, CA first session will begin at May, 28th, 2008. That means, that (may be) Nepali Republic will be finally proclaim before current summer's end or during Autumn-2008 (I know what means Nepali speed). CrazyRepublican (talk) 11:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. Good news. —Nightstallion 17:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

European Parliament groups 2

I proposed a compromise for the article and the related template, which is a summary of the article. I hope that you like it and that we can settle the issue. --Checco (talk) 18:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Archives  |  Tip Line  |  Editors The Novels WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXIV - May 2008
Project news The project coordinators' election has concluded. User Yllosubmarine was strongly supported and has promised to be "willing to get some things in motion". Best wishes from the newsletter. Member news The project has currently 380 members, 1 joined & 2 leavers since the start of April 2008. Other news Nero Wolfe is up in peer review. Grey Griffins has been nominated for GA status. Want to see what wikipedians are reading or want the Wikipedia community to know what you are currently reading? Then check out Wikipedia:What I am reading at the moment. Task force news WikiProject Sword of Truth has been proposed to be merged with WP:NOVELS. The project has currently 9 task forces. Novel related news The Enchantress of Florence by Salman Rushdie will be released on June 3. On March 26th, 2008, Brandon Sanderson commenced work on the completion of A Memory of Light, the twelfth and final novel in The Wheel of Time series by the late Robert Jordan. Current debates Discussion on assessing novel articles.	From the Members Welcome to the Twenty Fourth issue of the Novels WikiProject's newsletter! Use this newsletter as a mechanism to inform yourselves about progress at the project and please be inspired to take more active roles in what we do. We would encourage all members to get more involved and if you are wondering what with, please ask. feydey (talk), Temporary Editor Collaboration of the Month This month's Collaboration has been selected by popular vote and is Pride and Prejudice. Newsletter challenge Last month's challenge (The Great Man) was completed by our member User:MeegsC . The first person to start the article is mentioned in the next newsletter. This month's article is Amy Tan's novel The Hundred Secret Senses.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 18	2 May 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Wikimedia Board to expand, restructure	Arbitrator leaves Wikipedia
Bot approvals group, checkuser nominations briefly held on RfA	WikiWorld: "World domination"
News and notes: Board elections, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Did You Know ...	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 19	9 May 2008	About the Signpost

Sister Projects Interview: Wikiversity	WikiWorld: "They Might Be Giants"
News and notes: Board elections, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Featured content from schools and universities	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

European Parliament groups 3

It is very interesting the speculation about the futurible "Movement for European Reform" (this won't be the name of the group anyway, I guess) and the future of UEN, but there is another issue: where will go the Italian Democratic Party? Probably it will join PES, but only if PES changes its denomination, which will probably be "Party of Socialists and Democrats" (thus we will need to change also that denomination in the template!) or "Alliance of Socialists and Democrats". There has been a lot of talking about this in Italy, especially when Poul Nyrup Rasmussen came to Italy for the last congresses of DS and DL. Do you know anything about this? Any source? If yes, we should update European Parliament election, 2009... --Checco (talk) 13:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Frankly, no idea -- they could either join the PES or the EDP, but I sincerely doubt the PES would change its name for just a single member, even such an important one as PD. —Nightstallion 13:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

This will be a surprise for you, but it will probably happen, while I think that British Conservative finally won't leave EPP-ED. Rasmussen guaranteed to the Italian Democrats that the name will be changed and also French UDF could be interested. In June 2009 we'll see who of us was wrong... --Checco (talk) 13:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

UDF is dead, I suppose you mean MoDem. MoDem to join the PES? Do you, by any chance, mean instead that the PES (party) and the EDP will form a joint *group* in the European parliament, and that the PES' *group's* name would change? That I would consider likely, but I can't imagine that the MoDem would join the PES -- the PS in France is already covering that territory, and MoDem is not at all social democratic or socialist...

However, what I think I understand from your posting doesn't sound unlikely -- I can see the EDP joining forces with the PES in a group in the EP, as the EDP would gain a lot of influence as compared to right now where it's caucussing with the liberals. —Nightstallion 13:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I was definitely talking about MoDem, sorry. It is likely that PES and EDP will form a joint group, but is also likely that PES will change name because Italian Democrats are likely to join PES and not EDP. Also British Labourites are interested in changing the name of PES or, at least, this is what Italian newspapers report.

What about France? If PS wants to win again power, it needs to reform itself and make an alliance with MoDem. Segolene Royal thinks that the American-style Italian Democratic Party is a good example for France. I don't know how many years that process will take, but I'm sure that something like this will happen. --Checco (talk) 13:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Mh, interesting, thanks for the heads-up. I wrote a quick bit at European Parliament election, 2009, but we need to find sources -- you should be able to come up with something on PD's European membership, no? —Nightstallion 13:53, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Not yet, Nightstallion. What I talked you about are simply crescent rumors. In any case, in less than a year-time we will know. For now in Italy the only explicit discussion is the European Parliament electoral law reform. --Checco (talk) 14:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

What will change? —Nightstallion 14:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

(reindent) Both PdL and PD would like to put a treshold (at least 3%) in order to reinforce the bipolar/two-party system and in general to avoid any spotlight for small parties: as you might know, under the current system parties with 0.7-1% can elect a MEP and consequently there is a strong fragmentation in European elections. --Checco (talk) 14:37, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me. —Nightstallion 14:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Obvously small parties and the far left are talking of coupe d'état. This could be actually the first thing on which PdL and PD could agree. In general the fair play that characterized the electoral campaign continues: some PD officials made good remarks about the new Berlusconi government, Roberto Calderoli is proposing an Attali commission for de-legification... Let's hope. --Checco (talk) 14:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

What's "de-legification"? —Nightstallion 14:45, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe that's not the correct term: it means reducing 260,000 or so Italian laws.

PS: I think that you are all getting a little bit mad about Forza Italia. National conservative? There is nothing about Forza Italia which can be considered national conservative. Let's continue in Forza Italia's talk. --Checco (talk) 14:47, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, legislative simplification. Good idea. —Nightstallion 14:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

European Parliament electoral law reform. Calderoli is thinking about a system based on the Spanish model for general elections: the 73 MEPs could be elected in regional constituencies, without preferences ("blocked list"?) and with no thresholds (obviously the practical regional threshold will be very high). --Checco (talk) 09:15, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you mean "closed list". Likely to gain PD's support, as well? —Nightstallion 09:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Closed list, yes. I read the news this morning from Clandestinoweb and there are no reactions from PD yet. I think that PD would appreciate the proposal, but that there will be less than 20 regional constituencies. --Checco (talk) 09:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Another question: What exactly is planned right now? New European elections law, new national elections law, federalist reform, reform of the Senate, what else? —Nightstallion 09:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Calderoli spoke of electoral reform for European Parliament, fiscal federalism and some constitutional reforms. The former will probably be separate reforms in order to attract the support of UDC on some issues. It seems to me a very sensible idea. You can read the article at http://www.clandestinoweb.com/number-news/12/05/2008/calderoli-scuse-alla-libia-prevale-la-ragione-di-stato-2.html. --Checco (talk) 09:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Obviously also electoral reform for general elections is under debate... remember that if there is no such electoral reform, there will be a referendum next year. --Checco (talk) 09:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

When can we expect all those changes? —Nightstallion 09:58, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know. The next three-five months will be important to understand what kinf of relation PdL and PD will establish between them. Obviously the role of Lega Nord, which has alway been the bridge between centre-right and centre-left (despite the diffidence Prodi always felt for Bossi's party), is also very important. Any constututional reform will take some years to be approved, while there could be a new electoral law for European elections by January-February 2009 (that's my forecast, at least). --Checco (talk) 10:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

PATT, Civica and Lega Nord Trentino

You can read my detailed answer on the "PD-Civica-PATT issue" on my talk page. You should be very interested about my recent update on Trentino Tyrolean Autonomist Party. --Checco (talk) 14:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The more I read about Trentino the more I think that there will be a more competitive provincial election this year, even if the centre-left is clearly advantaged and will finally win (I bet on this). --Checco (talk) 15:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks! —Nightstallion 15:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The situation is a little bit chaotic in Trentino, anyway in Daisy Civic List you can read a description of what happened and of what will happen. Correct me if you find mistakes. --Checco (talk) 14:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks! So this will happen on 15 June? —Nightstallion 14:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

And when will the regional/provincial elections be held? —Nightstallion 14:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

This is what I read and it is reported in the news. I did not understand exactly what relation the two parties will have and who will join what. In the meantime, as I told you, there is a lot of movement also in the centre-right and all the PATT may return to the centre-right.

If I remember well, the provincial election will be held in October. Just to remind you, on 25 May there will be the Aosta Valley regional election.

PS: No comments on User talk:Checco#Trentino parties?

PS 2: If you have time to work on the parties of the Province of Bolzano, it will be great. --Checco (talk) 14:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

nods Interesting, thanks.

Yeah, I know. Will the autonomists retain power or will the leftists win?

PS: Didn't have much to say to it, but thanks for the information!

PS2: Which two are the most important ones for now? —Nightstallion 14:42, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

1) Aosta Valley. I haven't seen any opinion poll. My only Wikifriend from Aosta has no opinion polls too. I think that the autonomists will retain power, but, if they don't win in the first round, it would be interesting to see with which coalition they will form an alliance (if they decide to do so). Also what you call "leftists" have an important component, while UV is sometimes described as a social-democratic party, so they might form an alliance.

2) The two most important parties in South Tyrol needing a better article are The Libertarians and Union for South Tyrol. It would be interesting then to write something about their precursors: the Party of Independents/Freedom Party of South Tyrol and South Tyrolean Homeland. You can find informations about all of these parties in de.Wiki. A list of all the parties in the Region is available at List of political parties in Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol.

3) Flash news: Berlusconi called Veltroni this afternoon and proposed him a meeting and continuative talks. See http://www.corriere.it/politica/08_maggio_12/berlusconi_veltroni_telefonata_21478d7c-202f-11dd-895d-00144f486ba6.shtml. --Checco (talk) 14:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to work on those two when time permits.

Interesting, thanks. —Nightstallion 15:01, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Just in case, I will remind you the issue. --Checco (talk) 15:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Good idea, thanks. Another question: Formation of PdL is reported to happen in October, true? —Nightstallion 15:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

There is no official date yet. It definitely will happen before the European Parliament election, but I frankly don't know how before. --Checco (talk) 15:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! —Nightstallion 15:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Thank you for your message on my talk page. It is good that other people are finally giving the groups the attention they deserve and editing Political groups of the European Parliament accordingly, but such edits must be sourced, introduce no errors of fact, and bear some relationship to the real world: beliefs are not sufficient for edits, even if sincerely held, and it is not good to casually make widespread changes based soley on such private beliefs without reference to sources or the real world, nor to ignore the real problem of recentism (the fact that an entity may be characterized as having a complexion in 2008 doesn't mean it had the same complexion in 1973 nor 1958), nor to ignore the impact on other pages. Since so many pages/templates/gifs/pngs intersect with that page, any changes require a considerable amount of work so it would be best if consensus was reached so such changes will only have to be done once.

On a happier note, it appears that you are the go-to guy for gossip about developments after the 2009 elections. It has already been remarked that the likelihood of the British Conservatives leaving EPP-ED to form MER is low, so I won't dwell on that. However, what do you think about this remark from fr.wikipedia "Ce groupe est appelé à disparaître après les élections européennes de 2009 avec la création probable du groupe du Parti de la gauche européenne." (GUE-NGL is expected to be renamed to the "Group of the Party of the European Left" after the 2009 European Elections). Have you heard of such a development?

Kind regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 03:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

No, actually, not at all -- but I would see it as a logical development that the Left would unite into a single faction, finally. —Nightstallion 13:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Rock the vote 2008-05-11

Thank you for your contributions to the discussion on Talk:Political groups of the European Parliament. You may wish to take part in the vote here if you have not already done so. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 14:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Forza Italia

I think that it is unfair that Forza Italia is treated differently from the Union for a Popular Movement and most other EPP members. When truth is so disowned and denied. Moreover if PdL is liberal-conservative (see Parties and Elections in Europe) how can Forza Italia be considered more conservative? --Checco (talk) 21:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

C mon did also this which is ok but inconsistent with Forza Italia's article. --Checco (talk) 21:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't you think that it is strange to classify PdL as "liberal conservative" and FI as "conservative"? --Checco (talk) 09:26, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Not necessarily -- PdL consists of more than just FI. —Nightstallion 09:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and that "more" is more conservative!!! I'm not saying that liberal conservatism for PdL is not correct, but that it most liberal and centrist and also biggest component can't be classified as more conservative: that's simply non-sense. --Checco (talk) 09:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

shrugs Then make both of them conservative. Or liberal conservative. —Nightstallion 09:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm for "liberal conservative", as also Wolfram Nordsieck describes PdL and described FI. --Checco (talk) 09:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. —Nightstallion 09:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

However, I won't do any change to the article in order not to hurt C mon. --Checco (talk) 09:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

You could simply ask him whether the change would be okay? —Nightstallion 09:58, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I explained the problem in Forza Italia's talk page yesterday. --Checco (talk) 10:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Serbia

Eh. Well, not like we didn't expect this... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Are we talking about the same result? I certainly did *not* expect such a clear victory for the pro-European side... Too bad they won't be able to form the government on their own, but maybe a few MPs from DSS-NS will split from their party now? —Nightstallion 08:49, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Are there final results? --Checco (talk) 09:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Almost, I believe -- either way, 123 seats for the pro-Europeans and 127 for the nationalists. —Nightstallion 09:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hm, I actually did expect that all those polls were dump. Actually, my disappointment is this awkward situation, and the statement of the CeSID analyst that if LDP ran on the European list, it would've been able to alone form a government in Serbia, provincial governments and absolute majority in 85% of Cities and Municipalities. In most locations in Serbia locally, LDP failed to pass the census. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Shit. Well, hindsight is 20/20. —Nightstallion 11:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

In any case, it shows it seems you were right regarding the Serbian citizens' thoughts. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm very very glad I was right. :) —Nightstallion 12:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

It seems the SAA was over-crucial. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:29, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Forget about changes in the parliament though. Remember what the 2006 Constitution drastically brought - political parties are the true owners of seats, which are only filled by their easily-replaceable officials. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

So either the SPS wants a coalition with DS, or there'll be early elections again, since the SPS doesn't want a government with SRS? —Nightstallion 12:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't exclude the possibility that SRS amend their program and a accept a social-reform one, in order to gain SPS.

Besides, EU+LDP+JS+minorities = absolute majority. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

And JS would be willing to cooperate with EU and break with SPS-PUPS? —Nightstallion 12:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

That or convince the entire coalition to go. Remember, JS is the greatest critic (even bigger than LDP) when relations were broken with the countries that recognized independence of Kosovo. Palma claimed that it's hardly expectable that those countries will revoke recognition, and that a year or several months of straining diplomatic relations, solely damaging to oneself, is complete stupidity and accused DS-DSS-G17+-NS for that. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Does that mean that JS also favours accepting Kosovan independence? —Nightstallion 14:26, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Of course not. The party is conservative - nationalist. But this allegedly conservative nationalist political party is led a President who dictator-mayor of his incredibly flourishing and rich municipality of Jagodina, where Austrian and Swedish monary says everything. What Palma says is that which is best in the interest of the residents of his municipality (really truly, the care for his own ass can only go only along and not instead), in which SPS-PUPS-JS won 65% votes and almost the entire municipal parliament. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, that at least sounds like he'd be easy and uncomplicated to please. —Nightstallion 15:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Will the SPS be open to a coalition with the DS? —Nightstallion 09:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Is SPS truly social-democratic as written in the article? --Checco (talk) 10:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, yes, but it's also in the tradition of Milosevic, still. —Nightstallion 10:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Even I agree that it is a social-democratic party, but I notice also that in the Internet it is frequently decribed as "socialist" or "communist". --Checco (talk) 10:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I suppose it's more reformed than the Czech KSCM, but less than the Bulgarian post-communists. —Nightstallion 11:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

SPS refused negotiations with SRS, refusing its Government program which is Rightist. They demanded a social-reformist government and will start negotiating with DSS-NS today. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:54, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like very good news to me. —Nightstallion 12:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

So, PaxEquilibrium, will the SPS be open to a coalition with the DS? --Checco (talk) 11:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, see the division. The Europeans will start today with LDP negotiations, and announced them with all minorities and JS. DSS-NS and SRS finished this morning negotiations and determined for a government, are about to start with SPS and the Bosniacs. It is also disappointing the Romanis didn't win at least one seat. They would've sure been pro-EU (at least the major one) and I have no idea what's the reason for this sudden fall. It seems that right now, when there were so many minority candidates, most actually opted for bigger lists. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:27, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

nods So it'll be very close. —Nightstallion 11:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

However, it seems that the Patriots shall take over Belgrade, with Aleksandar Vučić as mayor. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:29, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, could have been worse, the "Patriots" could have gained all of Serbia instead... Will you be updating the election pages with results, BTW? —Nightstallion 12:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

The parliamentary already has. The provincial and local aren't published (in detail) yet. Though we know an overwhelming victory of the Europeists in Vojvodina and a similar one of the Patriots in Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:48, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks! —Nightstallion 12:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

---

The situation is slightly normalizing on the political scene as Kosovo is a past topic and living standards are becoming prime. It appears that the European Coalition snatched from everyone, even the Radicals. It would seem that the SAA signing stopped European Integrations as a myth and turned into reality, and also made the citizens actually stop their skeptics and believe with the Fiat that came in days after the SAA. For the first time actually an image of a victorious political course was created, even confirmed by these election results. Tourism also opened today. Kostunica committed self-suicide by claiming that the SAA should've been signed, by allowing its ratification in the tech gov and promising to abolish it at the same time - not to mention with the fact that Russia greeted it. I really think that this really is that the one moment. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

EU considers the minorities, LDP, JS and NS as favorable partners. The last one is new, and I am strictly against. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:14, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. Well, let's hope they'll be able to do it without SPS and NS. I hope you're right about this being the moment. —Nightstallion 11:29, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The thrill is over as I am a little disappointed...EU will form coalition with SPS-PUPS-JS, they are offering it a Ministry and demanding "at least little further softening up". LDP's call for negotiations was ignored. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:40, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

nods Well, naturally, I'm afraid -- the LDP alone would not suffice, even with the minorities' support. See it this way -- if LDP is not in government, it can make more political campaigns driving the government to be even more progressive, I'd say. —Nightstallion 13:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually yes, LDP can only gain from this. Especially will it be able to expand attacking Tadic for 'renewing Milosevic heritage'. DS and LDP are actually very close 'frenemies', and they plan things on the long term. In reality (not in public), I don't think they'll be angry - but LDP really has some very skilled culture-related people.

Let me correct myself to the up. Minutes ago Mladjan Dinkic informed that SPS-PUPS-JS can count on three Ministries, LDP on two, that three shall go to G17+, one to SPO and another to SDP and the rest including Secretary-General will be DS. It seems they are throwing the catch on all sides, hoping that something will bite. ;))) BTW it's highly unlikely the SPS-PUPS-JS will vote for abolition of the SAA (because of Palma), and even if they abstain, there are more pro than con (122 pro-European to 108 anti-European).

And let me have the freedom to add a little bizarre thing. Naturally, I am glad that LDP passed the threshold, but, if they didn't, the EU would need only a couple of votes (minorities) to govern alone. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:55, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

SPS-PUPS-JS will vote for ratification of SAA! Confirmed! :D

However they will negotiation first with DSS-NS, then with SRS and then with DS - if the first two refuse their program. It's just a game, Kostunica taught everyone a lot about politics. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep, sounds good to me. LDP will have the chance to grow further (and from my point of view, if the only party which publicly condones Kosovan independence gains votes, that can only be good for the general acceptance of the new reality on the ground), the Europeans can govern, and I've got hopes that now that Kostunica has finally declared his allegiances for the SRS, he's a goner. Maybe the SPS can grow and mature into an acceptable and democratic party through association with the DS and its allies, though I wouldn't count on it. What do you think? —Nightstallion 14:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

You do know that I find unacceptable the pro-EUropean pro-NATO reformed Christian Democratic party-purged HDZ, because it is full of old ultra-nationalisms and Tudjman's heritage-words, right?

I think you missed what I wroge on 14:05 to the up...(first sentence) :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and I didn't say I like them -- but there's always the chance that once abominable parties reform into respectable ones; at least it happened in a number of former Eastern bloc states with their former communist parties.

No, I read it, I just refuse to worry about it for now. ;) —Nightstallion 14:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, the SPS leader Ivica Dacic is a young man - back when he was Milosevic's party speaker he was very young.Most actually think that they will never give up Milosevic's wording, but simply silently abandon it. You see, their electorate is practically all over 60 years old. If they want to turn into a constant Social party - and every country needs it - they'll have to adapt to pertain old voters all the time. This would primarily mean that all we have to do is...uhm...wait until their Old ones biologically disappear. Old people are all extremely pro-Milosevic, and if SPS gave up on him - they would've definitely not passed the census.

I meant regarding the SAA. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:34, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

nods Well, we'll see. Do you expect the LDP and with it, acceptance of Kosovan independence, to grow in the next years?

Ah, that's what you meant. Good news! :) —Nightstallion 15:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Not significantly, as long as "the fight for Kosovo" remains an active part - especially with the ICJ everyone now awaiting - I don't expect any greater change in that manner. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

So you expect it to take one or two decades, then? Or do you expect it to turn into a Northern Ireland-like situation, where Ireland for a couple of decades claimed Northern Ireland as part of its own territory, but still talked with the UK? —Nightstallion 15:29, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

If things remain, then the latter. Serbia is bound to return backwards if violence erupts in Kosovo or a similar problem, note that the Radicals single-handedly won practically everywhere in Kosovo-Metohija and there are rumors that they will try to raise tensions.

And I have a very interesting question to the citizens of Serbia. Today Macedonia, Montenegro and Srbska greeted Tadic greatly and asked for closer relations and economic and other mutual treaties with Serbia. So I ask, what is better: this, or an aggressive Greater Serbia designed to swallow those neighboring countries and assimilate them, opening new conflicts? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, then let's hope it *is* the former, leading to final acceptance of the realities on the ground in a few decades.

Naturally, you're absolutely right -- through its sheer size and economic influence, Serbia is obviously the regional power of the Balkans, if it finally turns to sensible diplomacy. —Nightstallion 17:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

2nd place, right after Greece, I'd reckon. The only advantage over Greece is - being the heart of the region. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Frankly -- Greece is economically stagnant, politically calcified, and on the whole not really much of a centre for anything, as far as I know. Add the fact that they're not really willing to compromise on the Macedonia naming non-issue... (Plus, they had to cheat to even get the euro.) No, sorry, on the whole, I'm not really a friend of the idea of seeing Greece as a regional power for any other reason than former historical greatness... ;) —Nightstallion 19:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

(deindent) Wonder you didn't mention the minorities issue. --PaxEquilibrium (talk)

Yeah, wanted to mention that, too. —Nightstallion 19:56, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

This is the SRS/DSS-NS government program:

1. a Kosovo and Metohija as a component part of Serbia

2. Continuation of European Integrations with K-M as the state's constituent part

3. Improvement of living standards

4. Fighting crime and corruption

It will be tomorrow presented to SPS-PUPS-JS. This is EU's:

1. Serbia in the EU

2. Diplomatic struggle to preserve Kosovo-Metohija within the internationally recognized borders of the Republic of Serbia

3. Work on the creation of a progressive society and social justice

These are the Socialists' personal lines:

1. Preservation of Kosovo-Metohija within Serbia's state borders

2. Supporting the Republic of Srbska and preservation of the Dayton Accords

3. Continuation of European Integrations along with fulfillment of sovereignty

4. Building up a system based on social justice with improvement of the workers' rights and the standards of the retired.

Those are all. BTW, the Sanjak Bosniacs have introduced a little oddity, they want a Ministry and shall support anyone who gives it. They have also started negotiations with Kostunica. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

On paper, it sounds like they could all just form a big happy government of national unity... ;) Why aren't the Bosniaks supporting ZES? I thought the minorities were all strongly in favour of EU integration? —Nightstallion 20:36, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The SPS call for that for years...(though not this time).

The Slavic Muslims of the Sanjak region are by great (as much as it sounds odd to you) Serbian patriots, and they are followers of Kostunica for years by now, with whom they have brilliant relations. Yes, they are strongly *for a European Sanjak*, but they are also traditional enemies of Boris Tadic. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

All done

http://blic.co.yu/_customfiles/Image/slike/2008/05_maj/14/politika/tadic-dacic-v.jpg

Immediately after declaration of the final results (in Thursday), they should announce their coalition. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:50, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

That's a relief. —Nightstallion 17:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Turkey EU logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Turkey EU logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Jesse Viviano (talk) 18:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 20	12 May 2008	About the Signpost

Explicit sexual content draws fire	Sighted revisions introduced on the German Wikipedia
Foundation receives copyright claim from church	Board to update privacy policy, adopts data retention policy
Update on Citizendium	Board candidacies open through May 22
Two wiki events held in San Francisco Bay Area	New feature enables users to bypass IP blocks
WikiWorld: "Tony Clifton"	News and notes: Autoconfirmed level, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Changes at Featured lists
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Requested moves

I proposed two requested moves about the Radical parties. "Republican, Radical and Radical-Socialist Party" is too long as a title and also incorrect for the current Radical Party as that long title is not used any more. I'd like too know your opinion on these moves.

Moreover I'm considering again about having a single article on the French Radical Party as the "current" one is the direct and legal continuation of the "former". They are simply the same party. In fact Left-wing Radicals split from the Radical Party in 1972, after that Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber had been elected party leader in 1971. Servan-Schreiber continued to be leader until 1975 and actually there was no end to the "original Radical Party". --Checco (talk) 10:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I did not understand your argument, but what about the other move request? I don't think it is correct to name an article about a party with a name (Republican, Radical and Radical-Socialist Party) which that party doesn't use any more. It would be like naming that article about the Social Democratic Party of Austria "Socialist Party of Austria", as this was the name used by the party for more than fifty years! --Checco (talk) 10:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

About the second issue I brought to discussion and which I believe it is fairly more important, I think that we should consider having only one article about the French Radical Party, as it is the same party. Almost every source states that. Plese consider for example http://www.france-politique.fr/parti-radical.htm. PRG was a split from the Radical Party, but the Radical Party continued to exist, exactly as the Communist Refoundation Party continued to exist after the split of the Party of Italian Communists. --Checco (talk) 11:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Other sources support what I believe it is corret:

• http://www.indopedia.org/Radical_Party_(France).html
• http://www.politique.net/parti-radical-de-gauche.htm (states that PRG was born from the split of the minority faction of the Radical Party, also fr.Wiki states this)
• http://www.partiradical.net/pages/nous-connaitre/presentation.asp (the Radical Party presents itself as the direct continuation of the 1901 Radical Party)
• http://www.google.de/search?hl=it&q=parti+radical+de+gauche&meta= and http://www.google.de/search?hl=it&q=parti+radical+de+gauche&meta= (also PRG presents itself as a scission from the Radical Party!)

--Checco (talk) 11:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not against merging the two parties, but we should have the article at the correct name -- and as I remember, the last time we had this discussion it turned out the legal name was still RRaRSP? —Nightstallion 11:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Merging the two articles is definitely more urgent.

About the name, I see that the party is called simply "Radical Party" both in the symbol and in the website. Even if RRaRSP wold be the legal name (something I'm not sure about), I think that we should chose the simpliest name. Think about Conservative Party (UK) whose official name is "Conservative and Unionist Party", Rainbow Group (1984–1989) whose official name was "Rainbow Group: Federation of the Green Alternative European Links, Agalev-Ecolo, the Danish People's Movement against Membership of the European Community, and the European Free Alliance, in the European Parliament", Democratic Left (Italy) whose official name is "Sinistra Democratica. Per il Socialismo Europeo", Lega Nord whose official name is "Lega Nord per l'Indipendenza della Padania" and so on. Anyway I don't think that this is exactly the case. --Checco (talk) 11:29, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Mh. Okay, fair enough, consider me supportive of the shorter name. Now, what about the merger? The last time, some people brought some pretty good arguments why we should *not* merge -- what has changed since then? —Nightstallion 11:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Simply there was and there is no evidence or source that they are two different parties. A similar thing happened fro the Italian Democratic Socialist Party, if you remember. The fact that fr.Wiki has two separate article cannot be a reason for keeping two articles in en.Wiki. Moreover also fr.Wiki states that the "current" Radical Party is the direct and legal continuation of the "former" Radical Party... --Checco (talk) 12:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Mh. Okay, fair enough, then consider me neutral to moderately supportive on that. —Nightstallion 12:30, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I will copy this discussion we had in talk page of the articles and I will do the unfication. --Checco (talk) 12:35, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep, good idea. —Nightstallion 13:01, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I merged the two articles. The merged article need a huge clean-up, as also the article about the "former party" needed. If you want to check it and propose something about how improving it, you are the welcome in talk page.

And what about the move requests, now? Can I stop them and propose another move request? Can we, you and me, decide if and how to rename the article? --Checco (talk) 14:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I hope to have fixed the issue in the correct way. I proposed the new move in reqyested moves' page. If you want you can state your opinion in talk page. Maybe we could even move the article now... --Checco (talk) 16:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Detailed results

Too early to do that before the final results, right (next Thursday)?

What precisely did you have in mind.

BTW, it's very odd - all negotiations are covert, there are rumors about a DS-SPS government, and yet again on public only the Patriots are negotiating - bringing no result.

It's VERY strange. Ivica Dačić goes tomorrow to Moscow to receive advices from Putin on the future of Serbia as a final decision, as he is extremely heavily pressed by all sides - his finances demand a Patriotic gov, the EU has been in contact claiming that it will no longer treat the party as bad, etc...the Kremlin shall give the final decision. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, just a short table like this:

Region || Serbia || Central Serbia || Vojvodina || Kosovo

ZES || perc || perc || perc || perc

SRS || ...

and so on. You know what I mean?

Very interesting... What do you think Putin will tell him? —Nightstallion 09:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

How about better like the one we use / I will use for the map? On these?

No idea, Russian nationalists do not hide a bit of disappointment, but their analysts say a European Serbia is also Russian national interest. Don't know how will this affect 'Kostunica's Kosovo Independence Revocation' program though. In fact I have also discovered an interesting thing, the Foreign Minister Lavrov seems to be pro-European. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

We can do those additionally, but I think it's very important to see what the results in Central Serbia, Vojvodina and Kosovo were... Don't you agree?

Lavrov is europhile? Really? Source? —Nightstallion 13:43, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Well I don't really, because those are not regions in any way, just B92's own divisions. I could do if you insist...

Well I draw that from his attitude in general, he greeted the results which showed the "European perspective of Serbia", he greeted the SAA signing and now promoted that Serbia needs to become an EU candidate as far as possible. In other non-Serbia related aims, he is a strong endorser of European-Russian partnership. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

But they are the most commonly perceived division of Serbia into parts -- please do that, would you be so kind?

Mh, sounds good. —Nightstallion 14:03, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

OK.

In other news, LDP supports a government with SPS. If not a part of it (because of SPS' refusal), they will support an EU + SPS-PUPS-JS government in the parliament. On the other hand, LSV is unwilling to support it, so LDP's minority support might replace. Nenad Canak is demanding the seat of Mayor of Novi Sad for that (calling upon his father who held that post during Communist age for a long, long, time), although the 2nd round of the parliamentary election will have to be waited before everything is clear. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

And, will that work? —Nightstallion 14:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure, why not?

The only remaining problem is that I'd really regret to see that this news simply passes by unnoticed at the Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. Any help? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I thought the SPS doesn't like the LDP...? I just hope that you're right and that the SRS-DSS-NS negotiations with SPS are not serious...

Just added it. —Nightstallion 15:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

And the SAA? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

How would you mention it? —Nightstallion 08:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

---

The Socialist International offered membership to the SPS. SPS candidate for Belgrade Mayor and Party Vice-President stated that the offer didn't come as a surprise, since the Socialist Party of Serbia is the political party with the largest European perspective and value in the Balkan region.

Bwahaha...politics at times makes me sick, and at times (like this) cracks me up incredibly. What's next, will the LDP recommend banning all parties and establishing a dictatorship?! --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

... well, that would obviously be DS and not SPS, but still, I suppose pulling SPS over to the pro-European camp is the only way to do it.

Heh, possibly. —Nightstallion 08:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Looking for advice ...

Hi there, I hope you can help me here ... what to do when another user on purpose reverts every single comment you are making in any article, without any specific talk or reason? It is obvious that the neutrality of this user is under question, and he is behaving like if this is his encyclopedia. Any ideas? Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Ask for help at WP:AN/I? —Nightstallion 08:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I have warned the user and will use WP:AN/I if it happens again. Miguel.mateo (talk) 08:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Need help again - another argument. This time in article Schloss Esterházy, the same user (with the help of another user) is constantly reverting my changes and is asking for another discussion. Can you please pitch in? I have escalated the behaviour as suggested before. Sorry to bother, Miguel.mateo (talk) 15:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

BTW, if possible, please pitch in here WP:ANI as well. I am asking for help about user's behaviour and it turned into a content dispute. Miguel.mateo (talk) 00:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:HAU has a new format

Due to popular demand, HAU has a new look. Since the changes are so dramatic, I may have made some mistakes when translating the data. Please take a look at WP:HAU/EU and make sure your checkmarks are in the right place and feel free to add or remove some. There is a new feature, SoxBot V, a recently approved bot, automatically updates your online/offline status based on the length of time since your last edit. To allow SoxBot V to do this, you'll need to copy [[Category:Wikipedians who use StatusBot]] to your userpage. Obviously you are not required to add this to your userpage, however, without this, your status will always be "offline" at HAU. Thanks. Useight (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:Burmese constitutional referendum, 2008

What is your source for the information contained in Template:Burmese constitutional referendum, 2008? What is the May 24, 2008 election that it mentions? --Bowlhover (talk) 05:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

... erm, hello? The souce is in the template? 24 May is the date when the election will be held in the townships where it was postponed because of the cyclone. —Nightstallion 10:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:

The link you gave me is invalid, but if he got that message from Putin, it could be true.

Next week the President of the Socialist International is coming to Belgrade to meet with Ivica Dacic and Milutin Mrkonjic on the issue.

Tycoons and the BIA demand a Patriotic government, Boris Tadic intends to open all files to the public, so they are even allegedly threatening Dacic with personal incriminating data. While Dacic and Mrkonjic are likely for a coalition with Tadic, the political party itself seems to have already prepared a special Congress on which the leadership shall be deposed, should it decide to go with Tadic. SPS is almost equally divided into two currents, but under overwhelming influence, the Patriotic one is winning.

In other news, Boris Tadic is finishing the draft of the Restoration of Peace and Confidence in Sanjak program, where the European Union and the Republic of Turkey will be involved together with the government and local administration. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

No chance that SPS might split into two parties, one of which would support Tadic? —Nightstallion 12:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Would be useless in any case. Seats don't belong to MPs, but to parties.

Their biggest condition is the SAA, a painful dot for the Populists & Radicals. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Too bad.

The link should work now, BTW. So the SPS absolutely wants to ratify the SAA? —Nightstallion 13:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

No government without it. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's at least something. —Nightstallion 14:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

---

Noam Chomsky has become increasingly popular in Serbia, Montenegro and Srbska. This (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8) can't get off the TV. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:28, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Chosmky is great -- haven't got access to loudspeakers right now, what is he saying in the interview? —Nightstallion 10:54, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

About US's policies regarding Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

He upholds that the only solution is to merge Kosovo to Albania and keep an expanded part of North Kosovo as a part of Serbia, and blames by great the United States policy for the matters related to Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

nods Well, I don't think he's always right, but generally I think he's one of the smartest people alive as far as I'm concerned. —Nightstallion 20:58, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

WPPP

You are being recruited by the WikiProject Political Parties, Emphasizing consistency, global perspective, and neutrality, the WikiProject aims to create good articles about political parties worldwide. Join us!

--Soman (talk) 16:24, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Serbs of Montenegro

The Serbian National Council of Montenegro by majority votes decided to use the minority privileges. A huge conflict with the political leaders, as the Serb List increasingly opposed it and claims that it is direct recognition that nationally declared Serbs in Montenegro are a different people from nationally declared Montenegrins. Andrija Mandic states that this would bring forth division of Montenegro into two halves stronger and greater segregation between the two groups. On the other hand, the National Council's President has accused the politicians for only making those statements to achieve political points, accusing them also for working against the interests of the Serbian people. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

What consequences will this have? —Nightstallion 18:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

End of ongoing discrimination of Serbs and decline of Serb nationalism in favor of Milic's Socialism and Medojevic's Liberalism, but also deepening the rift. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:22, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

nods And in the long term? Is it likely that the "Serbs" will tend to identify as "Montenegrins" more now, or will the ratio of ethnicities stay as it is now? —Nightstallion 20:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

How would anyone feel as a national minority, after not being that for his/her entire life...and after factually not being that at all?

And in truth I think that in general being a member of a national minority isn't really a good feeling. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:54, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

So you think in the long run, the "Serbs" will feel as "Montenegrins"? —Nightstallion 20:55, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Well they all do feel like Montenegrins. In the same manner a lot of the *Montenegrins* that self-identify as such do not consider themselves a separate ethnic group from Serbs...I know, very hard to understand. :D --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

After WWI, most Austrians felt as "Austrians of German nationality", i.e. Austrians by citizenship but German by nationality; would you say the situations is similar in Montenegro right now, or different? —Nightstallion 21:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

A little different, there is a complete division on two halves - pro-sovereignist and pro-unionist ones, which could especially be seen at the independence referendum. Basically the most extremist members of the first block consider themselves a totally separate ethnicity and blame Serbia for serbianizing the Montenegrins, with nothing but the greatest hate of Serbia and the Serbs. The most extremist members of the other camp want nothing but Serbia's invasion of Montenegro and direct annexation, destroying all regionalism.

E.g. notice that several months ago the official language was actually symbolically renamed from "Serbian" to "Montenegrin". --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:17, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

nods And apart from deescalation in general, what do you think will happen as regards the feeling of ethnicity? More "Montenegrins" in the long run? —Nightstallion 21:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Affirmative, but on the long run nothing is unpredictable. No one could expect that in 1989 Momir Bulatovic, Milo Djukanovic and Svetozar Marovic would make 75% of Montenegrin citizens into outright Serbian nationalists if speech be given to me the freedom of overestimation. Or during the 1941-1944 Axis occupation, when hinting that you might have anything to do with the Serbs was punishable by death. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

nods Well, I hope neither of those events repeats itself... —Nightstallion 21:37, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually yes you reminded me, after the Fall of Yugoslavia the situation in Montenegro was completely identical to the one in Austria after WWI. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Interestingly, the situation in Austria only really changed with WWII -- after that, next to noone felt of "German ethnicity" any longer. I certainly hope Montenegro doesn't experience something similar... —Nightstallion 21:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

---

That reminds me of a banned movie made by the Euro-Liberals. It depicted a Montenegrin who came to Belgrade, disappointed after having fought in Dubrovnik in 1991 and 1992 and after purges became leader of SRS and used the crisis after Kosovo declaration of independence to get in power. In the move, the Radicals established a "national unity government" and the NATO withdrew from Kosovo, enabling Serbia to remilitarize it. Grave humanitarian catastrophes reported in Serbia, a war erupts in Macedonia and Serbia intervenes defending it from the Albanians and establishing a puppet regime in Skopje. Its forces enter Montenegro and annexation is confirmed on a national plebiscite. Serbia invades Bosnia and is welcomed in Banja Luka as a liberator, signing a treaty that there will be no more territorial expansions, annexing the Srbska. But only a year after that Serbia brakes it and quickly seizes the Federation, causing global sanctions. Immediately after that, it declares war on Croatia and an all hell breaks out across the entire Balkans, especially when they start making nuclear weapons when they start losing the war(s).

Ring a bell? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Who's the Montenegrin? ;) —Nightstallion 22:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

He's called Adam Hitric.

BTW, if you didn't know, Slobodan Milosevic was a Montenegrin. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The second answer was what I was looking for. ;) —Nightstallion 23:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Sanjak

Remember I wrote days ago that Boris Tadic is preparing the Restoration of Peace and Confidence program for Sanjak? Well, today is the 147th anniversary of the Islamic Community in Serbia, and both Islamic Communities of Sanjak calls for pacification and reunification.

However, on the actual political scene, it doesn't seem good. The Bosniac List for a European Sanjak terminated negotiations with Kostunica and finished them with Tadic, which led to outrageous reaction from the Sanjak Democratic Party. Originally, Rasim Ljajic stated that it is acceptable to him that both SDP and SDA S parties sit along in the government, but after the coalition treaties prepared, SDP stated that it will not only not participate in the government, but will also brake off from the coalition - together with its 4 MPs. This is another major blow, after those problems with LSV, and after today G17+ decided because of the cat & mouse games with SPS not to participate in the government, which means a loss of an abundance of good quality officials. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

sighs So that means that we would have a DS-SPS government only, with support from G17+ and LDP? Ouch. —Nightstallion 21:17, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Minority DS-SPS-SPO-SDA with G17+ and LDP support. Yep. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:20, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Better than nothing -- but what are the chances of that happening? Which way is SPS leaning right now? —Nightstallion 21:22, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Ivica Dacic stated that nationally and through relations, including so far negotiations, SPS is closer to SRS & DSS, but a Social-Left government is what they stand for and ideologically, they are closer to DS. It is also true that he himself personally isn't for a coalition with DS, yes (confirmed). Milutin Mrkonjic, their candidate for Prime Minister and most influential man in the party (recent presidential candidate) on the other hand seems to have some sympathies towards that. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:26, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

So it's in the balance now, and nothing's definite yet? A friend of mine stated that EuroNews reported today that there may be early elections in September -- what do you think? —Nightstallion 21:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I exclude all possibilities of again early elections. The Socialist Coalition stated with full determination that Serbia will have a government, no matter what - and whatever it may be. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

nods So for better or worse, there will be some kind of government. —Nightstallion 21:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)