Hi, Gryffindor. Actually, Barnstars are very informal. Anyone can give them, anyone can get them. You just have to select the appropriate award on this page and post it on the talk page of the person you want to give it to. We actually have a template to make it easier for those who want to give Barnstars. When giving them, just write {{award|image=write here the name of the PAGE where the award's image is located|text=write here the message you want to accompany the award you are giving}}. Generally, we try to stick to the award's described scope, but there have been cases of people awarding Barnstars off their given topic — notice, however, that some awards have a very wide, inclusive scope, so really there are no clear boundaries for their scope; other Barsntars have a more defined area to which they "apply". There's really just two limitations: 1)If a user tags his/her talk page as a "Barnstar-free zone", this means that the user in question does not wish to receive any Barnstar, so we must respect that person's wishes; 2)We don't award Barnstars to anon contributors, not because they don't deserve it, but rather for a practical reason: we'd have to post the Barnstar in the IP address talk page, and since those are often shared by several, or even many users, it becomes very difficult to determine who's really getting the Barnstar. Also, when you award a Barnstar, we usually keep track of givers and recipients through a list kept in the award's image page, and the giver of the award is usually the one who adds the name of the recipient to that list.
If you have an idea for a Barnstar that doesn't exist currently, you can propose its creation here. Again, anyone can propose a new Barnstar; the people who contribute regularly in this particular forum (I'm one of them) will give you feedback on your idea, maybe make suggestions to improve it, etc. Well, I think I've covered all the bases. If you need any other explanations, I'm at your disposal. Regards, Redux 02:48, 6 August 2005 (UTC) reply

I see you joined the Vienna project! Welcome to Wikipedia. If you have any question about how to use the templates or anything else, feel free to ask. The Vienna project is surely moving ahead, and it's been a great effort between Austrians, various students of the German language, and others in love with the city... Best, Tfine80 19:54, 7 August 2005 (UTC) reply

PS -- I didn't notice your talk archive, so I assumed you were completely new... Excuse me, but glad to have initiated your acquaintance anyway... :) Tfine80 19:57, 7 August 2005 (UTC) reply

I've proposed a possible solution to end the style wars. you opinions are most welcome. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (biographies)/Style War proposed solution. FearÉIREANN \ ^(caint) 03:43, 11 August 2005 (UTC) reply

Hi, I was on holiday and didn't see your message earlier. Sorry.

No, I dont have any other images from Howards End. Sorry again.

Thanks for trying to answer my quiz. Well done, but let me just give you a few more hints: Look at Teddy Kollek, Atom Heart Mother, Klopotec, and The Missionary Position (as opposed to the lower case " missionary position")! All the best, <K F> 20:39, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Gryff, thanks for your email. I've added some detail to some Japanese name disambiguation pages, but yes, there are many that could use more information. If you're interested in Japanese names and characters, a good resource is Jim Breen's WWWJDIC. You can lookup names (in enamdict) and kanji characters for their meanings. Unfortunately, the name lookup does not provide popularity ranking data. Cheers. -- ChrisRuvolo ( t) 23:35, 16 August 2005 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your response ChrisRuvolo, I took a look "WWWJDIC".. chō muzukashi :-) demo domou, it's a good resource. What happened with the List of Japanese given names? I thought I saw one once, or was that a category? Gryffindor 17:24, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

No problem. That article has been transwikied to Wiktionary. For the category, see: Category:Japanese given names. Not all of the given names have been moved into this category from Category:Japanese names yet. -- ChrisRuvolo ( t) 19:08, 29 August 2005 (UTC) reply

Hello, I don't know if you have the Elisabeth_of_Bavaria article on your watchlist, but someone recently made an entry there that, whilst it has some valid points that maybe could be integrated into the article, basically rewrites the article (i.e. gives biographical details that are already included at the top). It also has non-standardised spelling and improper source citing. Some more minor things are referring to the Wittelsbacher line as 'eccentric' (which, true or not, probably belongs in the Wittelsbacher article), Elisabeth being 'sexually frigid', and her being 'virtually raped on her wedding-night'. I'm pretty new at wiki, and I have no idea how to fix this. Should it be reverted, or integrated into the article? Certainly, some parts are valid for someone who might be interested in them, but I think they need to be rewritten (the assassination part includes a possible earlier attempt which should probably be included, but the bit about Jane Addams confuses me). Any ideas? I can help or even do it, I just need a little direction as I am unexperienced with these things. Thanks! ( Maaya 00:17, 23 August 2005 (UTC)) reply

Danke für Ihren Weisungen. Ich habe den Text kopiert und auf den Diskussion page eingefügt. ( Maaya 13:33, 23 August 2005 (UTC)) reply

Hello Gryffindor. I noticed that you moved Emperor Nijo to Emperor Nijo of Japan. The consensus that we reached was to leave the "of Japan" off the titles. And in fact, an administrator and I have already moved the first 49 emperors to the proper titles. We will be moving the rest hopefully in the next couple of days. Thanks. - Jefu 23:09, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

I got your message. Sorry it wasn't clearer. It's such a long discussion it's hard to know exactly what was said...But at the bottom of the page there are several references regarding naming the emperors just "Emperor X" and several people specifically mention the desire to remove the "of Japan" with only one person, PBS, mildly against the idea. - Jefu 23:58, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Gryffindor. I don't have a registered e-mail account right now, but this is best out in the open: the answer is only one, start a RfC on the user. You'll be required to inform him of this, so that he can defend himself. When everything else failed and the problem persists, Conflict Resolution is the only possible answer. Mind the requested format, present evidence (links, diffs) of your claims. If others are also annoyed by this, let them know, so that they can participate their views. Many Admins monitor RfCs, so you'll be calling qualified, neutral attention to the problem, and appropriate measures will be taken to solve it. Regards, Redux 04:05, 26 August 2005 (UTC) reply

I'd say yes. You could even get the help of some of the users who are being regularly harassed in constructing the RfC. Regards, Redux 11:52, 26 August 2005 (UTC) reply

Hello there. I noticed your vote on Talk:Duff Cooper, 1st Viscount Norwich, and I was hoping you could further explain it. The policy on naming conventions specifically allows for the exception I and others are proposing:

EXCEPTIONS: When individuals received hereditary peerages after retiring from the post of Prime Minister (unless they are better known for their later career under an additional/alternative title), or for any other reason are known exclusively by their personal names, do not include the peerage dignity. Examples: Anthony Eden (not "Anthony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon"), Bertrand Russell (not "Bertrand Russell, 3rd Earl Russell") (but Henry Addington, 1st Viscount Sidmouth not "Henry Addington"). [1]

Given that Duff Cooper is exclusively referred to without his peerage, it seems to me and others that this exception applies. Best, Mackensen (talk) 15:53, 26 August 2005 (UTC) reply

I'm afraid that the matter is somewhat complicated; I'll do my best to explain the situation. It's policy to note hereditary peerages at least in the beginning of the article, if not in the article title itself. However, not all hereditary peers (or life peers like Thatcher) were known by their peerages. A prime example of this was Bertrand Russell. Still others became peers very late in life and were always known by their previous name (before becoming a peer). Many of us feel that Duff Cooper is a good example of this happening; another is Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh, who became the Marquess of Londonderry about a year before his suicide. No one refers to him as Lord Londonderry. The purpose of the policy is to strike a balance between factual/historical accuracy and common usage. This is usually only an issue with men and women born in the last hundred years or so. Mackensen (talk) 00:31, 27 August 2005 (UTC) reply

Do you still disagree with the current naming of Hawaiian monarchs? I noticed you readded the move templates to Liliuokalani and Lunalilo. We're discussing the issue right now and I'm rather curious as to why you object to these article locations. If you want, you're welcome to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hawaii/Manual of Style#Names of monarchs. 青い(Aoi) 18:07, 27 August 2005 (UTC) reply

You haven't explained why you favor options 2, 3, and 4 and oppose option 1. Please do so at the location above. 青い(Aoi) 18:37, 28 August 2005 (UTC) reply

My comment on the Manual of Style talk page does not constitute a personal attack. I'm just saying that your thinking is flawed, e.g. wrong. You stated that using options 2, 3, or 4 would make Hawaii articles similar to other monarchs listed in Wikipedia when in reality this isn't true. There are no monarchs that I know of which use the titles, "King" or "Queen" in article titles involving regnant monarchs. By using options 2 and 3, you are degrading Liliuokalani, for example, to the status of a Queen consort. This is even more disrespectful than simply calling her "Liliuokalani," which leaves me surprised since you keep using "respect" as a reason for proposing to move these articles around.

Either way, you have still not yet indicated why you favor options 2, 3, and 4 and why you refuse to accept an option that seven other users prefer. Please explain on the manual of style talk page because you are the user who refuses to let this issue go to rest. If your reasons are compelling, we will be more than willing to compromise or even bow out. 青い(Aoi) 04:31, 29 August 2005 (UTC) reply

Welcome to Wikiproject Indian cities. Our goal is to improve all Indian cities and towns. If you need any assistance, feel free to message me. =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:46, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for messaging me. We Indian wikipedians lack long term contributors. There's just a handful of us. Let me know your plans when you get the time. =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:58, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

I did a Google search and the results are identical with or without capitalisation - You'd expect that, because Google isn't case-sensitive. I made a best guess based on existing spellings on Wikipedia and a skim of major web accounts (even official Australian accounts aren't consistent on "v" vs "V") - plus you never know what people do with name spellings once they're outside the country of origin. But if you think it's majorly wrong, I won't contest a revert of title. Tearlach 18:19, 28 August 2005 (UTC) reply

Hi. I've been off-line for a few days and only just saw your message. Are you happy with the present location of the article? There doesn't seem to have been any discussion, either before or after the move. Deb 18:54, 30 August 2005 (UTC) reply

There was no discussion on each emperor's page specifically; rather, the topic was considered en masse at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles). Noel (talk) 20:10, 30 August 2005 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the explanation, and I have no concerns now. Noel (talk) 13:53, 2 September 2005 (UTC) reply

Hi Gryffindor. About the first question: I'm afraid that any copyrighted image you doctor would still be copyrighted, and thus not usable on Wikipedia, unless if covered by Fair Use or with permission of the copyrights holder. The product of your editing the image would still have the same status as the original. If, despite that, you believe it can be used, you'd have to quote the permission on the image page (if used with permission) or tag it as a Fair use image (use the tag: {{fair use}}). Otherwise, the image will just wound up being deleted. About the second question: First, copyrights from 1955 still stand, but notice that if the copyrights would belong to the U.S. government (as you mentioned the Library of Congress), the image is on public domain, since the US government cannot hold copyrights — in this case, use the tag {{PD}}. In any case, if you have reason to believe that the image is on public domain, explain why on the image's page, and tag it as PD with the tag I mentioned above. Does that answer everything? Regards, Redux 23:24, 3 September 2005 (UTC) reply

Just why does that article qualify as a member of Christian interfaith and secular relations? Surely there will be hundreds of Christian converts to Islam with bios on Wikipedia, and I can't believe that you're listing all of them in that category. I felt I should ask you why you added the category before I just deleted it. Zora 04:56, 13 September 2005 (UTC) reply

Muslim women would be a much better category, as Maria is said to have converted before she was even "delivered" to Muhammad. Of course, by law that would have meant she was no longer a slave, but the early accounts take no notice of such quibbling inconsistencies as that. I will make the change. Zora 23:19, 13 September 2005 (UTC) reply

Maria is said to have been a Copt, an Egyptian Monophysite Christian, but according to Al-Tabari she converted to Islam. Since we know absolutely nothing about her life prior to the time she was given as a gift to Muhammad, it would be completely inappropriate to emphasize her "Coptishness". She enters history as a Muslim. Zora 23:33, 13 September 2005 (UTC) reply

If you want to start a category, "Copts in history" or some such, I suppose you could add Maria to it. But would Copts agree that she belongs on the list? From what I know about Copt-Muslim relations in Egypt, they're not friendly right now. Copts might see her as a traitor. That said, I'll leave it to the Copts to protest. Zora 00:33, 14 September 2005 (UTC) reply

I think "Ministers-President" is correct, like "Attorneys-General." The person is a minister who presides over cabinet meetings, not a president who is a minister. That is to say - president here functions, I think, as an adjective, and not as a noun. But I'm not completely certain of this. Here, however, is the OED definition of president as an adjective: That presides or occupies the chief place; presiding, superintending. (Sometimes hyphened, as if attrib. use of prec.) This usage is noted as now being rare, but I think it is still the usage which is meant in the term "minister-president". There are 12000 hits on google for "ministers-president" (when one excludes wikipedia hits), and only 874 for "minister-presidents." On the other hand, "Minister-presidents" seems to be commonly used on official German government sites. But I think that this is because "Minister-presidents" corresponds more closely to the German. In English, I think it should probably be "Ministers-President." But I'm not 100% sure of that. john k 22:57, 13 September 2005 (UTC) reply

I'm relatively unconcerned about which we use - it seems as though both are used fairly commonly, and I can't find anything which would tell me what the correct title is. It is, after all, a translation of a title mostly used in German- and related languages-speaking countries, and in those languages they pluralize president (or seem to). So whatever you want to do seems okay with me, at least until we can be more clear on it. john k 23:18, 13 September 2005 (UTC) reply

Just saw this by accident, some further ideas in this respect:

• Webster's (printed international edition 1981) accepts both ministers-president and minister-presidents. The dictionary entry further only refers to the German ones.
• In Dutch (that is at least for the Flemish ones, and for those of the Netherlands), both "minister" and "president" are plural. The official organisation that goes over correct spelling in Dutch everywhere it is spoken, had a separate advise on this, remarking that "minister" and "president" are usually experienced equally important in this context, but goes on that depending on circumstance and importance each of the composants of the word, "ministers-president" or "minister-presidenten" might be acceptable. reference on the "Taalunie" website - note however that in English "ministers-presidents" appears not to exist, although that's difficult to filter out by google-search.
• The European Union apparently rather uses Minister-Presidents for all those that are "minister-president" in the EU, for example this webpage in English announcing a meeting of such minister-presidents on the "Council of Europe" website (which is one of the official EU websites) has this form of the plural several times on the page: http://www.coe.int/T/E/Clrae/_6._Colloquies,_seminars,_Forums/16_edimburg_5_REGLEG.asp

-- Francis Schonken 13:35, 22 September 2005 (UTC) reply

Hello Gryffindor, the Charter for Esperanza is up. Take a looksie :) R e dwolf24 ( talk) 02:38, 19 September 2005 (UTC) reply

Hello again, I have (unilatterly) taken away the 'assembly' idea, as per my reasons at that edit summary and per Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Charter. I have left the admin general, as some leadership is good. Now, all you have to do is be a member to establish consensus, the whole assembly idea is gone. Also, I have added an advisory committee, of four members, with limited power besides watching over the admin general and making sure he doesn't do anything stupid. Please look at the ammended charter, and I would love a comment. R e dwolf24 ( talk) 00:12, 21 September 2005 (UTC) reply

Hello Gryffindor. As you may or may not know, there have been some troubles with Esperanza. So now, as a last ditch to save the community, please vote at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Reform on all neccisary polls. P.S. I'm very sorry for spamming you all with these messages, and this will be the last time. I recommend putting ESP on your watchlist. Cheers and please look at that, let's stop the civil war then. R e dwolf24 ( talk) 02:45, 22 September 2005 (UTC) reply

The word Summer must be kept because that's how the buiding is called. There was also a winter palace (either in Bratislava or Trnava, I have no time to check it). Secondly, the building could be called Archbishop's Summer Palace in Slovak, as well, but it is not, therefore actually I do not feel that any change is necessary. On the other hand, if you really feel that Summer Archbishop's Palace sounds like [Summer Archbishop]'s Palace, then you are free to change it (however you should check English origin web pages to see whether the Archbishop's Summer Palace combination exists at all - note that this is an official NAME and you should be able to find at least some occurrencies, ie. sources, in such cases). Juro 14:15, 23 September 2005 (UTC) reply

Hi Gryffinder,

I'm wrinting to you too thank you for helping me too, like your friend the user Journalist, because I left a message to redwolf, but he was quite busy to anwser, us you also say in your message so I'm thanking you for all the help. Again, sorry for my inglish. Well I still have some problems to put a good photo in that article about Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg, sorry for this, but I'm a great fan of her, if you could help me about just that I would be greatful to you. Well thank's again for everything

Goncalves67 18:11, 23 September 2005 (UTC) reply

P.S. And if the photos are from a magazine that I have, or mine?, How can I use them? Sorry again......

I was indeed a founding member; worry not, I've rejoined the association. I withdrew in the midst of the controversey over JCarriker & Redwolf24. Now that things have settled down, I'm back. -- Essjay · Talk 23:07, 24 September 2005 (UTC) reply

Hello, Gryffindor! Thanks for your support of my mediation committee nomination; I'm pleased to announce that I'm now an official mediator. Thanks once again. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W _S 20:36, 27 September 2005 (UTC) reply

Sorry, I don't have any other images of them. I don't really work on the Star Trek pages much anymore since I got sick of the stupid arguments I used to get into with other Wiki editors, so I been doing other subjects. Cyberia23 22:45, 30 September 2005 (UTC) reply

Ah, my first ever spam mass produced and mailed to the spamlist. Well first of all let me re-state that we have an irc channel, #wp-esperanza, and its been rather empty, so I'd appreciate it if you come, even if you just idle about. Now, the evil polls have closed, and I left a justification note for running the evil polls. Nothing has really changed, but at least I have somewhat of a consensus. I hope to figure out a way to overturn my power to JCarriker somehow, I'll figure out a way :-) Meanwhile, I've been busy reforming the mediation system where I am the chairman now, er, acting chairman. Enjoy your spam, with extra vikings. R e dwolf24 ( talk) 00:37, 1 October 2005 (UTC) reply

Hello spam list, look at this. Essjay is the new leader of Esperanza, and I'm interested in seeing how he runs it. I'm busy doing other work... Please comment at that talk page there. I will still probably run the spamlist though. R e dwolf24 ( talk) 22:58, 2 October 2005 (UTC) reply

Our new admin general, Essjay, has set the date for the advisory committee elections, that date being October 7th. By UTC it is October 5th right now. So see WP:ESP/E for voting in two days, and add yourself to the list if you're interested in running. On a personal note, I'm considering running, as I only resigned as admin general because of time. I'm sure I could help out on the advisory committee... Anywho, watchlist that page, and be sure to read the voting method too. Regards, R e dwolf24 ( talk) 01:08, 5 October 2005 (UTC) reply