User talk:Godefroy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
.
Contents |
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Blason Lyon.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Blason Lyon.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 15:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ok
First of all ...THIS: Olivier, User:R9tgokunks is on the rampage again. This time the target is the Strasbourg article where he made changes according to his very revisionist vision of history (according to him Strasbourg was not annexed by Germany in 1871, it was "ceded", and it wasn't restored to France in 1919, it was "annexed"). The attitude of this user is really annoying. He seems very displeased by the fact that Alsace is French, and he brings his POV in many Alsace related articles. He does the same in articles of Polish cities formerly German by the way. Can you have a look at the Strasbourg article? Thanks. Godefroy 13:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC) IS pretty much REALLY offensive to me and id like to thank you for being such a jackass behind my back to me, i should go around saying you are on the rampage and accuse you of editing articles that you havent edited in the past 2 weeks. Second... I was actually TRYING TO MAKE IT NPOV ...by the way ALSACE WAS INDEPENDANT UNTIL THE ARROGANCE OF FRANCE KICKED IN....and third ....Revisionist history???? -- Hrödberäht 05:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] World War II
As the infobox controversy is currently being hashed out in an RFC, why don't you contribute to the discussion as opposed to unilaterally changing the box? I won't revert your inclusion of France (though I strenously disagree) for the time being, but I can't say the same for other editors. If you'd like to reply to this message, you can do so here, and I'll see it. Thanks. Parsecboy 15:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Parsecboy, unilaterlly changing the box while its status is under debate is in pretty poor taste. Couldn't that edit have waited until some sort of consensus from the RFC was reached? Demerphq 15:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- I have left a comment on Talk:World War II. Godefroy 15:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
With utmost respect, your comment is irrelevant when attempting to justify your edit. Given the RfC status of the infobox, you shouldn't have changed the list. I would ask you to please refrain from doing so in the future until the conclusion of the RfC, but do continue to contribute to the debate. Thank you. — Dorvaq (talk) 16:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Dorvaq, lay off. You sound very angry. It was one edit. He was just trying to improve the article. Haber 18:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] at
Hi, Godefroy. I might not need to open up a grammar book as your edit comment on the 'France' talk page suggests. The more normal way would undoubtedly be 'Location of France on the European continent'. Nevertheless, it is also possible to state "Location of (something) at (place)", which is more general: Besides commonplace phrases like 'at home', "It is located at Bordeaux" may be in Bordeaux or allow for a margin near Bordeaux proper.
A continent is some solid ground one may walk 'on', but it is also a location, a geographical reference; 'the European continent' can be seen as a synonym for the placename 'Europe' (for which we would commonly say 'in Europe') or as the actual continental mainland, and here also we could say 'at Europe' if it need not be actually part of it.
I made the mistake of assuming Corsica, which is orange on the map, not to belong to Metropolitan France (and while editing I hadn't spotted the world map underneath either). But one might argue whether one should say that Corsica, hence 'Metropolitan France', is located 'on' the European continent. Just underneath 'European Union' it would be too ambiguous to simply use the term 'Europe' (which would allow the correct preposition 'in'). Especially since many users are a little allergic for EU matters, it is important to demonstrate the map not to locate a country just in the EU; such would clearly be too POV-pushing. Giving a geographical reference towards a continent as a generally known division of the world, while additionally showing a member-state's position in the EU is merely additional and relevant information. As there are several other places for which the map text would require another preposition, I still think the (admittedly a little peculiar) 'Location of ... at the European continent' is proper. But if no complaints about Corsica would arrive, the 'on' might as well stay in.
Perhaps one might say: on means 'above and touching', near means 'to the side or above or under, but not touching', at generally means 'to the side and possibly touching'. If one needs to express 'it is near, perhaps to the side but possibly on top, but it might be touching', then too at appears correct. — SomeHuman 26 Feb 2007 22:30-22:44 (UTC)
[edit] La Réunion
Hi, sorry to contradict, but the article La is part of the name La Réunion and can't be taken off in french. Of course you may find maps with Réunion only, and even on the region flag Région Réunion, but you can also find maps in german with Schweiz even if the name is die Schweiz. I'm trying to find out some written evidences but I am sure of what I say. In fact, in typography, you should even always shift the L of La Réunion but it is not really respected all the time.Channer 19:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- I checked on www.legifrance.gouv.fr, and it appears you're correct, but this full form with capital L is rarely used. I made changes accordingly in the article. Godefroy 20:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] St.-Martin/St.-Barth: En source?
In your edits, you state that both St.-Martin and St.-Barth got COM status on 27 Feb. Do you have a source in english for this date? If so, I have new maps ready to upload. - Thanks, Hoshie 06:51, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- In fact, they got it on 22 February 2007, confer http://www.newmedia-fr.info/ixm_ixpnews.php?file=article&story_id=21579. —Nightstallion (?) 12:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Overseasfrancemap.png in France article
Hi Godefroy,
- (The infobox is about the French Republic, not just Metropolitan France. Overseas France is an integral part of the French Republic.)
Just to let you know I've re-commented-out Overseasfrancemap.png in the infobox and also from the article's Geography section, as it is in need of some repair. I'd also hope a higher quality version might be available e.g. from the Commons. If you're able to repair and re-upload it, great; better still, though, would be a higher quality map. Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 05:51, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
...The map is now repaired and reinserted. David (talk) 19:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Flag
Hey man, thanks. └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 17:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:DeGaulle.jpg
I see that you have re-uploaded Image:DeGaulle.jpg after it was deleted according to our procedures. Please refrains from re-uploading it again. Thank you. Rama 00:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Louis, Dauphin of France (1729-1765)
Thank you! Noel S McFerran 01:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
