User talk:Passportguy/Archive 4

Maltby Lake

Thanks for the quick switch man. I could not find out how to change the title. cheers, geochange —Preceding undated comment was added at 23:59, 16 February 2009 (UTC).

South Africa Passport

Switzerland needs to be removed from the Map as Switzerland joined the Schengen and South Africans have lost the privilege to Visa Free Access to Switzerland. Here's the source:

[[1]]Pryde 01 (talk) 06:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll update the image when I have time. Passportguy (talk) 12:59, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Zimbabwe dollar images problem

Hello, Several Zimbabwean banknote images have been marked as disputed (list) due to the FairUseBot not recognising the name change from Banknotes of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe to Banknotes of Zimbabwe or redirect pages. Can you help revise each image's fair-use rationale to point to the current name please? Thanks. --Marianian (talk) 18:01, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I've already done that. --Marianian (talk) 19:20, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Kosovo

Can I put Kosovo on the Romania EU Passport List? Because every other EU Passport has Kosovo listed on theres. Also there is no immigration control either. Here is the source: [[2]] Pryde 01 (talk) 04:49, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

There is a Kosovo immigration control and they do stamp your passports. Last time I checked they essentially let any national in for 3 months without a visa. However I heard that after independence, that they were planning on limiting that to nationals from countries that recognize Kosovo as a state. But as apparently they never followed through on that, you can add Kosovo to the RO passport page. Passportguy (talk) 11:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

No they never went through on that because the EU would strongly object to that, and because of the EU arranging Visa Reciprocal agreements around the world for its citizens they would not accept that and therefore the EU has made it that EU Citizens get Visa Free Access to much of the world as possible including the Western Balkans. Kosovo's proposal would infringe on EU law and therefore Kosovo repealed it.Pryde 01 (talk) 05:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Visa Free to EU

I often here a lot of people from the Western Balkans and EE like Ukraine, Russia and further Europeanized East that they need Visas to enter the EU even though they are at the heart of Europe. Why do they need Visas and some Third World Countries dont need Visas for the EU even though they are not European and often dont really have much in common with the EU e.g. Venezuela and its leader? Dont you think thats kind of wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pryde 01 (talk • contribs) 12:02, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Visa requirements are not only political. The main reason for having visa requirements in place for the Balkans and Eastern Europe is 1) Criminal activity by the local mafias (especially Balkans) 2) Illegal immigration and sex trade (especially Russia/Ukraine/Belarus).

However there are currently negotiations underway to abolish visa requirements for Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia and Bosnia, which are expected to be completed in time fo the expected accession of Croatia to the EU in 2011/12.

Cosidering the shape they're in, I don't expect visa requirements for Albania & Kosovo to be lifted any time soon. The requirements for Belarus won't be lifted until Lukashenko is gone, Russia/Ukraine/Moldova will probably not be lifted until Russia itself abolishes strict visa and registration requirements for Europeans. Passportguy (talk) 17:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I might add that having a visa is not a guarantee that one will be admitted into another country, nor is being exempt from a visa requirement to enter it a previous indication of good will and no hassle. All foreigners are still subject to the discretion of the immigration officer(s) on arrival, and citizens of those Third World countries Pryde01 mentioned are usually very thoroughly screened at European airports and boundaries, regardless of whether a visa is needed or not.

I know: I am a citizen of one of those countries myself - I am Brazilian. I still remember the hostility, the harsh questioning, the tension and the cold sweat for over half an hour at London-Heathrow Airport (no visa needed for Brazilians then or now), on a trip to Europe when I was younger. They let me in after all, but I barely made it.

Since that time, things have gotten only worse. Hardly a week goes without the newspapers here publishing another horror story of Brazilians not only refused entry at some European entry airport, but also badly harassed by authorities as nice as hungry dobermanns (lately, this has been happening more often in Spain, to the point of emptying planes in the São Paulo-Madrid route). A Russian or Serb with a proper visa will probably suffer much less than a visa-exempt Brazilian when visiting the EU.

--UrsoBR (talk) 13:49, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I was reading somewhere that Croatia may not join the EU until 2015 because of Slovenia keeps vetoing its accession chapters.Pryde 01 (talk) 21:26, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

They have an issue of territorial waters. But the way the EU works, if Slovenia is the only one against the accession, the pressure put on them will become so immense, that they will fold in the end. What is more likely to derail enlargement is the stalled Lisbon Treaty process. Passportguy (talk) 21:55, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Holland is another EU Member States thats going to block Croatia over the war crimes fugitive but has got nothing to do with the Slovenia (EU State) dispute with Croatia. [[3]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pryde 01 (talk • contribs) 12:32, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Saudi Arabian Passport

Dear Sir, Could you please remove Turkey from the map?

Visas for Turkey must be obtained prior to arrival. Visa required.

Thanks & Best regards. --Ozguroot (talk) 15:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

The abolition of the VOA facility will become effective on Nov 1, 2009. At that point I will change the map. Passportguy (talk) 16:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Switzerland

Since Switzerland has extended its agreement on free movement of EU Workers (Romania and Bulgaria). Can we add the unlimited access to Switzerland to the Romanian and Bulgarian EU Passports? The other EU Passports have that.

Here's the source stating the agreement of free movement of EU Workers: [4]

Here's the other source of the EU Passports saying unlimited access: [5]

No. Switzerland had a plebicite yesterday in which they approved introducing free movement. However Switzerland is not likely to introduce full free movement until they have to in 2016 (full implementation in 2019). Passportguy (talk) 12:36, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, but the point of the Referendum was to extend the free movement of workers and Switzerland has done just that, they approved it with a 59.6% majority. Romanians and Bulgarians as EU Citizens now get the right to free movement of workers but there is a 7 year transitional rules in place. But they now have the free movement of workers and the right to live there as well. Romanians and Bulgarians get the same rights as the EU25 as from yesterday despite having 7 years of transitional rules. I mean you could say the same for the EU10 since they have the free movement of workers their transitional rules dont expire until April 2011, so why do they have unlimited access on theirs?Pryde 01 (talk) 01:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC) When will the extension of free movement of people be activated? Shouldn't it take affect immediately?Pryde 01 (talk) 07:25, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

No. The old EU-15 already have freedom of movement and can move and work in Switzerland freely. I'm not sure about the EU-25, I'd have to check that. Romania & Bulgaria will get full freedom of movement in 2016 at the latest, with the possibility of a further extension to 2019. In theory Switzerland is free to introduce it earlier, but it is unlikely to do so. Passportguy (talk) 10:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

No the latest Romania and Bulgaria can have their full free movement of workers would be 2016. As it is the same for within the EU 7 years max. The EU25 will have their full free movement of workers by April 2011.202.78.146.121 (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Estonia

Philippines is added to the Estonian EU Passport as 21 days. There was no source on there at first, but I have provided the source stating differently. This is incorrect as Estonia needs a Visa to enter the Philippines: [6]Pryde 01 (talk) 02:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

--Rockroll321 (talk) 01:00, 14 February 2009 (UTC) Phillipines government website has not been updated for a while. Visas to enter Phillipines for Estonian citizens are not required since January 14, 2009. More info at Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (in Estonian language) [7], Timatic database [8] and Phillipine Embassy in Sweden where Phillipine Ambassador to Estonia resides. [9]. There it states that "Holders of Swedish, Finnish, Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian passports who are traveling to the Philippines for business and tourism purposes are allowed to enter the Philippines without visas for a stay not exceeding twenty-one (21) days, provided they hold valid tickets for their return journey to port of origin or next port of destination and their passports are valid for a period of at least six (6) months beyond the contemplated period of stay."

Transnistria

I think we can add Transnistria onto the EU Passports as Visa Free. Here's the source: [10]. Can we leave it on there instead of someone taking it off all the time? There is proof to show that to enter PMR there is not Visa required from anyone including EU PassportsPryde 01 (talk) 01:27, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Transnistria is a tough case. The officialy don't have visas, but many, many travellers report having to pay "visa fees" upon entry. Those might actually be bribes, but Transnistria does not seem to have an as clearly organized border & immigration system as some other unrecognized states such as e.g. Northern Cyprus or Nagorno-Karabakh. So I'd be a bit hesitant to add it - for a lack of a consistant, reliable policy more than anything else. Passportguy (talk) 05:31, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Lithuania

Please update Lithuania Visa-free and visa on arrival map LithuanianPassportVisaFree.PNG to reflect recent changes: Lithuania is now exempted from visa requirements to enter Philippines [11] [12], Brazil [13] [14], Republic of China (Taiwan) [15] [16] and Australia. Like all EU and/or Schengen countries, Lithuania is now included in the recently established Australian E-Visitor program [17] [18]. Thank you!

 Done Passportguy (talk) 02:20, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

USA WVP

Hi,

Where did you find the information that Poland is now part of the WVP? --Botev (talk) 17:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Oops. I thought Poland had joined on Jan 1 along with the others. I'll correct that. I should habve double-echked that. Any idea when Poland will join ? Passportguy (talk) 18:33, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

As you have probably seen, I already corrected that. :) I don't think there is any decision about Poland joining the WVP. Still to many Poles remain illigally in the US and to many visa applications of Poles are rejected. --Botev (talk) 20:46, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

United Kingdom

South Africans have also lost the right to travel to the UK without a Visa. [19]. Can the UK be removed off the South African passport section?

I wonder as South Africa gets worse how many more Visa Free Access will South Africa loose over the next years? Pryde 01 (talk) 01:13, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I expect Ireland to introduce a similar measure soon. The UK and Ireland are bringing their policies in line with the Schengen countries, which have long required visas for Bolivians & South Africans. Britain gave special treatment to South Africans because of historic ties and that countries membership in the Commonwealth, but is now moving away from that. Passportguy (talk) 15:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Why did someone add the UK and some of its dependancies on there when South Africans need Visas for the UK? [20]Pryde 01 (talk) 09:00, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

At the moment the UK is still visa free. Visa requirements will begin in March/May. At that point the entries should be deleted. 13:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Marc jimenez

Good catch on Marc jimenez being taken from Michael Jordan. However, the correct tag would be G3 vandalism, not A7, no importance. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Darshildo

Just a friendly note on Darshildo. I declined the speedy because it didn't meet the definition of patent nonsense, which is "Pages consisting purely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history. This does not include poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, vandalism, fictional material, material not in English, poorly translated material, implausible theories, or hoaxes; some of these, however, may be deleted as vandalism in blatant cases." Instead, I redirected to dildo because a quick gsearch indicates this is in fact the meaning of the word. HTH.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

EU Dependencies

Why were two EU Dependencies removed off the Romanian Passport section Gibraltar and Greenland when Romania as an EU State has Visa Free Access to these two? Source 1: Gibraltar [21] Source 2: Greenland [22]. Since EU Citizens dont need Visas for another EU Member State like Denmark the rules apply to the Danish Dependencies e.g. Greenland Pryde 01 (talk) 02:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Gibraltar was rightly removed, as it is included in the European Union mention at the top (it's the only European dependancy that is part of the EU). Greenland is located in North America and is included there. Passportguy (talk) 09:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean that Greenland is included there? You mean included in the EU?202.78.146.121 (talk) 03:16, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

No. Greenland isn't part of the EU. However Greenland is included in the "Americas" section, as it is located in North America (like Bermuda, St. Pierre-Miquelon etc.) Passportguy (talk) 08:26, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

French dependencies do require a visa for Brazilians

I noticed that you changed the picture on the Brazilian passport page to include several French territories as visa-free. Of course, being the largest one and a bordering territory, I noticed French Guiana first, then saw the others. While we Brazilians can visit the entire EU proper without a visa - which, of course, includes France proper - France does require a visa for us to visit its overseas territories. That is, we don't need a visa to go to Paris, Nice or Toulouse, but we do need one to go to Cayenne, Pointe-à-Pitre or Papeete.

French Guiana is the main (or sole) reason for that, because of illegal immigration and gold prospection (panning) by poor Brazilians from the northern state of Amapá (and to a lesser extent, Pará), who easily cross the barely patrolled Oiapoque River on the border, but France extends the requirement to all its overseas dependencies. Due to the French Guiana problem, this policy is unlikely to be changed in the foreseeable future. French President Nicolas Sarkozy recently made such an inflamed (read: insulting) speech about Brazilians in French Guiana when he visited Cayenne that the Brazilian government protested.

So, I corrected the map again, graying out French Guiana, Martinique, Guadeloupe, Réunion, Mayotte, New Caledonia and French Polynesia. St. Pierre & Miquelon were still gray and didn't need to be changed, and Wallis & Futuna are too small to be easily located with that map's resolution. Saint-Martin is a de facto (though not strictly legal) exception because if a Brazilian enters the island by Sint Maarten, as most tourists do (the Netherlands Antilles are visa-free), nobody will check if he or she goes to the French side.

Also, I removed Cape Verde from the article's main table and grayed it on the map, because a bell rang and I checked the Web site of their embassy in Brasília (in Portuguese). Cape Verde does require a visa for Brazilians, and the page has all the instructions (documents, consular fees, etc.). There are probably more countries with incorrect information, but I can't check all of them. The French visa requirement for overseas dependencies can be checked at this page (in Portuguese and French) on the Web site of the French embassy in Brasília. --UrsoBR (talk) 05:25, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Turkey

Done.

Thanks anyway.

--Ozguroot (talk) 14:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

IRAN 100 Rials

Hi, I am French-Iranian citizen and the 100 rials showed in the page IRANIAN RIAL is not the actual 100 Rials but the 100 rials shortly after the iranian revolution. But thanks you to allow Wikipédia to show Iranian Banknotes.Best Regards Pemies (talk) 20:19, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Zimbabwe 4th 20 dollars obverse.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Zimbabwe 4th 20 dollars obverse.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. BJBot (talk) 05:12, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Burkina Faso

I think we should leave it on as VOA but we should cite that is under certain condition maybe with another number and describe the meaning of the code at the bottom of the footnote.Pryde 01 (talk) 09:34, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I have changed it. That should resolve any uncertainties [23]Pryde 01 (talk) 21:53, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

EU Canada Free Trade Agreement

As part of the EU Canada Free Trade Agreement EU Citizens will have the free movement of workers in Canada and vice versa so when the EU Canada Agreement has been signed and implemented I think we will have to update the map if need be [24]Pryde 01 (talk) 13:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

If the treaty gets signed, we indeed will have to update the maps, according to whatever the treaty will allow exactly. Passportguy (talk) 09:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

EU/Moldova

This incident is to be believed as a temporary issue, the EU will eventually force Moldova to allow full Visa Free Reciprocal Access for all EU Citizens as part of the EU/Moldova Agreement for abolishing Visas for EU Citizens. We just have to wait for a while until we can put back Moldova on the EU Romanian Passport List. Inevitably the Visa Free Regime between the EU - Romania will be established again we dont know how long though?Pryde 01 (talk) 09:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I expect this to be sorted out again fairly soon, but it may take a couple of months. Passportguy (talk) 09:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Romanian Pas

The map is wrong about Iran. It does require Romanian citizens to apply for a visa. There may be several other countries with this requirement. The full list can be checked the Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs' website. "Pasaport Simplu" means "Personal Passport"; "Pasaport Diplomatic" means "Diplomatic Passport"; "Pasaport de Serviciu" means "Official/Work Passport". "Perioada de scurt sejur (zile)" means "Period of short stay (days)". As you can see, the entry for Iran requires Romanian holders of "personal passports" (the most common ones) and "official passports" to have a visa prior to arrival. The ones in BOLD have special notes in Romanian at the bottom of the page with regards to visa information. Sufitul (talk) 15:07, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Both [25] and [26] list Romanians amongst the naionals elligible of the VOA, and both sites are usually quite reliable. There were some changes to the Iranian VOA policy a few months agao, possibly the Romanian MFA website is not up to date. Passportguy (talk) 15:14, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

In fact both sites that you cite mention specifically that visas can only be given upon arrival to tourists traveling with designated tourism companies in organized groups if they have applied for visas a minimum of 24 hours before traveling, which is a different story altogether. Moreover, the online form is intended for electronic visa filing at least 72 hours before traveling and may still mean a denied visa or a request for interview. The Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs website is updated very regularly, the last update was on April the 10th, 2009. Also, according to the website of the Iranian embassy in Bucharest, Romanian nationals are required to apply for a visa prior to traveling to Iran. [27]. Sufitul (talk) 08:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't know where you get the info that the in-arrival is the same as the electronic visa. The sites certainly don't say it and indeed it is not true. While there is also the possibility of filing an application with the ministry of foreign affairs online to get a visa, the 2 week on-arrival visa is completely different and does not require any prior notification.

It is true that there is a possibility that you may be denied a visa on arrival. That is true for any country, indeed even for countries which do not require a visa at all. There is always a small chance that you may not be let into the country and sent back home, i.e. this has nothing to do with VOA status or not. Passportguy (talk) 10:23, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I suppose you haven't actually bothered to read carefully what was written on one of the sites that you cited.

To relax and ease up visa issuance process, interested companies and travel agents can refer to the passport and visa section of the ministry of foreign affairs minimum 24 hours before arrival of the tourist(s) to file their applications for visa issuance upon arrival.

To relax and ease up visa issuance process, interested companies and travel agents can refer to the passport and visa section of the ministry of foreign affairs minimum 24 hours before arrival of the tourist(s) to file their applications for visa issuance upon arrival.

— http://iranianvisa.com/uponarr.htm

I have e-mailed the office for consular affairs of the Iranian Embassy in Bucharest about visa issuance, you'll get a full e-mail that you should be able to use beyond reasonable doubt, much like a US court. Yes, I am certain that that is your agenda, an unquenchable thirst for verifiability of the encyclopedic data collected from online sources that are not verifiable in their own right. Either way, I'll get the reply from the consul to you ASAP. If that does not satisfy you but instead you are satisfied by tourism agencies and airlines that are strictly forbidden to operate in those areas then I am afraid that we need to write back to the ambassador and tell him that he is wrong! Sufitul (talk) 09:44, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I think you should be very careful when you accuse other editor of not being diligent, especially when you are not an expert on the subject yourself !

To end this discussion : I have personally been to Iran and have gotten a visa-on-arrival. I have also talked to many other people that have gotten it : no paperwork required, no advance notice required either !

What the website is refering to is a service by which they guide you through the visa application process at the airport, i.e. do translations for you and fill out forms. It is not necessary, but useful if you haven't travelled much and feel insecure. Obviously that service needs advance notice, as the travel agency needs to send someone to the airport to meet you. But as I have stated, if you feel up to it you can fill out the forms yourself without too much of a problem, so it is not mandatory to book the meet-and-greet services of a travel agency to get you through. Passportguy (talk) 09:51, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Btw : since you seem to be so much in need of official sources : of the IR of Iran in Stockholm.

And, before you write back again : " In order to expedite the visa procedure involved at the said airports, travel offices and agencies may [not must !!!] contact the Visa Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 24 hours prior to arrival in order to enable the authorization concerned to be communicated to the branch office of that airport. Passportguy (talk) 10:07, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

CSD tagging

Hey, nice work so far! I've noticed you've edit conflicted me several times ;D However, the reason I'm here is because when you tag something, you have to do a series of processes: add it to CAT:CSD, and warn the user. For this reason, you might want to install Twinke; it does all that for you. Happy editing! Cheers. I'^mperator 12:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:G1

Hello! I have noticed your CSD tagging on Special:RecentChanges. Firstly, thanks for taking the time to do New Page Patrol, it is an area where there is always a need for more editors chipping away at the backlog. I have noticed, however, that you have tagged one or two articles using the G1 criteria. G1 only applies to pages that consist of patent nonsense, consisting purely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history... it does not serve as the all-purpose criteria. Have a read of Wikipedia:WIHSD#G1 and Wikipedia:Field_guide_to_proper_speedy_deletion#1._Patent_nonsense - these two essays can provide valuable information on how to apply each criterion while tagging. Since CSD is an area that involves many newer users, it is important we tag accurately. Thanks again for your help in this area; I don't want to appear mean, but it is important we get these things right. Cheers! ∗ \ / (⁂) 13:47, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I only tag articles with G1 if the content is meaningless. And in my opinion the two articles you listed above, certainly the first one was complete and untter nonsense. Passportguy (talk) 13:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

G1 only applies to "Pages consisting purely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history." It specifically does not include "poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, vandalism, fictional material, material not in English, poorly translated material, implausible theories, or hoaxes." The two articles indeed needed to be deleted, but the reasons for which you tagged were incorrect. I cannot see deleted articles, but as I recall, the first one could've been tagged as A7, and the second as G3. ∗ \ / (⁂) 13:54, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I can't see the artciles anymore either, but as I recall the were along these lines of "The milky man is a great big fat disease that exists everywhere". Which I would clearly classify as nonsense. Passportguy (talk) 13:56, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but it is not incoherent text or gibberish. I can fully understand what the article is trying to say, even if it is clear that it is rubbish. Hence, it shouldn't be deleted as G1, rather, G3 would've been more appropriate. (blatant and obvious misinformation) ∗ \ / (⁂) 14:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Not gibberish, but certainly incoherent. Passportguy (talk) 14:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I would disagree. The article had much more substantive content and was readily understandable. I'm more concerned about the first article however, as it described a club or group. ∗ \ / (⁂) 14:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I can't really remember the first one that well anymore, so I can't really comment. Passportguy (talk) 14:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Russia, Hong Kong

Russia and Hong Kong canceled visa requirements for nationals of both countries, the Russian foreign ministry said late Friday. 65.95.1.2 (talk) 01:23, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes they have signed an agreement, which will likely come into force in mid 2009. When it does, I will add them to the respecitiver passport pages as visa-free travel destinations. Passportguy (talk) 09:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Nora alsvik

Hi, hope you don't mind but I've changed the speedy of Nora alsvik to a needs translation tag. ϢereSpielChequers 12:34, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I've restored the tag, as it is (from the limited Norwegian I can understand) an attack page. Passportguy (talk) 12:37, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Zewdy

Thanks much for all your tagging work. I just wanted to let you know that I'm not saying you put the wrong tag on when I deleted this article as db-spam rather than A7; it began "Biography Combine passion, attitude and a bolster of pure talent and you get R&B /Pop Princess, Zewdy. The young talent flooded YouTube with over 100 cover songs..." It also didn't assert significance, so your A7 tag was probably right, but I know so little about singers and bands that I'm not willing to make a judgment on them, so I used db-spam. (Watchlisting) - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 17:04, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Regarding #WP:G1 (3 sections above this), I've asked related questions at WT:CSD recently, and consensus seems to be to tag these articles as G3/vandalism rather than G1/nonsense. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 17:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Moving forward

That's nice of you not to submit an AFD for it right away. I am going to do a compromise move. I am going to redirect it to neologism. Then the page history will still be there with the links so that if someone wants to expand it, they can. Now, isn't this cooperation, not fighting (edit warring)! User F203 (talk) 17:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

delete?

What do you think of deleting this piece of fluff and ad? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Boxer_Wachler User F203 (talk) 18:00, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Kent Martin

Hello Passportguy. I'm not creator of that article. Can you remove that message from my talk page, please?--Vejvančický (talk) 10:33, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Sure. I'm not quite sure how it got there in the first place. Btw : It was not a vandalism warning, so yoiu could have removed it yourself. Passportguy (talk) 18:42, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Continuous Repayment Mortgage

Hi Passport Guy

You guys are watching like hawks! Reason I initially wrote, then blanked above mentioned article was because the key reference page link wasn't working. I think I have fixed that now. Granted there may be other reasons for deleting the article but at least not because the original author blanked it! Neil Parker (talk)

I have removed the delete tag again. However if you blank an article on here, it is usually taken as a sign that the article shozuld be deleted and thus will be tagged as such. Passportguy (talk) 10:48, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Attack pages

When you tag a page as an attack page, it is common courtesy to blank the page as well. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 11:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes. But for really silly pages I don't always think it's worth the effort, as most of these pages just exist for a matter of minutes with next to no-one seeing them before they get deleted. Passportguy (talk) 11:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

MY ZACH BERGER PAGE

Yo... if I fix up my page and organize it and put in sources and put more about his music can it stay? He is mad good man... don't delete it. NO DELETING BRO!

Unfortunately, he has to become notable, before he can have his own wikipedia page. Passportguy (talk) 16:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)