User:ILBobby/Archive 1

This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page.

Hello, ILBobby/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- Francs2000 | Talk 01:31, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Yo!

Why are so bothered about the pages i look at on wikipedia? If you must know i have an interest on the recognition of Kosovo, so i tend to look at it bit. Is that ok with you? Ijanderson977 (talk) 19:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. Sorry if i seemed aggressive Ijanderson977 (talk) 19:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeh there is a few pro Serbia/ anti Kosovo users who trying to shorten the recognised list and using the silliest reasons to justify their actions, just so they can make Kosovo seem to have less support than it does because they are anti-kosovo Ijanderson977 (talk) 19:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

HaHaHa! I have emailed the MOFA in Malaysia instead asking them if they have recognised Kosovo or not. No response as of yet. But if they do email me back and say they do recognise Kosovo i can't really prove it to Avala still. Ijanderson977 (talk) 20:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll try doing that then. Ijanderson977 (talk) 20:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Edits to Foreign relations of Western Sahara

===>Sources Do you have any sources for your series of edits to this article? Justin (koavf) 13:42, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

===>Follow-up from my Talk Yes, it is scarce. Thanks for the info. Justin (koavf) 16:41, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Re:

No, it means that they will establish diplomatic relations with Turkey on July 3. I've already put this on the article already. -- Crna Gora 16:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Affirmative, it means that on 3 July 2006, the Kingdom of Spain shall recognize Montenegro as an independant country - and the Republic of Turkey will open speeches for establishing diplomatic relations... --HolyRomanEmperor 10:25, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Holy See - Montenegro

Thanks for your comment. One thing I forgot to add: While the Holy See site (still) has Yugoslavia on it, i'm a bit unsure if they are refering to communist Yugoslavia or the Yugoslavia that was replaced by the State Union in 2003. In saying this, I suspect the latter since the FR of Yugoslavia was shunned from 1992 until Milosevic's downfall in 2000. - Thanks, Hoshie | 21:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Embassy Openings

Thanks for the note. I also found a press release on the Austrian MFA website stating the same thing. Sir Tanx 11:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Bobby. You just go ahead and change it. The Austrian press release can be found here: http://www.bmaa.gv.at/view.php3?f_id=11305&LNG=de&version= - and meanwhile I'll try and see if I can find a Hungarian one as well. Best regards Sir Tanx 08:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Howdy Just saying "hi." It's been a little while. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 21:10, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Taiwanese missions

Thanks for your contribution. I don't know if people are going to raise any problem about the name (I would have simply called it Taiwanese diplomatic missions), but it is hardly worth the fuss.

French Embassy in Montenegro

Hey Bobby,

I did some checking around and called the French embassy in CPH - they confirmed the existence of diplomatic relations, but could'nt give me a date - oddly enough. I did see the link to the Montenegro MFA-list, but I must admit I'm not too confident in the list's accuracy - Take a look at the embassy of Guinea-Bissau accredited from Sarajevo, and then take a look at http://www.baz.ch/reusable/druckversion.cfm?objectID=8C3734C2-A18F-4A43-976D62A848F37560. A press release is in my book a bit more trustworthy, but no doubt the French have most likely upgraded to an embassy.

To some extent you're correct in stating that the presence of a diplomatic mission presupposes the presence of diplomatic relations. However, in this special case where Montenegro recently obtained independence there were (are) many examples of diplomatic missions in Podgorica, existing without dipl. relations. The British Embassy Office is an example hereof, as were the embassies of Hungary, Austria and now also France etc. All these missions was and are indeed diplomatic, and they did exist prior to the establishment of diplomatic relation. Not only under these transitional circumstances are there examples of diplomatic missions existing without the presence of diplomatic relations - Libya cut off diplomatic relations with Lebanon in 2003, however they continue to have a diplomatic envoy present in Beirut.Sir Tanx 20:02, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey again Bobby,

I did'nt see your message until just now - I'm still a bit wet behind the ears when it comes to Wikipedia, and I had'nt visited my User:page for ages. - Anyways, my name is Kristian, nice to meet you ;) Well, no need to apologies - I did'nt take any offence - hope you did'nt either :) Good idea to go through foreign diplomatic lists - and good work on the Ljubljana embassy - it's pretty odd they don't even announce the opening of the very first Montenegrin embassy ever at the MFA website. I'd love to see a "timetable" of some sort detailing their current plans for their foreign service - when and where they expect to open embassies etc.

True, I've been wondering the exact same thing - it's no more than a days work of signing some papers - and there you have it, diplomatic relations - but many countries seem passive. Hmm, weird..

Anyways - I'll let you know if I stumble across some new stuff.

Best regards, KristianSir Tanx 22:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

What about Greece and Italy? The list contradicts the map

Diplomatic missions by country

Hi Bobby:

Well, I just did Icelandic diplomatic missions to fill in a slow post-hangover Sunday morning. And I am thinking that it is high time we get some consistency. Well, I have been doing most of the articles, but a few have been contributed by others either unaware of the list, or people wanting to do it their way.

Which is not for me to judge. However I would like there to be some order and consistency, and perhaps you and others might want to join me in establishing some kind of WikiProject. You may have issues with the way how missions are currently presented, or good ideas.

Above all it should be consistent, informative, factual and easy to manage (some people want to put the names of Ambassadors - who wants to keep up with all the necessary updating?). Your thoughts? Kransky 00:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject

Hi Bobby:

If you want to send me a message, put it on my talk page (so I get alerted).

OK - I have never done a Wikiproject before, but I have done some reading. What is important is to get other people involved. It would be wrong to define and enforce standards without common consultation.

So far I have done most of the work, with a few articles written by others (New Zealand, Bulgaria, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, and your contributions). You haven't done anything wildly inconsistent, although I have enforced some consistencies that some might think is pedantic (eg: order of and membership of continent groupings, and naming conventions). I haven't yet made changes to other people's work if they have spent time providing extraneous details (see New Zealand's example).

BTW, diplomatic missions are not a state secret. Some countries simply do not have their embassies published online.

Feel free to progress with a reverse listing of missions in each country, but plan how you go first to save time later.

Kransky 10:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)Kransky

Update - most likely Diplomatic Missions by Country will be subsumed by another category (see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Foreign_relations#original_council_proposal_discussion_for_Foreign_relations) Kransky 15:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Can you enter your name (and continue this conversation) on the board Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals under "diplomatic missions by country" thanks Kransky 10:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

American Diplomatic Missions

Canadian Bobby: user:Mrzaius has renamed, and made substantial changes, to the article American diplomatic missions. The format he has made is different to the other 171 Diplomatic Missions by country articles. IMHO the changes he has made do not seem justified, and certainly it would not be reasonable if all the other 171 articles were amended to fit what this guy (who has made no contributions before in this area) wants. I am proposing that we revert to the last edit by Krokodyl on 19:33, 22 July 2007. Grateful if you could go to Talk:List_of_United_States_diplomatic_missions#Cleanup and confirm acceptance of my proposed revert. Kransky 15:09, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

SADR

Hey Bobby!

I didn't see your message before now, hence the late reply. I think the SADR-diplomatic missions list / foreign affairs would be a good idea - SADR is recognised by many countries, so why not :) Good luck! Looking forward to seeing it. Sir Tanx 11:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

WP Zimbabwe

You have been invited to join the WikiProject Zimbabwe, a collaborative effort focused on improving Wikipedia's coverage of Zimbabwe. If you'd like to join, just add your name to the member list. Thanks for reading!

Part 18:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject_European_history vs. Wikipedia:WikiProject_History/Task_forces/Europe

I'm posting a message to all members of Wikipedia:WikiProject_European_history to make sure everyon is aware that there is a proposal (apparently never discussed on at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_European_history to deprecate the project and mark it {{historical}} supplanting it with Wikipedia:WikiProject_History/Task_forces/Europe. Whether or not this should occur, we need to have as much discussion as possible. So far, only two editors have had anything to say about it. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_European_history#WikiProject_History.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 18:31, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

List of diplomatic missions in Iraq

That's fine, thanks. Aquintero 20:05, 3 December, 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/United Nations Parliamentary Assembly

Hello, I have created an article about the UN Parliamentary Assembly, a world body that would be similar to Europarl. Please review and vote on the WP:FAC nomination. Thanks, Sarsaparilla (talk) 01:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Diplomatic missions by country - categorising Turkey

Some guy with an ID address wants Turkey included in Europe. I don't think so (neither do most Europeans). Please contribute your views here Category talk:Diplomatic missions by country. Thanks Kransky (talk) 12:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Our crazy Turkish friend now has a name (User:Izmir lee) and has started to rewrite the articles. I have asked him to discuss this first at Category_talk:Diplomatic_missions_by_country, but he has commenced nonetheless. Please provide your opinion on the discussion page. Thanks Kransky (talk) 08:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

This debate has reared its head again on the same board, with Eae1983 wanting Turkey categorised as Europe. Please provide your feedback. Kransky (talk) 16:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Germany Invitation

Hello, Canadian Bobby! I'd like to call your attention to the WikiProject Germany and the German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board. I hope their links, sub-projects and discussions are interesting and even helpful to you. If not, I hope that new ones will be.

--Zeitgespenst (talk) 21:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Diplomatic missions of Europe

Template:Diplomatic missions of Europe has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Kransky (talk) 12:40, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Big Chiefs

Yeh, Avala and Tocino seem to think that they have authority over the place. Ijanderson977 (talk) 18:21, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
They seem to have stopped arguing that Malaysia hasn't recognised Kosovo. Ijanderson977 (talk) 19:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
lol. I have msn, add me on i.j.anderson977@hotmail.com if you want Ijanderson977 (talk) 20:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Chat

Sorry, I've not had the chance with it been St Patrick's day. I went out yesterday and today because of that. I'll try talk to you tomorrow. Its rather late in the UK at the moment, so I'll be in bed soon. I'm glad about Canada and japan today. Hopefully Bulgaria, Croatia and Hungary tomorrow. Chat tomorrow then. :-) Ijanderson977 (talk) 00:00, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about msn

its just signed me out, now im having trouble signing back in :-( its making me download a repair patch thing Ijanderson977 (talk) 16:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

\yet again f**king msn has just failed on me. :-( im going to watch a film now. i may be on later. have a good easter fri if not Ijanderson977 (talk) 21:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Yo!

Are you on msn? Ijanderson977 (talk) 17:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll be on msn in an hour-ish. im having a meal soon. Ijanderson977 (talk) 16:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Comment

I want to participate in writing these embassies. If you would like it I would like to start by exchanging msn accounts so I can get the format that you use to write UN State members and I will do my best.

-Regards
Ari

PS please reply in my talkpage. Kosova2008 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Macedonia

Greece has been a wanker and vetoed Macedonia from joining NATO. Anyway have a read of this [1]. Its new name suggestions for Republic of Macedonia. They include Democratic Republic of Macedonia, Constitutional Republic of Macedonia, Independent Republic of Macedonia, Republic of Upper Macedonia and Republic of New Macedonia. I think Republic of Upper Macedonia is pretty cool. They are planning to have a referendum on it. Ijanderson977 (talk) 13:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: FYI

Here's the thing, I trust you as an individual editor, because you are rational, reasonable, and you were right about Liechtenstein. However, I think that if we give a free pass for anyone to simply cite their private email communications with foreign governments, and to present that as grounds for editing content, then we'll have a lot abuses and deceptions on our hands. But, I'll support you anyway. :)--Supersexyspacemonkey (talk) 09:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

msn

you online mate? Ijanderson977 (talk) 12:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Get yourself on MSN ;) Ijanderson977 (talk) 16:54, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Lithuania

Can you please give me a link to why Lithuania has not recognised Kosovo yet. That think about the opposition party opposing for the sake of it. Give me the link please. ;) Ijanderson977 (talk) 11:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Saudis are ready to recognise ;) [2] Ijanderson977 (talk) 13:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Let me add my opinion on Lithuania. Why did Indonesia hestiate but not Malaysia? Canada but not the US? New Zealand but not Australia? Because those governments are concerned it sets a precedent for their successionist movements (Acehan, Quebec, Maori..). What proportion of Lithuania is Russian speaking? Kransky (talk) 10:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Disagree

In the talk page you mentioned that those autonomous territories are integral part of their parent/mother/father country. I disagree with you there severely. Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Kosova, are all under the provision of someone else (ex: Kosova as the colony of Serbia and by force a part of Yugoslavia --> Serbia). All these territories can declare independence and become countries---they choose not too because they reaper more benefits under parent countries than independent entities. Might I remind that I read a report years ago placed by the UN which concluded that by the end of the 21st century there will be another (possibly) 100 new nations. I ask you to please refrain from using the word integral. BTW this is just a discussion, I'd like to hear your opinion / argument Kosova2008 (talk) 20:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

:-)

Let me know when your on msn please? Ijanderson977 (talk) 17:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I am now on MSN. Canadian Bobby (talk) 20:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll be online later tonight bro Ijanderson977 (talk) 16:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Get on msn bad boy :) Ijanderson977 (talk) 16:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Orite then. Chat later. Message me on here first so then i'll know when to log on to msn Ijanderson977 (talk) 16:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

are you online? Ijanderson977 (talk) 21:39, 19 April 2008 (UTC) are you still on msn? Ijanderson977 (talk) 22:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Trade Missions of Vanuatu‎

User:Diplomaticworld has created this article in what appears to be blatant content forking, because I have issues of him including as missions an honorary consulate in Manila and an (alleged) trade office in Coimbra, Portugal. Please review the debate at Talk:Trade Missions of Vanuatu and add your opinion - by all means contact him for his side of the story. Kransky (talk) 10:53, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

hello

Its nice to see kosovothanksyou.com has nicked what i said about Montenegro and put it on their site. Nicked the exact same source. :-( Ijanderson977 (talk) 08:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Malaysia

Hi,

I expect you to be more thorough than some newbies. New edit request for Malaysia is based on today's statement by Malaysian Foreign minister not on what "we already went through this once" from two months ago. Please reconsider your vote.--Avala (talk) 15:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

"In the future, kindly refrain from leaving patronizing messages on my talk page."

Come on are you saying you haven't made a mistake when you said "we already went through this once"? You were referring to the discussion from two months ago and you didn't see my edit request was regarding today's statement. I can't believe it's that hard to say "sorry I made an honest mistake".--Avala (talk) 18:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Yo dude. The truth is that Malaysia has only welcomed Kosovo's independence, not recognised it. The High Commision said so :-( Ijanderson977 (talk) 15:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Im REALLY busy mate, trying to get some work done for college. I may be online later though Ijanderson977 (talk) 18:51, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey Robert. Are you on msn? If you are let me know please, I'd enjoy a right good chat ;) Ijanderson977 (talk) 22:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Yo Bobby

I cant come on msn tonight mate. I have a 5 hour exam tomorrow, so I need to get some revision done Ijanderson977 (talk) 20:01, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

PNG

		The Papua New Guinean Barnstar of National Merit
		I award you the PNG Barnstar of National Merit for all your hard work and research on List of diplomatic missions in Papua New Guinea Ijanderson977 (talk) 20:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
		_{this WikiAward was given to {{subst:PAGENAME}} by ~~~ on ~~~~~}

Present

let me know when your on msn. BTW ive made you something, hopefully you'll find it very interesting Ijanderson977 (talk) 13:52, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

You online dude? Ijanderson977 (talk) 21:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Come online. I have sumet for you! Ijanderson977 (talk) 21:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Hahah! this is funny as fuck [3] Ijanderson977 (talk) 22:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence

Please make an update.84.134.102.27 (talk) 18:33, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

chit chat convo

im going to be around 30 min. Russia won eurovison :-) Ijanderson977 (talk) 22:15, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

im back. come on msn again please ;) Ijanderson977 (talk) 17:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you online mate? If so let me know please as i'll come on msn ;) Ijanderson977 (talk) 16:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo

So, as per your reasoning on the kosovo reaction talk page, it only takes one person's objection to prevent an edit no matter how many agree with said edit? Canadian Bobby (talk) 22:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

My reasoning is that, according to WP:PROT, "Pages protected due to content disputes should not be edited except to make changes unrelated to the dispute, or to make changes for which there is clear consensus." Given the small number of editors involved, three people for and one person against -- if that one person has a reasonable objection, which he did -- does not constitute "clear consensus". If an overwhelming number of people support a change and only one person holds out with a less reasonable argument, I might judge the situation differently.

~~Next time please ask for clarification rather than snarking.~~ - Revolving Bugbear 22:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

That was asking for clarification. Canadian Bobby (talk) 23:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

~~Well then I will rephrase -- next time please ask for clarification without snarking.~~ The decision I made was well within the bounds of WP:PROT. In addition, rather than flat-out rejecting the request, I encouraged further discussion to forge a consensus. Thus it was not "one person's objection to prevent an edit" outright, and, as I said, given the small number of editors involved, it certainly was not "no matter how many agree".

If you feel you have something to contribute to the discussion of the Qatar issue, I urge you to do so. But the participants on that talk page have a tendency to expect an assessing admin to "disregard" other people's opinions, which just doesn't fly. Consensus means WP:CONSENSUS, not "we out-vote you". Tocino made a reasonable request for more vigorous sourcing. That does not make him a troll or a spoiler, and it does not mean I am letting him ruin things at others' expense.

What we should all be doing is working towards forging an actual consensus. I am sure that if the sourcing presented is rigorous and accurate, an amicable and clear consensus can be established. But, when in doubt, a protected page defaults to taking no action -- see meta:The Wrong Version.

Regards. - Revolving Bugbear 23:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm striking my comments about snarking for fear I may have spoken too brusquely. But please keep in mind everything else I've said here. I'm committed to neutrally assessing consensus based on not only representation but how the arguments are reflected in policy. I look forward to more dialogue on the issue of these sources, as I really do think dialogue will bring these things to a positive conclusion.

Cheers. - Revolving Bugbear 23:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)