User talk:Niaps

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Niaps! I am Wireless Keyboard and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Wireless Keyboard: Chat 15:21, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arc de Triomphe, a symbol of genocide

Hi Niaps, you are welcome to edit, you need to provide references as per WP:SPS. As suggested avoid self-published sources such as blogs and also references not in English. Happy editing, --STTW (talk) 15:39, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

STTW, thanks so much for the advice. I have added a few more references. I hope this brings some balance to the discussion. I just find weird that articles on Napoleon just do not say a word about the 6.5 million people massacred under his rule. Back in Germany's 1930s, Hitler presented himself as Germany's Napoleon. If they had understood back there and then what Napoleon meant, we may well have saved scores of millions of innocent lives (Niaps (talk) 23:57, 16 May 2009 (UTC)).[reply]

Copy/paste of discussion on multiple talk page

Please stop doing that, it makes actual discussion impossible. I suggest you stick to Talk:Napoleon I of France from now on, where discussion has developed, and do not copy/paste the same section on any more talk page related to the Napoleonic era. I also suggest you have a look at WP:SOCK. Equendil Talk 04:01, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. I just found aberrant the same kind of glorification of Napoleon everywhere, and tried to bring a different point of view. I will do as you say and stick to the talk page on Napoleon. Thanks (Niaps (talk) 04:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Please remember articles on Wikipedia are written from a neutral point of a view, you seem to have an axe to grind here. Equendil Talk 04:41, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Equendil. I'm trying to bring the opinion of experts and researchers who seem to be banned by some other contributors. True that my family has also been a victim of Napoleon, but are descendants of Holocaust victims banned from denouncing attrocities? But then of course, I'm not going to lecture anyone who doesn't want to read a counter-opinion. Thanks. (Niaps (talk) 04:53, 17 May 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Mostly, you are trying to bring the controversial views of one French writer, Claude Ribbe (see WP:UNDUE, WP:FRINGE as to why this not acceptable), on which you extrapolate (Ribbe's book is about the Haitian revolution, not the Peninsula War) through original research which is against Wikipedia's policy. Wikipedia is not a medium to "denounce" anything, if that's your intent, you're simply on the wrong site. Equendil Talk 05:20, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Equendil, there is a wealth of research on Napoleon's crimes. Please start by reading Napoleonic Wars casualties. I'm not going to revert your deletion. But the article of Napoleon, as it stands, is apologetic of his well documented crimes. (Niaps (talk) 05:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)).[reply]

Style in "Nobility particle"

Hi Niaps! I'm very glad you've taken on this article, but I'd like to bring a few things to your attention. First, the use of bullet points should be used for precisely that, a list of point. They are not needed to differentiate paragraphs, especially if the paragraphs are well written. See, Bulleted and numbered lists. The section on Spain is now too busy. I realize the original author of the article also favored extreme "bulletization," which I tried to remove, but which keeps getting reintroduced; again mimicking a how-to-manual of finding out who's a noble or not.

Second, the Manual of Style rightly asks that we avoid the use of first-person pronouns like "we." It's an encyclopedia article, not a how-to-manual. There are ways to say "We have to distinguish between two styles" that don't use "we" and sound more encyclopedic. See, First-person pronouns.

Finally, Wikipedia does have a reasonable policy against original research (an encyclopedia is not the place for that) and a policy against excessive Wikilinks ("too much blue text," I've seen it called). It's great that you are finding all these examples of patronymic+toponymic names, but only one or two sufficed. That's why I simply put, after two examples, "and most conquistadors." We don't have to list all the conquistadors here for the reader. That's what the category, Spanish conquistadors is there for. See Wikilinks

I offer this by way of friendly advice. I'm interested in keeping a reasonable level of polished writing on Wikipedia. It will help it be taken more seriously. Happy editing and have fun building the page! TriniMuñoz (talk) 04:55, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Series_of_possible_hoaxes

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Series_of_possible_hoaxes. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 07:38, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]