User talk:Stefanp

Proxy IP

Could you, please, add the following proxy IP address 65.19.174.35 to the Wikipedia banned IP list? According to http://cqcounter.com/whois/, this IP is that of the email anonymizing company Primedius (http://www.primedius.com). It's not an open proxy, true, but still a proxy. People can hide behind such proxy IPs, vandalize Wikipedia, act irresponsibly under cover of anonimity. —This unsigned comment was added by Stefanp (talk • contribs) .

I'm not an admin, but I'll forward your message to one. --Rory0 96 05:13, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done, and I added him to the CVU's blacklist so we can monitor edits he makes. --Rory0 96 19:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Rory096. The anonymous user 65.19.174.35 has since his/her ban registered as "male" Bernardbblois. He/she (65.19.174.35 last signed his/her post as "female" "Marina Cummings") does the exact same kind of vandalisms to the King Michael articles/discussions under his/her new alias as the old banned user used to do. Moreover, Bernardbblois has just forged a piece of BBC news I posted, by diminishing the 500,000 Swiss francs Communist payment to King Michael down to 50,000. Would you, please, be so kind as to warn him/her for vandalism and correct his/her forgery? Stefanp 07:47, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Antandrus unblocked him with the reason "appears no longer to be an open proxy." I'll scan it to make sure. However, remember that regular proxies are allowed, just not open proxies, otherwise we'd be blocking several countries who all use one proxy (which is rather annoying, yes, but we can't just block so many people for the actions of a few). --Rory0 96 17:51, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael's residence

You write: "He now lives mostly in Switzerland and partly in Romania, in an official residence provided to him as former head of state by the Romanian government." Can we see some evidence (a) that he partly lives in Romania and (b) that the Romanian government has provided him with a residence? Adam 05:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

King Michael lives only part of the year in Romania, as illustrated by the listing of all royal engagements together with the princely ones on the public agenda of his son-in-law, Radu Duda. As about the official royal residence, please, see the following AFP report: "The government has also invited Michael to establish his official residence at the Elisabeta Palace." (AFP report of May 21, 2001, from a semi-official royal web site) Stefanp 06:11, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Obviously not reading Romanian makes it difficult for me to follow, but I don't see any immediately obvious evidence at those links that Michael lives in this residence in Romania, as opposed to stays there when he is visiting. Adam 07:07, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The public agenda link is in English. If you have the curiosity to check it out, you will notice that King Michael participates in very few public engagements in Romania, occasions when he lives (or stays - depends on which term one prefers) at Elisabeta Palace. Stefanp 00:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lives and stays have different meanings. Queen Elizabeth stays at Government House Canberra when she is visiting Australia, but that doesn't mean she lives there. She lives in London. I maintain my view that Michael lives in Switzerland, and when he is visiting Romania he stays in Elisabeta Palace. Adam 00:28, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see. If you feel strongly about it (I personally don't), perhaps you should change the wording in the article to reflect your take on Michael's living situation. Either way is fine by me. Stefanp 00:46, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Would you, please, be so kind as to remind newcomer Morgandy Aithne to not edit other people's talk and to revert/reorganize his/her edits to Talk:Michael I of Romania? Such edits are considered vandalism. Thank you in advance! Stefanp 22:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't look like he's editing other people's comments there, it looks like he's making comments of his own. What do you mean? --Rory0 96 22:55, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I meant: is it ok for a user to insert his/her comments within others' comments? It disrupts the initial message and appears like editing. Stefanp 23:08, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism 2

Done. You can revert vandalism yourself, you know. Just click history, click on the time of the edit before the vandalism, click edit, and save it. --Rory0 96 18:21, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That looks more like a content dispute than vandalism. You should discuss it on the talk page, or if that fails to work, try WP:RfC. --Rory0 96 22:02, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pretenders Ernst August

Please see Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (names and titles)#Ernest Aug. and constibute to the discussion there. I look forward to people assessing UE:should English be used in all these cases and how; would any sort of numeral be acceptable; what are the correct ordinals anyway; and Is there any other sustainable way to disambiguate these systematically. Shilkanni 11:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iapethus

Hi,on the "Talk:Radu, Prince of Hohenzollern-Veringen" page I had the press report you put a link to about Prince Charles roughly translated by a romanian speking friend and we can't see where the thing is about him being offered the throne. Can you point out the line where it is mentioned, including translating, thanks Iapethus 18:06, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Stefanp, ok so i had some correspondence with Professor Gallagher since end August, i got the text of the article in english in the meantime. I was blown away that he answered me (2 times). He is a great guy -superior intellect obvously, yet a bit vague through decency i think and refuses to be drawn in. What a guy. I am saving to go to any lecture he gives in europe-now he is in New Zealand - too far for me for now.his books are GREAT.

Professor gallagher said no offer that he knows of was made to prince Charles to accept the Romanian throne, Prof was just talking "hypothetically" in the article he published, which was about quite another subject. I was sort of disappointed as your idea was so interesting. I ams ending this also to other editors and discussion pages, its fair as so much discussion happened.

Here are Professor gallaghers words, from his first email to me of 23 august:

Sujet Re: Romania - King and Prince Charles Afficher l'en-tête

Expéditeur T.G.Gallagher@.........uk

Date Mer, 23 Août 2006, 10:11

Dear Mr Perlier,

I'm glad that you've been having rewarding times during your visit to Romania.

it is a multi-layered country and it is only rarely that some of its finer

aspects get the treatment they deserve in the world's media.

(....)I had a look at wikipedia and couldn't find the reference to my recent article

in which i alluded to an invitation to Prince Charles to come and fill any

monarchical vacancy in Romania. (...) maybe I didn't look

at the particular sentence with the reference to Prince Charles closely enough.

It was a detour from the main point in the article and I was just saying that

if there was a vacancy and a call came, he might want to consider accepting it.

all good wishes,

Yours Sincerely,

Tom Gallagher

Second email 2 days ago: (after I explained how to get into the article in Wikipedia)

Sujet Re: Romania - King and Prince Charles

Expéditeur T.G.Gallagher@........uk

Date Sam, 28 Octobre 2006, 18:38

Dear Ian Perlier,

Thank you for your absorbing message.

...

As for the main point of your letter: sorry to disappoint you, but I am

reluctant to get further involved.As you know, I didn't call for Prince Charles to become a contender for the Romanian throne, I just floated it as a hypothesis. Perhaps it was inevitable that royal bloggers from different camps in Romania would choose to argue that I had done the first. But my words stand for themselves in the newspaper and you have managed to find the translation, due to your tenacity.

What I say or don't say from now on about the subject will make little

difference to how it is treated and I am reluctant to plunge into wikipedia armed with a denial. It was a very rare intervention by me on the royal question and I don't have strong views on the matter, except perhaps that in certain specific circumstances a royal restoration could end an injustice and prove beneficial for the future development of Romania...

Best wishes,

Tom Gallagher

Well, I really like the way he says and sees things. Iapethus 23:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael

And you've already broken it repeatedly with your sockpuppets. john k 00:20, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry

In the future, please confine yourself to one account. Cheers, Mackensen (talk) 17:31, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]