User talk:Nightstallion/ψ

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Nightstallion. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Estonia is now a full member of the OECD. This map should reflect that. Just letting you know in case you feel like updating it. Cheers. Pristino (talk) 02:55, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I would, but I can't edit SVG maps... —Nightstallion 08:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I see your point about the cook is., but you didnt respond about the american "colony" election from nov 7. I removed them to the local as its not a state by any stretch. are you okay with it?(Lihaas (talk) 17:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)).

Our usual standard for inclusion was "if it's got an ISO 3166 code, it's on the list". Why do you want to change that? —Nightstallion 14:15, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I know that in the past there were multiple discussion about whether the EU should be mentioned (with an — instead of number) in "List of countries by GDP/area/population" and in other similar cases (infoboxes, templates, etc.) that deal with states, territories, etc. The arguments against that I remember were mostly around "EU is not a country/state" and "If we list EU, then we should list AU and other organizations" (referring to continental unions or trade blocs or international organizations in general).

Recently I had some related discussions (point 2 here, here) and also the related issue here about the "total number of entities conducting diplomatic relations/recognition".

Basically here I tried to summarize the arguments in favor of listing it (and setting a criteria for listing other organizations/unions).

I write to you, because I think that this issue should be addressed at some central place - for all lists/rankings, so that we don't have to go over the same discussion separately at each place. Could you arrange such discussion or point me where to raise the issue? Alinor (talk) 10:28, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Mh. Some relevant WikiProject, like WP Countries? —Nightstallion 11:19, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, I filed it here. Alinor (talk) 14:05, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Template:People's Republic of China elections has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji (talk) 14:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually, you didn't PROD it, you just posted it here and on the template site. Besides, I'm against deletion, as it is part of a standardised series of election templates. —Nightstallion 14:31, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Dear Nightstallion, after more than three months with no answer (see Talk:Democracy Is Freedom – The Daisy#Article move), could we (in fact, you) move the article to its previous (and correct) title, Democracy is Freedom – The Daisy? --Checco (talk) 17:30, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. --Checco (talk) 20:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Your military history newsletter – Volume LVIII, December 2010 From the editors • "Military Historian of the Year" • Discussions • The month's new featured and A-class content • Review awards Contest results • A-class medal recipients • bahamut teaches us proper usage of "Jargon and acronyms" To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here. BrownBot (talk) 21:25, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

as a common political editor, youre welcome and encourages to express your view on the page.(Lihaas (talk) 08:48, 22 January 2011 (UTC)).

The article Qatari legislative election, 2013 is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qatari legislative election, 2013 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Rob (talk) 11:08, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Just got your message now, thank you. Will keep you posted. Gryffindor (talk) 22:21, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey Nightstallion. I think your paragraphs around secession etc. may need updating/editing:

"Southern Sudan is allowed to hold a referendum on independence from Sudan in 2011, according to the Comprehensive Peace Treaty signed on 9 January 2005. Simultaneously, status referenda will be held. These include Abyei (North Kurdufan-Northern Sudan with special administrative status or North Bahr el Ghazal-Southern Sudan), South Kurdufan (join Northern Sudan or Southern Sudan) and Blue Nile (join Northern Sudan or Southern Sudan). (cf. Image:Regions of Sudan.png)"

doktorb _words^deeds 21:56, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I know, but I was gonna wait until a.) we have final results and b.) Abyei and the two states have been allowed to decide what they are going to do. —Nightstallion 22:58, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Ah fair do's. Sorry, I think the only times I write on here is to point out trivial corrections when I should be filling your page with praise for what is my usual first port of call every time I log in ;) doktorb _words^deeds 00:06, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Great to hear that! :) I'm all for corrections and suggestions, so if you have any ideas on what I should be including or phrasing differently, be sure to tell me. —Nightstallion 10:20, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

i agree with you completely. the egypt one was unilaterally moved by someone to what tickles his fancy even though most agreed tro revolution but not the proper noun one he chose.

although, WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS also negates the similarity.Lihaas (talk) 18:00, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

as an aside, are you updating referendums too? im just about to go through the swioss one. can we nominate for ITN then?Lihaas (talk) 18:01, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I am in principle, though I'm not sure whether I'll get to it today... Can we try to get the Egypt article to the right place? —Nightstallion 18:04, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Hey. I noticed in your notes section a red-link to Freedom (Great Repeal) Bill. If I get my guess right, this is a link to Protection of Freedoms Bill that I have just created :) doktorb _words^deeds 09:33, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Great, thanks! —Nightstallion 16:28, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Your Military history Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: EyeSerene discusses "Writing neutrally for Wikipedia"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 16:24, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

It should be changed to a tricolor with the bands of equal width, and a 3:5 ratio to better reflect the makeshift flags being flown, also nearly every flag hoisted have crudely drawn crescents and stars including the massive one raised in Benghazi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.169.239 (talk) 11:44, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your moving Tunisian revolution to Tunisian Revolution. Please also move Talk:Tunisian revolution to Talk:Tunisian Revolution. Thanks. --Pengyanan (talk) 17:19, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for your moving! --Pengyanan (talk) 17:22, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Gladly! —Nightstallion 17:22, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello, the article International Criminal Court has been suggested to me by an IP editor for GA reassessment. Since you are one of the editors listed as actively involved in it, you might be interested in the Discussion.--Obsidi♠n^Soul 23:25, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Nightstallion! I think, that it's interesting for you: [1] CrazyRepublican (talk) 23:56, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, let's hope they're successful... —Nightstallion 00:03, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Once more about Swaziland's uprising: [2], [3] - CrazyRepublican (talk) 22:32, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey Nightstallion, hope you are well. I have created Sixth Periodic Review of Westminster constituencies in an attempt to follow all four Boundary Commissions as they do their duties. I think you've a link for this at your Notes page but if not, and you want it, here it is :) doktorb _words^deeds 10:27, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Great, thanks! I had recently read about it at BBC, but not yet seen the article here. —Nightstallion 10:31, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

It looks like the situation is just like in Fallujah or Vukovar where most of the fighting will be over, but sporadic pockets of resistance will still put up a fight for another few weeks before they are all cleared.EkoGraf (talk) 23:30, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that's the case, actually. From what I've read, the fight is still not over and the democrats still hold the city centre. —Nightstallion 00:26, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

No, you didn't get what I was saying, I ment was - Yes there is still ongoing fighting but it will probably be over in a day or so but after that there will be clean-up operations house-to-house, and so the battle will probably not compleatly end for a few more weeks. And they're royalists actualy not democrats. :) EkoGraf (talk) 02:52, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Ah, okay.

I don't think so; not one of the revolutionaries has even mentioned the former king... —Nightstallion 09:15, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Actualy they have been waving his picture quite a lot and the flag they are using is the old monarchy flag. :) I personaly think they themselves don't know what kind of government they want if they manage to get rid of Gaddafi, because they are made up of different opposition factions with different political aggendas. EkoGraf (talk) 17:34, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

The old monarchy flag is used because it isn't Qaddafi's, and the TNC has stated it wants a democratic republic. —Nightstallion 18:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

What do you suggest we do? Since it looks like Gaddafi may retake Ras Lanuf in a day or so and there has been fighting there for the last four days, should we create an article named Second battle of Ras Lanuf or should we reopen the old one and say when the rebels took it it was phase one and now, two days later, it's phase two?EkoGraf (talk) 17:10, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Reopen it. —Nightstallion 11:40, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

It's been a week since the discussion started on the renaming of the article, and a majority concenssus is to rename the article to Battle of Ra's Lanuf. Only two editors opposed. Could you move it, because I only nominaly know the procedure for doing that? EkoGraf (talk) 22:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll do it. —Nightstallion 10:47, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Given the Dalai Lama's announcement to rescind his authority soon, I also stumbled upon these websites talking about a new PM in 10 days. I wondered if you new anything more about it. Therequiembellishere (talk) 21:01, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

No, not really... —Nightstallion 11:40, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Nightstallion,

I hope life is treating you well and that you have a prosperous 2011. Thanks  �� Amakuru (talk) 23:45, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Could you also move Battle of Brega to First Battle of Brega, since I created Second Battle of Brega today? Unlike Ra's Lanuf where it was only one day between phases these two battles don't warrant to be in the same article since it was 11 days between the two different battles or phases. EkoGraf (talk) 01:17, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Forget it, no problem, Lothar von Richthofen moved it himself. :) EkoGraf (talk) 05:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Ed talks about real-world collaborations and how you can help

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:26, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Nightstallion. Since January, User:Enok has made huge changes to the Padania article. Some were good, others were not accepted by other users (at least four: Filippo83, Keith 64, Dans and I, plus one or two IP users). We had a long time appeasing Enok and accepting his advices, as the article's history and the talk testify. For some strange reason he continues to remove the material he doesn't like from the article. Filippo83 and I started to rollback him, but nobody of us wants an edit war. Keith 64 showed up in talk page to urge him to stop. In the last case Enok removed opinion polls and the Padanian flag proposed by Lega Nord. I rollbacked him, but things can't go on like this. The discussion is too long and I don't want you to read it all, but can you show up and calm down Enok? --Checco (talk) 04:41, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

In contrast, I am very strongly against stating it - I think it makes the templates look odd. The reason I have always included them without a note is because in almost every case I know about the Constituent Assembly acted as a parliament once elected. Nevertheless, if they are to be marked, perhaps using an asterix and the |below bar would be a nicer solution? Number 57 20:24, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Mh, yes, I could live with that; I, on the contrary, know mostly of Constituent Assemblies and Conventions who did *only* the constitution drafting while the regular parliament existed side-by-side, but I suppose back in the days when new nations were founded it was the way you described it.

So, marking them with an asterisk? Would you make the necessary changes? —Nightstallion 08:06, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

No problem - I'll do it in the coming week. Cheers, Number 57 08:13, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:The Left (Italy) logo.jpg. 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 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 05:30, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Dank helps you see what article writers want from reviewers

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 04:20, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello, My name is Natalia Olaru and I am a final year master student in the Corporate Communication programme at the Aarhus School of Business in Denmark. I am currently working on my final paper on the topic of the motivation of users to create content on collaborative media websites, the focus being Wikipedia. As a sample I chose the English and Danish portals. I would like to invite you for an online interview on the topic of what motivates you, as a user, to participate in editing and creating articles for this platform. Your real identity, and wikipedia account will be kept confidential through the paper. I plan on doing the actual interviews in the period between 6st and the 15th of May via Skype, MSN, Google Talk or Yahoo Messenger. I am, however, open to other channels of communication too. Please let me know if you would like to participate in this interview and the preferred channel. Thank you, Natalia Olaru Email: natalia.ioana.olaru@gmail.com --MulgaEscu (talk) 12:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, sure, why not; I don't use any IM, though, so it would have to be by e-mail, if that is good enough for you. —Nightstallion 12:56, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry for the late reply but I am still having a bit of trouble with Wikipedia since I am a new user myself. Email sounds good too, do you have an email address I could use or should I send it through wikipedia email?--MulgaEscu (talk) 18:46, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Send it to nightstallion AT web DOT de. —Nightstallion 20:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Could you please undo your move on this page, this template is used in all the Scottish Parliament elections. --Barryob (Contribs) (Talk) 15:21, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Buggie111 discusses neutral point of view

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

This message is being sent to you because you have previously edited the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) page. There is currently a discussion that may result in a significant change to Wikipedia policy. Specifically, a consensus is being sought on if the policies of WP:UCN and WP:EN continues to be working policies for naming biographical articles, or if such policies have been replaced by a new status quo. This discussion is on-going at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English), and your comments would be appreciated. Dolovis (talk) 17:01, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Whats with all these stub election 1-line articles (most of which stay that till the addition of results) we need to expand it on content not the 1 election article. Im willing to help if you are. Know anyone else on wikipedia with broad electoral intersts as us not limited to parts of the world? Anwyays, at the moment im trying to expand the Cypriot legislative election, 2011 (general) article due imminently. we need issues and parties. You post the parties, ill do the issues? (and background if need be)(Lihaas (talk) 02:50, 21 May 2011 (UTC)).

all these people turned out to see 1 line? ;)

anyhoo, we need to srt the infobox not remove it.

ps- incidentyally, a call for recognition for kosovo? why not Abkhazia and South Ossetia...democracy...?(Lihaas (talk) 03:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)).

I'm not quite sure what you mean? Yes, I'd love to have all of these articles expanded beyond the "will take place on" and the adding of results afterwards, but my time is limited... What do you mean by "srt"? And let's just say I don't agree that Abkhazia&South Ossetia are the same situation as Kosovo. —Nightstallion 12:29, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Nightstallion! Express your interest in unrecognized countries by placing {{User:Presidentman/Ubx/URC}} on your userpage. - Presidentman (talk · contribs) (Talkback) Random Picture of the Day 13:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors – Contest results, A-class medal recipients Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Editorial: Hawkeye's thoughts on the article writing process

To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:53, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

As a member of WikiProject Countries, I'm seeking your opinion on a possible issue identified at List of sovereign states. If you have some spare moments, please contribute a comment at the Discussion of criteria. Best regards, Nightw 06:48, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your response! Could you answer either "yes" or "no" in the survey section? This is for the reference of participants to identify whether or not there is a problem with the arrangement of Kosovo in the list. Thanks, Nightw 16:54, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Finland and Spitfires Op-ed: Fifelfoo and hunting for plagiarism

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 23:39, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Zeebrugee and Afghanistan Op-ed: WereSpielChequers examines RfA

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 23:31, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

As you were involved in the previous discussion about naming of the articles on Template talk:Yugoslavian elections, you should be aware that there is a new proposal on Talk:Yugoslavian parliamentary election, May 1992. Cheers, Number 57 17:48, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Please join a preference survey on how to divide our List of sovereign states. All responses are appreciated. Thanks, Nightw 13:38, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Last one is up! If you haven't already done so, please leave a statement of reasoning with your preference. Nightw 14:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Carthage and Australia in Palestine Op-ed: Remembering 9/11

Just a heads up that we need the table for the result (since you usually make these). the EC should finish counting in a day or 2. then were set for ITN. (i might be offline for a bit)

Also can you check on the infobox? the parties dont work, so i hid them.Lihaas (talk) 06:47, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:DieChristenLogo.png. 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 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:11, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Polish parliamentary election, 2011 result should be out inside 12 hours. I may be asleep at that point so can you tablise it for ITN?Lihaas (talk) 02:39, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Is there a source for the table? right ow there is only 1 specific one ad ot broadly. THE OLD Table had a source.Lihaas (talk) 00:50, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure there are sources, but as I have my final university exams in a few hours, I'll trust you'll find them. They should be somewhere on http://wybory2011.pkw.gov.pl . —Nightstallion 07:28, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:18, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Nightstallion/ψ! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D and Ian Rose look at Australian air power Op-ed: Buggie111 ruminates about WikiLife and WikiDeath

Hello Nightstallion! Britain & dominions decided to exchange primogenture rules: [4] CrazyRepublican (talk) 06:58, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I know. I still hope some of the more anti-monarchy countries (looking at you, Jamaica) take this opportunity to abolish it. —Nightstallion 09:09, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I believe, that ALL dominions will become a Republics: at first Black Dominions (I think, that they will become a Republics during one year after EII death), and than White Dominions (Australia, New Zealand and Canada). I think, that Republican Constitution for Solomon Islands will be adopt not earlier, than 2013. But Jamaica can to proclaim Republic on August, 6th, 2012. CrazyRepublican (talk) 09:32, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the Solomon Islands will certainly become a republic, the only question is when they finally finish their new constitution. Jamaica also seems like it wanted to do this ages ago, but maybe it'll finally happen soon. Tuvalu and Saint Vincent/Grenadines could try again (referendums only just failed), and Australia only needs a strongly republican PM, then it should be fairly soon. What do you think? Read any other sources?

Unfortunately I haven’t any information about possibility of constitutional changes toward Republic in current British Dominions (Commonwealth Realms). Taking in mind the promise of current prime minister of Solomon Islands to promote the New Constitution, I think, that he will delay introduction of the New Constitution before the end of his term. Nearest opportunity to persuade in serious intents of republicans in dominions is 50th anniversary of the Jamaican Independence.CrazyRepublican (talk) 07:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Using a chance I want to ask you: what country from non-dominions monarchies you see the next Republic? (Bahrain, Oman, Swaziland or some other)CrazyRepublican (talk) 07:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

No idea; the best chance is probably a revolution in Swaziland or one of the Arabian dictatorial monarchies. Spain is pretty Republican, actually, so if the current king dies and his unpopular son takes over, who knows … —Nightstallion 08:01, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Nightstallion! I proposed the article for deletion because it's sitting there without any evidence that the election will happen after it was proposed for 2010. Regards Hekerui (talk) 21:06, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

We've got other category:cancelled elections, why not make it one of those instead? —Nightstallion 22:16, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't expected such a category to exist. Why would we need a category for cancelled referenda? The cancellation of a referendum negates its notability, don't you think? Hekerui (talk) 22:26, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

In my opinion, it's still notable if there were concrete plans for it … —Nightstallion 07:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your diligent editing work, and also for your /notes page, which is something of a go-to for democracy-related events around the world! --pmj (talk) 07:15, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Great to hear it's useful for other people, too. :) —Nightstallion 14:18, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D analyzes three books from Osprey Publishing Review essay: Nick-D reviews the new Bundeswehr Military History Museum