User talk:Theeuro

My talk page was getting unruly. So I had to make these sub pages for older topics!!

EU

...has 27, and not 25 countries. I think You forgot Romania and Bulgaria joined. ;)

What part of Bosnia and Herzegovina you think is going to secede? The Serbian Republic? --PaxEquilibrium 17:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I know the EU has 27 members. I went to all 25 when there were only 25- so before Bulgaria and Romania joined. I know its not accurate but it sounds nice, so I leave it there!

Not the Serbian Republic. The Kosovo region is going to form an independent country and begin producing their own euro coins, minted in Germany at Karlsruhe. Montenegro is doing the same afterward, but will be minted in Italy at Rome. This is going to reduce inflation in the eurozone by at least 3% and will allow the UK to retain at least 60- 80% of the value of their currency in time for them to join in 2010. This is all dependent on a vote in both the EC and the UK. If the UK decides to change their mind again, it will not proceed. It is all very complicated and is basically a way for the ECB to save about 20.000.000€/ year. Just a note- this is all public knowledge, since Kosovo has submitted some paperwork to the UN for sovereign status (The US has promised to veto such a concept). Both already use the euro in lieu of their own currency, but that causes some inflation for Germany and thus the whole of the eurozone. With these two in the eurozone, Germany's EPL (Euro Production Limit) will shrink and having new members sequentially will provide strength to the euro at the base, providing an element of stability that will then become acceptable for the UK to join.

It's like a catch 22 because Kosovo is depending on the UK to join the eurozone so they can as well; the UK is waiting to hold a referendum until Kosovo enters the eurozone. I'm not sure how they'll work this one out. Similar negotiations are taking place for Andorra (by 2008) and Iceland (by 2010) to join the eurozone. Denmark isn't even in the ERM anymore and I think Sweden is about to follow Denmark. Of course they could go in the entirely opposite direction and join next year too. The Swedes are unpredictable like that.

--Theeuro 17:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

We shall see. On 19 April the United Nations mission will head for Kosovo to oversee the situation. It will affect the decision of the UN Security Council by great part.

A lot still could change. I don't think a country without international recognition (like the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus) could be in such a position... anyway, it's only weeks away, so we shall see. ;) --PaxEquilibrium 20:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Sandbox

You're welcome, you just switched their names around by accident... The table looks pretty good, and it quite useful, I'd say. As I can see, you have just recently joined Wikipedia, so...Welcome :). Cheers. Sideshow Bob 20:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement. I'm actually doing this as part of my job at the ECB. My department has been charged with providing education and accurate information to people who might visit Europe. Not many Americans, Cnadians and Australians know the difference between a Turkish Lira coin and a 2 euro coin. It's beginning to cause some problems.

The table is designed to provide only one thing... an easy transition toward referring to the Czech Republic as Czechia as a matter of course. Their euro design will have this name (the czech equivalent).

Thanks again for the feedback. Anything else you might think about it would be appreciated!

--Theeuro 20:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

In case you're not watching my talk page...

Replied there:

Yeah, I did know that, but it is quite confusing; "Serbian Republic" is usually left untranslated as "Republika Srpska" even in non-Serbian texts, precisely for this reason.

I didn't know that about Blair; I had heard something similar, but was not aware that the Labour Party was now in a bind to finally adopt the euro. Good news, then! Is the ECB thinking about somehow reducing the number of euro coin designs? What are the current proposals for this issue? And while we're at it -- may I ask you what the inside information on the status in Denmark and Sweden is? I have heard that Denmark is likely to adopt the euro after a new referendum, but that it was postponed due to the problems with the constitution so as to not have voters confused as to whether they're voting on the euro or on the constitution; and I've also heard that the new centre-right Swedish government would like to adopt the euro, but can't, due to public opinion being against it... What information do you have?

Thanks for the very interesting information! —Nightstallion (?) 16:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't be fully sure about the event, because people said in 1990 Kosovo's independence is going to happen. And 17 years have passed since then. Who knows where the wind will blow... I would not be surprised one bit if tomorrow Jesus Christ appears in Kosovo again... I'm completely convinced that the Republic of Kosovo will become a country (recognized or not) one day, but considering how things have been going so far... BTW fact is Ahtisaari's proposal for independence currently (drawing the word as an important one, anything could change) does not have enough support in the Security Council, which's decision is and will be final (then again, in 1999 it decided that the future of Kosovo is only within Serbia; in 2015 it might decide to re-attach an independent state of Kosovo to Serbia ;).

Talking about history, you're most probably referring to Milosevic's crimes. But you should first indeed study the recent history before making conclusions, for it's often not represented at all in most cases (many politicians have said that Kosovo must secede because of Milosevic's atrocities, but they don't know when, where and what happened at all). It is especially necessary in very "emotional" and hurting subjects like this one. Plus, you have to keep on mind how will this affect the rest of the world. --PaxEquilibrium 17:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not referring at all to Milosevic in any way. This is not a conclusion. It is a real proposal to solve the UK euro adoption question. It has less to do with politics than it does with the ECB saving money and reduction of inflation rates in Germany. Any previous agreements regarding the borders and sovereign status of Kosovo are inconsequential. The Security Council does not have the final decision on UN troop deployments into *non-warzones*. The border between Kosovo and Serbia is not a warzone. The paperwork filed wasn't to establish a state, it was to request border patrols from the UN to secure a new Kosovar border.

That Kosovo will cede to form a sovereign state is really moot if the UK decides not to join the eurozone since Kosovo will not then cede because there will be no immediate necessity for Germany to control their inflation rates. That can be achieved by reducing the number of euro produced by Germany. The consequence to this would be that the UK would then have to pay the ECB a sum of around 2.5 billion euro and they would have to leave the ERM and would not be able to peg its currency to the euro.

This has nothing to do with political or cultural history- it has to do with economic history. Please understand, though, that I have indeed studied history. I have a degree in European Economic and Social History and teach the subject at Leiden University each Winter.

This 'is' a very emotional and impactful issue. The fact of the matter is that the formation of a sovereign Kosovo would bring long term stability to the region. Understand that Serbia is going to be well compensated for a Kosovar secession. WELL compensated. As for the rest of the world, the UN has no jurisdiction over the formation of sovereign states. So support from the Security Council is not necessary. A Kosovar state would have the encouragement and blessings of the EU.

International recognition is also inconsequential. The EU would recognize the state, Serbia would be passified with conditional monetary compensation, Albania has nothing to say whatsoever about it- especially given their forthcoming petition for EU entry.

–--Theeuro 19:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Aha, now I understand.

BTW what precisely compensation?

Oh, and I you have slightly overestimated the power and influence of the EU and underestimated that of the SC. For example, if it decides for autonomy (despite how unlikely that seemed), there is no possibility for independence (at least not EU recognition) and there'll be Turkish Republic of North Cyprus. --PaxEquilibrium 22:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Compensation like money and a lot of it.

There is already a Turkish Republic of North Cyprus. The EU has more influence over matters such as this in Europe than the SC does. Because it is Europe. Kosovo is represented in the EC by a rather large delegation. Let me put it this way... the ECB has more influence over this matter than the SC does.

--Theeuro 04:10, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Kosovo is represented in the EC? I don't understand?

What does "a lot" mean? Millions? Billions?

I think that that will only antagonize and extremely anger Serbia, creating an image that it is selling itself (some things are not for sale).

And aside from that, there is an alternative under which Serbia could accept independence of Kosovo, just like one Serbian politician said (Cedomir "Ceda" Jovanovic) - problem is the Kosovar Albanian political leadership will never yield to those terms.

BTW when it comes to Kosovo, Serbia does not care about the money one bit. She is far more interested in the people there, the Serbian Orthodox Church, the vast treasures of resources lying there, the historical importance that's actually "fueling" its existence and the very fact that no state is simply willing to give up its own part. The (Former Yugoslav) Republic of Macedonia will not be just ready to give up its northwestern Albanian quarter. The Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina is not giving up of the Serbian Republic, and I'm not even going to think if it'll accept if the Croats decide to secede too. Remember the Frontier Albanians too, I think they'll try to separate from the Republic of Montenegro - will the Montenegrins accept that? And with Serbia also give up Albanian-populated Presevo Valley?

Who knows where we'll reach if I go beyond ex Yugoslavia (Abkhazia, Transnistria, South Ossetia,...). --PaxEquilibrium 17:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Kosovo has a delegation in the EU parliment.

I'm not sure of the amount, but it will be considerable, and please understand that they will care about the money when the time comes.

Kosovo is not 'for sale'. Serbia will be compensated for 'loss of resources, both economic and natural' when Kosovo becomes a sovereign state. Kosovar Albanian leaders have nothing to contribute either way.

The Kraja have no desire to cede from montenegro. They were very instrumental in Montenegro attaining its independence, so they have a vested interest in keeping the country whole.

Keep in mind that the result of Kosovar sovereignty will not be a wall on the border. The cultural and soci-economic ties that the two share will be intact. There is nothing to prevent the two regions from re-uniting in the future under Serbia; the problem is extensive corruption on the political front- especially at the local levels. It is pushing Serbia further away from a harmonious existence in the neighboorhood. Hopefully this will change in the next elections.

I think the Presevo Valley will be the limit of Kosovo's border. I'm not sure about that one.

--Theeuro 19:52, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Unruly mess

Well, my talk page was such that I couldn't keep up with any changes or new messages. Only one-sided and inactive discussions are in the archives. The discussions that are still active are all here. So talk away... –--Theeuro 07:41, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Kosovo

Like I said, Serbia does not care about the money (at least its political leadership). I'm 100% certain they'd rather be an isolated and poor country, outside the Euro-Atlantic world with Kosovo, than a prosperous rich Slovenia-style economically advanced country and member of the Trade Union, NATO and EU.

I think there's the main problem. For if Belgrade wants compensation, it will demand it to be paid solely from Pristina (for all the billions of dollars of investment in the past decades, as all the results will be confiscated by Pristina) and Pristina will never pay anything to Serbia.

Unlike most Albanian-populated areas in Montenegro, there is a settlement in Kraja in which Montenegro does not have sovereignty. Also remember that Albanian Kraja terrorists tried to sabotage the recent 2006 election (and failed). In the 1990s the Kraja Albanians have been balloting for secession of Montenegro and joining Albania. The only reason why they have pacified their desires (like one half of the Presevo Albanian political leadership) is because they entered the government in the opposition against Kosovo Albanians' enemy, Milosevic; and only because they supported an independent Montenegro (just as Agin Ceku said in 2005, collapse of the Serbo-Montenegrin state is an Albanian national interest, as that will boost support for future secessions from Serbia).

You forget that Serbia retains strong cultural and socio-economic ties only with one part (and small one) of Kosovo, with the other being de facto an enemy in war.

The relative majority of Albanians politicians of Presevo want to join Kosovo. And the majority of Serbian politicians in the Serbian Republic want to secede from Bosnia and Herzegovina. --PaxEquilibrium 22:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

BTW this has little to do with personal economic interests and much more with... er.. nationalism and ethnic hatred, to tell you the truth. --PaxEquilibrium 13:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Listen- I'm trying to convey to you that this has everything to do with econimic policies of the ECB- and nothing whatever to do with nationalism and ethnic hatred or even politics. Well it has to do with economic politics- but not governmental politics. It has, more generally, to do with the UK not wanting to hand over billions of pounds to the ECB in penalties for leaving ERM II.

Please understand that regardless of Kosovar independence, the UK will either be adopting the euro by 2010 or paying the ECB billions of pounds. If Kosovo is a sovereign state by this time next year, the UK will be adopting the euro by 2010. If it is not, then the UK will be paying billions to the ECB. It really is that simple.

I can't begin to tell you nor impress upon you enough that the political/cultural/ethnic consequences of Kosovar sovereignty has nothing to do with the push within the EU (more precicly within the eurozone) for Kosovar sovereignty- nor is it even a factor. The only way that the UK will join the eurozone by 2010 without a sovereign Kosovo is if Germany can get a handle on their high inflation rates. Either Germany will sabbotage its own economy to make this happen or will push for Kosovar entry into the eurozone. The only way this can happen is through a cessation from Serbia. Also, this will require Montenegro to either begin using its own currency or join the eurozone.

I mean you are entitled to your own opinion about this- frankly I have no opinion at all- I am merely issuing facts that I know of on the comings and goings of the euro. That's it.

–--Theeuro 18:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The euro inside Part 2

NOTE- forwarded from User_talk:Nightstallion

I'm a bit "surprised" about some of the informations given here. "Surprised" may not be the good word because it's in line with what was already done, but I'm skeptical about the ideas. I speak firstly about the idea to limit the validity of coins from San Marino, Monaco and Vatican to limited areas. What's the interest to it? Those coins are very rarely seen in common circulation and are capted by collectors. They don't bother anyone and it's always a good surprise to find one. Every authomatic parking meter will accept them all over the euro zone, and an Irish shopkeeper won't spontanemously make the difference between them and commemorative Luxembourgian coins! I really can't see the reason for this idea.

The second one is about a common face for all Scandinavian countries. How can the said countries accept that?! Countries like Andorra which already uses the euro but without their own coins struggle to have their own ones. Why would this right denied to Sweden? If Germany has the right to produce 16 different 2€ coins during 16 years, why not Sweden a single one?

And what about the "unconstitutionilty" of the production in England of the English euro banknotes? The "English constitution" is made of ordinary laws and can been changed very easily, as it was done to change the composition of the House of Lords. It's what I read in Constitution of the United Kingdom.

Švitrigaila 11:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The reason these coins are not going to be legal outside a certain area is to reduce the confusion factor among those using the euro. If a shopkeeper in Ireland happens upon a San Marinese 50 cent coin, I doubt he/she would refuse the coin after the legislation is enacted. It is not going to be enforced in any other place but inter-bank transactions. So even if you have a Vatican 1 euro coin and try to deposit it into your account at a bank, it will be accepted, but the bank will return it to the Vatican and not keep it in their tills. There are so few of these in circulation that it isn't going to cause a huge wave in the banking industry and private sectors. The purpose is merely to remove the idea of 18 distinct coins from the public perception of 'appropriate euro coin designs'. If these are officially not accepted outside their respective states, the public won't have to remember what they look like and thus will reduce the number of coins in the general perception of what is the euro. It is very complicated; perhaps I haven't explained the position of the ECB properly, but it is necessary as part of an ongoing campaign against coins which are improperly identified as euro coins.

The single 'Scandanavian Design' will encompass Iceland, Sweden and Denmark. Another strategy to reduce the number of coin designs in circulation. Where 24 designs would be introduced, only 8 will. This is not a policy imposed by the ECB, but one which is accepted as a possible course of action by the three countries in consideration of introducing the euro.

The letter 'J' has been reserved for the UK to produce euro banknotes. The UK comprises of four areas- Scotland, N. Ireland, Wales and England. England can not produce paper money for use in England without the portrait of the reigning monarch in one form or another (including watermarks) present in the design. It is a part of the charter of the Bank of England. Therefore, the UK euro banknotes will likely be produced in Wales or Scotland. This is not as big an issue as you might think. Luxembourg has a similar situation and their share of paper euros produced are done so with the letters 'P', 'U' and 'Y' for France, Netherlands and Greece. Their letter is 'R' but they have yet to produce a single paper euro for the same reasons that England can't print euro paper money.

--Theeuro 13:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for these precisions. I'm still sure the charter of the Bank of England can be modified as simply as the British law establishing the pound sterling can be modified. If the English want to produce their own euros, they will, and they won't be bound by an unmodifiable law written 400 years ago.

Excuse me to answer your facts by my opinion, but I want to tell what I think of all that, and I would be glad to receive the opinions of the others. I still can't imagine why the ECB can tolerate comemmorative 2€ coins and complain about the plethora of national sides. As for protection against "coins which are improperly identified as euro coins", I would think it would be simpler to forbid them. In shops in Paris I can see a lot of "proof euro coins" from different countries (including Chechnya and Corsica!) If those false euros are freely on sale, there's no point to pretend wanting "to protect people against coins which are improperly identified as euro coins".

I think it's important to keep a national face on euro coins if it can help people to accept them. I'm really and deeply in favour of a common European single currency unit, but I think everything has been done badly concretely to make the "euro" object something acceptable:

• Its name is ugly in a lot of languages. Why? Because for some obscure reasons, some people wanted to have a unique word to call it in every language, disadaining the languages and their rules (see Linguistic issues concerning the euro) And it's of course a failure. No-one knows what to do with that word. The French forget to pronounce the liaison before it and the -s for the plural form, as if it were a kind of foreign unconfortable brand name. And the Hungarians and Latvians want to add a long article in the European Constitution stating the word will follow the Hungarain and Latvian rules of grammar when used in their language!! Mustn't it be an evidence for all languages? Be surprised after this kind of stuff that the electors reject this text by a referendum! I would have prefer a name with a unique root and a lot of forms in all the languages. For exemple crown. It would have been crown in English, corona, in Italian, Krone in Greman, korúna in Czech, couronne in French, and so on. It exists in every language. It would have look liked a real common noun.
• About the euro symbol, it would have been better to make a simple desciption of it. The $ symbol is just a S with one or two bars, for example. But the Euro sign is not a sign. It's a logotype with a very minitious description of all it dimension. All that to make the user a bit more sure that Euro is not a common noun but a kind of registred mark.
• Nothing is written on the banknotes, except an obscure "BCE ECB EZB EKT EKP"! Even in India with fourteen official languages or the USSR with fifteen, the name of the bank was written, and the value of the banknote was written in every fifteen languages. See here: [[Image:Rouble-1961-Paper-1-Reverse.jpg]]. But not on the euro banknotes. I guess it would have made them too famillar, too "banknote-like". "BCE ECB EZB EKT EKP" is far better to make the user adopt it!
• And of course, the design! Someone has decided to chose to show on their sides some interesting feature which are common to every European citizens. That is: nothing! As if it were quite ovious, the better thing to depict what the Europeans have in common is non existing buildings!

I always wonder if those who did the "concrete" euro (I mean the coins and notes and so on, not the common currency itslef) had no idea that someone will once use it. It was conceived as a product, with a brand name and a logotype. Not an object for everyday life with a common name. I'm surprised we've not yet to write it euro® ! The national sides are the last spaces were this currency can still look like a currency. So the idea to create a common face for several Scandinavian countries is, in my opinion, a huge stupidity. But not a surprising one. If every automatic machine can make the distinction between a euro coin and something else, why not people? If the value is written on the international side, every person who has a doubt about the authenticity of the coin he has in his hands will look at this side, and if the international sides are the same on every genuine euro coin, were is the problem?

I apologize if I use your talk page to expose my point of view. But I wanted to say that for a long long time and that was the occasion. Don't hesitate to share your opinion(s).

Švitrigaila 17:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I have no problem with- and in fact encourage- people to express their opinions on this page!

One thing about the Scandanavian design- This wasn't a decision arrived at by the ECB. The idea was first proposed at one of the meetings of the Nordic Council. It is a possibility only- not fact. You know one of the reasons the euro referendum can't pass is because the people in these countries identify themselves as Scandanavian first and European second. Many supporters of euro introduction suggested this idea as a way to get the people to accept the euro and many thought it would be easier if it was more closly related with their Scandanavian heritage rather than 'part of europe'. It was described as a 'unified currency inside the unified currency'. The idea of a single Scandanavian currency was in place long before the euro was a twinkle in anyone's eye.

I also have to point out that the concept and idea of the euro was never meant to be a brand of any kind. It was made as nationalistic as possible while still being a symbol of european unity. I can't tell you the kind of sacrifices that the peoples of France, Netherlands, Germany, Italy and others made to make the euro possible. The Guilder was the first stable currency in all of Europe. The Deutsch Mark represented strength and national pride for Germany and the Austrians loved their Schilling. It was almost comical how the Italians loved to Lira bash when they had to- at many points in time- carry buckets and buckets of Liras to the market just buy bread.

I mean, personally speaking, the Guilder was like a national symbol, sort of like the Queen. Gulden were as synonymous as being Dutch as cheese was. I was sad to see it go too. We have the Guilder in all its forms all over the house in places where we are reminded of it in a romantic kind of celebratory historical fasion. There is a Gulder encased in plastic that we use as a key chain. There is a picture frame hanging alongside the rest of our family with old gulden in it. Does anyone reading this remember the 50 Gulden note with the sunflower and the 10 cent teintje? Let me tell you- we did exchange any Dutch money for euro. We still have a few jars of gulden in our closet.

I think that europeans saw that it was more than a single currency we were adopting. It was a philosophy. That's how many people in Nederland feel- and Germany and France and Italy.

It was developed with the idea in mind that it was going to be a part of everyday life. It is accepted by the people- not loved. Eventually maybe in 50 years it will be loved. 'Crown' was one of the ideas, but it was too similar to other currencies and wasn't quite secular enough for the planners. As for the designs of the euro banknotes- the buildings represent styles of architecture found all over europe- which is something that every country has a connection with. Just go into any capital city in the EU and you will find a style of building like those depicted on the euro notes- from the 5 to the 500. The bridges represent a crossing from the past to the present- which is aprt of the philosophy. This is a little too cerebral for some to understand, though. That the European Central Bank's accronym was added in several languages as opposed to writing the whole thing out was done to leave room for the 20 plus security features that were neccessary. I've never heard that they don't look like a banknote. That's certainly a first for me.

You know, I'm French. So I perfectly understand what you say about the Gulden. It was the same thing for the franc. I don't regret the franc but it's clear I regret the design of the French banknotes, and the German banknotes, and the Dutch, Italian and so on banknotes (sorry, Nightstallion, I absolutely don't regret the design of the Austrian banknotes!) It's clear for me that the euro banknotes don't look like "serious" banknotes. They are like proofs created to test the new security features, but they are... how should I say?... they are empty. They are sheets of paper with a lot a security features and nothing on them. No message. No picture. No sign. Nothing. Empty sheets of paper. And I feel very sad to know that they exactly depict what the other Euro states and us think we share in common: emptiness. It's better to show nothing than to show a Greek philosopher, a Greek philosepher could make the other people jealous. European Union was supposed to be the sum of all national cultures. Seeing these banknotes, we can undesrstand it's the subtraction.

The common Scandinavian side makes me even more skeptical if you tell me it's an initiative from the countries themselves because "they feel more Scandinavian than European". If it's so, I guess they feel mor Swedish, Danish, Norwegian or Icelandic than Scandinavian. Why would they strip their national side for a Scandinavian side? What for? And why not merging their football teams together before the European Cup? Just imagine what would supporters say! Švitrigaila 20:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

While I agree that the euro banknotes are a little on the plain side, it is certainly not the bricks nor the mortar which holds the EU together; it was never intended to be the cultural fabric of the EU. I know that the franc was important to the French. There were elements of the country and culture on the currency, and indeed the euro is about the only tangible item that most people in europe have of the EU. Having said that, it is also a peice of history. When you say that 'we share emptiness', it makes me think that you are placing too much emphasis on the currency and not enough emphasis on the ideas and philosophies behind it.

If you don't see the idea that we all share architectural similarities and a movement into a new era from a terrible past, then the concept is clearly lost on you. If you don't see that the EU is defined by far more than the common currency, then you haven't grasped what the EU means for all of Europe. While you might (if you are Parisian) carry a newspaper in your pocket and drink wine with dinner, I will have chocolate sandwiches for breakfast and eat kale and potatos for dinner... but we are both Europeans, we are both citizens of one of the greatest institutions and testiments of one of the highest acheivements in human civilization. Our great- grandchildren will be the second generation to have lived and died not having to learn about a war that their parents have had to live through. This is a new era for Europe. The Treaty of Rome is an impactful moment that history will remember as being the beginning of the greatest era of peace that Europe has ever known. If that means that we have to look at rather bland peices of paper as we purchase our daily provisions, then so be it. What a small price to pay for generations of peace, don't you think?

Regarding the Scandanavian design- I really don't know what it is you are skeptical about. I'm only relaying information. Perhaps it might help you to know that it is only a suggestion and has no better chance of fruition than any other suggestion for future euro designs of these countries.

—Theeuro 02:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Slovenia

How come only Slovenia of all the 12 new European countries crossed to the Euro??? --PaxEquilibrium 14:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The Tolar was the only currency out of all the others to have met the criteria of ERM II. We all thought that Slovakia and Lithuania would also join in 2007, but they proved to have more difficulties toward the end of the ERM II timeframe.

Malta and Cyprus will be joining 1 January 2008.

--Theeuro 17:47, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The euro inside part 3

NOTE: portion forwarded from section entitled 'The euro inside', User_talk:Nightstallion

Hi Nightstallion and Theeuro, I'm a new member of Wikipedia and my name is: I love Euro. I would like to ask some questions to Theeuro, because I like very much this discussion. Here they are:

1. When do you think a referendum upon the Euro adoption in Denmark will be held?

I thought the date had already been announced.

2. What happened with the official Swedish Euro adoption date you were talking about?

Nothing 'happened' to it. They just changed their minds at the last minute. This isn't the first time that it happened.

3. When do you think the United Kingdom will adopt the Euro currency?

Around April/May 2010.

4. When do you think there will be official news upon the 2008 Euro adoption of Andorra, Iceland and Liechtenstein?

Who knows?!?! The whole thing might crumble apart!

Thank you for your attention and patience.

--Theeuro 13:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding point 1: No, it has not been announced; in fact, it was only rumoured to be planned. —Nightstallion (?) 14:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, it has been planned. I don't know the exact date of when it will be put to the people. My guess is before year's end. I mean it would be a waste to have all those ballots with 2007 printed on them go to waste!

–--Theeuro 18:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for all that information. I found the discussion via Nightstallions page. Very interesting what you write. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 19:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The euro inside part 3.1

So the ballots for the Danish referendum have already been printed? —Nightstallion (?) 14:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

About half of them were finished late last year, with the 2007 template. The rest have been or are about to be completed. Are you certain that the date has not already been announced? I'm not too sure how elections work in Denmark. In the Netherlands, the ballots are mailed out. I'm reasonably certain that at least the directions for how to vote have been sent out already in Denmark.

Just to be clear- I am referring to the referendum on joining the euro, not the vote on the constitution.--Theeuro 16:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, of course. I am absolutely sure it has not yet been announced, that kind of event would *certainly* have turned up in the media (and Wikipedia) by now, and I follow these events even more closely so I would have certainly noticed... I'll ask User:Valentinian about it, he's Danish IIRC. —Nightstallion (?) 16:26, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

And out of curiosity, how often have the Swedish government changed their mind up to now? I can see how the new conservative government might have thought of introducing the euro and make it official by the end of 2006, but before that? —Nightstallion (?) 15:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, I have lost count. More than five times for sure. It is a big mess and has caused unending amounts of paperwork. I wish they would just introduce it and be done with it. I mean it has to happen eventually so why put us through all this agony?!?!--Theeuro 16:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

If you ask me, you're absolutely right. But we'll see. I'm fairly certain the next government will introduce it, if this one won't. —Nightstallion (?) 16:26, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Denmark, I found the following info on da:Euro:

“ Danmark stemte ved en folkeafstemning den 28. september 2000 nej til euroen (53,2% imod, 46,8% for). Meningsmålinger sidenhen har imidlertid vist et nyt klart ja-flertal for euroen, alligevel har den liberal-konservative regering foreløbigt valgt (marts 2007) ikke at udskrive en ny folkeafstemning. Årsagen hertil er måske taktiske politiske overvejelser i forhold til det erklærede EU-fjendtlige støtteparti Dansk Folkeparti eller ganske enkelt usikkerhed overfor den danske befolknings luner og - dens formodede - generelle mangel på europæisk identitet. ”

However, I was not able to find anything confirming that a referendum has already been officially announced; I think it's fairly likely it will happen in 2007, but I believe there's been no announcement yet. —Nightstallion (?) 20:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Image:Map of Nordic--Theeuro 13:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC) Council.png

Hi Theeuro

Thank you for uploading this image. Would you mind taking a look at a few minor issues with it? The island in the Baltic you've coloured in pale blue is Gotland so it should be the same colour as the rest of Sweden. The Finnish Åland islands are located further north on what would be a straight line from Stockholm to Helsinki. The pale blue spot north of Scotland is part of the Shetland Islands. The Faroe Islands are located between Shetland and Iceland. I am also a little puzzled why you haven't coloured Jan Mayen and Svalbard the same way as the rest of Norway. In Scandinavia, we normally consider these two regions completely integral parts of Norway, although Svalbard is also covered by an international treaty. Otherwise a very nice map. Happy editing. Valentinian ^{T / C} 14:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Valentinian,

You know, this has been quite a struggle for me, pinpointing where all the locations are in Scandinavia. I can't quite find the Åland Islands on the map I have created, nor on the basic map I have been using to develop these other maps. Do you know of any maps that might be a little more detailed so that I can fix the ones I have been using? I'll fix the map to include Jan Mayen and Svalbard.

Also, Does Jan Mayen share the same kind of administrative division as Svalbard?

Thanks for the help! --Theeuro 14:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Taking a closer look, both the Faroe and Åland Islands are completely missing on your map. Perhaps this map might be of help. The Norwegian territories on the northern hemisphere (Jan Mayen, Svalbard and Bjørnøya) are all considered integral parts of Norway. This map shows the Faroes as "Føroyar" (the native Faroese name). They are located NW of Shetland and SE of Iceland. The Åland islands are a bit trickier find; it is the cluster of islands located SW of the Finnish mainland in the Gulf of Bothnia. On image:EU_location_FIN.png they are a bit easier to see, coloured the same way as the rest of Finland, but very close to the Swedish mainland, and on this map they are located NW of the Å in Åland. I haven't been able to locate a better "blank" map. Valentinian ^{T / C} 15:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey thanks for all your help. Have a look and let me know if I'm missing anything. I'll have to make other corrections to files of this type that I have uploaded too.--Theeuro 17:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks much better. Jan Mayen, Svalbard and Åland er all fine. If you could shrink the Faroes and rotate them a bit clockwise. The Faroes are too big, and should be shrunk and rotated a bit clockwise. The Faroes are actually a bit smaller than the Shetland islands. But a definite improvement. Valentinian ^{T / C} 08:53, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The reason I left the islands disproportionatly large is so that their location could be distinguised with color. I put a notice in the description that they are larger than they should be. I'm a little out of free time to change images. If you have the ability to do it yourself, feel free! You might have a better idea than I of where the geographical location of these islands are. I'll have a bit more time next month if you don't get around to it.

Thanks! --Theeuro 13:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Country-related templates

Hi JR,
I suddenly realized I was inadvertently removing the {{{titlestyle|...}}} option you've added to a few of the above, so I hope I've now replaced them (plus default suitable for the {{template group}}s within which they often appear). Apologies if it might've looked as if I was working against you. I'm trying to feel my way to a consensus on these templates, so thanks for your contribution!  Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 14:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey, don't worry about it. I'm all for consistency, but more than that, i was trying to have all the templates at List of countries in Europe have the same color background. I think I used the template for 'Nrodic Council' as a base for the rest of them.

If you think your way works better- by all means, proceed!! I was also looking for but couldn't find a template with just EU member countries without the candidate countries and vise-versa.

I'm pretty much done with the templates, as I fixed the ones that I wanted to use on that page. If there is anything I can do to help, please let me know! --Theeuro 13:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

List of countries in Europe

From David Kernow#List of countries in Europe

Greetings. I am the user who created this article. I deeply appreciate your contributions- they have made the page much better. Since you seem to have some extensive editing experience, I thought I might ask you this question about some recent edits that are not attributed to you.

If I go back to an edit which is between your edits, and undo an edit which is not yours, will that then erase your subsequent changes? Basically, I don't agree with the note about the UK and also 'Holland' was removed from the list as a name. Ongoing debate and contradiction of these issues aside, the real benefactors of this article are Americans. A large portion of Americans do not understand the complexities involved in the naming conventions used to distinguish national boundaries within the UK. Nor do they understand the connection between Holland and The Netherlands. As stated before, I don't think they are ignorant Americans, but because colloquial American and proper English are in disagreement at this intersection of the language, I think it would serve to educate and benefit a large audience as to the slight discrepancies between the American English and the Queen's English.

I suppose there are two questions in this post. I'm more interested in your answer for the first question and interested in your opinion of the second. Apologies for spelling- I am not a native speaker of English, but have qualifications in linguistics.

Thanks for your attention and help!!

Best regards, --Theeuro 05:40, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

FrankB

Hi, my names Frank, and I work a lot with David Kernow... I just happened by on some Commons business, so I figured you could use an answer soonest. So... In case you're working, let me field this for David. I believe he's somewhat to the West of us both these days.

• and undo an edit which is not yours, will that then erase your subsequent changes? -- In a word, Yes. The way to do that is to bring up the diff screen in another browser or tab, and edit in another. Then work in the change, whether it be subtracting some or adding. If the change is something you want to add back, and it's in one of the diff panes, you can usually just drag and copy it, then paste it into the page.
  Unexpected use of template {{2}} - see Template:2 for details. Your other points, regarding distinctions, and whatnot, sound fine in theory, and need packaged in proper language. If something has been removed before, or a term added erroneously, sometime adding the change back and incorporating an inline comment with a note about why it is proper will stick. In any case of such 'difference of opinion', suggest adding a talk section noting the issue, presenting the case, and then pointing said in-line comment to it as a good practice. An in-line comment is set off by <!-- to begin it and a matching close comment ---> after it. Actually, you only NEED three characters, but that's a bit weird to me, so I add the extra hypen ahead and behind most of the time. Best wishes. // FrankB 07:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Let me add in closing, that I like the table (template), particularly putting the locator maps with the other items. I'm not sure about your color choice on those indicators though. Isn't there a form of color blindness that can't see blue? (Just a troubling thought. You might ask Quiddity, and for feedback on the effort as well. He's British and a good egg.) Keep up the good work! // FrankB 07:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

David K

• Looks like Frank has covered the ground – thanks, Frank!  Thanks also to yourself, JR, re the above – which I suppose was an example of inadvertently undoing some edits!  Re the second point here about American English, British English, etc, etc, I'll revisit List of countries in Europe and take a closer look. Incidentally, re your English spelling etc, not only have I not spotted any unusual spellings (how's that for complex English phrase?!) but I'd say I'd've said (!) you were a native speaker!  Chuckle, David (talk) 00:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, thanks for the encouragement. English was my second language... I lived for 15 years in America, but German was my first language and Dutch was my third. Most of my education was conducted in Dutch so I'm very good, I think, about writing in Dutch. Some of my relatives are in the US, so I have to speak English quite often. Sometimes I get the urge to spell things in English as they would be spelled in Dutch, which is why I'm a terrible speller in English! Thanks again for the compliment! --Theeuro 03:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Afternote

I should note that the above comments were made as being applicable 'in general', not realizing the graphical nature of your tablized list. But the same principles apply. I see on another look that you have claimed credit for making the maps such as Image:Europe_map_russia.png. While I'm sure you're a clever fellow, most of us don't have the free hand drawing expertise to generate such to scale without some outside source... which presents a potential copyright issue, as maps are intellectual property. I know there are various public domain blank map sources, so to be proper, your claims should cite the beginning blank (source). Otherwise someone may come along and tagging such with a copyright deletion notice. Better to keep the hounds at bay!

Also, such would be better uploaded to Template:Wpd. Otherwise someone else will have to spend their free time and download it, re-upload it to the commons server, and then delete it here on wp. If you want to delete any such you adjust, and whatnot after loading it on the commons, just add a {{db-author}} tag to it, and it will be speedy-deleted with minimal impact on others time. One nice feature on the commons is email notification of changes... if someone edits an page you're watching, the system will send you a change notice. It's far better than browsing one's watchlist! If you're unsure of how to categorize such, just drop me a note of what you've uploaded, and I'll deal with it. Cheers again! // FrankB 07:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

• Well I guess I thought I knew enough about wikipedia editing to do what I was doing. Can you give me a more detailed description as to what the protocols are for uploading and then using images to/from wiki commons? --Theeuro 21:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Proto-proposal

1. Sorry, I suck at watching watch lists, and have been busy. I'm just old and slow, not intentionally rude! (Well, not in this kind of thing! I can be firm now and again with sufficient cause! <g>)
2. Other answers: Ping here
3. Regarding the above... uploading to the Commons is same as here, just create an account. The 'rules' are mostly the same, but the things some licenses and templates are called vary some. You use the image precisely the same way, so if an image is there or here, you don't know when viewing it until you enlarge it. When that happens, a link to it's commons page is on the page here stating that it's a repeat of the commons description page and gives you a link to the actual archive if you need to make an edit.
   Unexpected use of template {{2}} - see Template:2 for details. David Kernow or I can help you there with other questions. Browse my contribs there for talk page posts, and that should help you locate a few others who are active, and since in the main, my contribs there have been either Maps or Templates or Maps categories, such individuals will mostly know something about Maps. Just take a diff to see what was discussed. IIRC, my templates discussions are rare compared to Maps matters. A good starting place for 'other contacts' would be the contributors to Commons:Category talk:Maps. Browsing their Village Pump will turn up some other editors in common with our pages as well. Their welcome template has other links and there is a list of Admins too.
4. note the Atlas dude is Template:Cms, and the territories project should interest him and his helpmates.
5. Gotta run back to RL! Ping me if there is something you'd like answered quick! Cheers! // FrankB 16:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey! Good Stuff happens too!!!

re:This pair of edits. Note the template name on the first of the set. This is the 'Protocol' you were asking about, and the 'Acceptable Source' I was stumbling around to describe above somewhat. Not sure what the equivalent template is here but I'll let you know. (I just emailed someone on that!)... Same name: {{GFDL-GMT}} no that's something different. Helps to ask the right question! <G> It's NOT! {{GFDL-GMT}} (My contact reported a diff name--I think I sent the wrong commons template name, a sub-template! Ooops!)

Here's some source links that are acceptable: (there are more, I'm just not someone who sources such, though I may someday soon.) This is the tickler note I left myself on my /desk page:

1. The map has been created with the Generic Mapping Tools: http://gmt.soest.hawaii.edu/ using one or more of these public domain datasets for the relief:
   
   1. re: This edit ] squirrelling away this find!
   2. GLOBE (topography): http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/topo/gltiles.html
   3. ETOPO2 (topography/bathymetry): http://dss.ucar.edu/datasets/ds759.3/
   4. SRTM 3/30 (topography): http://srtm.usgs.gov/
2. In any event, that Commons tag is available, and that's where stuff should go.

Hope that's a help! Cheers! // FrankB 01:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Economic-type question

Why are the national investments required abnormally early-on? This long-term political crisis in Serbia has, according to political and socio-economic analysts, cost Serbia entire 2007, and some say it has decapitated 2008 by great...? --PaxEquilibrium 17:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand your question. --Theeuro 19:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I think he means why political decisions or, in this case, political inactivity, can cost a country economical advances far into the next year; I'd answer the question for you, but I'm afraid we haven't heard enough about economic yet at university to succinctly answer that question. ;) —Nightstallion (?) 18:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh is that all?! It really isn't that complicated. Think of economic development as a window of opportunity that opens only once, maybe twice per year. If the brid that is stuck inside the house doesn't leave through the window before it is closed, he must wait until the window again opens. Such is the case with Serbia. There has to be a certain amount of 'stars in alignment' so to say, in order that development takes place, too. In the case of Serbia, unusually long investment is required so that it is viewed by Serbia as just that- a long term investment. Forgive this analogy, I mean no disrespect- it is very much like teaching a dog to sit. We all know this takes a great deal of time and patience before a return is seen. It does nobody any good to shoot the dog after only a day or so of training if he still doesn't obey the command to sit. Political crisis, of any kind, is a major red flag to investors, banks and public opinion. I would go as far to say that even 2009 is gone for Serbia- perhaps in 2011, the process can begin again to gain strength. This was a surprise- by the way- for everyone. Even the ECB was caught somewhat off guard by what happened.

For investors, stability is key. Without investors, you can not have bank involvement. Without public support, you can't have investors. These are just the three major stars, perhaps the brightest, that must align just so in order that economic development can take place. Take a look at the Euro exchange rates between it and the major currencies in the world. The Euro is becoming stronger as the US Dollar and British Pound Sterling become weaker. Bush is about end his reign over the US and Tony Blair is awaiting a successor. Political crises can throw an economy into disaster- no matter how strong it is or was at the time when the element of instability is introduced. That the Euro can not be affected in such a manner is testiment to this fact. The rotating presidency changes with celebration and a few hundred peices of paperwork. There is no election, no public opinion- no one single political body with a link to the Euro. Put simply- there is no political connection attached to the Euro except the EU.

This is all possible because of the political stability that existed within the EU at the time of the first ERM. Were one of the countries to experience political instability at the time just before or just after (6 months either way) entry into ERM, those countries would simply be removed. This happened with Greece, but they, in true Greek political style, managed to pull their act together at the 23rd hour and was allowed to stay in.

I know Serbian economy has little to do with the Euro, but look to it for an example of a currency in a politicaly stable environment. Did you know that over 60% of the world's currency reserves are now in Euro instead of the US Dollar? This is because economists are just begining to learn why the Euro is unaffected in the same ways other currencies are. It is- to say the least- an oddity as far as economic history goes. It is the first time that a currency is unaffected by politics. And it looks like it will stay that way for a long, long time.

I hope this gives insight- I already know it doesn't answer the question, but I'm only an expert in Euro-economics.

--Theeuro 10:11, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Eurocoins nat slovakia.s01 001.jpg

Hi, Is this image your own scan?--OsamaKBOT 02:56, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Did you get my e-mails?

Just asking, you seem not to have replied... —Nightstallion 21:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

FYI

There's some kind of server-side-image-cache-whatever problem with the images, nothing we two can do about it; and it *is* actually Sammarinese. —Nightstallion 14:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Mladjan Dinkic

Did you hear about Mladjan Dinkic? --PaxEquilibrium 20:16, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Awarded Economy Minister of the Year 2006 in Washington. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 10:54, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Luke Ravenstahl

Thanks for helping make the article better. 216.194.3.177 17:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Theeuro\eurotemplate

If you want it deleted, put {{userreq}} at the top of it. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 02:25, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually I went ahead and deleted it. Cheers, -- Flyguy649 ^talk 02:29, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem! You probably know this, but if you want a subpage, you have to use a forward slash (/) rather than a backslash (\). -- Flyguy649 ^talk 02:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:€2 commemorative coin Austria 2007 TOR.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:€2 commemorative coin Austria 2007 TOR.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. BetacommandBot 20:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Bot malfunction apparently... I just got the [same message]. » byeee 12:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Betacommand

Thanks for that, I thought I was in the twilight zone there for a minute! What is going on with that Betacomand rubbish? Why did you post on User talk:Fuhghettaboutit page?--Trounce 21:07, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I would like to help. I am not particularly good with the behind the scenes workings of Wikipedia though. I have posted here on a help page.Not sure what kind of a response I'll get--Trounce 21:34, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Just thought I'd let you know I got a response from user Betacommand here --Trounce 23:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: BetacommanBot

I've responded to your post on my talk page. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit 03:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

E-mail

I've replied to your e-mail the third time today -- check your spam filters, I suppose? —Nightstallion 18:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Eurocoins nat slovakia.s01 100.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Eurocoins nat slovakia.s01 100.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) 01:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Your rollback request

I have granted your rollback request at RfR. However, reverting vandalism does not some under WP:3RR, and rollback should not be used to revert good faith edits, and neither should it be used to revert-war with other users. For more information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. Good luck. Acalamari 02:42, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

hi

i don't understand why you say in your site and in various articles about national designs that 6 countries need to change the design of their coins but you list just five of them (austria germany greec belgium and finland) and i can't find any sixth —Preceding unsigned comment added by SquallLeonhart ITA (talk • contribs) 16:38, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. That is a puzzle. The correct number is (or was) 5. Two have changed the designs already- Finland did so last year and Belgium did this year. There was a mistake on the FAQ page of my website, and I have corrected it there. Where else have you noticed this error? Was it on a Wiki article? Thanks for pointing it out.
Cheers. The € • ^T/_C 02:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

don't wory ill fix it--SquallLeonhart_ITA (talk) 20:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:100.est.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:100.est.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:010.est.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:010.est.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:010.sla.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:010.sla.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:200.est.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:200.est.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:020.est.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:020.est.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:020.sla.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:020.sla.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:050.est.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:050.est.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:050.sla.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:050.sla.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:001.est.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:001.est.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:001.sla.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:001.sla.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:002.est.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:002.est.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:002.sla.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:002.sla.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:005.est.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:005.est.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:005.sla.01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:005.sla.01.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

List of countries in Europe

Hello Theeuro.

I noticed you reverted my edit on the List of countries in Europe article. What source are you using to say that the names "Ville de Paris" or "Comune di Roma" are official? Thank you, Korg (talk) 18:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Paris and Rome both have references to the name. The names are official in that they are the native or domestic long form name of the city in their respective domestic languages.
Cheers.The € • ^T/_C 06:26, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but I don't see any reference saying that these names are official. In fact, I would rather see the names of the cities one could expect in such a list. Korg (talk) 03:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The English names are already present; what other names might one expect? If you look at the articles Rome and Paris, you will see in the country information box, at the top, where official names are located, the official names of the cities in question. Also, please see Talk:List of countries in Europe.
Cheers.The € • ^T/_C 03:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:100.fin.02.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:100.fin.02.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) 05:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:050.fin.02.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:050.fin.02.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) 05:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:020.fin.02.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:020.fin.02.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) 05:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:010.fin.02.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:010.fin.02.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) 05:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:005.fin.02.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:005.fin.02.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) 05:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)