Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.

Note: I will delete useless flames or discussions I do not want to get in to on this page

Where does Guantanamo go?[edit]

Hi Shocktm,

I'm wondering where Guantanomo should go. Is it at proper pene-exclave as it is only a lease or is it just regarded a military base and therefore just a ex-territory just as embassies are?

I opt for the pene-exclave. What is your view?


Peter Mulvany —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mulvany (talkcontribs) 23:15, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As it leased land it is not an enclave/exclave and should not be listed on List of enclaves and exclaves. Maybe an explaintion should be added to the top section about leased land instead otherwise the list will get longer with a lot of militraty base/embassies/etc. -- (Shocktm | Talk | contribs.) 23:23, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Renewed discussion about the EU entry in List of countries and outlying territories by total area[edit]


I'm contacting you because you participated in the discussion about the EU entry in List of countries and outlying territories by total area in the past. So I concluded that you might be interested to know that two editors currently push for a change in the article structure that is in conflict with the standing consensus resulting out of our past discussion.

The consensus was to include the EU entry in the initial text of the article, but not in the actual table (even unnumbered). — Whereas the change that is currently pushed would result in moving the EU entry to the very end of the article, even after the references/sources table. The result can be seen here: [1].

The standing consensus was not my favorite solution, as I would like to include the EU into the very list (unnumbered), but I content myself with the standing compromise. Whether you agree to or oppose the change, I strongly feel that the article's structure should not be changed without a proper discussion and maybe even a new vote before changing the standing compromise. You might want to give your point of view in the current discussion at


Cheers and take care, MikeZ (talk) 14:12, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An AFD you participated in before is back for a second round[edit]

List of special entities recognized by international treaty or agreement is nominated for deletion again. I'm contacting all of those who participated in the first AFD discussion. Dream Focus 02:26, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Foreign establishment[edit]

The article Foreign establishment has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced article under a neologism as title with no known solid official evidence exists definitively confirming in the English language of such usage, and originally started off by an IP-number address registered to an University in Singapore; the article read a bit like an incoherent but incomplete anti-British and anti-American anti-Colonial rant.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. (talk) 12:48, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]