I'm aware that some of the family trees i made are not properly tagged. I intend to licence them all with the {{Cc-by-sa}} but unfortunately i get bored, so i place the tags slowly. So you can either wait or put the tag yourself. Thanks for your diligence. muriel@pt 20:52, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I delete old talk; I answer here; I wish you a merry christmas

Que bellos los ojos tuyos! -- Viajero 19:15, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

• Gracias! (blushing) Muriel G 13:37, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Muriel, in terms of the Charles, Duke of Orleans, I think that we need to figure out how article on the French nobility should be titled. My opinion is that they should be at Firstname (Surname), frenchnobletitle de Title, rather than Firstname (Surname), Englishnobletitle of Title. But I think a consistent or semi-consistent system needs to be worked out, as we have for the English nobility. So, no, I won't delete the page now, because I don't think it should be moved there. If we can come to some sort of system that says the article should be there, I'd be happy to do so. Perhaps I should open discussion at Wikipedia:Naming Conventions (Names and Titles), or whatever the page is called? My attempt to do something similar for German noble titles there, which was largely ignored, somewhat discouraged me, though. john k 18:52, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Dear John, i'm afraid i have to disagree with you on this Firstname (Surname), frenchnobletitle de Title, because i rather have the English version, because this is a English Language encyclopaedia. The Duchesse du Berry and the Comte de Anjou s place are in the French wikipedia, as well as the Herzog von Sachsen und der Graf von Pfalz in the German one. When I'm back in Europe, i'll have a look in the Naming Conventions. Muriel G 13:37, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The German titles, I'd agree, are not generally used in English (at least before the abolition of noble titles when they became part of the name). However, for French noble titles, the French titles are very fequently used in English. Certainly for non-royals. We speak of the "Marquis de Lafayette," not the "Marquess of Lafayette." The "Duc de Broglie," not the "Duke of Broglie." Certainly I've never even seen "Count of Provence" and "Count of Artois" to refer to Louis XVI's brothers. Will and Ariel Durant, for instance, use the French noble titles exclusively (including for the Duc d'Orleans). Essentially, different foreign languages have different levels of familiarity in English. The Romance languages are almost certainly the most familiar, and they are also the languages where noble titles are the most similar to those in English. As such, it is common (and increasingly more common) to use the native language titles in Spanish, Italian, and especially French. Where both usages are common, I think we should stick to the native usage. I'd add that Encarta and Columbia use French titles exclusively. Britannica gives both (one in parentheses), and somewhat inconsistently, but seems to prefer the French titles. john k 17:31, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Dear John, first i am glad you agree with me on the german titles!! Second, I understand your point: you want to follow the more traditional conventions, like the sources you cited (and i suspect that Duke of Orleans and Count of Artois give you the creeps, because you are not used to it). But put yourself into an (meaning not a scholar in History like you, or an interested amateur like me) ordinary user's position, while searching the internet, especially if they dont know French. The use of French titles is confusing (and in my own POV, ugly, but thats beside the matter) and might lead to unsuccessful searches. Anyway, either with the French convention or the English one, we do need a convention. Do you know the opinions of other users? Do you think this deserves a poll? Cheers, Muriel G 14:54, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

As to the general issue, I think my point was that use of the French titles is standard in English, and that the Wikipedia should follow standard English practice (used by other encyclopedias), rather than babying its readers and assuming they'll be confused by the standard way that French noble titles are referred to. I mean, one might just as easily argue that English-speakers will be confused by the use of French or German given names, and that we should translate these into English. Clearly, though, we should have redirects, and we should try to take care to explain the French titles somewhere. I would agree that perhaps earlier titles that are actually associated with rule of a particular region, rather than just being noble titles, should perhaps be treated differently. But I really don't see how using the convention that is generally used in English would be particularly confusing to readers. But perhaps we should take this to a naming conventions page and invite the participation of others. john k 16:05, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I've copied our discussion to Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (names and titles). john k 19:48, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. The whole thing was kind of unfortunate, but what can you do. Best wishes. -- Curps 18:29, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hello Muriel,

You contributed a graph to the article on Wars of the Roses. Apparantly some names on the graph are displayed in white. However, since the background of the graph is white as well they would appear to be illegible. Do you have the original graph or the missing data available?

Nice set of eyes by the way. :)

JeroenHoek 14:22, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Well... I have some responsabilities on that figure. I'll change it to something less absurd. Thanks for the compliment. Cheers, Muriel G 17:53, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hi... I am completely new to this, so I am not sure if I am doing it right... Muriel, your information on here is completely interesting and I'm putting it to good use filling in some blanks. Thanks for your hard work... I wish you would show your entire face, your eyes are simply captivating... Denny

Hello again, on the List of Byzantine Emperors (well, the talk page at the moment) I have added family relationships to the list...that might help, if you are still thinking about making family trees. What would help even more is a book called "A History of the Byzantine State and Society" by Warren Treadgold, if you can find it - he has family trees for almost every emperor (except the usurpers). Adam Bishop 02:18, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I think Norwich's lush popular history of the Byzantine Empire also has family trees, although I'm not certain of that. john k 05:09, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips! I didnt quit, i am just taking a break from family trees and wiki.en. The wiki.pt is about to reach 10,000 articles and i am giving a hand. Muriel G 14:06, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Olá! é bom ver aqui outro portugues (neste caso uma portuguesa) :) - --Cyprus2k1 12:21, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Idem! Mas agora ando mais pela wiki.pt, que anda a precisar de toda a ajuda possível. Estamos quase a chegar aos 10,000 artigos lá e o ambiente geral é bastante mais saudável... Viva Portugal!! (nao sei quanto a ti, mas eu sofro imenso com a bola!) Muriel G 14:06, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hi Muriel! Just a quick note to express my heartfelt appreciation for your vote for me, as well as your encouraging words of support on my talk page. Wikipedia is a tremendous project, and it is a privilege to be able to play a part in its development. Your encouraging words meant a lot to me, Muriel. Thank you so much. Have a great day, my friend! David Cannon 09:19, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Yes, it was me:-) As one who helps out on the Multilingual Statistics page, I keep a sharp eye out for approaching milestones. It is so exciting to see such growth in what was until recently a small wiki, and you have every reason to be proud of reaching ten thousand articles. I'm sorry you feel asleep in front of the computer and missed the milestone! I'm sure, however, that it won't be long before you have even bigger milestones to celebrate - just keep up the tremendous work and you'll be there in no time:-) Congratulations to you and your colleagues on pt.wiki! David Cannon 11:40, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• Thanks! Muriel G 11:47, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi Muriel, I wish you weren't leaving, but I can understand how frustrating en: is getting as it grows. There is a lot of madness here, and maybe I am more foolishly optimistic than you, or maybe I am not yet far enough removed from high school to be annoyed by that aspect of it :) Well, good luck with the pt: Wikipedia, and thanks for all your help here! Adam Bishop 13:13, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Ditto to what Adam said. We'll all miss you, Muriel. It is thrilling, however, to see that there's now more than enough to do on the Portuguese Wikipedia to keep you busy and I wish you the best. That said, I do hope you'll still show up here for a visit once in a while. I'd rank you in the top 10 contributors whose work I've most enjoyed reading, and it bears repeating that I'll miss you. Be assured that I'm not the only one. Ah, I know ... I'll send you a bottle of wikihol to make you come back! How's that? David Cannon 14:24, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• thanks guys! if everybody was like you, wiki would be a nicer place. drp me a line in pt. if you need something. Cheers, Muriel G 18:15, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Farewell. See you soon.;) -Stevertigo 01:05, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

In response to Plato's adminship request, you left the following message:

• I was under the impression that in here, a encyclopedia, people were supposed to have freedom of say what they want and subject themselves to opposing votes. Apparently, wikipedia is turning more and more to hypocrisy. That makes me sad. Muriel G 12:07, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Welcome to the Red Faction!!! You are our grand prize winner, we are proud to accept your membership. Lirath Q. Pynnor

• Fuck, why not? :) Muriel G 21:05, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hurray! Lirath Q. Pynnor

Nice joke. When I stopped laughing, I added the Yorkists. But I didn't have the same font as you, so it doesn't look as good as it might. You might think about redoing it from your sources, if you still have them. See Image talk:Rosas.png for more comments. Gdr 16:26, 2004 Jul 27 (UTC)

Thank you. Gdr 20:24, 2004 Jul 27 (UTC)

I was thrilled by the way you did not quibble at all in your response to 172 on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/User:Plato/red faction (although the by about editing Zionism seemed a bit over the top). Your "the price of repressing fundamental liberties" really resounded for me. Thanks you for cutting through the hypocrisy.

You might find this other VfD nominee, Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/User:IndigoGenius/Micronation of interest; while the case is more borderline, the motivations for listing it seem to be the same, that is, to misuse VfD to "punish" a perceived enemy.

And while that VfD's lister, User:Snowspinner will no doubt win his Request for Administrative powers when voting closes only a few hours from now, you may wish to read this User:Snowspinner/Avala_Evidence and, if it seems as unjustified and contrived to you as it does to me, register a vote here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#User:Snowspinner_.2854.2F6.2F2.29_Ends_17:06.2C_31_July_2004.

-- orthogonal 06:29, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC) (forgot to sign initially)

• I have no desire of involving myself in discussions, although sometimes, as were the case, i feel that i need to say something. If i was over the top it was nothing to compare with 172. I might say that i was chocked, apalled, younameit, with the use of a personal family tragedy as an argument. As if because of his grandparents he can say whatever he pleases. Fortunately i know personally enough jews to know that emotional blackmail is not common among them. Muriel G 10:25, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • That was not emotional blackmail. You called me a fascist and I stated otherwise. Don't react to people so hysterically and you'll elicit a more positive response. 172 15:23, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • And there you are, being nosy again! :) 172, chill out, please. Imagine what reaction i could give to the above hysterical response of yours... I wont give it. In part i understand your irritation, but i also think that you shouldnt give much atention to Plato or Lir. You know that they live on attention, surely. If I reacted in such way, that's because i find wikipedia too much involved on politics, on petty subjects and petty discussions. By saying this, I'm not pointing the finger to you or anybody else, its just a general feeling i have and makes me jumpy - and thats why i moved to wiki.pt. Your nomination of Plato's page in VfD was absolutely superfulous, and I'm sure that you'll agree with me if you compare it to your other contributions to wikipedia. I've been nosing around myself in your page and i saw that you are a keen reader on politic topics that I'm sure deserve your atention much more than the red faction. I am not a person who likes quarrels and you wont find any user who had problems with me (except perhaps Mr See Warning, but well, one's not perfect), or an argument i pursued just for the sake of it. However I do say what i think and i will continue to do it. That i think was what got me the membership of the redfaction, by the way. Actually what i wrote is my belief that with nomination you were trying to turn wikipedia into a fascist dictatorship, but there is no point in discussing grammar. You are of course free to present a complaint about that. As for the emotional blackmail, i still dont understand whats the point of somebody obviously smart like you in naming family tragedies as arguments. I could also write some sad stories about my father and both of my grandfathers to get simpathy: throughout the history, jewish people got one of the hardest blows, surely, but tragedies are not exclusive to them. You can see White Rose for an excelent example. With wikilove, Muriel G 16:48, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

As you have learned, by arguing with 172, the cabal is real. They are a group of petty tyrants with no respect for common decency -- their goal is not to make the wikipedia better, but to make the wikipedia theirs. Lirath Q. Pynnor

• Thats why i moved to wiki.pt :) Muriel G 10:25, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Adenda to the above comment: the reason is the general environment not of course 172, whom i never worked with. Muriel G 08:46, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I've had a lot of people leave here I considered friends, or at least "comrades-in-arms" -- editors who understood this project, who had the right attitude, and who were good for it. Meaning no disrespect to any of them, I think you're the one I'll miss most of all (unless a mass exodus takes one of a select few who remain). I hope you can return someday, even in limited fashion. If this place does not make someone like you welcome, I fear it will not keep me for as long as I'd hoped. But I will do what I can to make it a better place, and hope I was not a part of the clique problem that led you to leave. I don't know that I am a member of such a group, but then such people are rarely aware of it. If there is anything I could have done to make your time here better, I hope you'll share that information with me. Best wishes to you, wherever you go from here -- may you find peace and friendship. Jwrosenzweig 18:05, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• Dear James :) you are such a nice bloke! Of course you were not a part of the issue and neither is this a big deal. I am still here, although in a limited faction. I'm putting pt links and fiddling with the red faction, above all things (see above for a tiny sample). For the time being I'm pretty happy in wiki.pt, a heaven of peace and contentment, and I have no desire to contribute anymore in english, because i am sick of the generalized view that all wikipedians are equal but some are more equal than others (and if any that more equal should be you!). This slowly got into my nerves over the last few months. I am not upset or angry with anyone, that's just not me, and of course my views might change, once a wikipedian always a wikipedian, but not until i return in October from yet another trip to the southern hemisphere. Please dont you leave: its people like you that make this place nice. And since we are at it, i remembered that i have to vote on something, whenever the voting starts. I truly wish you make it, for the love i have for the project and everything sacred! See you around, with a wikihug, Muriel

Ditto to what James said! Muriel, you have a HUGE number of friends around here who miss you terribly ... who feel that your absence has left a painful gap in the soul of Wikipedia. I know, it can be a tough place sometimes. I sensed a number of months ago that you were feeling the heat, so I deliberately edited a bit in "your" space, to let you know that somebody was around who appreciated and enjoyed your work. I can see that you're a kind-hearted person by nature, and it therefore can't be easy to be around people who are constantly bickering, lobbying, and putting others down. But I don't think they're doing it deliberately, Muriel. I think they're just acting out of wikistress. It's just that after weeks on end of sitting up until 4am on Wikipedia, 3 hours of sleep a night, a hard day at work, then another 4am stunt, day after day, they're not in the best of moods. I have to confess that I've fallen into that trap myself once or twice, but it emphatically isn't the "real me," and I don't think it's the "real them" either, in the great majority of cases. They just need to take a wikibreak for a day or two to destress. I do hope all of us will take your concerns to heart and work hard to make wiki.en the kind of place you'll someday desire to come back to. With the way wiki.pt is growing now, of course, I realize there's enough work there to keep you busy for quite some time - but you'll then need somewhere to relax occasionally! We'll work to make your old home (wiki.en) a place where you can do that, Muriel. When you come back in October, I hope you'll see a few changes that will warm your heart. By the way, I see you're visiting the southern hemisphere. Does that trip take in New Zealand, by any chance? We've got a few Portuguese Porto restaurants here with hot, spicy hamburgers the way you love them (there's one in Auckland's main street, FYI). Have a great day - and a great holiday, my Lusistanian amiga. David Cannon 22:41, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• Thanks for your support. I already feel the black clouds fading away :) Muriel G 16:21, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm still pissed cause you called me disturbed and haven't removed it. anthony 16:30, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• I'm afraid that i dont feel confortable to respond to comments posted by users who do not trust themselves to keep their minds and (quote) will sometimes modify my comments even after people have replied to them, although i have to respect their decision and apreciate the warnings. Muriel G 17:30, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Well, I've removed the warning. anthony
    • If you are looking for an apology, you wont get it - your recent behaviour regarding Jim Henson shows that i have my point. If you want to ask me something about an article, you are welcome without your warning. If you are seeking trouble and a fight, you can look somewhere else. Muriel G 16:07, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • I'm not looking for an apology. I would appreciate it if you removed your personal attack on me, though. anthony (see warning) 01:41, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I don't feel I've twisted your words; perhaps you mispoke. I mentioned to you that 172 was quite unfriendly, and your response was to state, "Thats why i moved to wiki.pt". How then, have I gone too far by suggesting that 172s unfriendliness is detrimental to the wikipedia? Lirath Q. Pynnor

Olá, sou novo nisto de wiki e pensei que me pudesses ajudar. Criei um artigo e aparece lá "não sei quê cleanup", que devo fazer?

Hi Muriel! Seeing that it's now the 24th (at least in my time zone), I thought I'd send you a short note to wish you a happy birthday. I do hope you're having a wonderful holiday in Namibia, and that the nonavailability of wikihol in that place isn't causing too many severe withdrawal symptoms. Your birthday will likely be long past by the time you get this, but I want to send it now to let you know that there are people on Wikipedia who were thinking of you, missing you (I'm not the only one by a long shot), eagerly looking forward to your return in November. Please come back to us - even if only to say Hi! Wish I could send you some wikihol:-) David Cannon 13:08, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

P.S. I thought the best kind of present I could give you as a fellow-Wikipedian would be an article about you. I hope you like it! I was so tempted to put the article in the main namespace rather than in your user space, but decided against doing so without your consent. Muriel, I really hope that I haven't misrepresented you, and that I don't appear to be making fun of you. I assure you that it would never enter my thinking to embarrass you. If I have unintentionally misrepresented or embarrassed you in any way, please forgive me. I just thought it would be nice to give you an article as a present, not only from me but also on behalf of the many, many people who want to see you back here. Once again, I hope you had a great birthday. David Cannon 14:00, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You're welcome, Muriel! I'm glad you liked it. BTW, I never realized that such beautiful flowers would grow in a desert place like Namibia! Thank you so much for sharing them with me! David Cannon 11:56, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliments, Muriel. (I had thought you'd left en: for pt:, but to see that you're still around is a pleasant surprise!) Actually, I think I'll have to expand it to cover the economics, politics, and the social development, too, if it is to compete with, say, Economy of Africa or the Japanese toilet. And I can already see that when I get to the last two articles of that series, I'll be in muddy waters (read: controversial-article zone). Ah well... Lupo 06:40, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi Muriel! I'm so glad to hear from you after such a long absence. I trust your time in Namibia was an enjoyable one and that you're not now finding Europe too cold! As you pointed out, some exciting things have been happening while you've been away. Yes, I had noticed the dramatic growth of the Portuguese Wikipedia (I'm one of the volunteers helping out with the tables on the Wikipedia:Multilingual statistics page) and I have to say that I don't think any other Wiki of its size has mushroomed so explosively - you gained an incredible 8696 new articles in the month of September alone. You certainly are giving us (on EN) quite a run for our money now! Congratulations to all of you. It's something to be proud of. As for the bots, that isn't "cheating." Articles created by bots are valuable "infrastructure" and make a framework for human editors to build on - as I'm sure you're doing in a big way:-) At this rate, it won't be long before you're into six digits!

I'm glad you got "a good laugh" out of 172's goings-on. What a nerve he's got - while currently in arbitration, he puts his own name forward! Speaking up for you was the least I could do, Muriel. Having made my point, I think I'll now ignore him - and thereby starve him of the attention he seems to be craving.

Anyway, it's great to see you back, Muriel! I look forward to seeing you around:-) David Cannon 13:08, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Obrigado! Na verdade, domino melhor o ingles escrito que a minha propria lingua, o português, o que é muito triste; mas sem duvida ei de aparecer ai no Wiki português.

Hi! Could you briefly translate this article to Português! Thanks!--Untifler 21:11, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That's fantastic! Much better than the old version, and the text looks a lot nicer too. Good work! Proteus (Talk) 11:21, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It really is quite absurd, isn't it!<g>. Rabid advocacy is becoming a big problem. But I see now that JTDIRL has been managing things and I will be happy to help him out. I suppose if it comes to it we could do a "Request for Comments" but very often on (somewhat obscure) things like this no comments are offered. But it might be worthwhile to develop a "paper trail" that demonstrates we've tried to achieve consensus in case the only way to maintain an NPOV involves Arbitration Committee sanctions.

Nice to hear from you, BTW! We can use some good common sense around here<g>! - Nunh-huh 22:55, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You added information onto Titus Pomponius Atticus from The Modern World Encyclopædia: Illustrated stating that as it was published in 1935 it was sufficiently out of copyright. My understanding is that in the UK copyright in books lasts for 70 years after the death of the author. May I ask why you believe the book to be sufficiently out of copyright? For the time being I have put a copyvio notice on the article. jguk 20:21, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi. You missed your target here. The only thing i did was merge the article with the contents previous in Titus Pomoponius Atticus, a misnamed article, now a redirect. I stated nothing about copyrights. The article in question is just a stub. The effort you made by putting a copyright notice, placing it in the appropriate page and put a note on my talk page, is a lot more than right an alternative stub. Fretting about copyrights from 1935 in a 3 sentence stub is what i consider vigilantism and having nothing better to do. If you want to continue with this issue, i suggest you follow other clues. You'd give a good detective. Cheers, muriel@pt 09:51, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to...

1. ...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
2. ...all articles...

using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. So far over 90% of people who have responded have done this.

Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff. So we use their licenses too.

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}}. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know at my talk page what you think. It's important to know, even if you choose to do anything so I don't keep asking. -- Ram-Man (| talk) 14:19, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia is open to the extent that people who want to use our stuff use our license (the GFDL). But it is not a true free license. See this comment:

I find the GFDL cumbersome and unwieldy compared to the Creative Commons licenses, launched after Wikipedia was born. It's unfortunate that we can't get in touch with every single contributor ever and get them to agree to relicense their work... -- User:Trilobite

So projects outside of the WikiMedia projects, such as WikiTravel use a different, more popular license. I don't know how many of such projects exist (or will exist), but they can never use our articles and we can never use theirs without individual editors giving permission to multi-license so that they can use the stuff. The details of the licenses don't matter. The fact that they are different incompatible licenses is really the important part, but you can give others permission to use YOUR stuff anyway (as described above). -- Ram-Man (| talk) 14:51, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

I responded to your questions by adding some more to the Multi-Licensing FAQ. -- Ram-Man (| talk) 14:17, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you feel that I am making a fool out of myself for trying to improve Wikipedia, and making sure our featured articles are up to current standards. I did not intend to criticize anyone, apart from maybe the standards for brilliant prose back then, I am well aware that the procedure was different back then, but the standards sure were NOT that much lower. I see you were also quite quick to judge people on Wikipedia:Featured_article_removal_candidates#White_Rose, please assume good faith, it is really not relevant how long you or other editors have been around, what matters is how we deal with issues right NOW. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\^talk]] 16:10, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

Hi Muriel! Thanks for uploading Image:Drepana.png. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (Yadda yadda yadda - glad you're still around.)

Thanks, Denni☯ 01:39, 2004 Dec 13 (UTC)

Also:

• Image:KingsDenmark3.png
• Image:KingsDenmark2.png
• Image:KingsDenmark.png

This is important! Thanks. --Kbh3rd 04:12, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The license tags were added, thanks you both for the reminder! muriel@pt 08:47, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help! --Kbh3rd 13:51, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Also:

• Image:Kannadaalphabet.jpg

Hi Muriel. :) I'm sorry to say that I know no more about the contest's status than you: Danny officially closed Wikipedia:Danny's contest to new submissions on the 10th, after someone complained because an article was submitted on the 9th even though the contest was supposed to end on the 4th (there's been no indication that the late submission is valid or not). I was one of several users to comment on the apparent deadness at Wikipedia talk:Danny's contest#What gives?. I was a bit conciliatory in pointing out that three of our judges were at the NYC meetup on the 12th, but now—two days later—I can't think of any other reasons for the silence. This worries me, because I'd like to see these contests continue into the future: If the next contest's theme is diagrams, your skills would be tough to outflank judging by Image:SiegeAlesia.png. :) -- Hadal 20:07, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

• Image:EgyptianPtolemies.png

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{PD-self}} if you wish to release your own work to the public domain, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. Peter O. (Talk, automation script) 05:47, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Hi, thanks for the welcome back. The Thomas Patrick Norton I article looks like a genealogy page, and should go. Do you want to list it on VfD? RickK 19:57, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)

No problem - I'm glad to help. Proteus (Talk) 21:42, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You've had a very very good idea<G>. Perhaps it'll induce some discussion instead of reversion, but even if not, it avoids promoting misinformation. He's probably violated the 3RR as well, not that that really helps in solving anything.... Did you take a look at Duke of Braganza? He's had some nonsense in there for a while as well...I've tried to fix it but your insights would be good there, too. - Nunh-huh 23:24, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

If you are the person responsible for the information on the 1755 Lisbon Earthquake, specifically the part where it states that "priests roamed the city hanging people.....", then I must ask you again, WHERE IS YOUR SOURCE FOR SUCH AN ALLEGATION??? There is absolutely no evidence for this allegation in any reputable history book or encyclopedia. Surely, if this had happened, there would be mention of it in virtually every history book written. If it had been just a charge levied at the Jesuits at the time, even though they were innocent, there would still be some mention of it in history books. The Jesuits were accused of many things, but "roaming the city hanging people...." was not one of them. If you can provide no evidence for this allegation, then please stop calumniating the Catholic Church and remove this spurious charge from your essay.

• Jesus! Then remove the allegation. Its not my essay, it's our (like in me, you and everybody else here) article. muriel@pt 13:21, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

There is a link on the bottom of my page to my email. It is daniwo9 AT aol DOT com. Please include your t-shirt size. Danny 15:46, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Miss Muriel, the name of Maria Pia de Saxe Coburg Gotha Braganca is reported:

in the definitive sentence of Sacra Romana Rota(http://www.theroyalhouseofportugal.org/portugues/srr1.htm ):The Apostolic Tribunal SACRA ROMANA ROTA declared the Dom Duarte Nuno request to cancel the name of HM the King Dom Carlos I, Maria Pia rightful father, from the certificate of Baptism of the Princess illegitimate and confirmed the complete validity of the act of Baptism and the paternity of Donna Maria Pia. This woman was ALWAYS called as HRH Dona Maria Pia de Saxe Coburg Gotha Bragança from Important istitutional Person as for example HM the King Alfonso XIII,king of Spain and and the Prince Alfonso Jaime de Borbon( http://www.theroyalhouseofportugal.org/html/alfonso.html ),by general Humberto Delgado( http://www.theroyalhouseofportugal.org/html/delgado.html ),Mario Soares ( http://www.theroyalhouseofportugal.org/html/letters.htm ),by gen. Francisco Franco and later by Felipe Polo Martinez-Valdes ( http://www.theroyalhouseofportugal.org/html/franco.html )and very other authorities... See these scanned images of parts of some books undaubtably confirming the identity of Donna Maria Pia as Royal Princess of Saxon Coburgo Gotha de Bragança, and her title of XXI Duchess of Bragançam and her role in the history of Portugal( http://www.theroyalhouseofportugal.org/html/testim.html ) Dona Maria Pia died in Verona in 1995 as Maria Pia of Saxony Coburgo Gotha and Bragança and this is reported in the document demographic services in the city of Verona(Italy):(http://www.theroyalhouseofportugal.org/media/docs/batesimi_2526certificati/cert-morte.jpg) Miss Muriel,now please, can you inform me where can I see a document that identify this woman as "Hilda Toledano"(that was only a pseudonym in Salazarist period),so also I can understand your pretension to leave in this web page the name Hilda Toledano.In the contrary case this is a tentative of mystification of the historical truth. I attend your answer.Thanks. Manuel

Thanks. It's an excellent article, You've done a great job with it. I'm glad you like the edits I've made. Cooperation is so much better than the alternative ;-) Regards. Paul August ☎ 17:41, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Muriel, I've made a few more edits. I hope you like them. If you have a problem with any of them, let me know ;-) Paul August ☎ 21:55, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

The article is now nominated in FAC. I am wondering if you could draw another map representing the battle progress and/or perhaps help in finding more pics for the article? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 23:31, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

how do we lve msges

Congratulations on producing such as high quality and excellent article. You undoubtly one of the best and profilic Wikipedians (in terms of achievements) that I have come across. I have supported the F.A.C. of the article. Squash 09:51, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks for your support. I hope it makes it. History here is still a bit neglected. Cheers, muriel@pt 22:11, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Email me at dgerard at gmail dot com and I'll look for your address and remove it directly. There's also a form at the bottom of http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l to do it yourself if you want to try again - 01:10, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You may want to think about rephrasing your comments in this discussion. My first thought on reading your remarks was "this person is trolling." However after reading the comments on this page, it became clear to me that you are not the kind of person who would do such a thing. Can I therefore give you feedback that your comments are in danger of being misunderstood? GeorgeStepanek\^talk 23:44, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Dear George, thanks for your note. I was indeed out of line with the female nudity comment. I meant it as a joke, but femininists are not known for sense of humour and tend to be offended with these things. After seeing kaldari's complaint i visited FAC to see what was going on there and when i saw that nomination i burst laughing and i couldnt resist. That was very stupid of me. Nevertheless, femininists do make me nervous. Main page is male dominated?? Whats the next thing? A rule that 50% of sysops must be girls? Anyway you were very right in calling my attention for my silliness. Cheers, muriel@pt 11:01, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• • I've learnt the hard way. My English sense of humour is understated and leans towards irony, and Americans in particular just don't get it. I've had a few too many misunderstandings in my time. Nowadays I try to always flag my attempts at humour with a smiley or an <irony> tag. But you were quite funny... GeorgeStepanek\^talk 08:07, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Working on this page has been a delight. There's something wonderfully quirky and unexpected about it, probably because of your contributions and insights, and I think it's why I was attracted to the page in the first place. (I've also visited Lisbon twice and fell in love with the city, though I have not been back for more than 15 years.)

Would the entry benefit from a couple more images? Perhaps one of the Marquis of Pombal? I would rather have him that Voltaire or Kant or Rousseau, but they are all candidates as well. What about a "before" and "after" section, if you can lay your hands on an early engraving and (perhaps) a contemporary photograph of the city? Also -- I distinctly remember this -- aren't there still broken walls and crooked streets left over from the quake? I remember walking around the Alfama and having this pointed out to me.

Again, all my thanks. Whether it's a Feature Article or not, it's still one of my favorites. Sandover 16:56, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)