User talk:Freshacconci/Archive 12

This edit removed the structure/new section and modified language added by Wikinj321 on Mujandes' talk page. I didnt understand why u reverted it, when the most that was required was removing the excess signing. I thought of reverting your action, but felt it better to talk to you first about it. Thanks! Anir1uph (talk) 00:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I'm not sure what happened as I had no intention of reverting your edits. I was on an iPad and sometimes those are tricky to edit with. I must have hit revert by mistake. Sorry for the mix-up. I've reverted myself. In case you're new to Wikipedia, editors should rarely, if ever, revert another editor's comments on a talk page without a really good reason. If it happens again, whether it's me (hopefully not) or someone else, you should restore your edit right away and then ask why your comments were altered. It's bad etiquette to do that intentionally and sloppy to do it by accident. freshacconci talktalk 01:31, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey hey! it was not my edit, it was Wikinj321's edit that you reverted. Muhandes' talk page happens to be on my watch-list, and that topic is of interest to me, so i looked into it. And that is why i preferred to inform you about it, and not revert it myself! Thanks and cheers! :) Anir1uph (talk) 01:37, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a straw poll taking place here. Your input would be appreciated. ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:41, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you should read the texts associated with kitsch philosophy before editing this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitschpainter (talk • contribs) 15:23, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You of course have no idea what I've read or haven't read. Insisting that kitsch artists are not artists is unsourced original research. "Artist" is the general name used for any practitioner of visual arts. Even if some kitsch artists prefer not to use the word "artist", this has nothing to do with Wikipedia. If there are reliable and third-party sources that discuss this sort of issue, that can be added to the article. However, we don't change basic terminology used throughout Wikipedia based on a very local and specific preference. freshacconci talktalk 15:34, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If what you say is true concerning artists, then truth would also have it that the header should read Artists rather than Kitschists. See Law of Identity (Aristotle). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitschpainter (talk • contribs) 16:16, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's very cute. In any case, what the header says or doesn't say isn't the issue. It's an article on the so-called Kitsch movement, so either "Kitschists" or "artists" is sufficient (as would "Impressionists" in the Impressionism article). What you're attempting to do is argue semantics over something quite fundamental. In English we identify the makers of visual arts as artists. They can be called all sorts of other things, but since we are talking about a general description, identifying them as artists is the most reasonable and neutral. You or I have no idea of knowing whether artists working in media other than painting or sculpture could become part of this movement. What if someone uses pencil or crayon or photography? The main issue however is that you are now edit warring and that is something that can get you blocked. Argue your case on the article talk page but I can pretty much guarantee that without some good sources, you will find it difficult to make this case. freshacconci talktalk 16:31, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If changing "painters and sculptors" (other acceptable identifiers in English) to "artists" is appropriate, then why not change the header from Kitschists to Artists as well? Perhaps your edits reveal your preference to the term artists because you are an artist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitschpainter (talk • contribs) 16:36, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't understand what I'm saying, I'm really at a loss on how to make it any clearer: "artist" is general and neutral. Anyway, please take this discussion off my talk page and onto the article talk page where it belongs. freshacconci talktalk 17:37, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

• Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 17:17, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to have stumbled into a long-lived sockpuppeteer User:Ananny that you are familiar with.

User:Criteriart and User:Canadianwikipics have uploaded the following images by Terry Ananny to Commons, claiming "Own Work":

• File:Winter_Celebration_on_Ice.JPG
• File:Birthday_Party_Celebration_ext.jpg
• File:Back_To_School.JPG
• File:At_the_Orchard_2002.JPG
• File:Curling_Ladies_Bonspiel.JPG
• File:Halloween_Trick_or_Treat.JPG

The files are tagged as possible copyright violations, but now that I've found Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Ananny it seems more likely the files were uploaded by the banned user. So, do the files stay up? There seems to be no provision to speedy a file on the grounds that it was uploaded by a banned user. Seems very strange to me.

This is at least the third time I've noticed artwork by Ananny being uploaded and dumped into articles, but I've only now discovered her history.

IP 184.148.29.21 added images to Ice skating, Birthday. and Party, but that only covers two of the images, so there are probably other IPs too. I'm not familiar with the SPI board, so if you want to take care of reporting this have at it. Meters (talk) 03:08, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. I actually don't know anything about the commons or how those rules work. I'll see what I can do. I keep seeing her images pop into articles but they're difficult to trace from various IPs. And she no longer users her name to identify the work, just credits it to a "Canadian Artist". She's also tried adding unrelated text to Pop art along with an image hoping it will go unnoticed. Pretty shameless. She may become famous after all but not for the reasons she would like to. She's definitely one of the worst spammers/self-promoters I've every come across on Wikipedia. If she wasn't wasting so many editors' time it would be mildly amusing. But I find it despicable, frankly. freshacconci talktalk 17:16, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, she buries her name in the file description but it doesn't show up in the articles the images are used in. That's why I at first assumed that they must be copyright violations. What artist would freely license her works but hide her name? The next time I see one of these I'll immediately revert as a sock of a banned user. I still can't believe that there seems to be no policy or guideline to stop a banned user from uploading files. Meters (talk) 18:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm questioning your rather odd if not concerning interest in the career of Christian Corbet. You seem to focus on him a great deal...why? Some actions by other parties in the past have led people to receive advice from council concerning their behaviours. This is not a threat but fact that is all I'm saying.Belovedsarniacherie (talk) 23:01, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, it sounds like a legal threat. freshacconci talktalk 23:32, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And it appears you've already been blocked for making threats. freshacconci talktalk 23:34, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned on the talk page, I believe that the Christian Cardell Corbet article is being heavily trolled by information meant to cover with ridicule the subject of the article in question. What should one do to efficiently protect it? 87.64.169.61 (talk) 22:25, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I find it a bit odd that you deleted this addition to the list of covers of "Dear Prudence". Why didn't you simply delete the link if its presence was problematic? The cover version by a highly respected and influential jazz musician is a fact, and your reference list is now incomplete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misij123 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasper_Johns

as the most notable example. Keep up the superb work, and any additional suggestions are welcome please!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasper_Johns

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banksy

as the most notable example. Keep up the superb work, and any additional suggestions are welcome please! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tron77 (talk • contribs) 13:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there are others too but the infobox should only be a photo of the person not examples of artwork. Also, if you are using more than one account to edit, you should stick to one or else you could get blocked from editing. freshacconci talktalk 14:05, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editor Sorrh ou Modom..

Razor - good stuff..I have several putative players in the biz who feel the necessity to establish an Inet profile..They already have REPUTATIONS..

Then there are musicians who use such Tosh as Hello Montreal etc because Janis Joplin did.. They wanna be STARS..

I try to cut across this in my work and my life and my work..

I say Echo Narcissus and practitioners whose life and works are based on The Greek School Of Mathematics leave the room..I mention Faith and a whole generation thinks I'm barmy.. I am not mad , I am outraged at clearly resistible Societal Change..WE have a 4/4 Disco / Karaoke culture , which produces Monoculture..Not Good..and I like Disco..

I can spot a Charlatan after a few sniffs..

Hope you like my contributions..

All the best , Chris Willey OTM Records UK / Out Of Stroud

82.132.249.200 (talk) 14:49, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Words fail me. freshacconci talktalk 15:24, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lou Reed... I was trying to add to the debate with a practitioners perspective..hopefully a sharp and accurate and amusing one..You wanna get a great song that resonates through Time (and get some $$$s through Covers )..you go for The Haunt..transcends mediums, engineering parameters, specific languages..Songs get hummed, whistled ALL OVER.. That is My Craft..

8 Miles High..

Is a great Song about Alienation..anywhere in the known universe..

Stoned Americans wishing to create a Stir with a Sound and a Look..they succeeded.. Gene Clark , like Gram Parsons , was never less than excellent ..when able to stand, sit and consume his feed..Mr Jim ( no sorry Subud Roger ) Sang the song..Front man..now LIVES OFF IT LIKE THE CIRCUS ACT HE IS..that is not a criticism.. Circus is good..

Jagger - a Dartford Warbler and Ferry - a sleek Newcastle Brown were about FASHION..as is Bowie..They are FANS who love many Art Forms - were also after the same girlie like Eric Clapton & George..

Zimmerman toodled Caustic Ironic Rhyme all over his playmates and can now see every Narcissistic Schticke except his own..

They set Sonic Art Patterns.. Robert Wyatt is Something Else , as is Ishmael Reed..Eddie Cochran was The cataclysmic pop musical event..Tony Joe White followed.others..thousands of them were Slower Burners.. Chris Willey (talk) 15:36, 28 July 2012 (UTC) bw CW[reply]

Chat room or a place where knowledge is enhanced  ?

Correspondance on the 8 Miles High line does appear to become vituperative..a chat room scenario does develop ..egos clash..you are the landlord..you can and do turf 'em out.. It is your ball, your park.. You got it REGISTERED..

If I offer a benign attempt to throw light on a topic , it is with the aim of enhancing awareness..insight about process..better next step..

We have a SERIOUS problem going on as a species about CLAIMS & TERRITORY..

Vigorous debate is One Way through..

Moderation is overrated..

bw CW — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Willey (talk • contribs) 03:11, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Ian carr-harris 137 tecumseth.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:53, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well the sources on the page for Kinshasa seem to contradict the statement on the Montreal page. The one source on the Kinshasa page is newer than the book source of Monteal. Also one of the sources for the Montreal page's claims says "Western world" which is why I changed it to that. If you think that we shouldn't be using that term, then why even have that source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anawrahta (talk • contribs) 15:12, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see where that source in the Kinshasa article states that Kinshasa is the second largest French city. It states that it has a population of 8 million but makes no other claim. I skimmed it so I could be wrong but it does not appear to be there. That source further states that French is a minority language, spoken as a second language by 15% of the population nationally. In Montreal French is the majority language and the official language of Quebec. The Montreal article states that it is the second largest French-speaking city in the world, meaning as spoken by the majority of city inhabitants as the main language. Perhaps the wording could be improved and as I said this has been discussed on the talk page. If you have suggestions on how this could be improved you can discuss it there. freshacconci talktalk 16:45, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Freshacconci :) Please explain me why should an image be discussed in an article in order to be there?! Please check the Facade article. There are several photos there that are not even mentioned in the text, but are - there because they illustrate the subject. Please comment. Thanks in advance. --PretoriaTravel (talk) 11:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand why you deleted my edit, and I don't have any source except for our ears and our knowledge classical rock. Please do listen to it yourself, then I think you'll understand why I made the change. This is not a pop song or just a rock song. thank you. After your reply, I'll re - edit again.Phymacheo (talk) 11:39, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, simply put, if you don't have a source, you cannot add that info to the article. Whether or not you or I "hear" something is irrelevant because that would be original research. You will need to find a published source for that to be included. freshacconci talktalk 11:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just to clarify, the "non-notable" in question that I referred to in my reversion of the prior edits was Orenthal James (O.J.) Murdock, and not Phyllis Hyman. Thanks for restoring Hyman with the proper cite. It is much appreciated. Nightscream (talk) 02:06, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Freshacconci! A Wiki-knowledgable friend recommended contacting editors who had contributed to art collective or art-related pages on Wikipedia in the past to ask for help with my problem. I see from your history that includes you. I'm trying to create a page for the Good/Bad Art Collective which existed in Denton, Texas from 1993-2001, see my efforts here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Good/Bad_Art_Collective It keeps getting rejected. Originally I thought it was too long (at first I listed the collective's major works, and member's names) but then it just seem to boil down to not having "cited sources related to the collective itself" But I don't understand how articles by art reviewers in The Dallas Observer newspaper, The Houston Chronicle and The Village Voice are related to the collective. They are reviews of their work. And, several ex-members have gone onto become famous artists. Plus, I have no relation to Good/Bad and am not or ever was a member. My friend (who used to edit on Wikipedia a lot, mainly the Judy Garland page, but hasn't in a year) suggested contacting someone with a bit more knowledge about art scenes. Looking at the history he thinks it's being rejected by people sticking too-close to Wikipedia rules and current issues, and can't see its relevance beyond that. Just a hunch? I see many other art collectives, even some who existed just a few years ago, have Wikipedia entries that have done far less than Good/Bad ever did. Do you mind taking a look and seeing what you think? Any suggestion you may have would be GREATLY appreciated. This is my first article for Wikipedia, and I'm determined to make it work because I know it's relevant. It was originally much more detailed. Thank for your time! MarkAllen5 (talk) 18:00, 27 August 2012 (UTC) .[reply]

I'd like to know why you reverted my edit on the Andy Warhol article. I rewatched that scene in Men In Black 3 seven times, and my version is the correct one. Also, the previous version makes much less sense in the context of the film with Agent W being driven insane by the absurdity of his assignment (note the continuation of the scene where he covers his conversation by saing he is filming K eating a hamburger). -- Anthony S. Castanza (talk) 16:33, 5 September 2012 (UTC) A. S. Castanza[reply]

I've finally succeeded in getting the entire range that the MoS IP Vandal uses blocked, per this discussion. If he pops up again, just go to this admin; he's already familiar and will take care of it. Cheers. Radiopathy •talk• 04:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I added David Zaintz to the list. It was taken off, siting "no article" please explain further. Thank you!

Waveman1 (talk) 07:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Waveman1 (talk) 07:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. I figured it out. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waveman1 (talk • contribs) 07:56, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you being serious! it is a matter of FACT that Pete Doherty is a self confessed user of Heroin and Crack Cocaine. He has been arrested several times for possesion and has been jailed for it, even been the subject of a DRO (Drug Rehab Order). If he was not a Heroin addict, why did he have a Naltrexone implant fitted? for fun? and as for Goering, that is also well noted, he was the smack head of the nazis. Il put it back in when i get chance to add all of the 1000+ refs for Dohertys heroin use.Markdarrly (talk) 18:51, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it's all well-noted then it should be easy for you to find sources which we require per WP:BLP in the case of Doherty. freshacconci talktalk 18:56, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for dealing with the IP who was giving out personal attacks. I have one question though, why did you restore the removed comments? -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 03:14, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From GeorgePierBain (talk) 22:24, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this message is from the person who has been inserting the new section "The Far Right in America" into the article. Needless to say, the IP is not fake. I understand that this back and forth with the editing must be frustrating, and I sincerely apologize. Yes, I am new to Wikipedia, but I wish to do this properly from now on. As for the content of what I have attempted to add, it is accurate - and I will explain why. In the past, groups in the USA that can arguably be described as far-right have met the description given in the current version of the article. Today, any such groups have been marginalized to the point of insignificance. Where any individual lies on the political spectrum in the USA depends primarily on where he or she stands on the relationship between the individual and the state. On this American spectrum, therefore, Fascism is far to the left of mainstream liberals and conservatives. Without the distinction made clear by my section, the article unfairly and innacurately portrays the political views of many people in the United States. If you compare the current versions of the Wikipedia articles "Far-right politics" and "Far-left politics" with a truly objective mind, you will have to see some clear bias. The latter is brief and lacks any mention of the negative aspects of far-left politics, the negative parts of the ideology and of the history. In stark contrast, "Far-right politics" includes genocide, oppression, racism, and xenophobia as essential elements. In fact, these are common elements of far-left politics as well. The article "Far-left politics" does not even include a "History" section! Why is this? As for citations, the general description in "Far-right politics" (contained in the first two paragraphs) includes but one source. And this source is the work of one person who presents his own analysis, something that should not be considered indisputable fact. I can add citations to my own contribution, but they will be just the same; I will have cited the opinion of another who agrees with me. What is very clear is that these two articles must be altered in the interest of fairness and accuracy. I would like to achieve this with anyone whose primary concern is presenting the truth.

GeorgePierBain (talk) 22:24, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am an expert in the woodlands style, I do not own the link that I used to update that page.

I personally knew Norvall Morriseau, he was a close friend of my family, I own various pieces of his work. I have several books on the subject. I also know his apprentices. This was not a random edit, but an updating with regards to the new generation of artists following his footsteps.

Please take the time to undertake some research before engaging in vandalizing my edits on this subject. I do not edit wikipedia a lot, but when I do it is with expertise and knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warisart (talk • contribs) 17:10, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The website you attempted to list was not a proper source and was in fact spam as it was a commercial site. I really don't care if you knew Morriseau or not. It's irrelevant. If I hadn't removed the link someone else would have. You should read the links I provided on spamming and what count as legitimate sources. As for "undertaking research" in this matter it was quite simple: I clicked on the link you provided and found it was not suitable for Wikipedia. Do not accuse other editors of vandalism for legitimate edits, such as removing spam. Please read and understand WP:CIVIL along with WP:SPAM and WP:RS. freshacconci talktalk 19:57, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, we are French students. Our English is not very good. We are trying to put some elements on wikipedia about Laurent Gervereau. He is a specialist of images, artist, novelist, philosopher... He had works in many subjects. We just would like to put some elements in thoses subjects and if the wikipedia community wants to know more, they may have a look to his websites, movies or books

We don't want to just "redo" what is deleted. But it is not normal for wiki to have no elements at all about these works, this is not scientific. Could you help us ?

Many thanks

PlurofuturoPlurofuturo (talk) 15:37, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Freshacconci,

I answer to all of you, many thanks for helping.

Generally, we feel quite strange that wikipedia in English ignores important aspects of non English speaking other countries. So that is why we begin to try to improve it with other friends (students).

Well, for the example of Laurent Gervereau, I heard what you said. So, I will write some short words only for 4 subjects directly connected (we could take also for him literature, Art, politics, cinema, photography...) with references : political ecology, history of art, image, philosophy

Then, please help me Francophonie & Androphilie to read it and to put it in a better English

Many thanks

PlurofuturoPlurofuturo (talk) 09:44, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

what do you make of all this: [1][2][3]. Hyacinth seems to think something is amiss (see edit summary), I tend to agree. How should we address this matter? Semitransgenic _talk. 19:11, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrited everything and put the ISBN of the sources. This information is really important for the theory of both subjects: there is only one World Dictionnary of Images in the World. it would be shocking if nobody speaks about this main question of borders today

Maybe my English is not very good...

Many thanks

PlurofuturoPlurofuturo (talk) 07:32, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

why on earth wouldnt you want additions to artist names when they were included and done in a professional manner? meanwhile you sit in peoria pontificating? your reversion i consider vandalism. who are you and why do you think you are the end all in the art world? are you a failed artist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artstarnyc (talk • contribs) 01:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

oh, i get it. if they were artists in toronto maybe you would consider them real. let me remind you freshmacoroni, new york is a center of the art world, like paris? youre just some kid, go back to art school!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artstarnyc (talk • contribs) 01:53, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Why did you delete the entire criticism section that had been in this article for some time and is referenced?

Also, you stated that you deleted my edits because they "would fall under original research as the source is a primary source", but my only edits were (1) fixing the omitted word "page" in the sentence "In February, 2008, the organization was criticized in an 87 report by the Ontario Ombudsman for a mishandling of funds in the legal defence of Richard Wills." and (2) fixing 2 omitted commas. I will say that I should have marked my edits as minor edits.

Nottrulyrandom (talk) 23:59, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I reinstated the criticism section as I can only assume that you deleted it by accident.

Nottrulyrandom (talk) 16:10, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain why some Canadian provinces must have a French translation on their Wiki pages???? Even for those Canadian provinces that don't have French as the official language (i.e. British Columbia)???? I don't even understand why British Columbia Wiki page must have a French translation "la Colombie-Britannique, C.-B."???? (You had to re-instate my edit back to your version, is it because you were born in Montreal???? But the majority of the BC population don't need French at all, nor the stupid bilingual labels the Federal government decided to print/enforce, such a waste of taxpayers money)

It may make sense for Quebec and New Brunswick to have the French translation because both provinces declare English and French as their official languages. But that also creates a lot of hardship for the English speakers who can't find a job because they can't speak French!?!?!? And a lot of them have to leave the province and seek jobs somewhere else.

Bilingualism actually lead to Job segregation/alienation/discrimination, whatever you call it. Just look at this hospital located in Ottawa, Canada, all Jobs are French-only and it creates a hardship for the English speaking people who won't be able to work in such hospital. For Gods sake, it's a hospital in Ottawa, Canada!!!! And it's French-only!!!! Isn't it crazy!?!? http://www.hopitalmontfort.com/index.cfm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatchewan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manitoba http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newfoundland_and_Labrador

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_Scotia Nova Scotia Nouvelle-Écosse (French) Alba Nuadh (Gaelic)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Edward_Island Île-du-Prince-Édouard (French)

You have to also realize that the English language had become the "common" language for all nations worldwide for everyone to communicate effectively in trades and businesses, science and medicine, research and development.

You also have to realize that a "language" is a "political tool", and what's the point of having a French translation for the province of British Columbia where 99% of the people speak English, and they all came from all ethnic background, namely the (here's the big list):

Cornish, English, Irish, Manx, Scottish, Welsh, British Isles, n.i.e.**, Acadians, French, Inuit, Métis, North American Indian, American, Canadian, Newfoundlander, Nova Scotian, Ontarian, Québécois, Other North American provincial or regional groups, Antiguan, Bahamian, Barbadian, Bermudan, Carib, Cuban, Dominican, n.o.s.***, Grenadian, Guyanese, Haitian, Jamaican, Kittitian/Nevisian, Martinican, Montserratan, Puerto Rican, St. Lucian, Trinidadian/Tobagonian, Vincentian/Grenadinian, West Indian, Caribbean, n.i.e.**, Aboriginal from Central/South America, Argentines, Belizean, Bolivian, Brazilian, Chilean, Colombian, Costa Rican, Ecuadorian, Guatemalan, Hispanic, Honduran, Maya, Mexican, Nicaragua, Panamanian, Paraguayan, Peruvian, Salvadoran, Uruguayan, Venezuelan, Latin, Central or South American, n.i.e.**, Austrian, Belgian, Dutch (Netherlands), Flemish, Frisian, German, Luxembourger, Swiss, Finnish, Danish, Icelandic, Norwegian, Swedish, Scandinavian, n.i.e.**, Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Byelorussian, Czech, Czechoslovak, Slovak, Hungarian (Magyar), Polish, Romanian, Russian, Ukrainian, Albanian, Bosnian, Bulgaria, Croatian, Cypriot, Greek, Italian, Kosovar, Macedonian, Maltese, Montenegrin, Portuguese, Serbian, Sicilian, Slovenian, Spanish, Yugoslavs, Basque, Gypsy (Roma), Jewish, misc. Slav (European), European, n.i.e.**, Afrikaner, Akan, Amhara, Angolan, Ashanti, Bantu, Black, Burundian, Congolese (Zairian) people, Congolese, n.o.s.***, Dinka, East African people, Eritrean, Ethiopian, Gabonese, Gambian, Ghanaian, Guinean, n.o.s.***, Ibo, Ivoirian, Kenyan, Malagasay, Mauritian, Nigerian, Oromo, Rwandan, Senegalese, Seychellois, Sierra Leonean, Somali, South African, Sudanese, Tanzanian, Tigrian, Togolese, Ugandan, Yoruba, Zambian, Zimbabwean, Zulu, African, n.i.e.**, Egyptian, Iraqi, Jordanian, Kuwaiti, Lebanese, Libyan, Algerian, Berber, Moroccan, Tunisian, Maghrebi origins, n.i.e.**, Palestinian, Saudi Arabian, Syrian, Yemeni, Arab, n.i.e.**, Afghan, Armenian, Assyrian, Azeribaijani, Georgian, Iranian, Israeli, Kurd, Pashtun, Tatar, Turk, West Asian, n.i.e.**, Bangladeshi, Bengali, East Indian, Goan, Gujurati, Kashmiri, Nepali, Pakistani, Punjabi, Sinhalese, Sri Lankan, Tamil, South Asian, n.i.e.**, Burmese, Cambodian, Chinese, Filipino, Hmong, Indonesian, Japanese, Khmer, Korean, Laotian, Malaysian, Mongolian, Singaporean, Taiwanese, Thai, Tibetan, Vietnamese, East or Southeast Asian, n.i.e.**, Asian, n.o.s.***, Australian, New Zealander, Fijian, Hawaiian, Māori, Polynesia, Samoan, Pacific Islander, n.i.e.**, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.234.129 (talk) 07:25, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's all very interesting but I have no idea why you're mentioning this to me. freshacconci talktalk 13:08, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

this revert. Thanks, Resolute 16:42, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I can't. I have no idea why that happened. It was not intentional. I must have hit revert without noticing. Sorry about that. freshacconci talktalk 23:43, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

S'alright then. The timing just seemed odd. Cheers! Resolute 14:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay no Problem ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albanianp (talk • contribs) 16:19, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Freshacconci

I added notable intermedia artists to the intermedia page and you reverted it. But, I thought it needed to be there, mainly because intermedia is such a broad subject (encompassing such divergent artforms - from music, to film, visual art...etc).

I don't have to add it, but with the growing intermedia departments around the world and the confusion around electromedia, non-standard music and cyberarts, there probably needs to be a breakdown on who is considered intermedia so students of Intermedia don't get confused. Also, the genre ranges from the Dada all the way to modern artists today - with some opting to remain true to intermedia and using few cyberartistic techniques. I think the page is really incomplete without the notable artists listed (especially as there are so many on Wikipedia)

Consider adding it or let me continue to update the list (as it's found on many university curricula). Up to you. 17:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)Mnocry (talk)

Hello Freshacconci

As co-writer of the original Mail Art Wiki page two years ago and mailartist of 30 years' experience, I can confirm that the addition of Luther Blissett by Evarney is a legitimate additional example of a multiple name, Wiki has a 'Luther Blissett (nom de plume)' page. However, a wholly incongruous addition to the page (added by Nagle in October) refers to the marketing of postcards (Line 50) and has so far proved impossible to undo. Mail art isn't about marketing, one of the movement's oldest tenets is 'Mail Art and money don't mix'. The two examples cited, Hairmail and Astroturf, are unheard of and they've been inserted into a section about materials and activities generally, not about specific examples of artworks. Also, the associated Reference (9) links to an article which is not available without a paid Washington Post subscription. Keithbates51 (talk) 09:09, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Freshacconci. Thanks to Hyacinth, it has been suggested that given my work history, that I declare a declaration of interest concerning the Joseph Nechvatal page. Perhaps that is an answer. I was not aware of that option before. Anyway, all the information on the Joseph Nechvatal page is objective and verified. Most recent verification can be found on page 199 of the book 100 Ideas that Changed Art by Michael Bird, published by LAURENCE KING PUBLISHING LIMITED, London 2012 - where his painting Orgiastic abattOir : flawless ignudiO (2003) - published with his permission on wikipedia - is presented and discussed around his ideas of the "viractual" (p. 198). The issue of notes does not apply to this page. I would appreciate it if you would remove the COI banner. If it is best, I will not contribute to this page any more. Is that a good solution? Thanks for your help. Valueyou (talk) 11:04, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is Ajayupai95. Just curious, but could you please specify in what way my additions were a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion? But again, I am sorry if it so. Thanks...:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajayupai95 (talk • contribs) 12:35, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]