Ganchelkas

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

• Be Bold!
• Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
• Meet other new users
• Learn from others
• Play nicely with others
• Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
• Tell us about you

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! If you need help feel free to drop a line at my talk page. :) --Actown ^e 15:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

2005 Belgian urban violence

Hi, I've nominated 2005 Belgian urban violence for deletion : Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2005 Belgian urban violence (second nomination). I thought you might be interested. --LucVerhelst 21:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Belgium

Hallo,

ik heb momenteel het initiatief genomen voor het nieuwe WikiProject Belgium, neem eens een kijkje en als je geïnteresseerd bent aarzel dan niet om je bij de deelnemers te zetten!

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 00:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Chamber of Representatives, Belgium

Hello,

(you seem to be a Fleming, but for now I'll write in English, I'm a member of the Wikiproject Belgium too by the way :) )

I am very interested in articles about politics, and I appreciate your work on Belgian Chamber of People's Representatives.

[1], starting at (about) Art 166, this official document explains the situation a bit better.

"All electoral districts have an electoral threshold of 5%, except for the electoral districts of Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde, Walloon Brabant and Louvain." I don't think that is completely true, there is still one but it's not as strict as in the other electoral districts.

"Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde is the only bilingual electoral..." well what exactly is meant by that? It's definitely wrong to say that there are no Frenchspeakers in other parts of Flanders, and as this document shows, they do have a political party in the electoral districtLeuven :[2] UFE did get some votes.

Why do you call it Louvain, is that the official name in English? (I know this is extremely sensitive... but it IS outrageously Flemish, unlike Brussels)

Thank you! Evilbu 15:09, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, first of all, I'm indeed Flemish and I must say I'm glad that you appreciate my contributions. I must admit that I wasn't sure about the electoral threshold thing either, but it said so in the Belgian Federal Parliament article, so I used it in the article on the Chamber of Representatives. However, I've looked it up now and according to this factsheet the 5% rule applies everywhere, except in BHV and Leuven. So I'll strike Walloon Brabant in that sentence.

I also took the BHV bilingual bit from the Belgian Federal Parliament article, but in that case I'm sure there's just a simple misunderstanding. I'm aware of the presence of French-speaking "Flemish" parties, but I assumed that it meant that people could vote for both the traditional Francophone (Walloon) parties as well as the Flemish parties. Perhaps it does need some clarification.

And last but not least, I assumed that "Louvain" was the name more commonly used in English, but I'll change it to "Leuven" as that is the official name. --Ganchelkas 16:40, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[3] I really do suggest you read Art.165 bis.

I used to trust that document you show there too (!), but come on, it's obvious this has been written way too fast.... its numbers are suspiciously nice (as if those ratios are integers) and its use of variables is confusing (you can't write equalities within the numerator of a fraction!). We have two conflicting writings from an official source, I think it's obvious which one took more time to write :). It's a shame, we have the right to understand the democratic process!

For now, I'm contacting other people who understand it better, because I think the language used in my source is still vague. There is a threshold in BHV, but the percentage is calculated with respect to the number of francophone votes, and vice versa, not the total number of votes. But as I said, I still have to make sure for myself. Within a few days I should know more.

We really need to do something about the articles about the federal parliament. Belgian Chamber of People's Representatives provides less info on the electoral districts than Belgian Federal Parliament, while the latter also deals with the Senate! It's also confusing, when we want to correct a mistake, we might forget to correct it in the other article... and later argue that the other article is a conflicting source. I cannot stress that enough, when governmental sources conflict... Wikipedia articles cannot be used as a source.

My dream is to make the entire Belgian system accessible on Wikipedia, but that's difficult and I definitely cannot do that alone!

Greetings

Evilbu 19:53, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

You're right, something is wrong with those factsheets. I didn't think there would be factual errors in it, but you're right, there are. There is indeed some sort of threshold in BHV and Leuven. Funny though, the Belgian Government speaks so much of "e-government", but they can't be bothered to explain the democratic process to the public decently. --Ganchelkas 15:37, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Hallo, ik wou je gewoon even laten weten dat ik op de "article improvement drive" een verzoek heb geplaatst om Brussel-Halle-Vilvoordete verbeteren. [4] Het is echt frappant dat er zo vaak wordt gepraat over die kieskring maar dat niemand eigenlijk lijkt te weten waar het om gaat. Evilbu 22:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Belgian Userboxes

I'm thinking of adding some userboxes related to Belgium, you can see what I've got so far under "Draft Userboxes". I would like some opinions on these draft userboxes before I turn them into userbox templates, there are also several userboxes I think can still be improved. So please discuss or comment on the draft userboxes here. All input is welcome. --Ganchelkas 15:26, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Well I like them of course, but one minor remark : your Flemish independence box has a red tongue and red claws, making it a tamed version, not the official one.Evilbu 15:59, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I see your point, I assume you're referring to this flag (the upper one), which is often used by Flemish nationalists. I'll change it sometime today or tomorrow.--Ganchelkas 16:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Changed it. ;-) --Ganchelkas 10:23, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay great! I already used it. (Unfortunately, I'm still a bit clumsy when it comes to sorting userboxes). Actually what I said is a bit confusing, the red claw flag is not the original, but it is in fact the original one, and the one you can find at universities, libraries, city halls... :( Evilbu 11:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the draft userboxes here, the userboxes can now be found on the following subpage: User:Ganchelkas/Userboxes.--Ganchelkas 15:52, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Merger Regions of Belgium -> Communities and regions of Belgium

Hi, Ganchelkas. In the Communities and regions of Belgium talk page I boldly a) edited the section title and b) split off your P.S. as a seperate section title, thus a) allowing redirecting towards the place to discuss the merger [one cannot redirect to a section that has double brackets around a part of the section title], and b) giving room for a standard type of 'Support'/'Oppose' voting in the discussion section. As the comment that contains the undesired categorization belongs to User:Fram, (even if someone else would unduly have applied categorization style), why not asking the decategorization on his talk page ;-) — SomeHuman 25 Nov2006 17:59 (UTC)

Wikinews

Are you incredibely fast or are you the anon that wrote n:Belgian peacekeepers wounded in Lebanon?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 17:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Yep, I'm the one who wrote the first version of that article.--Ganchelkas 10:11, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

POTY Identity Confirmation

I hereby confirm that I am the same user as commons:User:Ganchelkas. --Ganchelkas 16:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Guy Mathot

I love your citation

"La dette publique, on ne sait pas comment elle est arrivée, mais elle disparaîtra d'elle-même."

- Guy Mathot

I didn't know this but this is great. Sometime I feel ashame being a Walloon. The problem is that Guy Mathot is not the only Wallon politian who says such thing. I think one should just take it as humor -- even if it isn't.

Cheers, Vb 10:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Formation

I noticed that you are currently writing a major revision of the article, so I won't heavily edit the article, but if I could help with the sandbox version, just let me know. Also, in case you would have access to De Standaard, please read this source - it gives a chronology of the first 70 days: [5]. Sijo Ripa 10:37, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's not really a revision, it's just a loose collection of notes and bits that I'd like to incorporate in the article in the near future. Also, sorry for my tardiness in replying.--Ganchelkas 13:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

The Working Man's Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		I'm awarding you this "Working" barnstar for your tireless and endless work on the more laborious or repetitive wikipedia tasks. We need more like you! Wikidudeman (talk) 16:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Municipalities_in_Liege

Hi. Found your name somewhere on the template pages, and decided to direct this question at you. I noticed that some of the links in Template:Municipalities_in_Liege lead to disambiguation pages, (e.g. Clavier). Wasn't sure how to fix this, but thought i'd let you know. Regards, Marmelad 09:28, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I fixed the problem.--Ganchelkas 09:55, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

so liek

ur a dirty gaylord amirite? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.235.159.53 (talk) 18:37, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Belgian_American Newbie

I have spent most of the day searching various user pages, etc. in hopes of finding a contact point. And then I came upon your user page and the varied and discriptive userboxes. You seem to be a kindred spirit. As is the case with any "newbie" I am eager to join in the fun...which I did. But, most importantly, I don't want to waste valuable time in long-winded arguments over miniscule differences. Ive read a myriad of discussion pages, most longer than the referenced article. All my reading was about Belgium/Flemish/Dutch/Low Countries/Benelux etc. I have been in America all my life...since the age of 5. I'll be 61 soon. My point is this, if I am going to spend quality time at Wikipedia I want it to be a friendly environment. Let me know if I found the right spot!!!--Buster7 (talk) 20:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

To be (Dutch) or not to be (Dutch)

Groetjes. The article "The Dutch (ethnic group)" contains a much discussed collage of 12 individuals. Very well done. But, not a single Belgian is included. From what I could gather from the discussion page, not a single Belgian was even considered for inclusion. In the box related to Total Population there is an ambiguous reference to the inclusion of the Flemings. The font size of this little footnote (concerning 6 million people) is the smallest I can find anywhere in the article. Am I being overly sensitive? Is this my own personal sore point? I am far removed from the European interplay of Flemish and Nederlanse. But, I have experienced the snobbery first hand. I am reluctant to make any edits or additions until I am more experienced. The article is rife with subtle, but no less incendiary, remarks and statements about both the Flemish and the Belgians. But, as we say in America, I will bite my tongue. I'm new in this schoolyard...and my purpose is to make friends rather than enemies. How do I join the WikiPrject Belgium. Bedankt! --Buster7 (talk) 03:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Demographics of Rotselaar

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Demographics of Rotselaar, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Fram (talk) 12:03, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Rotselaar.jpg)

You've uploaded File:Rotselaar.jpg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Ganchelkas! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 54 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Melchior Wathelet - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Jaak Gabriëls - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Jan Peeters - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Redirects

Hi! Ganchelkas, I know it's been a while

I wanted to create an article on FPS Mobility and Transport, but I didn't know you had already started one. I made a stub, then tried locating the Dutch and French articles. When I found the French one, I found out you already made one, so I redirected where my stub was to your article.

Next time, please create redirects from as many plausible locations as possible so people can find articles Thank you WhisperToMe (talk) 23:58, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of National Force (Belgium)

The article National Force (Belgium) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The page only includes one sentence, and is an orphan page (linked from no other page). I did not find any information on Wikipedia or even the internet, so I doubt it is notable.

While all 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. SPQRobin (talk) 02:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Movement Control Group for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Movement Control Group is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Movement Control Group until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:47, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2nd Group CIS

The article 2nd Group CIS has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Couldn't establish WP:NOTABILITY

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. Boleyn (talk) 20:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Category:Order of Leopold II recipients has been nominated for discussion

Category:Order of Leopold II recipients, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Herostratus (talk) 19:20, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Category:Illegitimate children of Belgian monarchs has been nominated for deletion

Category:Illegitimate children of Belgian monarchs has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Military units and formations of the Belgian Land Component

A tag has been placed on Category:Military units and formations of the Belgian Land Component requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Embassy of Belgium, Washington, D.C. for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Embassy of Belgium, Washington, D.C. is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Embassy of Belgium, Washington, D.C. until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Dan arndt (talk) 01:50, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Arrondissement of Torhout

The article Arrondissement of Torhout has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not appear to be notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Thilsebatti (talk) 03:48, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Special law

The article Special law has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Completely indefinable term; no effort is made to define what makes a law a special law, and the Belgian and Canadian examples are not obviously related in any way, making this article inherently WP:OR.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 22:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)