User talk:Maurice27/Archive 2008

DOCE, DISCE, AUT DISCEDE...

Maurice27	Sandbox	Articles	Wikipedians Quotes	Movie Quotes	Talk	#27

TEACH, LEARN OR LEAVE

Archives
2008 2009 2010

Space missions WikiProject

Hi, I noticed that you are a member of the Space missions WikiProject. A couple of weeks ago, I proposed that the Space missions and Space travellers projects, which both appear to be inactive be merged into the Human Spaceflight project. Whilst this is being done, the capitalisation of the Human spaceflight project's title would also be corrected (ie. Human Spaceflight → Human spaceflight). The projects are all doing the same/very similar things, and in my opinion, a single, larger, project would be more effective than three smaller, and somewhat inactive projects.. In light of very little response to messages on the project talk pages, I am now sending this message to all members of all three projects, inviting them to discuss the proposal on the Human Spaceflight project's talk page. I would appreciate your opinion on this. Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 22:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Països Catalans

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Països Catalans. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Camaron | Chris (talk) 13:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I also have to say the same thing about related articles such as Mediterranean Sea. Camaron | Chris (talk) 13:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Maurice27-presentation quote

A tag has been placed on Template:Maurice27-presentation quote requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Maurice27/Salute

A tag has been placed on Template:Maurice27/Salute requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Some reflexions

Sincerely I'm sorry. Fallo de comunicación, y mea culpa: debí ser más conciso en mis mensajes. Te prometo que a partir de ahora lo seré (y espero que el resto lo sea conmigo, incluido tú). De verdad yo creí que me estabas puteando (al no cambiar tu comentario en PPCC, y luego con el "tuu tuu tuuuu"). Yo creí que habías entendido mi referencia a "el futurible" de Dúnadan, que no estaba bien. A eso me refería yo en el mensaje que te dejé aquí. Mejor mirar lo que estamos discutiendo, y si alguien se sale de madre o actúa de mala fe, pues dar un toque (IP anónimas incluidas, y lo digo por la basura vomitada en la página de discusión de PPCC).

El caso es que necesitamos romper esta dinámica. Yo no sé cómo hacerlo, excepto señalando lo que no me gusta, o retirándome para que otros con más experiencia avancen. Por ahora nada ha funcionado. Y esto ya ha ido demasiado lejos: hoy por hoy, estar de esta forma es perder nuestro tiempo en nada. Así son las cosas. Ea, por mi parte está olvidado, pero ese "Sorry if I "destroyed" your good faith intentions with my comment. It won't happen again" tuyo suena muy raro. De verdad: si tienes algún reproche o lo que sea, por favor, mi talk page o un email. Porque nos continuaremos viendo en los catalan-related articles. Borraré varios comentarios, si no te importa, de esta forma "aquí no ha pasado nada". Un abrazo y cheers. --Owdki ^talk 16:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeaaaaah! =D Dicho y hecho. Disfruta del viaje a los pipi-sisi, y que el trabajo sea leve. Un abrazo! --Owdki ^talk 22:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Charles V Imperial Crown.png

A tag has been placed on Image:Charles V Imperial Crown.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Charles V Imperial Crown.png|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 06:05, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Coat of arms of Spain during Bourbon restoration.png

A tag has been placed on Image:Coat of arms of Spain during Bourbon restoration.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Coat of arms of Spain during Bourbon restoration.png|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 01:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Template usage

Hi! I've moved four templates of yours to userspace, since they are appropriate for your page only, and not for the general project. They are:

• Template:User:Maurice27/presentation quote to User:Maurice27/presentation quote
• Template:User:Maurice27/Title Menu to User:Maurice27/Title Menu
• Template:User:Maurice27/Main Content to User:Maurice27/Main Content
• Template:User:Maurice27/Talk-Page Quote to User:Maurice27/Talk-Page Quote

I've modified your userpage to point to the new locations, and requested the template redirects for deletion. Also, I removed Image:City of London Arms.png from your userpage as usage on your userpage violates our policy on the use of fair use images at WP:NFCC #9. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 16:18, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Please Maurice

You should have taken my willingness to expand and improve the article of Madrid (autonomous community), and even make it a good and high quality article, as a token of good faith and a proof that I really do not care about political or nationalistic ideologies whatsoever. So please, do not start a useless edit war by defending an anti-nationalistic POV over a rather stupid issue. The term is valid, used in the constitution itself, as well as by nationalists and anti-nationalists. Even if it was used only by nationalists—which is not the case—diversity is good in Wikipedia. That is why I used the words "nation", "country" and "State" interchangeably in the article. I have no problem calling Spain a "nation" or a "country"... or a "State". Because Spain is all of that, and all three terms are constitutional. Please, I urge you, have good faith and a positive attitude, after all, I am positively contributing in an article in which you have personal interest. I am not only "correcting" for "anti-nationalist" edits (as you do in Catalonia), but I am actually adding valuable quality information. You should consider that.

In all good faith, --the Dúnadan 00:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry Maurice, but you seem to be unmoving and uncompromising in your position and reject a constitutional term based on your personal perception of purported "Francoist" or nationalistic connotation. I urge you, once again, to think things over. Spanish State is a valid constitutional term. You can bring hundreds of references of anti-nationalists, but the constitution is a primary source. Please, Maurice, for the second time, compromise. --the Dúnadan 00:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Politics apart, I had no idea you had a Sandbox that you were using to translate. We can use it, if you want, but if you noticed, I did not translate verbatim but shortened as I was translating, eliminating irrelevant or unnecessary stuff. As such, I don't think it is necessary. In editing the original article we have the advantage of having a history of discrepancies and compromises, and other users who do not know me or you or your sandbox can participate in the process and decision making. --the Dúnadan 00:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Despite the good faith that I have shown and willingness to contribute in any article, whether Madrid or Catalonia, you seem to be uncompromising and closed to any other options. Three things to notice, though:

• This is the English encyclopedia; whatever purported connotation the term carries in Spanish, it does not carry it in English. Just as "country" in English, as you have aptly pointed out, might carry a different connotation than "país", the term, in English does not evoke any purported Francoist ideas.
• It is your perception that the term evokes Francoist ideas. That is called POV. The term is constitutional, that is NPOV.
• You must understand that your political preference is not right. There is nothing wrong with being a Spanish-nationalist (or Unionist) anymore than being a Catalan-nationalist or a Basque-nationalist. That is called NPOV. Even, if the term is used by nationalists only—which is not the case—that doesn't make it wrong. It might go against your political preferences, but that doesn't make it wrong. You must understand that this Wikipedia is neutral, and it is written in the English language.

I showed my good intentions in willing to collaborate in all articles in a neutral way. You've shown your intentions to promote your own particular POV. Please, reconsider. Let's work to make this a truly neutral and high-quality article, which involves compromise. Again, I kindly ask you to think things over. Read the article over again. Adding the constitutional term "Spanish State" in the English language does not evoke any connotation. Even the "Politics and government" section is well-written and balanced. That should show you that unlike you, who only wanted to edit Catalonia to protect your POV, but never bothered to expand the History, Geography or any other section, I am contributing to expand all sections. Please, in the best of Spirits, reconsider your position, even if it is only to avoid a fourth reversion from your part.

Cheers, --the Dúnadan 22:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Leave it at State

OK. Let's leave it at "State" for now. If other users wish to discuss, we can open the debate. I assume "State" is acceptable, instead of "Spanish State" based on your previous comments. --the Dúnadan 22:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey Mozza

How's life mate?

I've been out of wikitown for a while, getting out of BCN rid me of many (though not all) of my Geurrilla anti-nationalist tendencies.

I was just getting in touch to tell you about a blog I've started and invite you to have a look if you want. There's a nice Sant Jordi's day article to start with :-).

http://downhillsince92.blogspot.com/

all the best.

BNS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.252.24.34 (talk) 19:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Escudo ejercito aire españa.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Escudo ejercito aire españa.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 07:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Coat of arms of Catalonia

Hi Mo. You know more about these topics, I dont know if you already checked that article, but I'd like if you could pay a look in there...to start with 'oldest apparitions' is quite clumsy English ;) Mountolive _{group using a loop of another pop group} 22:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

well, as I said, I am not an expert in the matter, so I have little to say. I was just afraid of the habitual POV, but it's good to hear from you that things are fine over there.

hey, I was recently in Arica, Chile and got in contact with that ssssexxxxy Chilean accent and their ever protracted 's' ssssound. As a matter of fact, the accent wasnt the only sexy thing in girls over there, so I guess I can already express my congratulations in this regard, man ;) Mountolive _{group using a loop of another pop group} 22:01, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

no doubt, but my Polish chick can't be much behind of any Chilean hottie ;)

good reasons for not really caring that much about wikipedia, huh? :D Mountolive _{group using a loop of another pop group} 23:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

(from the comment on the talk page of the article, unrelated to the rest of this thread) Maurice, it will take me a pair of days before I can take a look at it --Enric Naval (talk) 06:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

3 revert rule on Crown of Aragon

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_of_Aragon. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. .

Leges palatinae miniature, or, laws of the king James III for the Kingdom of Mallorques, 14th Century, you can see the coat of arms of the pales, the coat of arms familiar of the house of Barcelona members, so do not repeat again "used exclusively by the monarchs of the Crown [1] (of Aragon i supposed) because is an Aragonese nationalist lie and shows that you are the ignorant. I think, you do not have read enough to edit about this. --Sclua (talk) 18:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

mmmmm... Quite an interesting argument you got there. That rule hasn't been broken, so that makes a false accusation! God, I love those situations! I'm having another little pussy cat for breakfast...--MauritiusXXVII ^{(Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!)} 21:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

reporting

Try reporting first at WP:ANI. There is a good chance that they will block him for a few days for continued disruption and incivility. Arbitration cases are only for very long and serious cases, so they will also tell you go to first to ANI. --Enric Naval (talk) 20:44, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm going on a wikibreak for 3 days, but I'll keep an eye on the article. Just make sure to never insult him, so he can't say that you are being uncivil to him or something. --Enric Naval (talk) 20:30, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

flag query

Hiya Mozza. I wonder if you could check the ratios on this [2], for old times sake?

All the best BNS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.51.23.195 (talk) 19:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

BNS, I am really sorry for not having answered to your request about your blog yet. It is true that I've read some of them and I found them quite interesting, but I'm quite in a lazy pattern these latter days. I promise that I will soon do it! Cheers, --MauritiusXXVII ^{(Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!)} 07:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

messages deleted from talk page

Maurice, I'm afraid that Sclua can delete the warnings from his talk page if he wants, even if it makes other editors angry, see this message that is given to a different user about restoring deleted comments on a user talk pages. Of course, if the user removes an edit, then he is acknowledging that he has read it, so you can still remind him of those messages.

He seems to have calmed down a bit for now, let's see what he does. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

you have been reported

i inform you that you have been reported [3] --Sclua (talk) 18:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

let's open a WP:RFC/U

Well, that's the straw that broke the camel back. I'm going to prepare a RfC on Sclua's conduct. I'll first write up a draft at User:Enric Naval/RFC draft. Can you help me prepare it and write it? I left a notice for other editors not to edit, but of course you can edit it.

Also, the RFC needs two editors that have tried to resolve the dispute or it won't be accepted, so please add yourself under "Users certifying the basis for this dispute" , where it says "Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute" if you want to support the RfC. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

ok, but today I've had enough of medieval history :) Today I'm gonna do some other stuff to cool off. I don't want to get obsessed with stuff and get burned out --Enric Naval (talk) 19:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I got entangled on a different page, let's see if tomorrow I can make the RfC --Enric Naval (talk) 07:35, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I have started doing the RFC. I'll finish it today. I'll leave you a note when I'm done so we don't start running into edit conflicts --Enric Naval (talk) 23:42, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I think I'm done. Please review the RFC draft and correct any mistake you find and add whatever you find is necessary. When you are done, I'll move it to its final location and add it to the list of open RFCs for public comment --Enric Naval (talk) 06:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I moved the draft to its final location on Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Sclua. Now other users will be able to comment there. --Enric Naval (talk) 17:44, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Not at all. Let's see if we're lucky and the RFC solves this situation. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:28, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Sclua

Hi Maurice. The correct thing to do is to open an RFC, as this is complex. I am warning Sclua against POV editing and edit-warring. But at the same time, if a user removes something from their userpage, do not re-add it (as here), please. Neıl 龱 09:11, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Thanks

You're welcome. We might disagree on content and ideas, but you will always have my support and respect. --the Dúnadan 21:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Flag of Spain

Me parece perfecta tu propuesta, Maurice, y ya la he cambiado. Echale un vistazo a ver qué te parece. Saludos. --Ignacio (talk) 22:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Tienes razón. Si te parece preparo algo parecido a la de Alemania. Y ya puestos, creo que convendría darle una vuelta completa al artículo. Saludos. --Ignacio (talk) 06:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Aprovechando el fin de semana, le he dedicado unas horas al artículo sobre la bandera de España y creo que algo ha mejorado. En mi opinión es bastante mejor que la versión en español. Si tienes un rato, míralo y me dices qué te parece. Y si puedes comprueba también mi inglés, que a veces meto la pata. Saludos. --Ignacio (talk) 18:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Que pases felices vacaciones, Maurice. En cuanto al asunto de la bandera, sigo pensando que la legislación vigente en España define claramente la bandera de España, y ésta es la que no tiene escudo (en realidad se definen tres emblemas diferentes: la "bandera", el "escudo" y la "bandera con escudo", cada uno de ellos, supuestamente, con usos diferentes). Está claro también que la bandera con escudo es el emblema del Estado (cuando no puede usarse sólo el escudo), y por eso la representaciones españolas en el exterior usan también esta bandera (la diferencia habría que establecerla entre bandera de Estado y bandera nacional). En cualquier caso, creo que lo más ajustado a la realidad (al menos la jurídica) es decir que la bandera de España es la tribanda (sin añadidos), que es la que ha permanecido inalterada durante más de dos siglos. Lo que no me parece razonable es que se diga que la bandera es la que lleva el escudo y que luego se diga que hay una versión sin escudo, porque la ley dice exactamente lo contrario. Ya ves que esto es un lio. Saludos. --Ignacio (talk) 07:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Otro asunto: He visto que hay un usuario no registrado que se dedica a meter frases "graciosas" en los artículos. Tiene IP fija (65.249.61.78) y es facil de localizar. Habría alguna manera de bloquear esa IP? --Ignacio (talk) 07:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Valencian Community

Mo, I would appreciate it if you removed the unbalanced tag from that article at this point. As you know, it is very much heated by now and you could contribute to cool it down by removing that tag. By doing so, it would be clear that there is only one user disrupting the previous status quo. Then, when (if!) things cool off, you could reopen the debate once again.

Of course, this is only my personal advice: I am nobody to tell you what to do or think. In other words, if you still think that the issue is too important, then I guess it is ok...but, still....you could add your 2 cents of help at this point, maybe? Mountolive _{spare me the suspense} 22:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I guess you have some point after all...indeed, the no-no-no to the inclusion of the Spanish name sounds like testosterone per collons driven despite all the "let's discuss" speeches. I mean, I dont get the need to discuss over thousands of KBs when it is damn obvious that you have a good point and there's nothing clear cut in the blessed wikipedia guidelines. The thing could be yielded at ease without much consequences, but....

So, I guess then you are in your right to assess your own testosterone levels. And, if someone wants to win you over collons, s/he should think twice, as you have been editting Osborne's bull for too long ;) Mountolive _{spare me the suspense} 22:56, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Featured article

Hola Maurice, He pensado que podríamos promover la nominación del artículo de la Bandera de España como "Featured article". ¿Qué te parece?. Ya me dirás cuando vuelvas de tus vacaciones. Saludos. --Ignacio (talk) 22:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Escudo familiar

No hay problema, Maurice. Házmelos llegar a mi emai y veré lo que puedo hacer. Saludos. --Ignacio (talk) 16:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Sí me llegó. En cuanto tenga algo te lo diré. Saludos. --Ignacio (talk) 09:25, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Kingdom of Valencia map

Hi Mo.

We have added some infobox at that article. It does look fine, the only thing being that it is not translated into English. I think you have the ability to do that on maps/images, dont you? if you can, please give us a hand with it. If you needed help with the translation, just let me know.

Thanks! Mountolive _{deny, deflect, detonate} 14:34, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Aha! So Maurice might be the man. Good idea! Cheers and thanks in advance. --Carles Noguera (talk) 14:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll follow-up at the article's talk-page. --MauritiusXXVII ^{(Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!)} 06:14, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Two reverts

Maurice, let's try to find a solution and do not start an edit war. The article Catalonia was for a long long time with "Catalan" first, and then "Spanish". I think if you want to change the status quo, it should be you who gives a reason to change it.

With the Balearic Islands, however, I agree that the status quo was another, and therefore I agree in leaving so until we finally find a solution. However, I beg you to try to find a solution. There is an open discussion since a long time ago, a lot of people has participated and you continue without wanting to participate. I ask you to give there your reasons (sincerely, after reading the whole page, I think you quitted after you saw that your arguments were wrong and now you are boycotting the possibility of making this change both by not collaborating in the discussion and, at the same time, not allowing to change the article. Let's remark that since you left, there have been new proposals).

So, I hope we can find a pacific solution. Cheers.--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 08:10, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Edit warring in Catalonia

Hi Maurice27, I have reported the current edit warring in Catalonia. I am still waiting for the answer to my message where I precisely wanted to find a solution to avoid these wars. Cheers, --Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 15:44, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

under impression

El teu català (avalencianat ;) és pràcticament perfecte. You have greatly improved it, man. Respect! Espere que aprofites el temps amb la teua xileneta, perque em sembla que jo mateix m'he ficat en un jardí i ara me n'adone que potser és massa tard per eixir... (eixir és valencià per 'salir').

Si, això ho sabia. Et pots imaginar que els quals vivim a Madrid ho primer que aprenem a llegir en valencià des de petits és "eixida a Gandía/Oliva/Tabernes de Valldigna" i a dir "cafè bonbón". Si a això li sumaves que es podia demanar un "frigopie" en perfecte castellà, encara que fosi amb accent francès, ja es podia passar una estiu excepcional sense més problemes. ;) --MauritiusXXVII ^{(Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!)} 07:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Apologies

Hi Maurice! I come immediately here to express my sincere apologies. It was far from my intentions to offend you, but unfortunately I haven't chosen the best words to express what I wanted to say in that conversation with our common friend Mountolive. By "actituds típicament mauricianes" I only wanted to refer to the complaints you have expressed several times about our wikiproject being "a Catalan lobby to impose a certain political point of view", and you being there to prevent us from "turning wikipedia into our political pamphlet". I have argued that in my view this is not the case, and that the project is open to anyone (no matter their political or whatever affiliation) willing to work on the articles under its scope. But it was never my intention to imply that you are not willing to collaborate with me although not being a member of the project, or that you haven't been always polite and kind to me. You know (and everybody can check it just by looking at the discussion pages where we had some conversations) that our relationship has been always under a perfect wikiettiquette, and I hope it will be like this in the future. So, please accept my apologies for a bad chosen words, and let me also congratulate for your almost perfect Catalan. Salut! --Carles Noguera (talk) 13:59, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

And I of course accept them. Thank you very much for them. I have always expressed my opinion that if every member of that wikiproject was to discuss and talk in the same conciliatory way as you always do, the confrontation would not exist. --MauritiusXXVII ^{(Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!)} 20:57, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! :) --Carles Noguera (talk) 13:56, 29 November 2008 (UTC)