User talk:Mountolive

Archives
June 06 - Feb 07 Feb 07 - Dec. 07 Coda 07 Jan. 08 - Oct. 08

I'll tell you this for free: the idea that a "nation" or a "culture" or a "community" has rights which supersede the rights of human beings is the guaranteed road to a nightmare. Add to that the idea that the descendents of an oppressor have to be punished in the oppressor's place, and your nightmare will become hell

— user:BillMasen

Slashed Titles

I moved the page from Villava/Atarrabia to Villava and created a redirect page for Atarrabia. To create a redirect page that doesn't exist, you basically just create a page like a normal article and put #REDIRECT [[Villava]] for the content. I found the same results as you with Villava overwhelmingly more frequent than Atarrabia. I'm not sure why people keep creating these slashed article titles; they're probably thinking it's more politically correct, but in my opinion it looks a little unprofessional and can make someone think that's the name of the town. I'll take a look at some of the others too in that category. There are also some more in ones in Catalonia too. Kman543210 (talk) 11:15, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Languages of Catalonia

Hi Mountolive, until now I didn't notice that you already created the new article and moved there all that section. I'm really busy right now and I can not work here...

I am not very happy with the result: I'd say that in Catalonia now there is too few info, and I find too much "C's"' POV, if you compare it with the actual friendly situation that we live here. "efforts a way to discourage the use of Spanish", "other than two hours per week of Spanish medium instruction", "there is no obligation to display this information in either Aranese or Spanish", "The use of fines", "53.4% of citizens declared Spanish as their native language", "the Generalitat usually uses Catalan", etc. Is all this info really so necessary in a very small sum up of 5 paragraphs of Catalan language in Catalonia? I think people's literacy (p.e.) more interesting than saying that there is no obligation to sth or than saying that there are fines which, actually, in practice are very seldom.

Anyway, I know I could and should have worked on in before (as you said, to avoid complaints as this one), but I couldn't (and also because I do not want to spend time discussing with Maurice... of course most of the sentences above are true, but this does not make them eligible to be included in such a small sum up, and I'm afraid that it'd be impossible to delete any of these sentences without starting a long and exhausting discussion, in which I do not want to spend my time).

Therefore, I just wanted to thank you for having made this change, and I wanted to make 2 suggestions: 1) with your copy paste, you deleted the "Catalan/Valencian-speaking world template" from Catalonia. I think it should be restored. 2) In Languages of Catalonia there is just 2 lines of the Spanish section. I think it should be developed, of course, but not with a sum up of Spanish language, but with some info about Spanish in Catalonia (and not just to say that Catalan government tries to do as much as they can to eliminate it ;-), I meant literacy and so one...). In this way, I see the table "Spanish Español Castellano" quite superfluous, just like "a quick solution" to put "something" about Spanish in the article. As I said, I think this section should be developed in another way than just adding this table.

If you accept these suggestions and/or you want to discuss about the sentences I told you above (or any other way to improve this section or article), I'll try to find the time to, at least, give my humble opinion. Thanks once more.--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 17:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Xtv.

Well, if I am not wrong, I basically block copy-pasted the information which existed at the Catalonia article, if I recall well, I didnt bring much anew rather than accomodating the intro to put context and other minors. What I mean is that "C's" info which doesnt make you that happy was there before the article was created anyway, so that is another story. In any case, I agree with you in that removing those sentences, which are for the most part true, as you yourself point out, would cause trouble.

As to address your questions, I'll explain you my motives. Regarding the template Catalan Whatever Speaking World (a template I dislike even in the title, for calling that a world is pretentious to say the least) I removed it because the template is controversial.

Several users (including myself) have protested and objected what they (we) see as a "nation-building" basically political statement. The reply from users supporting this template is that is cultural and/or linguistic. If so, then it belongs so much better in the Languages of Catalonia article, which is a more specific article than Catalonia. That's at least how I see it.

I agree in that the Spanish section should be worked out, but that is not something neither you or I are going to do, are we? our time here and interests are limited and someone else should help out. As for you disliking the Spanish Español Castellano template, even though I may agree partially with you in that this is a shortcut for lack of other information, you may agree with me in that it is not completely out of place, no less than the Catalan speaking "world" one. And, after all, if we removed it, then it would be even less information about Spanish (provided that no one is really adding anything).

I think your dislike of this template is connected with your liking of the template you find missed at Catalonia article. I think this is very natural and reflects your point of view, something which is not bad by itself. I also have my own point of view and, as far as we accomodate both, then we are ok.

What I am trying to say is that, in a way, it is somehow good that you are not that happy with how these topics are reflected. I just wrote somewhere else that I am not satisfied either, but due to opposed reasons. I see a vague-to-obvious Catalan nationalist touch in many related articles. Also, as I said somewhere else, the fact that Catalan nationalism (or Catalanisme, if you want to water down the most political aspects of it) is now the standard vision in Catalonia (especially in the media) does not mean that it is the standard view of the rest of Spain or the (in)famous "Catalan Countries". Not at all.

Sorry if you dont feel your questions really addressed (do you?) but the whole thing demands a whole lotta effort getting everybody involved in a fair playground and I can't see either coming in the near future. I guess all we can do is to make the best of what we have.

Salut. Mountolive _{le déluge} 16:35, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Mountolive, no tinc temps, així que millor que et respongui en català (i si us plau, avisa'm a la meva pàgina que m'has respost aquí...).

Ja vaig veure que el que havies fet consistia en copiar i enganxar d'un lloc a l'altre, però mentre a un lloc quedava (malament però) diluït entre la resta de la informació, ara sembla tal com ha quedat, els arguments C's són quasi la meitat del text sobre la llengua a Catalunya (a l'article de Catalunya, no pas a l'altre). I ja no provo ni de modificar-ho, perquè ja no puc més.

Sobre la plantilla del món catalanoparlant (entès com a conjunt, igual que parlem del "món de l'empresa" i no crec que en aquest cas, per exemple, sigui pretensiós), crec que Catalunya, per raons òbvies, és un lloc més que idoni per col·locar la plantilla. En tot cas, jo no en faré un cavall de batalla. Només et deia que no em semblava bé treure-ho, però no considero aquestes plantilles el nucli de l'article.

Sobre la plantilla del castellà, continuo considerant que és completament fora de lloc. Estem parlant del castellà a Catalunya, no pas del castellà per ell mateix. Fixa't que l'apartat de català es centra exclusivament en el coneixement i ús del català, i només dedica 3 línies a parlar de la llengua en ella mateixa. Així, crec que la plantilla del castellà és massa gran per la informació pròpiament de l'article que aporta.

En fi, tal com ja et vaig dir, t'agraeixo que hagis fet l'esforç de crear l'article i tot i que ja t'he comentat que hi ha detalls que no m'agraden, trobo el resultat prou acceptable en general. L'únic que considero més greu és el resultat que ha quedat a l'apartat de llengua de l'article de Catalunya, però, tal com et dic, no em veig en cor de començar una croada interminable, així que assumeixo la retirada. Salut,--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 12:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I have been arguing against this Catalan Speaking World Box for some time now. I find it redundant. I believe a category included at the bottom of the article would be much more appropriate.--Arthurbrown (talk) 16:43, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Hola, Xtv. No sé que dir-te...ho veiem d'altra manera i no hi veig l'espai per maniobrar. El que hi ha a hores d'ara em sembla legítim i prou ben sustentat amb referències. El problema sembla ser que veus massa 'carregades les tintes' cap a una direcció, doncs aleshores ho tens fàcil en el sentit de que només quedaria ficar una mica de pes en la balança contraria, no?

En quant a allò que dius que l'article és sobre el castellà a Catalunya i no el castellà per si mateix, ok, però no tenim una plantilla pel castellà a Catalunya (que hi podriem posar en aquesta teòrica plantilla? mmmhhh....que en Justo Molinero parla català amb un accent que t'hi cagues, potser? :D) i, en qualsevol cas, tot i que mai en pensaré que two wrongs make one right, tenim la plantilla aquesta dels "Catalan-speaking countries" també ficada amb calçador a un bon nombre d'altres articles...

Ja sé que tot això és frustrant (i, mare meua, em tem que a partir de hui em tocarà a mi aguantar una embranzida que ja voràs...) però no et pases i em descarregues tota la culpa, mestre, que jo bastant tinc amb lo meu i ja saps que estic obert a les aportacions més ponderades de gent cabal com tu. Mountolive _{le déluge} 22:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

No crec que la solució sigui carregar la balança a la banda contrària. Més aviat crec que falten coses que no carreguin la balança en cap direcció, i sobren les que carreguen (en ambdues direccions, si vols). Sembla més una cursa d'"a veure qui pot posar més coses que foti l'altre" que no pas "a veure qui pot posar més coses interessants".

En cap moment he descarregat la culpa sobre teu. Ja t'he dit que agraeixo el que vas fer, només crec que el resultat pot millorar i em lamento (ai las!) que no hi veig possible solució, però justament no per culpa teva. Estic convençut que amb tu sí que podríem arribar a escriure un bon article. I bé, ara no tinc més temps, però... deixa un missatge a la meva pàgina de discussió quan responguis, si us plau... :'(

P.S. l'estudi aquell sobre l'ordre de les lletres, no sé si realment existeix o no (crec que s'haurien d'aportar les referències pertinents), però crec que el fet que es conservin les lletres inicials i finals és en cert punt intranscendent. Segru qeu atméb opts ellgri aòix XD --Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 19:51, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Ei, jo només deia que si respons aquí, però em deixes una nota a la meva pàgina (de l'anglesa mateix) dient: t'he respost, doncs ja sé que m'has respost. Ara no col·laboro gaire per aquí, però quan era actiu i responia a 6 o 7 pàgines en un dia, ja perdia el compte de la gent a qui havia escrit, i m'hauria estat força difícil recordar quines pàgines havia d'anar a visitar.

Sobre això de fotre l'altre, és un sinònim de carregar tintes o ficar pes a la balança contrària. Justament a l'exemple en qüestió, crec que sobra tant la part de la Unió Europea (et puc assegurar que la frase és literal: justament la vaig posar en una discussió amb en Maurice, per que et facis la idea), com les crítiques. És a dir: no crec el més important de la llengua a Catalunya sigui si hi ha gent que considera que s'està desencoratjant l'ús del castellà, ni que la UE creu que és un bon exemple a seguir. Tampoc crec que és interessant destacar que la Generalitat s'adreça per defecte en català als ciutadans, però que si es vol, es pot rebre en castellà. Aquí només hi veig les ganes d'un grup d'afegir-hi una cosa negativa vers el català (d'una, des del meu punt de vista, dubtosa importància) i després la resposta per fer veure que el tema no és tan greu com ho pinten, i etcètera.

De fet, trobo bastant fort que a una enciclopèdia, un dels quatre paràgrafs que es dediquen a les llengues siguin basats en una opció més que minoritària a Catalunya (C's), i les seves respostes. Tu ara diràs que fora de Catalunya no és minoritària, perquè el PP també defensa aquesta postura, però jo em pregunto: quina importància té el que pensi l'electorat del PP fora de Catalunya, si ells no coneixen, no viuen, no tenen ni idea de la situació que es viu a Catalunya, de tal manera que el propi PP de Catalunya generalment no està d'acord amb les declaracions sobre la llengua que es fan des de Madrid? Reconeguem-ho: un votant indecís de Valladolid, quan sent les declaracions del PP sobre la llengua a Catalunya, li puja la bilis i veient que el PSOE no diu el mateix, a les següents eleccions, vota el PP. Però: què sap aquest home realment del que passa a Catalunya? No dic pas que aquesta situació no sigui digna d'entrar a un article sobre el sentiment "no nacionalista" (és a dir, nacionalista d'un altre color, tan legítim com el nacionalista català) a Espanya, però no crec que sigui un fet destacable a l'article sobre Catalunya, el que pensa la gent espanyola de fora de Catalunya.

Mira, si vols et dic què deixaria jo d'aquest apartat: Fins a "Some groups...", ho deixaria tot. Aleshores saltaria directament a "Today..." i deixaria fins a "...two hours per week of Spanish medium instruction". Aleshores aniria directament al penúltim paràgraf (el qual expandiria una mica: faria un resum del que realment hi ha a Languages in Catalonia: si la gent l'entén, el parla, si l'escriu, si entenen i parlen el castellà, si el 53% de la gent té el castellà com a llengua materna, etc. Aleshores vindria l'últim paràgraf i també ampliaria la informació sobre si els aranesos saben l'idioma, si el parlen, si l'escriuen, etc.

Jo crec que això no està dient si la gent és o no és feliç amb la política. Es diu: la política és aquesta, a l'escola s'ensenyen dues hores de castellà, etc, però entrar en si hi ha gent que pensa això però n'hi ha d'altres que pensen allò, crec que ja és anar-nos-en de mare. Respecte les multes: sí, hi ha una llei que posa multes, però és ingenu pensar que aquesta llei serveix d'alguna cosa. Jo visc aquí, i el 90% de les vegades que vaig a un bar o a un restaurant, no tenen carta en català, i ningú els multa. Aquesta llei va ser un brindis al sol, també per, el partit de torn, guanyar vots de la branca nacionalista. Senzillament no s'aplica (sí, ja sé que hi ha 2 o 3 casos on s'ha aplicat, però justament, uns pocs casos respecte les infraccions no sancionades que hi ha, és insignificant). Així, si es vol mantenir que quedi ben clar que hi ha una llei que sanciona el no-ús del català, crec que és necessari afegir (ben referenciat, tranquil, segur que trobo un parell de notícies de l'AVUI ràpidament) que el 90% dels establiments es passen aquesta llei per la patilla i ningú els diu res. I de seguida puc afegir (aquí i a l'article d'Espanya) que l'Estat Espanyol té 151 lleis que obliguen (també amb multes) a etiquetar els productes en castellà, i en canvi no obliguen que a les comunitats amb llengües cooficials també s'etiqueti en aquestes llengües. No, no ho posaré perquè ho consideraria fora de lloc, però és per això que declaro la meva tristor de com ha quedat l'article, i de com el veig impossible de modificar.

En resum: estic 100% d'acord amb el refrany periodístic de l'home que mossega el gos, però com que això és una enciclopèdia, hauríem de posar el nombre de gossos que mosseguen homes, i no pas l'home que mossega el gos.

Apa, Déu n'hi do amb el rotllo. Salut i que vagi bé.--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 09:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Coca

Hi Mountolive, I just dropped you a comment at Coca (pastry). --Espencat (talk) 18:52, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Did you konw?

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. --MauritiusXXVII ^{(Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!)} 08:58, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Itnrestnig... Mountolive _{le déluge} 18:09, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Akekee in Metrosideros polymorpha

What's the justification for linking to akekee on the ohia page? There's nothing to indicate it's more attached to ohia than any other native bird, and certainly less so than apapane. If we start listing everything that's dependent on ohia we'll have a huge list of birds, plants, and insects that are not terribly relevant. KarlM (talk) 10:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

According to the bird's factsheet, it "feeds almost exclusively in terminal leaf clusters of ohi`a trees", that alone suffices for a See Also, doesnt it?

Not really, IMO. But I added a bit about species that depend on it, see what you think. The main thing I didn't like was that it was just in the "See Also" with no mention of akekee in the ohia page or vice versa. KarlM (talk) 18:13, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Yupik would like to wish you a Merry Christmas, a Happy Chanukah, or whatever you may be celebrating at this time of year plus warm wishes for a good 2009!

Hyvää joulua ja onnellista uutta vuotta! Buriid juovllaid ja ráfálaš ođđajagi! Pyereh juovlah já luholaš uđđa ihe! Lahkoe jåvle jih buerie orre jaepie! Buorre javla ja buorre ådå jagev! God jul och gott nytt år! Hyveä roštuota! Hyveä rastavoa! С новым годом! -Yupik (talk) 20:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Starlight (Muse song)

OK, you moved it because you claim there's a more popular Starlight song. The song doesn't even have an article.. so what was the point of moving it? RandySavageFTW (talk) 00:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the too much spare time comment. It was needed and appreciated. Why disambiguate from something we don't have? RandySavageFTW (talk) 16:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Auca (cartoon)

Hi Mountolive,

How ya doin'? Shall we start the new year with another friendly lil' fight around the PPCC issues? :P In fact, seriously, I dont understand your recent edit at Auca (cartoon). What's wrong in using a term that was coined afterwards? It was used just the linguistical sense, to refer to the Catalan-speaking lands which already existed in the 19th century regardless of the fact the term "Catalan Countries" hadn't been coined, right? I don't know, it seems strange to me.... couldn't we talk about prehistory in Europe, for instance? Let me know, please. Cheers. --Carles Noguera (talk) 18:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey Carles. Sure, we have to keep some sort of lively debate, dont we? :P

That the term existed or not is not the main issue. Let me explain better my point now. The issue is that "Catalan Countries" is a controversial term. Many (actually, most) people do not feel included under this term (people from Valencia, Alguer, La Franja, Roussillon, Balearics, Carche...Catalonia itself! do not self-identify as being "from the Catalan Countries"....by the way, as a side note, what should be the demonym for someone coming from the "Catalan Countries"? "Catalan-country man"? or, maybe, just Catalan? ooops...). These people primarily identify with other cultural/political structures othe than the PPCC. And, what is worse, many not only do not feel identified, but staunchly reject forming a part of those "countries" whatsoever. So who are us to impose a controversial naming convention on a majority of people? especially when the geographical/political scope is well covered by "other parts of Spain" in that article.

All in all, let's accept it: the PPCC concept is a rather fringe one for the time being. People like you (per your tag at your user page) are rather the exception than the rule and, despite being perfectly legitimate, it is not fair that you extend your preferred identity to a population of millions who do not feel represented by that identity.

Then, secondary to that main rationale, the fact that the term "Catalan Countries" was not even invented when auques had their prime is only adding insult to injury (that's just a manner of speaking, eh? ;)

Hope I am making a bit more sense now MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 22:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I see. It's that old point of yours instead of a matter of anachronism. Well, the reason for the wording is that, according to the data provided there, aucas were first developed in Catalan (in several places of the language domain) and afterwards, more incidentally, it spread to other parts of Spain in Spanish language. The wording, if you insist, could be salvaged by substituting the expression you don't like for "Catalan-speaking lands" or something like that, and I can accept it without further problems.

Nevertheless, I cannot avoid thinking that this is yet another instance of a long lasting problem we have been suffering. You may already guess what I mean: that bloody question of what should be the criteria for denominations. It affects many things: Catalan Countries, Valencian Community, Valencian/Catalan language, Spanish/Castilian language, names of towns, rivers .... and so on and so forth. As I have told you sometimes (and even yourself have complained about that) we don't have any clear general criterion to decide about naming conventions. Sometimes we appeal to legality (i.e. non-English official names that we translate into English), sometimes we stick to that reasonable policy that enforces to use the most common name on English sources, sometimes one comes up with some convenient high court resolution; now you even propose another one: popular acceptance of some expression linked to its possible political connotations (regardless of whatever non-political usage it may have on academic sources). I understand that each of these rationale have its own justification and sounds reasonable on its own... but, of course, we cannot use any them at libitum depending on each situation to justify our preferred denomination, right? Recently, there was an unfortunate attempt to debate about some of the involved instances of the problem in Talk:Valencian Community. The debate was not fruitfull, I am afraid, and it only ended with the surrender of one of the opponents. Being Christmass time I couldn't find the time and energy to get involved, and moreover it wasn't correctly set up from the beginning, as such a delicate issue would need first a general abstract discussion rather that straight discussion about controversial instances. So, shall we try to solve it once and for all, or will be consensuating each particular thing one by one and changing criteria each time? Don't get me wrong, I am not blaming anybody for the blame in such unsolved situation is to be put equally on all involved people. I just wanted to let you know my concerns and my feeling that we should not delay it much more.--Carles Noguera (talk) 15:45, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Urgh, Carles...you scare me. You do, because you seem to think we could possibly fix that. Maybe we could, but...Jimbo should pay for it, dont you think? ;)

I mean, you are right in that there is a main problem to tackle, but the effort you are asking for is just huge, more than it could seem prima facie. No one before in the media has treaded this path (they just choose their preferred conventions and that's all).

Ok, you and I we may reach some agreements (not even all of them anyway) but it is not you and I only and the whole thing is likely to get back to the starting point soon back again, just some zillion kbs, the astray mediation and a few corpses after we started it. Paga la pena? Not to me...so far you haven't been involved in those huge fights of, say, a couple years ago (I'd say they have gained, in retrospective, the epitome of "Classic Catabrawling", something to remember, really...). But I tell you now from experience that you can bleed to death in those, really. It is not something you may want to try just for the heck of it.

The constraints of daily life (paid work not being the least) do not give me much space for this anyway. We could have tried during Christmas, maybe, but, like every Christmas, we were busy with the now traditional Martorell's season's greetings.

All in all, I do understand what you mean, but the nature of this discussion and the nature of wikipedia make the process you are suggesting only comparable in terms of negotiations, research and political will to the one in... Palestine?. A very limited set of editors from the different sensibilities should be selected to speak out for the rest, and a whole team of administrators, arbitrators, facilitators and UN trainees should help us, lead us, settle things in stone, and whatever consensus reached, should be enforced by wikipedia itself, not by editors. In this view I see it, there are far more things involved to fundamentally tackle the problem you aptly mention than just you and I being agreeable to explore ways. That is a maze and the only thing we would do by trying to find the way out by ourselves would be hurting outselves. So, let's wait, if you may, that they fix the Palestine thing first, and then we could consider this one if you manage to befriend Mr. Jimbo ;) In the meantime I still favour small incremental steps trying to present a at least decent picture, not much charged in either direction. I think we have made a few valuable steps so far.

As for this particular small dispute, I certainly insist in that this particular mention of the "Catalan Countries" would be particularly unfortunate. The "Catalan Countries" thing is, as I said, basically a fringe theory at this point. Enciclopèdia Catalana is not the world. PPCC only have a very limited currency in Catalonia (especially in Catalan independentism and some Catalan "intelligentsia"). I know we disagree on this, but, IMO, to try to expand this concept outside of its own article is a fundamentally ill move and I will certainly resist it...

But I still love you anyway ;) MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 12:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi there! I am back from a wikibreak (again too much work and traveling across Europe to find the time for Wikipedia :(). Hope everybody is still doing fine here. I realized now, by the way, that I didn't reply to this one, your last message to me. Well, it is quite a pity that you consider everything so difficult. I agree that it would be a hell of mess and a terrible work to reach some kind of agreements that would then be enforced by Wikipedia policies. But I was not that ambitious! I was just referring to some little agreements between users that are currently interested on these topics that would allow us to reach a new working (and hopefully better) status quo. Anyway, don't worry too much that. We will keep on solving particular problems when they appear, as usual. Salut! --Carles Noguera (talk) 08:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

There is no possible "too much travelling accross Europe" when compared to spending time in wikipedia, at least in the wikipedia we know. Your endless faith in wikipedia and collaboration is a thing of beauty, really, but I'd rather spend my time travelling Europe instead, even for work...

Well, in your absence I have kept things more or less as (un)tidy as you left them (I said "more or less ;) but dont forget that the threat of a termonuclear war is always there, much closer than we think, so.... MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 23:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

p.s. For fuck's sake, each time I mention that danger (termonuclear war) is looming round the corner, wikipedia is smashed with Martorell's "contributions"...

Jeez! I've spent 6 more wiki-free days and I find this now! The PPCC page even blocked, that's a serious conflict... I'll try to leave my opinion there. We all need a lot of patience.... --Carles Noguera (talk) 11:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Dude, you may agree with me in that guys like Martorell (besides desecrating great historical names) are the ones who give the whole bunch a bad name. Dont really count on me this time, I'm just so weary of having all the damned work undone by this guy every four-six months... MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 17:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Icelandic farce

Hi Mountolive, bon any!

For obvious reasons, I shan't comment on the discussion above, except to propose the new English adjective coronadaragonese as a solution that is at least as sensible as most that I've seen in such discussions ;) In case you didn't see it, Jimbo Wales was interviewed on the back page of La Vanguardia a couple of days ago, and referred to cawiki as "one of our most active" (don't have it in front of me, so I can't give you the phrase in Spanish, sorry castillano, sorry castillà, sorry…)

I saw your edit on the Icelandic fiasco – I'm sure that, with your proven knowledge of Valencian politics, you could help us out in describing the caciquisme, corruption and general incompetence that has obviously been the rule in Reykjavík recently. However, I can't agree with The Economist nor the IMF in describing it as "the biggest banking failure in history relative to the size of an economy." One of the quickest, yes, and a failure that, for once, burnt the fingers of a few foolish banks in "civilised" countries (none of them Catalan-speaking, as far as I'm aware), but I have IMF research papers showing even more dramatic banking collapses, even in the post-war period. For the moment, trying to steer a line between the Brits who lost lots of money and the Icelanders who've lost even more, I would stick to saying "the jury's still out!" Best wishes as always, Physchim62 (talk) 02:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Nice, very nice to hear from you. I thought you had maybe joined the Capellades CUP, as a finantial consultant or something...Bon Any per a tu també!

Hehe, did Jimbo said so? no, I wasnt aware of that interview. I guess "one of our most active" is a good definition ;)

As you see, nothing much has changed over these months since you left, neither at Ca Mountolive nor at Can "Catalan speaking countries" Casa Gran. Well, in fact, there is some change, which means that frequent catabrawling has been replaced by a sense of brittle tense cold war, always prone to short-lived toxic outbursts...and the good news is CNoguera, a user you certainly can talk to, even though he still believes we could possibly fix this ;)

Sometimes I miss users like you or Boynamedsue (apparently, some in the "Catalan speaking countries" think they are the only ones leaving this playground, while the evil Maurice-Mountolive pair ruin a beautiful story, as told in the "very active" Catalan wikipedia (nation building always demans some work after all, huh?). But, holy crap, those Catabrawling episodes are way too nasty to have more than one a year, so I understand why you guys left. But you are sorely missed anyway.

Well, admittedly, I take The Economist as some sort of latter-day Bible. There might be some worse banking crisis than this one (maybe some of the smaller Asian countries during their 1990s finantial crisis? Maybe, but I still doubt it, though, because these Economist guys do not take things lightly).

Anyway, I rise to the occasion to wish you all the best for the year. MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 12:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Financial consultant to the Capellades CUP? No, they don't need one! They are very much into the idea of the presupost participatiu, where everyone in the village gets (or would get) the right to vote on every item of the municipal budget. So of course we vote that the CUP go and get drunk in the local Cata-taverna where at least they don't bother anyone else… On the other hand, I did buy a lottery ticket from Esquerra Republicana, which told me in big letters "Espanya és un mal negoci" – it didn't win, so I guess that Esquerra és un mal negoci as well! Still, doesn't stop our alcaldessa (from CiU, for the first time in years) trying to be more "esquerrana" than ERC. Poor thing, she must be the least popular woman in the village… Capellades – the largest centre of cigarette paper manufacture in, erm, els Països Catalans! Physchim62 (talk) 14:11, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Everything is a bad business these days anyway, let alone ERC ;) MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 23:23, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: translation

Hi Mountolive! You are right AND wrong. The literal translation is Basque Country's Left. The maybe more rational translation would be Basque Left of course. In any case, Basque Left would be Euskal Ezkerra. David (talk) 16:27, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: date format

Hi again! Well... it is NOT an Arana thing, it is because of the structure of the language itself. The correct date is somethimg like year-month-date, because Euskera has a system of declinations (like German or Latin) and the suffix particle -ko is used, meaning "of". So March 15th 2009 is 2009ko Martxoa 15a, never 15 Martxoa 2009ko because is an incorrect phrase order in Euskera. Hope it helps! David (talk) 14:19, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

So, if it's in the language system itself, the other questions are answered already. Thanks again! MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 15:02, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I have reported Martorell

Hi there. It's sad that our first chat in quite some time is again for the same attitude Martorell has always had... Anyhow, I have reported him because of the 3 moves of the article he has made. here is the link if you wish to add anything or simply read it. Cheers and Salut! --MauritiusXXVII (Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!). 00:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC) (or should I now sadly say "Mauricio" :( )

Ho hum! we don't usually translate plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose either! Physchim62 (talk) 00:28, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

RE Països Catalans

Dear Fayssal.

Regarding your block move of this page, I wonder whether it shouldnt actually be blocked at the point when the edit war started, i.e. blocking Països Catalans from being moved to "Catalan Countries" unless there is a consensus for such a move. User Martorell has provided little to none support for his move (other than Maurice and Mountolive are very-very bad).

Here is some comments on the issue you may or may not have seen yet[1]

Maybe wikipedia's rules are other, but it is my understanding that it should be blocked where it was before a single user started his crusade for the move regardless of one of the longest discussions at the talk page I have ever seen.

Thanks for your attention MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 23:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I see your point Mountolive but as you know administrators do not have the right to wait until a preferred version is reverted to before they protect. The protection has a chilling effect. I'll be happy to see you guys at the article's talk page. I'll be reading everyone's arguments there before deciding. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 23:41, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

You haven't been much active lately in wiki. I replied to Fayssal comments in paisos catalans talk-page. You may want to take a look. Cheers. --MauritiusXXVII (Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!). 23:22, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Dear Maurice. As I said, I am not in a great disposition to go about these petty edit wars at this point. This said, I am following it and ever ready to step in if I feel I will add something, so dont worry about that ;)

I am not so comfortable with you archiving that talk page. Why? In my view, to keep it there -regardless its brutal length- is the best testimony of a near-consensus existing, which should prevent the odd Catalan nationalist from predating there. MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 17:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

About your recent comments at "Països catalans" talk-page

• "As for now, I can't see the point nor I have the energy to engage in that hell again. There's no bloody reason for so doing if nobody is going to protect whatever the results anyway, like just happened this time. This is just so very disappointing. MOUNTOLIVE fedeli alla linea 23:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC) "

Dear friend, I believe that you are in the mood for this...

Don't give up cos you have friends. Don't give up, you're not beaten yet. Don't give up, I know you can make it good. When times get rough, you can fall back on us. Don't give up, Please don't give up!

FaysallF has asked for someone to point him to a consensus to keep it at "Països Catalans", and I have broughted it to him... :D

I love you man! --MauritiusXXVII (Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!). 01:11, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, I was down indeed and you cheered me up indeed :)

As for now, if you dont mind, I will just sit back and relax watching the show. What I think is there already and you are more than free to use my reasons on my behalf, if you want. You have been resting for (too) long so I think it is fair that you deal with it. Actually, you have started your reasons in the best way possible, I couldnt make it better. What is really needed is having some kind of action with Martorell. You may agree with me in that the community should not be assaulted every once in a while by his "contributions" like he has been doing lately. Depending on how things go, I could shoot a silver bullet if needed ;)

No, really, I will be looking at it and I will probably contribute, just not in the next hours.

The feeling is mutual :D MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 03:11, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Sarnatxos

If you are trying to make me fear revealing my real identity, you actually don't know who I am. Anyway, at least what I know, a sarnatxo comes from Novelda, but I'm not from this town. I maintain my very negative opinion about your attitude through Catalan-speaker wikipedians or, at least, those that comes from the Viquipèdia. --Joanot Martorell ✉ 23:17, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Mmmmhh....your real identity is absolutely irrelevant. Sorry 'bout that. MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 23:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Juan Gaetano

Thanks for adding Bernardo de la Torre. I could use your help in expanding this article, as it looks like you have acess to sources I haven't been able to find. Viriditas (talk) 00:24, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Viriditas. No problem, really.

As for the sources, well, I just googled, so I dont think I can add that much. What I could do for you is translate from Spanish, if needed.

Best. MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 20:39, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Catalonia/Vegueries

I think that there were references about that topic in both article but I have put it more, because it seems that you don't believe anything that there is in just one or two references.--Vilar 07:47, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

The reference that you have erased it's not from a blog, it's a newspaper pdf. --Vilar 13:36, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

You have a response on Talk:Vegueria. --Vilar 17:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Cotilleos

I know you love to read these things... So here it is... ;) Cheers--MauritiusXXVII (Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!). 22:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

You and your "friends"...

Now more seriously, I find it disturbing to see an administrator behaving like that. MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 01:41, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Greetings

I saw your comments on ANI. Would you please enlighten yourself by looking here and correct your misrepresentation? Toddst1 (talk) 02:09, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

No. That is all I wanted to say. And, as I said, I really hope that you forget about me from now onwards. I dont want to be in your list, you're scary. MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 02:56, 17 June 2009 (UTC)