text:
Imperial Rule Assistance Association

The Imperial Rule Assistance Association (大政翼贊會/大政翼賛会), or Imperial Aid Association, was the Empire of Japan's ruling political organization during much of Second Sino-Japanese War and World War II. It was created by Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe on 12 October 1940, to promote the goals of his Shintaisei ("New Order") movement. It evolved into a "statist" ruling political party which aimed at removing sectionalism and factionalism from politics and economics in the Empire of Japan, creating a totalitarian one-party state in order to maximize the efficiency of Japan's total war effort in China and later the Allies. When the organization was launched officially, Konoe was hailed as a "political savior" of a nation in chaos; however, internal divisions soon appeared.

Origins
Based on recommendations by the Shōwa Research Association, Konoe originally conceived of the Imperial Rule Assistance Association as a reformist political party to overcome the deep-rooted differences and political cliques between bureaucrats, politicians and the military. During the summer of 1937, Konoe appointed 37 members chosen from a broad political spectrum to a preparatory committee which met in Karuizawa, Nagano. The committee included Konoe's political colleagues Fumio Gotō, Count Yoriyasu Arima and entrepreneur and right-wing spokesman Fusanosuke Kuhara. A radical wing of the military was represented by Kingoro Hashimoto, while the traditionalist military wings were represented by Senjūrō Hayashi, Heisuke Yanagawa and Nobuyuki Abe.

Konoe proposed originally that the Imperial Rule Assistance Association be organized along national syndicalist lines, with new members assigned to branches based on occupation, which would then develop channels for mass participation of the common population to "assist with the Imperial Rule".

However, from the start, there was no consensus in a common cause, as the leadership council represented all ends of the political spectrum, and in the end, the party was organized along geographic lines, following the existing political sub-divisions. Therefore, all local government leaders at each level of village, town, city and prefectural government automatically received the equivalent position within their local Imperial Rule Assistance Association branch.

Ideals
Prior to creation of the Imperial Rule Assistance Association, Konoe had already passed the National Mobilization Law, which effectively nationalized strategic industries, the news media, and labor unions, in preparation for total war with China.

Labor unions were replaced by the Nation Service Draft Ordinance, which empowered the government to draft civilian workers into critical war industries. Society was mobilized and indoctrinated through the National Spiritual Mobilization Movement, which organized patriotic events and mass rallies, and promoted slogans such as Japanese spirit and All the world under one roof to support Japanese militarism. This was urged to "restore the spirit and virtues of old Japan".

Some objections to it came on the grounds that kokutai, imperial polity, already required all imperial subjects to support imperial rule.

In addition to drumming up support for the ongoing wars in China and in the Pacific, the Imperial Rule Assistance Association helped maintain public order and provided certain public services via the tonarigumi neighborhood association program. It also played a role in increasing productivity, monitoring rationing, and organizing civil defense.

The Imperial Rule Assistance Association was also militarized, with its members donning khaki-colored uniforms. In the last period of the conflict, the membership received military training and was projected to integrate with the Volunteer Fighting Corps in case of the anticipated Allied invasion.

Development
As soon as October 1940, the Imperial Rule Assistance Association systemized and formalized the Tonarigumi, a nationwide system of neighborhood associations. The 6 November 1940 issue of Photographic Weekly Report explained the purpose of this infrastructure:

"The Taisei Yokusankai movement has already turned on the switch for rebuilding a new Japan and completing a new Great East Asian order which, writ large, is the construction of a new world order. The Taisei Yokusankai is, broadly speaking, the New Order movement which will, in a word, place One Hundred Million into one body under this new organisation that will conduct all of our energies and abilities for the sake of the nation. Aren't we all mentally prepared to be members of this new organization and, as one adult to another, without holding our superiors in awe or being preoccupied with the past, cast aside all private concerns in order to perform public service? Under the Taisei Yokusankai are regional town, village, and tonarigumi; let's convene council meetings and advance the activities of this organization."

In February 1942, all women's associations were merged into the Greater Japan Women's Association which joined the Imperial Rule Assistance Association in May. Every adult woman in Japan, excepting the under twenty and unmarried, was forced to join the Association.

Likewise, in June, all youth organizations were merged into the Greater Japan Imperial Rule Assistance Youth Corps (翼賛青年団), based on the model of the German Sturmabteilung (stormtroopers).

In March 1942, Prime Minister Hideki Tōjō attempted to eliminate the influence of elected politicians by establishing an officially sponsored election nomination commission, which restricted non-government-sanctioned candidates from the ballot. After the 1942 Japanese General Election, all members of Diet were required to join the Imperial Rule Assistance Political Association (Yokusan Seijikai), which effectively made Japan a one-party state.

The Imperial Rule Assistance Association was formally dissolved on 13 June 1945, around three months before the end of World War II in the Pacific Theater. During the Allied occupation of Japan, the American authorities purged thousands of government leaders from public life for having been members of the Association. Later, many of them returned to prominent roles in Japanese politics after the end of the occupation on 28 April 1952 by the Treaty of San Francisco.

title: Imperial Rule Assistance Association


text:
Talk:Belgian euro coins

Untitled
I think the table needs redesigning. 惑乱 分からん 12:55, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:€2 commemorative coin Belgium 2007 TOR.jpg
Image:€2 commemorative coin Belgium 2007 TOR.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Asymmetrical coin flips
Coin links to this article, stating that the Belgian 1-euro coin is asymmetrical and does not have a 50-50 probability of flipping 'heads' and 'tails' as, I suppose, almost all world coins do. Could someone explain this Belgian 1-euro attribute here in this article please? Tempshill (talk) 02:23, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

 * The information was here, but the source was not reliable and the study itself was not reliable either, hence it was removed. You can google it and I am sure that something will show up.  The study was just a few flips (less than 1000) so obviously, '56% heads' does not mean anything.  I hope that helps, I will remove the other reference.  Thanks for bringing this up. Miguel.mateo (talk) 06:37, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Eur.be.005.gif
The image File:Eur.be.005.gif is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

 * File:€2 commemorative coin Belgium 2009 EMU.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --11:44, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

 * Done, Miguel.mateo (talk) 08:48, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Mintage quantities
There is still Data not available yet for so early years as 2003!!! I wonder if those will ever be 'available'? Same goes to german euro coins article. There has gone over 7 years from those first missing datas now. 82.141.95.131 (talk) 16:05, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Same problem again. Last data available in 2017 date back to 2012. Please update.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Belgian euro coins. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140605112710/http://www.monarchie.be/fr/actuel/agenda/archives/premieres-pieces-de-monnaie-leffigie-du-roi to http://www.monarchie.be/fr/actuel/agenda/archives/premieres-pieces-de-monnaie-leffigie-du-roi
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071030203718/http://www.ibiblio.org:80/theeuro/files/files.nat/belgium.s01.htm to http://www.ibiblio.org/theeuro/files/files.nat/belgium.s01.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216132754/http://www.ibiblio.org:80/theeuro/files/files.nat/belgium.s02.htm to http://www.ibiblio.org/theeuro/files/files.nat/belgium.s02.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:02, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Belgian euro coins


title: File:Preacher56.png


text:
Talk:Definiton of asset

All "definition" articles are supposed to go into Wiktionary, aren't they? I agree with the merge tag. Hbackman 00:54, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Definiton of asset


text:
Jean de Venette

Jean de Venette, or Jean Fillons (c. 1307 – c. 1370) was a French Carmelite friar, from Venette, Oise, who became the Prior of the Carmelite monastery in the Place Maubert, Paris, and was a Provincial Superior of France from 1341 to 1366. He is the author of L'Histoire des Trois Maries, a long French poem on the legend of the Three Marys, giving his name at the start of the text, and has since 1735 been also regarded as the author of an anonymous Latin chronicle of the period of the Hundred Years' War between England and France. In recent decades it has been questioned whether these were in fact the same author, although it seems that both were Carmelites. Other historians see no reason to create an extra author, but recent French publications tend to refer to the "Chronique dite de Jean de Venette" ("Chronicle said to be by Jean de Venette"). By his own account the chronicler was of peasant origin, and his view of the events of his lifetime has a significantly different perspective from that of other chroniclers.

The Chronicle
The Chronicle is a narrative of several historical events spanning the years of 1340 and 1368, written as early as 1340, until Jean de Venette's death at or soon after the year 1368. When it was first published in the Spicilegium, vol. 3, it was included as the "second continuation" of the popular earlier chronicle of William of Nangis (died 1300). This survived in a number of manuscripts, but it was later realized that one MS British Library MS Arundel 28, contains only Venette's chronicle, in a version with significant differences to those appended elsewhere to Nangis' work. This manuscript was later translated into English by Jean Birdsall, and was published as The Chronicle of Jean de Venette in 1953, edited and annotated by Richard A. Newhall, Brown Professor of European History, Williams College. Newhall and Birdsall's contention that the Arundel MS contains a text closer to Venette's original than other versions has been generally accepted.

As many of the portions were recorded contemporaneously and in a chronological fashion, it gives a very reliable first hand account of several historical events. The evidence seems to indicate a dual authorship from 1340 to 1368. During the years 1358-1359 the entries were contemporary with the events recorded; the earlier portion of the work, if it was begun as early as 1340, was subjected to revision later, though Venette himself states on the first page of his chronicle (1340) he is recording events "...in great measure as I have seen and heard them."

The Chronicle begins in the year 1340 at which time Venette talks about the revelations of a (unnamed) priest who was held prisoner by the Saracens for 13 years and freed in 1309, who foretold of a vision of a great famine which would occur in 1315 and other horrible things which were to happen thereafter. Venette states that he was seven or eight in this year and indeed the famine did occur exactly as predicted and lasted two years. He then tells the background of the fight for the crown of France after the death of Philip the Fair and the claims of Edward I of England to that throne, thus describing the background to the beginning of the Hundred Years' War. His history is detailed and precise. He also describes the Battle of Crecy in 1356, The Peasant's War, and the siege of Calais, again with great detail.

According to one scholar, "Venette is not a first-class chronicler. He is often inaccurate or muddled, and there are few matters of real importance for which he is our sole or principal authority. The interest of the chronicle lies in the fact that it is the work of an intelligent and not uncritical observer, well placed to witness great and often tragic events, who provides a useful corrective to Froissart's aristocratic romanticism and is quite uninfluenced by the official Valois version of affairs, the version preserved by the Saint Denis chroniclers and still largely accepted by French historians."

Background

Venette had a master in theology from the University of Paris and spent a great deal of his time promoting study among the younger members of the Carmelites, and he gathered information on the earlier history of the Carmelite Order going all the way back to Elijah, its founder. Venette regarded ignorance as the cause of many of the problems of his time, including the Black Death, and encouraged many of the Carmelites to learn to read and write.

What is noteworthy and perhaps unique about Venette's work is that he had a great understanding and sympathy for the peasants. Most chroniclers wrote from the perspective of the nobles. It is possible his own humble beginnings afforded him a unique understanding of the hard life of these peasants. His work covers many important events of the fourteenth century including the Black Death, the Hundred Years' War, and The Peasant's War.

Formulation of beliefs
Venette first and foremost followed the teachings of the Pope. No matter the person or the circumstances, he did not deviate from his religious beliefs and criticised anyone who was Excommunicate or otherwise not following the teachings of God. Venette combines his religious belief with astronomical events. He quotes and agrees with the interpretation of Master Jean de Murs and others made before and during this time. It is clear that he (as did other monastic chroniclers and monastic astronomers) attributes these signs as a "warning" from God that punishment was coming for man's sinful nature. In 1340, he speaks of a comet that appeared in that year. This comet is also described by Augustine of Trent who blamed it for an epidemic that was occurring in Italy at the time. Due to his many references in the Chronicle, it is almost certain that Venette agreed with Augustine. Another comet, still unidentified, was said to appear in August 1348 which Venette himself sees. This comet is referred to by Mike Baillie as "Comet Negra" in his book New Light on the Black Death. Venette also refers to passages from the Book of Revelation to try to understand and explain the chaos in and around him.

The Plague
The Black Death was a devastating disease which first appeared in Europe in 1348. Where it originated from is still debated but Venette attributes its origin to the "unbelievers". According to Venette and others, within a short time, over 500 dead per day were being buried. It lasted approximately one year but returned in later years. While Venette observes how many "timid" priests did not do their religious duty to visit the dying and administer the Last Sacraments, he adds that the Sisters of the Hôtel-Dieu "not fearing to die, nursed the sick in all sweetness and humility and many of them died themselves from the plague".

The Hundred Years' War

Venette vividly describes several battles of the Hundred Years' War such as the Battle of Crecy, the siege of Calais and the Battle of Poitiers.

Of the Battle of Crecy, he places the time and day on "Saint Louis's Day, 1346, at the end of the ninth hour". He mentions the failure of the Genoese crossbows to function, he states they were useless because they were wet and not given time to dry out. He states that the French King ordered the massacre of the crossbowmen because of what he conceived as cowardice. He blames this and the further disorder and confusion of the French on the "undue haste" of the French King. He describes the English longbowmans' arrows as "rain coming from heaven and the sky's which were formerly clear, suddenly darkened".

Venette was known as a child of the people and, until later in his life, he consistently acknowledged the power of the monarchy. He does not, however, hesitate to criticise the nobles for their failure to protect the people, particularly after the Battle of Poitiers in 1356 at which time the King of France and his son were taken hostage and held for an enormous ransom.

After the Battle of Poiters, many of the nobles and the "Companies" were ravaging the different towns and cities, pillaging and raping. Of that time Venette states: "Thus discord and all three estates abandoned the task they had begun. From that time on, all went ill with the kingdom and the State was undone. Thieves and robbers rose up everywhere in the land.  The Nobles despised and hated all others and took no thought for usefulness and profit of lord and men.  They subjected and despoiled the peasants and the men of the villages.  In no wise did they defend their country from its enemies; rather did they trample it underfoot, robbing and pillaging the peasants' goods.  The regent, it appeared, clearly gave no thought to their plight.  At that time the country and the whole land of France began to be put in confusion and mourning like a garment, because it had no defender or guardian." Venette is referring here not only to the French Nobles, but to the Companies who also plundered the peasants and Churches.

The Peasant's War
Venette also speaks about the Peasant's War (part of the Hundred Years' War) in France. In one particular account, he tells of how a group of French peasants, led by Guillaume l'Aloue, defeated the English in several skirmishes. After the capture of the French King by the English during the Battle of Poitiers in September 1356, power in France devolved fruitlessly among the States General, Charles the Bad, King of Navarre, and John's son, the Dauphin, later Charles V.

L'Histoire des trois Maries
Les Trois Maries ("The Three Marys") or L'Histoire des trois Maries ("Story of the three Marys") is a long poem in French written circa 1357 by a Jean de Venette who may not be the same as the chronicler. The three Marys spoken of are: Mary, Mother of Our Lord, Mary Cleophas and Mary Salome of St. Palaye, that is to say the "three daughters of Saint Anne".

The poem has not received a modern edition. Manuscripts include five at the BnF in Paris, and one in the British Library. One manuscript copy (BnF MS, Fr. 24311) on vellum from the mid-fifteenth century contains 232 pages, with titles in red, and some initials in gold and color. It is decorated with seven miniatures in grisaille, and begins:

"Cy commence le liure intitule le liure des troiz maries lequel compila fit & ordonna frère Jehan Filions de Venette lez compiegne en beauuoisins de lordre des Carmes lan 1357 acompli ou moys de may ledit an a lheure des compiles"

"Here begins the book called the book of the three Marys which was created, made and done by Brother Jean Fillon of Venette near Compiègne, a member of the Carmelite Order, in the year 1357, finished in the month of May that year at the hour of Compline."

A prose version was completed by Jean Drouyn in 1505, and printed in several editions.

External links and further reading

 * P.M. Rogers, Aspects of Western Civilization,(Prentice Hall, 2000), 353-365
 * "Peasants at War in France: Guillaume l'Aloue in 1359," De Re Militari: The Society for Medieval Military History, ed. Peter Konieczny, 23 Feb 2008

title: Jean de Venette


text:
Talk:German euro coins

I noticed that there are machines that do not accept German 2 Euro coins, but have no problem with French ones. Is this common? Andries 08:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

What does this mean?
"The berlinwood started in germany and thats why there coins are how they are.[1]". That's not English. What is it supposed to mean, anyway?

Fair use rationale for Image:€2 commemorative coin Germany 2007 TOR.jpg
Image:€2 commemorative coin Germany 2007 TOR.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:€2 commemorative coin Germany 2007.jpg
Image:€2 commemorative coin Germany 2007.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Mintage Quantities
The table seems very large for the article, should I exclude the mint mark differences and just have totals? Kevin hipwell (talk) 03:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If the table seems too large, split it up. I think the totals for the different mint marks is a good bit of information and should be kept. Cheers. The € • T/C 04:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Great idea, I split the table and added totals Kevin hipwell (talk) 05:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

 * You guys are way ahead of me! Kevin I like what you did with the tables, it looks by far clearer and the information about the different mints separated is good, Good Job! Miguel.mateo (talk) 07:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

 * There's Data not available yet mentioned in so early as 2003 coins. I wonder if they ever will 'available'? Or are they now available when two years have passed since previous posts on this subject?
 * And why there is no total even when all five mints have their minted quantities on the table? 85.217.35.49 (talk) 01:37, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:€2 commemorative coin Belgium 2009 EMU.jpg
The image File:€2 commemorative coin Belgium 2009 EMU.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --07:58, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Done, Miguel.mateo (talk) 08:51, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

New design
A new design on the German euro coins is expected in the near future to comply with these new guidelines

In the near future? Does not seem like that, over six years have now passed. 82.141.95.20 (talk) 10:25, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I have removed that section because it was original research. Article. 8 of those new guidelines explicitly state that coin designs that were approved prior to the new recommendations are not required to be changed. The relevant German authorities have not yet announced any intention to change the design of their coins, so our claim was simply unfounded. Tvx1 12:22, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

2016 5€ coins
Hello!

Would this be the right place to talk about the German 5€ coins? I was looking for information about them and didn't find any on WP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.217.5.141 (talk) 18:55, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No. This would be the place.Tvx1 16:08, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Mint letters
I had to do some research on this. I like that the article mentions the history behind it, but it is inprecise. You have to do your own research which ones were used for the last DMark etc. I think either you put a proper paragraph about the lettering, or you put in a link to it in the article about the DMark. Now, B Hannover, C Frankfurt and H Darmstadt were already closed in 1882, when E in Dresden just opened! So you could say that A D E F G J were used in all various German states until the creation of the two German states after WWII in 1949. After E Dresden, closed in 1953, in EAST GERMANY, A in Berlin remained the only one there. D F G J were used for Germany until 1990 when Berlin A also started minting there.

SO either just say that A D F G J were also used when the Mark was last minted, and don't mention how Dresden was the last one closed, or mention the details about the other three and which ones were used during seperation. Edit. My proposed edit: The letters were assigned to the mints as they opened. The mints in Hannover/Vienna (B), Frankfurt am Main (C), and Darmstadt (H) were closed by 1882. After the German seperation [ADD LINK], D, F, G and J were used for the Federal Republic of Germany, while the German Democratic Republic used Berlin (A) and Dresden/Muldenhütte (E) until it closed 1953. Berlin (A) also minted D Mark coins starting in 1990. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.154.81.212 (talk) 18:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:German euro coins


text:
User talk:Kinneytaylor

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Tempshill 00:55, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Images
Hi,

I noticed you've uploaded a pic or two without noting the source of the picture, and the pictures don't appear to be referenced in any articles. Please make sure to fix both these problems. See Copyright problems for some typical copyright problems that cause pics to be nominated to be deleted.

Drop me a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Thanks - Tempshill 00:55, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Peter002.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Peter002.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. -- Carnildo 23:52, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Scott003.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Scott003.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. -- Carnildo 08:12, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia needs you
Hi,. You have helped with a number of articles in the past, but you haven't edited any articles in a while. Could you make some new contributions soon to help make Wikipedia better? I hope you decide to become a more active contributor again. Feel free to drop me a line on my talk page. -- ForteTuba 04:22, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Check out these articles chosen for you, based on your past edits, to help you find articles that need work.

Image copyright problem with Image:000d8te0.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:000d8te0.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 07:09, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Sharon001.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Sharon001.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 10:35, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Thea001.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Thea001.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jackofalltradesmasterofnone 13:07, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kinneytaylor


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comixpedia.org

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Redirect — 9 votes redirect (delete/redirect included), 4 votes merge, 3 votes delete and 1 vote abstain — the page will be made a redirect to Comixpedia --Gareth Hughes 15:04, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Comixpedia.org
A POV essay about how Wikipedia has refused to accept WP:COMIC as gospel disguised as an article about a website with an Alexa rating of 348,296. As the article stands it fails WP:NOR and if cleaned up it does not meet WP:WEB standards for notability. 207.136.11.122 00:55, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete -- it appears to be a mirror of, the article presents a one-sided criticism of Wikipedia, it unsalvageably fails WP:NPOV, and in its current form, has no place in the article namespace. --Mysidia (talk) 01:48, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * COMMENT from author... this is not a POV Essay. The critical commentary in the article is intended to document the creation of a webcomic encyclopedia and the reasons for such a creation, not to argue a point.  In fact, the article is not critical in and of itself, but rather documents criticisms that have been raised.  This documentation takes the form of both paraphrasing and quoting cited sources.  At no point does the article itself make an argument about Wikipedia.  If it is interpreted as doing so, that was not the idea and I apologize.  However, actually reading the article should show that this is the case quite clearly.  Many of the reasons the Comixpedia encyclopedia was created had to do with the feelings of failure that existed in some way or another by members of the Wikipedian community in regards to the WP:COMIC.

 * As for the idea of this site not meeting web standards of notability, please take into account the following:
 * This comic encyclopedia is linked to by several pages in the Wikipedian webcomic project pages as an alternate venue for webcomic pages that are found to not be sufficiently notable for this encyclopedia.
 * This site is owned by Comixpedia.com, a site that is notable enough in the webcomic community to both have an Alexa rating of "181,818" and be listed in Wikipedia.
 * The site has only been operational for 2 months, which serves to deter it from having a high Alexa rating.
 * The site was born out of criticisms raised by the writer Eric Burns of the popular Websnark blog site. Both of which are listed in Wikipedia and are seen as notable in the webcomics community.
 * Additionally: As for the argument that this piece is "original research" article and fails to meet WP:NOR standards, this is a baseless accussation. All the facts documented in the article are available at one of the following sources:
 *
 * WP:COMIC and related talk pages

These sources are cited in the article itself. Rather than hitting delete so early, why not suggest improvements to the article if you feel it is not adequate.

ALSO OF NOTE: the idea that this article is a copy should not be a problem under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. Obviously, I hope that this article will be added to by the Wikipedian webcomics community. Another idea: If you feel the article is not worthy on its own, it may be a good idea to merge the information contained in this article with that in Comixpedia.com's article, as the sites are owned by the same company... in fact, it appears someone has already created a section in that article for Comixpedia.org (not me), so perhaps this information can be merged and incorporated there if editors feel that this article is not worth its own page.

--Tedzsee 03:16, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete  Molotov    (talk)   e [[Image:Caranimationforvmolotov.gif|25px]]
 * Abstain - I'm ambivalent about whether Comixpedia.org is an encyclopedic subject or not, but this is, as written, overly self-referential to Wikipedia, as it seems to focus more on the controversy that lead to the creation of WebcomicsWiki than the actual creation and history of WebcomicsWiki. The POV issues can be fixed, but first the article needs to be rewritten to be more about the site and less about the (largely unimportant in a larger sense) controversy. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 03:27, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Response: Regarding your above comment... That has to do with the fact that the site has been up for only a short while. As the site grows, this will obviously (hopefully) be resolved.  Also, as writing about the creation of the site would be undocumented-- THAT would certainly qualify as original research, and thus make this an unencyclopedic article.  I tried to write the article using sourced material to avoid it being judged as original research and failing the WP:NOR provision.  As I said, it probably makes sense to just merge this with the appropriate section in the Comixpedia article more than anything.  I'd do it myself now, but I don't want to open myself to criticisms of running or whatnot. --Tedzsee 04:02, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Merge with section "Comixpedia.org" of Comixpedia article. Just to make my vote official. --Tedzsee 04:02, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete & redirect to Comixpedia, as that article's summary of the comixpedia.org wiki is sufficient --Anetode 06:15, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

*Delete. Why even bother arguing on this one. This is not encyclopdia caliber stuff. The author should take up his beef with the public relations department or somesuch and really, spare us all the pain of this debate. WP is not a crystal ball.--Gaff talk 10:23, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * What's with the personal attacks. I HAVE NO BEEF! sheesh!  This article documents the formation of a service that was created.  That is all.  my goodness, you people have a stick in your eye or something. --Tedzsee 15:19, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * For the comfort of Tedzee and everyone interested in this debate, I will withdraw my vote and abstain from further discussion. I have striken out my above comments, which were not meant intended as personla attack.--Gaff  talk  08:42, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Apology accepted. Perhaps I took the comment too personally?  However, it was written quite harshly.  Either way, thank you for your positive attitude prevailing.  --Tedzsee 22:00, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete ranting and create a new redirect to Comixpedia. No encyclopedic content to salvage here. —Cryptic (talk) 12:43, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * How is it ranting? It documents a series of ARTICLES written.  Those articles were essays found on the site Websnark.  What you interpret as ranting is sourced material. --Tedzsee 21:04, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete per Cryptic. Article is unintelligible to anyone but Wikipedians; can't stay in mainspace.  --A D Monroe III 15:12, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * As rewritten stub by Splash, conent is now okay, but I now vote to delete based on being non-notable. --A D Monroe III 15:27, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Forget it. I will add the appropriate material to the main comixpedia article and delete all the rest.  --Tedzsee 15:20, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge with comixpedia. Wow Tedzsee, sorry you've had to go through so much of this of late.  Merge it into the comixpedia article as a separate section, having a .org and .com article, both run by the same company seems kind of superfluous.  I kind of like the webcomic wiki, I've mentioned it loads in various Afds, and although it's new, I would bet that it becomes a haven for the webcomic community. - Hahnchen 16:31, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Merge per Tedzsee. not to be taken personally, but I fail to see the need for seperate articles. Jesse 18:59, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't take anything personally. In fact, I didn't know that a .org section had been created in the Comixpedia entry when I created this article.  Otherwise I simply would have added the info there.  So, in fact, I agree that two articles aren't needed.  What I do take personally is accusations that I tried to write a biased article or something.  It certainly documents a bias, but I don't think the article itself is biased, and it does provide valid information about the reasons behind the creation of the WebcomicsWiki.  Notice that the wikipedians who are real visitors of the WP:COMIC section of the site are the ones who are providing the most valid and knowledgeable discussion. Those are: Hahnchen and A Man In Black  (conspire | past ops)
 * I've replaced it with an NPOV-stub. Article space is emphatically not where we carry rants on Wikipedia guidelines. Do that either on the guideline's talk page or in your userspace. I nevertheless would strongly delete my own stub because it's a brand new website that has yet to meet any kind of notability bar. -Splash talk 21:42, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Once again, I would suggest you read the article. You emphatically argue that the article is a rant, I emphatically argue the opposite.  The site was formed because of disagreement with Wikipedia guidelines.  The original article documents that disagreement with cited sources and points to 2 outside articles.  The original article does not attempt to say who is RIGHT or WRONG in the dispute.  Also, replacing the article with a stub does not allow voters to see the original article.  --Tedzsee 23:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I did read the article. I don't participate in AfD without doing so. And rewriting the article has turned into something that is at least not s writing out of someone's disagreement with a Wikipedia policy. Everybody has a history button, and is able to use it with a click of a button. It is everyday practise to rewrite an article during AfD, and is positively encouraged. As I said, such commentary on one persons view of a formative guideline belongs either on that guideline's talk page or in userspace. We avoid self-references in article space, and even if we allowed this one, it would be a hopeless POV article since it wouldn't include any other POV. If it did, it would immediately duplicate the proposal's talk page, so we go full circle. -Splash talk 03:38, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Comixpedia article. -Sean Curtin 07:16, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Comixpedia --Rogerd 03:27, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Comixpedia. Regarding Tedzee's precedent below, I actually think it's better to just say something was founded by disaffected Wikipedia members.  If you have criticisms of Wikipedia guidelines in an article, you can't make it NPOV without including the other side also.  And Wikipedia articles are not the place to argue about Wikipedia guidelines.  Therefore I can't really see how to include the original discussion of concerns while keeping the article in line with Wikipedia policy. -- SCZenz 16:15, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Comixpedia. There's hardly enough left of the article to even call it a merge.  -Abe Dashiell 12:23, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Please note:
 * PRECEDENCE: I recently found precedence for this sort of article at Wikipedia. Please see Star Wars Wiki.  It both references Wikipedia and notes the same sort of complaints that I document in my article.  The difference?  My sites are sourced and relevant material is cited to document the dispute.  If anything, I'd say the other article is more unencyclopedic.  Either way, neither article is presenting an argument that Wikipedia is bad... they're just saying that because of certain frustrations users decided to go elsewhere. --Tedzsee 02:26, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Redirect, as there's nothing left to merge. Saberwyn 03:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment I found amusing that some people think comixpedia.org is nonotable and pov when there are many reason to say it is notable and not Pov. Oblivously some people don't read debate. As a mattter of fact, our ranking for 1 week aveage is 99,133 which clearly make us more notable than asserted.--Kiba 23:46, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Talk:Find A Grave Forums

While the Forums are related to the main site, in my opinion they are very different in nature and not the same at all as the main site. There are many folks that are much more active in the forums for the very spirit of community and exchange with others interest in 'graving' that do not participate much on the main site. Then there are other very active members on the main site that do not even belong to and have never been to the Forums.

They require a separate registration to participate while both can be viewed without signing up. Doc 00:55, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

rv edits by 134.174.140.40 to last version by Dantheox The merge & redirect were by an unregistered user and without discussion. Should someone wish to further discuss that would be one thing with some consensus, but IMO there is purpose to separage articles as the sites serve different and distinct purposes Doc 22:24, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

rv edits by Perfecto to last version by Solver, once again discussion is invited, but I strongly believe that this page and its members are a separtate base from the regular Find A Grave site. There is discussion of genealogy and a great deal of information that has nothing to do with the listings on the primar Find A Grave site. The page I am sure can be improved and give more information which anyone is welcome to do, but to eliminate it without discussion, particularly if the person doing so has no familiarity with the two distinct sites is without basis. Doc 23:57, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Notability
Okidoki, Doc. Please expand the article then to establish notability. As it reads right now, IMO, it's just like any other website on the topic. Without references, you risk the article being tagged for deletion. -- Perfecto 17:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Find A Grave Forums


text:
Talk:Traverse Lake

I'm new. The Traverse Lake redirect shouldn't. There is a Traverse Lake in Ontario, Canada at 44 deg 30' N and 76 deg 18' W. Here we go...

title: Talk:Traverse Lake


text:
Talk:Dutch euro coins

Fair use rationale for Image:€2 commemorative coin Netherlands 2007 TOR.jpg
Image:€2 commemorative coin Netherlands 2007 TOR.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

issuing
There reads: As in Finland, most of the Dutch shops have decided not to issue one and two cent coins starting from September 1, 2004.

So, shops issue the coins? I thought the banks issue coins. Isn't that where the money is obtained from? And I think that here in Finland, you can't get 1-cent or 2-cent coins even from a bank. Although it is possible to pay with them, if you get them from other countries. 82.141.94.123 (talk) 01:58, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, shops can issue coins. When they get rolls from their banks and use the coins from these rolls as change for their customers they issue these coins. I.e. they bring them into circulation. Tvx1 (talk) 04:02, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

newer figures to "Circulating Mintage quantities"
The section only has 2010 figures as the latest, and 2011 row has "**", which means 'data not available yet'. I wonder how long that has been there, because more than 2 3/4 years have passed since 2011. Quite hard to believe that 2011 numbers (and actually 2012 & 2013, too) would not have been published by now. 212.50.203.198 (talk) 13:01, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Google gave me http://www.euro-mintage.com/, and they list sources (mostly national mints) at the end. I guess that should be credible enough... 212.50.203.198 (talk) 13:05, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I've updated the table up to the lasted published figures and added another source. I must say that these tables are hopelessly outdated over all the euro countries' articles. Tvx1 (talk) 04:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Yeah, but Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Netherlands) only has coins to 2009. So there is 5 whole years missing. As all the gold & silver coins pages seem to have. 212.50.203.198 (talk) 19:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dutch euro coins


text:
Talk:Ex-Muslim

Article
I actually started this article to keep adding and improving it while having the benefit of criticism and the feedback of other editors. Although there is an article entitled apostasy, I think the movement of ex-Muslims deserver a dedicated entry. Much more can be added to this article and I look forwards to everyone's input.

 * Sorry but no. Small, self-designated movements do not deserve dedicated entries. After all, this is an encyclopedia, not a webpage. This can easily be redirected as it is now. -- a.n.o.n.y.m  t 01:01, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Yeah, they don't deserve it, but each season of Big Brother does. If that's the Wikipedia consensus you have some screwed up priorities on what belongs in an encyclopedia and what doesn't. The topic is of social, political and scholarly interest, which is more than can be said for many Wikipedia articles that no one is suggesting deleting.

 * Your article was just an advertisement for several Islamophobic websites, one of which isn't even up due to its servers being hacked . Ex-Muslims are Muslim apostates which is fit for the article "Apostasy in Islam". Yuber(talk) 01:03, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Absolutely. Also, non-notable promotions of websites can easily be classified as spam. -- a.n.o.n.y.m  t 01:06, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * There is a growing socio-political movement of Ex-Muslims, and given the time and bandwidth dedicated to all the pop culture crap on Wikipedia, I think saying this article is "non-encyclopedic" is kind of sick.

PROD
this should just redirect to Apostasy in Islam, which didn't need to go through a prod to do just that... 76.66.200.95 (talk) 04:02, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ex-Muslim


text:
Talk:Portuguese euro coins

Fair use rationale for Image:€2 commemorative coin Portugal 2007 TOR.jpg
Image:€2 commemorative coin Portugal 2007 TOR.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:€2 commemorative coin Portugal 2009 EMU.jpg
The image File:€2 commemorative coin Portugal 2009 EMU.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --08:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Done, Miguel.mateo (talk) 10:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:Portuguese euro coins


text:
Upjohn

The Upjohn Company was an American pharmaceutical manufacturing firm founded in 1886 in Hastings, Michigan, by Dr. William E. Upjohn who was an 1875 graduate of the University of Michigan medical school. The company was originally formed to make friable pills, which were specifically designed to be easily digested. They could be "reduced to a powder under the thumb", a strong marketing argument at the time.

History
Upjohn developed a process for the large scale production of cortisone. The oxygen atom at the 11 position in this steroid is an absolute requirement for biological activity. There are however no known natural sources for starting materials that contain that feature. The only method for preparing this drug prior to 1952 was a lengthy synthesis starting from cholic acid isolated from bile. In 1952, two Upjohn biochemists, Dury Peterson and Herb Murray announced that they were able to introduce this crucial oxygen atom by fermentation of the steroid progesterone with a common mold of the genus Rhizopus. Over the next several years a group of chemists headed by John Hogg developed a process for preparing cortisone from the soybean sterol stigmasterol. The microbiological oxygenation is a key step in this process.

Subsequently, Upjohn together with Schering biochemically converted cortisone into the more potent steroid prednisone by a bacterial fermentation. In chemical research, the company is known for the development of the Upjohn dihydroxylation by V. VanRheenen, R. C. Kelly, and D. Y. Cha in 1976. Upjohn's best known drugs before the acquisition by Pfizer were Xanax, Halcion, Motrin, Lincocin, and Rogaine.

In 1995, Upjohn merged with Pharmacia AB to form Pharmacia & Upjohn; the company was owned by Pfizer from 2002 until 2020.

In 2015, Pfizer resurrected the Upjohn name for a division which manufactures and licenses drugs for which patents have expired; as of 2019, it planned to divest itself of this business in 2020.

In July 2019, Pfizer announced plans to merge Upjohn with Mylan. The merger was expected to close in the first half of 2020, but was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The merger was completed in November 2020 and the new company was named Viatris.

title: Upjohn


text:
Talk:Spanish euro coins

Just read that spanish coins are going to change.

 * Apparently, they were released at the beginning of February. So, the "current series" presented in the article are not current anymore... 85.217.20.78 (talk) 07:18, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:€2 commemorative coin Spain 2007 TOR.jpg
Image:€2 commemorative coin Spain 2007 TOR.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:€2 commemorative coin Spain 2007 TOR.jpg
Image:€2 commemorative coin Spain 2007 TOR.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:10, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Spanish euro coins


text: Category:Railway stations in Japan

title: Category:Railway stations in Japan


text:
User talk:Curlyshorthair

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! DS 00:58, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:Curlyshorthair


text:
The Big Three Killed My Baby

"The Big Three Killed My Baby" was released in March 1999 as a 7" single and is the third track on re-releases of The White Stripes, the eponymous debut of the Detroit-based American garage rock band the White Stripes. A live recording of the song is featured on Under Blackpool Lights; the band's first official DVD release. The single is backed with "Red Bowling Ball Ruth".

"The Big Three" refers to the three major automakers in the 1950s and 1960s: Ford, Chrysler and General Motors, all of which have their headquarters in Detroit. The song is an attack on these companies, relating to the engineering technique of planned obsolescence, and a short-sighted lack of innovation. Jack White has stated in interviews that he does not believe music to be a viable medium for political messages and did not write another political song until the 2007 release of "Icky Thump" (which criticizes American immigration policy). The song mentions "Tucker's blood", a reference to Preston Tucker's ill-fated Tucker 48. More recently, the White Stripes have performed the song live with alternate lyrics referring to the Iraq War: "Bush's hands are turning red... and I found out your baby is dead."

The photo that the band is standing in front of on the single's cover has a note on it, which reads "Insert your money here", a reference to the costs of maintaining automobiles which are intentionally engineered to become prematurely obsolete.

title: The Big Three Killed My Baby


text:
Template talk:Toronto Stock Exchange

Brackets
Template:nyse doesn't put its output between a pair of brackets, like this TSX template does. For example, vs. .  Is there any support for or objections to the removal of brackets from the output of this template? Kurieeto 00:59, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I based the template on the NYSE one back in March. Since then, the brackets have been removed from that template, and I have no objections to removing the brackets from this one too. ~⌈Markaci⌋ 2005-10-15 T 02:30:24 Z
 * I've removed the brackets as per the logic for the same move on the NYSE template - If editors want them on individual pages they can be added manually. Kurieeto 13:52, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Also, not putting brackets here is better for combining similar templates. Shawnc 16:34, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

TSX2
There is a need for a template exactly like this TSX Stock template, but without the automatic categorization to Category:Companies traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange that occurs when this template is linked to. This need would be for instances when the template is desired for use on article talk pages, or for templates that exist on multiple articles. For example, because the tsx template was called on this talk page, Template talk: Tsx is now in Category:Companies traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange, and if the tsx template was added to for example Template:CanWest Global Communications, all articles linked to in that template would also automatically be put into Category:Companies traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange. So, two actions could be taken: The code that automatically categorizes any page that calls this TSX template into Category:Companies traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange could be removed, or, a second TSX template could be created that provides the same function as this one without the automatic categorization. If the first option is chosen, we would need to ensure that all articles calling the template are manually put into Category:Companies traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange. Thoughts and comments on this matter? Kurieeto 12:51, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

 * As per the precedent of Template:Nasdaq and Template:Ndaq, I've created Template:Tsx2 to be used when the auto-categorization provided by Template:Tsx is not desirable. Kurieeto 20:53, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The templates previously used on this page have been replaced by the "2" version to avoid categorization. Shawnc 22:09, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Multiple symbols
Could this be modified to include more than one ticker symbol? The template on Canadian Tire doesn't enable it to show the CTC and CTC.A stocks. Lexicon (talk) 22:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

title: Template talk:Toronto Stock Exchange


text:
Talk:Lithuania and the euro

Contradiction
Please discuss at Talk:Euro. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 00:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Design?
There reads: For images of the common side and a detailed description of the coins, see euro coins.

Well, I actually don't see the national designs either. Maybe there should also be where to see those... 82.141.66.217 (talk) 09:49, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Treaty
The Maastricht Treaty originally required that all members of the European Union join the euro... Why originally? Has the Treaty been changed? --134.176.204.87 (talk) 19:16, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The UK and Denmark are not bound by this rule... so, yes, the situation is slightly different.Travelpleb (talk) 10:30, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The opt-outs of UK and Denmark are part of the Maastricht Treaty. --134.176.204.41 (talk) 11:56, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Update
Could someone update the convergence criteria data? Thanks.--134.176.205.139 (talk) 23:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd like to, but I don't have a reliable data source for the reference values. So if I tried, it would be removed for being OR. With the current data for August, Lithuania has inflation of 2.0% (Eurostat) with a reference value of about 2.3% (since Greece appears to be outside the benchmark now, it doesn't count anymore). Lithuanian's interest rate would also be in the green. Deficit was projected to be 2.9% in 2013 in the spring report (would also mean green). In about 6 weeks, the autumn report will be out, and we'll get a better projection.
 * Of course, it would be better if someone with access to better data would post the actual values. Ambi Valent (talk) 20:31, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Not sure how to read the table but maybe it is useful: http://www.lb.lt/convergence_criteria_and_their_implementation

--134.176.205.195 (talk) 21:12, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Aren't there newer figures than April 2013? --134.176.204.29 (talk) 23:43, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Poll
The poll is not dated and the source is not available. --134.176.205.246 (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Erased poll. --134.176.205.246 (talk) 16:26, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The source worked for me, but I dug up the original Eurobarometer report and added it to the article. Hopefully this addresses your concern.  TDL (talk) 17:32, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

better wording?
There reads: '''In February 2013, the government of Lithuania approved a plan for euro adoption in 2015. This would make it the last of the three Baltic States to adopt the euro, after Estonia (2011) and Latvia (2014).'''

However, Estonia and Latvia have already adopted the euro, while Lithuania has not. It will be the last Baltic country without a doubt. I don't know how to rephrase those sentences. 82.141.73.182 (talk) 23:02, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * It's "would" because we technically cannot say for certain that it will happen, so it's like saying that that would make it the last to join if their plans work and it happens. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.229.101.21 (talk) 03:04, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * If Lithuania joins, it will be the last of the Baltic states to do so.

 * But if it won't join, it is the last remaining Baltic state not to join (as it currently is). 82.141.73.182 (talk) 23:09, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Date
"midnight on 1 January 2015" -- To me, "midnight on X date" means the one second after 11:59:59 P.M. on day X, not one second before 00:01 on day X+1. However, I assume the former is what is being referred to (but only because I don't expect a formal, ceremonial action like this to take place on the second day of a year. Do others read it the way i do?  Think about this:  "Midnight on New Year's Eve" -  Do you really read this to mean the night between Dec. 30 and Dec. 31? 211.225.34.166 (talk) 06:54, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I clarified it: 00:00 midnight 1 January 2015 = 24:00 on 31 December 2014. – Kaihsu (talk) 16:40, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I thought it might be better as "midnight on the morning of..." or something. I've put that construction in the article. Kahastok talk 16:44, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Lithuania and the euro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes: When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080109031242/http://www.forbes.com:80/markets/feeds/afx/2007/12/04/afx4401809.html to http://www.forbes.com/markets/feeds/afx/2007/12/04/afx4401809.html

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 15:57, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 2 external links on Lithuania and the euro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes: When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140309112003/https://www.lb.lt/projects_for_lithuanian_euro_coins_already_bear_the_year_2015 to https://www.lb.lt/projects_for_lithuanian_euro_coins_already_bear_the_year_2015
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140820014357/https://www.lb.lt/the_first_lithuanian_euro_coins_are_being_minted_by_order_of_the_bank_of_lithuania_1 to https://www.lb.lt/the_first_lithuanian_euro_coins_are_being_minted_by_order_of_the_bank_of_lithuania_1

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:43, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 28 December 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Although "[w]e strive to make titles on Wikipedia as consistent as possible with other titles on similar subjects." (WP:CONSISTENT), the article content significantly exceeds the scope of the articles named "X euro coins". (closed by non-admin page mover) — Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:22, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Lithuania and the euro → Lithuanian euro coins – The correct name of the page is "Lithuanian euro coins" as in use for all contries that have already introduced the euro. Please do see: Austrian euro coins, Belgian euro coins, Cypriot euro coins, Estonian euro coins, Finnish euro coins, French euro coins, German euro coins, Greek euro coins, Irish euro coins, Italian euro coins, Latvian euro coins, Luxembourg's euro coins, Maltese euro coins, Dutch euro coins, Portuguese euro coins, Slovak euro coins, Slovenian euro coins, Spanish euro coins, Monégasque euro coins, Sammarinese euro coins, Vatican euro coins. Thank you 79.31.38.141 (talk) 21:32, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per nomination. The form "Country and the euro" is only used for main title headers of articles delineating countries where the euro is not in use, but may come into use in the future (Poland and the euro) or countries where the euro is used unilaterally (Montenegro and the euro). Lithuania, as pointed out in the nomination, is part of the eurozone. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 00:40, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose because this article is not primarily about Lithuanian euro coins. If we need an article on Lithuanian article coins, then we should make one. Kahastok talk 09:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
 * So you would rename all the previous pages (From Austria euro coins to Vatican euro coins) in the form "Country and the euro" or creating the page using the same texts you can find in? It is easily to verify how all those pages cointain the same information about the "history" how, when and why the euro was introduced etc. I do remember also that it is important to maintain coherence in naming pages that are on the same subject. --79.31.38.141 (talk) 13:00, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Where the content of the other articles is similar to this one - i.e. focussed broadly on the country's relationship with the euro rather than on the specific coins - then yes, I would rename them to match this one. Kahastok talk 14:11, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose. This page is about Lithuania's journey from the litas to the euro, not on the 1- and 2- euro coins (for example) that the country mints. The appellant's example (e.g. Austrian euro coins) actually focuses on the euro coins that a country mint, rather than the history behind a particular country's decision to euroize. NotReallySoroka (talk) 08:17, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I do see a section of the article on Lithuanian euro coins. My oppose stands since the coins is only a part of the article as a whole. However, I think that splitting Lithuanian euro coin s into a separate page - and reserving Lithuania and the euro for Lithuania's road to the euro - might be another solution. NotReallySoroka (talk) 08:19, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Support Consistent with other articles like Latvian euro coins. Reywas92Talk 00:28, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose since the article weighs more on the history and process for meeting the criteria for the Euro adoption while. Unlike the examples listed at the start of the discussions, this article provides details beyond design, identification, depiction, and circulation. Petra0922 (talk) 01:48, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This article is about Lithuania's relationship with the Euro, how it came to join, all that sort of thing. It is not just about coins. See above opposes. — Amakuru (talk) 21:24, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment. Since there is the possibility of a basic misunderstanding regarding the purpose of this nomination, it may be helpful to reiterate the nomination's main point:
 * Euro coins are issued by 20 members of the European Union and 4 non-members. Below are the 24 English Wikipedia entries covering each of the issuing entities:

There are also 13 entities [but actually only 10, since 3 are already issuing coins] which may possibly issue euro coins at some point in the future. Below are the 13 English Wikipedia entries covering each of the those entities: Thus, only one entity has two separate entries (Croatian euro coins and Croatia and the euro). All the others are either in the first grouping or in the second grouping. There are only two outliers which issue euro coins, but are bereft of the main title header "Country euro coins" — #1 and #15, which leads to WP:CONSISTENT for those two main headers. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 23:17, 5 January 2023 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * 1) Andorran euro coins (redirects to Andorra and the euro)
 * 2) Austrian euro coins
 * 3) Belgian euro coins
 * 4) Croatian euro coins (also has a separate entry for Croatia and the euro)
 * 5) Cypriot euro coins
 * 6) Dutch euro coins
 * 7) Estonian euro coins
 * 8) Finnish euro coins
 * 9) French euro coins
 * 10) German euro coins
 * 11) Greek euro coins
 * 12) Irish euro coins
 * 13) Italian euro coins
 * 14) Latvian euro coins
 * 15) Lithuanian euro coins (redirects to Lithuania and the euro)
 * 16) Luxembourg's euro coins
 * 17) Maltese euro coins
 * 18) Monégasque euro coins
 * 19) Portuguese euro coins
 * 20) Sammarinese euro coins
 * 21) Slovak euro coins
 * 22) Slovenian euro coins
 * 23) Spanish euro coins
 * 24) Vatican euro coins
 * 1) Andorra and the euro (Andorra is already issuing euro coins)
 * 2) Bulgaria and the euro
 * 3) Croatia and the euro (Croatia is already issuing euro coins and has a separate entry for Croatian euro coins)
 * 4) Czech Republic and the euro
 * 5) Denmark and the euro
 * 6) Hungary and the euro
 * 7) Kosovo and the euro
 * 8) Lithuania and the euro (Lithuania is already issuing euro coins)
 * 9) Montenegro and the euro
 * 10) Poland and the euro
 * 11) Romania and the euro
 * 12) Sweden and the euro
 * 13) United Kingdom and the euro
 * I don't think there's any misunderstanding, the feeling is simply that we should not be renaming the article from a title which accurately describes its scope, to one that does not describe its scope. No amount of consistency makes that the correct decision, or a useful thing to do for our readers. In fact, looking at the list you provide above, there seem to be several others that are incorrectly titled. Latvian euro coins should be moved to Latvia and the euro for example. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 08:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Additional points regarding the above discussion
Although the discussion has been closed (at 15:22, 6 January), these points were typed before the closure and may be useful once the matter is reopened at some point in the future:
 * A number of entries at WP:RM are indeed about main title headers that are not WP:CONSISTENT, which is the key point of contention here. At 08:19, 3 January, above, NotReallySoroka wrote,"However, I think that splitting Lithuanian euro coins into a separate page - and reserving Lithuania and the euro for Lithuania's road to the euro - might be another solution." It would be indeed appreciated if one or more Wikipedians, who specialize in this area, were to create the currently missing 2 entries with titles as listed below:
 * Andorran euro coins (the header of the analogous entry is currently Andorra and the euro, although Andorra is already issuing euro coins)
 * Lithuanian euro coins (the header of the analogous entry is currently Lithuania and the euro, although Lithuania is already issuing euro coins)
 * If those two entries were to be created, then it would be appropriate to create the currently missing 21 entries with titles as listed below:
 * Austria and the euro
 * Belgium and the euro
 * Cyprus and the euro
 * Estonia and the euro (redirects to Estonian euro coins)
 * Finland and the euro
 * France and the euro
 * Germany and the euro
 * Greece and the euro
 * Ireland and the euro
 * Italy and the euro
 * Latvia and the euro (redirects to Latvian euro coins)
 * Luxembourg and the euro
 * Malta and the euro
 * Monaco and the euro (redirects to Monégasque euro coins)
 * Netherlands and the euro
 * Portugal and the euro
 * San Marino and the euro
 * Slovakia and the euro
 * Slovenia and the euro
 * Spain and the euro
 * Vatican and the euro
 * Currently only one national entity has two separate English Wikipedia entries (Croatian euro coins / Croatia and the euro). The consistency in article headers (except for the headers Andorra and the euro and Lithuania and the euro) is that the header "Country's euro coins" indicates that the country in question is issuing its own distinct euro coins, while the header "Country and the euro" indicates that the country in question is not currently issuing its own distinct euro coins, but might do so in the future.
 * Thus, unless the above-proposed articles 1 and 2 along with articles 1 through 21 are created, there is no benefit to leaving the Andorra and Lithuania headers in their current form, which only retains inconsistency and confuses users. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 16:27, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

 * I suspect that users are more likely to be confused about why less than 20% of an article called Latvian euro coins, for example, is actually on the topic of Latvian euro coins. Kahastok talk 16:50, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

 * I do confirm that correctly understood my point of view and why I proposed the moving. Also the proposal to split the page in two different pages might be interesting, but I wonder if there will be "enough texts" to create two pages that can properly/adequately stand on their own --87.9.99.123 (talk) 17:56, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Rather than create new articles and split information apart, expanding the current euro coin articles so their content is more comprehensive would seem the much better option. CMD (talk) 01:29, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Expanding the current euro coin articles so that their content is more comprehensive would be indeed welcome, the already-existing Croatian examples (Croatian euro coins / Croatia and the euro) notwithstanding. Perhaps someone is willing to undertake the task of merging Croatia and the euro into Croatian euro coins.
 * However, as things stand today, two main title headers in question (Andorra and the euro and Lithuania and the euro) continue to be misleading since such headers are currently only used for national entities that do not issue euro coins.
 * As an example of this uncertainty, an above comment posits that "users are more likely to be confused about why less than 20% of an article called Latvian euro coins, for example, is actually on the topic of Latvian euro coins". Of course, the article could be expanded to include additional detail on the minting of Latvian euro coins.
 * However, if the implication is that due to the scarcity of information regarding Latvian euro coins, the main header, Latvian euro coins, is misleading and should be moved to Latvia and the euro, such a move would be even more misleading since Latvia does indeed issue euro coins, unlike all other entities under the header "Country and the euro" (except, of course, for the misleadingly titled Andorra and the euro and Lithuania and the euro). —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 02:22, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I do not see what is misleading about "X and the Euro" titles. Each country's relationship to the common currency is a topic with coverage in reliable sources. CMD (talk) 03:29, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The fact that "Each country's relationship to the common currency is a topic with coverage in reliable sources" should not be material to WP:CONSISTENT titling, which is understood to be one of the basic tenets of English Wikipedia main headers.
 * It would seem counterintuitive, for instance to move the header of Latvian euro coins to Latvia and the euro on the basis that less than 20% of that article's content is about euro coins, but not move the French euro coins header to France and the euro because at least 43% of that article's content is about euro coins, without specifying what percentage of euro coin content is sufficient to maintain the euro coins header.
 * Ultimately, there is a category — Category:Euro coins by issuing country — under which are 24 entries for national entities that issue euro coins. All of those, except two, carry the header "Country's euro coins". The two outliers are, of course, Andorra and the euro and Lithuania and the euro.
 * There is also the analogous category — Category:Euro by country — under which are 14 entries for national entities that are not members of the eurozone and do not issue euro coins, but will do so or may do so in the future. Thirteen of those (with the exception being the header for the article 2000 Danish euro referendum), carry the header "Country and the euro".
 * One national entity — Croatia — is under both categories since it has two separate articles — Croatia and the euro and Croatian euro coins, while two — Andorra and the euro and Lithuania and the euro — should not be under this category since those two entities do issue euro coins and, unlike Croatia, contain all their euro coverage under a single article. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 19:31, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The idea that readers would be more confused by seeing a couple of articles that don't conform to some made-up formula, than by seeing an article titled "X euro coins" that is mostly not about coins, is quite a bizarre one to me. To be clear, "Lithuania and the euro" doesn't suddenly not make sense just because the country has adopted the currency. Anyway, the RM above was unsuccessful, and I suggest it's about time to drop some sticks and move on. I think Latvian euro coins and some others should now be moved to follow this one, I would do it as Uncontroversial, but I suspect there might be objections so perhaps I need to start an RM? — Amakuru (talk) 21:12, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I would argue that unless and until we create the 21 proposed articles under the (mostly redlinked) headers above (Austria and the euro, Belgium and the euro, etc), per Croatia's example, the headers "Lithuania and the euro" as well as "Andorra and the euro" are not styled in their proper form. Thus, unilateral analogous moves for other such headers would be controversial and should be indeed submitted to RM. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 01:07, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lithuania and the euro


text:
User talk:Amphax

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! , SqueakBox 00:59, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Thank you for the welcome! I don't know much about the wiki style now, so I'm mainly just making small corrections and adding little things, but I hope to do much more as I learn more about how this site works. Thanks for the friendly welcome! Have a nice day!

Amphax 01:03, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Amphax


text:
User talk:Bobo the hobo

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Mtruch 01:00, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

This message is regarding the page Qwertypie. Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. xaosflux T/C 17:20, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia!
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page (User Talk:BigrTex), or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Hello! Danny Olson is not the appropriate place to post information about yourself, because it is in the part of Wikipedia where encyclopaedic articles are written. A "userpage" at User:, however, is available for personal information about yourself. When adding personal information please remember that Wikipedia is not MySpace. Your userpage is for anything that is compatible with the Wikipedia project. It is a mistake to think of it as a homepage: Wikipedia is not a blog, webspace provider, or social networking site. Please see Introduction and User page for more information.

Again, welcome! ~ Bigr  Tex  20:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Stephen Buchanan
A tag has been placed on Stephen Buchanan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. ~ Bigr  Tex  20:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Malissa
Please refrain from creating inappropriate pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. ~ Bigr  Tex  20:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense artciles about your friends
The next time you create a nonsense article, or an article about your friends, half a dozen of which I have just wasted time deleting, you will be permanently blocked from editing Wikipedia. 〈 RED VEЯS 〉 22:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bobo the hobo


text:
Talk:Slovenian euro coins

Date
''On January 1, 2007, Slovenia is expected to replace its national currency, the tolar, with the euro. ''

Is this the date that Euro coins and bills will actually begin to circulate? Or will there be a transition period where the Tolar is locked to a specific exchange rate against the Euro? --Jfruh 21:59, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Jan 1, 2007 is the day, when Euro coins and bills start to circulate. There is a 14 day transition period, where both, the tolar and the euro are legal tender. Gugganij 08:10, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:€2 commemorative coin Slovenia 2007 TOR.jpg
Image:€2 commemorative coin Slovenia 2007 TOR.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:€2 commemorative coin Slovenia 2009 EMU.jpg
The image File:€2 commemorative coin Slovenia 2009 EMU.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --08:03, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Done, Miguel.mateo (talk) 10:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Different sort of 50 cent coin
I have managed to acquire a Slovenian 50 cent coin with a different design than that pictured here. It shows a castle instead of a mountain and bears the word "Slovensko". It is stamped 2009. I also have another Slovenian 50 cent coin with the same design as that pictured here. Where did the first one, with the different design, come from? J I P | Talk 16:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I found out it's actually a Slovakian coin. The word "Slovensko" threw me off, I didn't realise it didn't mean "Slovenian". J I P  | Talk 16:38, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:Slovenian euro coins