User talk:Michael Zimmermann

Welcome to the Wikipedia

Here are some links I thought useful:

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. The Wikipedia:Village pump is also a good place to go for quick answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be Bold!

[[User:Sam Spade|Vote Sam Spade for Arbiter!]] 14:18, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Guantanamo Bay

Someone moved it in a way that was against the consensus and someone else just set up a new poll on what had already been asked before. Please come again. ROGNNTUDJUU! 15:21, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please could you revisit the vote page just to confirm if it is option 1 or 2 that you'd prefer to support? Thanks, --Rebroad 18:26, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guantánamo/Guantanamo-related move/redirects

Greetings! I hope you're well. In light of prior discussion and to round out recent moves and redirects/DABs regarding Guantánamo/Guantanamo-related articles, I have proposed another ... with a twist. Please weigh in, and thanks for your co-operation! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 01:08, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me 262

You are correct.

I got the two dates swapped in my notes. I have fixed the information. I took some of the info out of the introduction, and added them where it was more pertinant.

Many thanks.

Delta Flight 5191

But don't you think it would be better to rename it to Delta Air Lines Flight 5191 to match the standard of other Delta fatalities? Jomi 13:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, pls. see your talk page for further discussion. MikeZ 13:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comair Flight 5191

Hey its actually an inferrence. according to http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5290760.stm the aircraft was delivered in jan 2001. and on http://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/Comair%20(Delta%20Connection)-active-crj-70.htm it shows N431CA is the only aircraft delivered to Comair in January 2001. I'll go ahead and cite it there.

Userboxes

Hallo Michael, I'm a novice at doing somethings on Wiki, I just look around the other Users pages and copy what the most experienced Wikipedians do on their pages. But sometimes it takes a bit of searching !! Germans are my favorite Europeans outside of Ireland, I hope that other Micheal wins the F1 World drivers Championship. Freundlich danke and a bit of Irish, Go raibh maith agat Culnacreann 20:52, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Schosskirche

Thanks for the mote. No, I do not agree. We should use an English translation for several reasons. First is that most English speakers find a text harder to comprehend when non-English terms are included in the text. Second, the term itself is a nickname for the actual name of the church, and so is not a proper noun. In English practice, we almost always retain only proper nouns and then often modify these. Third, most of the English literature on the the Reformation uses the term "Castle Church" or "University Church" for the University's congregation. I'm not against a footnote with the original form, perhaps even the full, formal name of the Schlosskirche. --CTSWyneken^(talk) 10:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

simple links

Hello. Please note that you don't need to write [[banknote|banknotes]], as you did in normal distribution. Just writing [[banknote]]s makes the whole word---not just the part in brackets---appear as a clickable link, and it links to the article whose name is inside the brackets. Similarly with [[hyphen]]ated, [[logic]]al, [[cat]]s, [[evolution]]ary, [[rabbi]]nical, [[Egypt]]ian, [[dogma]]tic, [[apocrypa]]l, etc. The more complicated thing can be used for things like [[philosophy|philosophies]]. Michael Hardy 19:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Munich

Hello,

You are invited to join WikiProject Munich!

There are a lot of things to do in this project. From creating new articles to finetuning articles into featured article status.

How can you help?

You can join a Task Force.
You can help comform Munich-related articles to Wikipedia Policy.
You can get free Munich-related images under GNU Free Documentation License.
You can create and edit of Munich-related articles.
You can do translations from German Wikipedia to English Wikipedia on Munich-related articles.
You can help do assessments of Munich-related articles.
You can help expand articles currently in the Stub-class and Start-class.
You can help reference articles.
Since original research is against Wikipedia policy, you can research topics to expand. This means you don't need to know anything about Munich.
You can help expand stubs and start-class articles and help finetune other articles into Featured article status.

A WikiProject of this nature is very broad. Munich has a rich history in sports, culture, politics along with many more topics. Feel free to help out in your area of interest.

If you want to check the project out you can click the link above. If you want to join the project, you can sign up here.

If you have any questions feel free to contact myself or any other member of the project.

Palais Strousberg

Sorry for reverting all of your edits on the above, let me explain. A few months ago I put IG Farben Building through WP:FAC. In the course of that FAC a few things were picked up:-

Not wiki-linking years, only occasional significant dates.
Not using ß for ss.
Anglicising addresses.

I can't remember where the policies are that dictated these changes; if you like I will dig them up for you. My position however is that I know I was asked to make these changes and it is considered by community consensus to be the 'correct' way of doing things, so my future articles have used this style. Rather than reverting you again, perhaps you could review your edits to the article. Cheers. --Mcginnly | Natter 16:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up I've been digging around looking for ß policy - seems there's several proposals such as Wikipedia:German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board/Umlaut and ß and Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics) all of which appear to be leaning towards ss. Also, according to German spelling reform of 1996 ss should be used after short vowels. I think we can agree the 'a' in strasse is a short vowel and so the ss is approriate even in german. Gruss. --Mcginnly | Natter 17:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Big Ben'

Thanks for your message. Yes, I inadvertently omitted the imperial measurements when reorganising the material. I think your calculations were correct, although there is some confusion (in my mind at least) over the merits of the long and short ton. I have included both measurements in the hope that someone more knowledgeable than me on such matters to delete as/if appropriate.

Best wishes,

Mdcollins1984 23:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

L'Avion

I wanted to let you know why I reverted your edit on the L'Avion article. You included Privatair in the list of similar services to L'Avion, Eos, Maxjet and Silverjet. However, as Privatair does charters and flies under the banner of other airlines (KLM, Lufthansa, etc), they are different from the other 4 who sell direct to the public and sell their own seats. Aphenry 19:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EU page

Hi Michael, I´ve noticed your correction on the Airbus image at the EU article. There is a discussion about keeping this image and many other of the current article layout. If you are interested, join the talk or have an eye on it. Would be great. This is the version [1] to keep, if you want to... all the best Lear 21 05:59, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Michael. Thanks for your input to the discussion on graphics. I've taken the liberty of deleting the obvious candidates identified by the vote. I don't think we have any major differences of opinion, but if you feel strongly about any individual item I've removed, please put it back! On a positive note, we no longer get the warning at the top of the article about it's size. Countersubject 00:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I think the English version of the motto is much more official than the Latin one as: 1) the Latin version doesn't appear anywhere on the official europa.eu site, while the English version appears in many places; 2) the English version appears in the Constitutional Treaty while the Latin one doesn't; 3) English is an official and working language of the EU while Latin is neither an official nor working language. Luca Italy 12:14, 2 February 2007 (CET)

Hi, sorry to intrude, but I might be able to cast some light on this (if not, just ignore me!). As I understand it, the Latin version was accepted by the President of the European Parliament in 2000 (see the article on EU symbols). As Michael has said, Latin was chosen because the EU is multi-lingual, and Latin is Europe's historic common language. Since then, another motto has been written into the proposed constitution, in each of the national languages. It's this version that's appeared on the commission's website. If the constitution is eventually ratified, then it will become the 'official' motto. Until then, the Latin motto is the only such. Countersubject 11:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Council of the EU

Hello.

>>> Michael Zimmermann: your cited statement "the working languages most frequently used at the General Secretariat of the Council are English and French" is not excluding German as the third working language!

As for that, it is not excluding Finnish either.... Why then not mention also Finnish as the 4th working language of the Council? :-)

Cheers, Luca Italy 15:13, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work...

...with Template:Languages of the European Union. It is much more easily manageable now. --Michkalas 21:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-) MikeZ 22:00, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

German currency

While I agree with your move on German Reichsmark and German Rentenmark in principle, I must tell you that this has been discussed and the decision was not to move (even though I was in favor of the move). If moved, then there are tens of German-speaking currency articles that span across many states before a unified Germany, Austria, Liechtenstein, and A-H Empire. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 08:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ops, thanks for your information. I wasn't aware of that vote (and I'm not pleased with it's outcome either). MikeZ 08:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isreali Wine

Do you have any views on the neutrality of the Isreali Wine Article? Please could you reply because i am considering a rewrite.

re: my comment on List of Countries by total area

It more or less means that being close, but not actually reaching the goal, is irrelevant, for all things except horseshoes and handgrenades. To put it in context, when you said that the EU is closer to being a country than a multinational organization, I replied that close isn't good enough. I hope that was helpful. Cheers. Parsecboy 12:09, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jäger

Hi! About this edit I think that rollback was not necessary. de:Jäger doesn't seems to be a disambiguation page but Jäger is one! I can't speack German but imho the correct page to link should be de:Jäger (Begriffsklärung). --Alleborgo 21:04, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I have a weird question...

Hi, how are you? I have a weird request, but can you please help me? I want to ask a friend a question in German, but I do not know how to speak it. Can you just tell me how to say this in German:

"Hey, are you German? I got the feeling that you were".

I need that translated in German, if you can help I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you in advance. User:VeronicaPR

Put the answer on your talk page, have fun with it :) - cheers, MikeZ 09:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Reserve currencies

You have reverted my edit to Template:Reserve currencies, and restored the text "expressed in US dollars". I don't want to start a revert war, so I am explaining my reasons. You wrote "That's not exactly true, as currencies are converted to USD first, then the percentage is calculated".

1) How do you know (unless it was you who did the calculations in the first place). They could have been all converted to USD, Euro, Batavian Gumbos or any other arbitrary currency.

2) It doesn't matter which currency they were all converted into, you always get the same answer

EXAMPLE: I own USD 12 and EUR 15 (assume EUR 1 = 1.2 USD).

Via USD: 15 Euro = 18 USD = 18 / (18 + 12) * 100% of the total = 60% in Euros (40% in USD).

Via EUR: 12 USD = 10 EUR = 10 / (10 + 15) * 100% of the total = 40% in USD ( 60% in Euro).

The answer is always a dimensionless pure ratio it IS NOT in any particular currency. Please comment, otherwise I will remove the "expressed in US dollars" text again. TiffaF 11:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TiffaF, thanks for your comment regarding this topic. Let me try to answer your points.

1) That fact was stated in both sources (EMF and ECB), the reserve amount is in both sources given as end-of-year values expressed in US dollars, then as a percentage of total identified holdings.

2) I completely agree on your mathematical view and on the fact that a percentage is dimensionless. Your example assumes that the conversion of USD to EUR is the multiplicative inverse of the conversion of EUR to USD. However, in currency trading you need to take the bid/offer spread into consideration. You will get slightly different reserve value holdings if you go by USD versus by EUR for example. The result is again your dimensionless percentage, but the value of that percentage may differ. So, I think it's still relevant to have that information available what currency conversion was done before the percentages are calculated.

Cheers, MikeZ 05:16, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah but, you are not currency trading here, your are comparing amounts in different currencies. For the purposes of comparison I would have thought the mid-point value would have been used, to remove any bias. The bid/offer spread for the large amounts involved in inter-country trading would be small and a lot closer than the rates quoted by commercial banks. All exchange rates are variable anyway, to pick one exchange rate is arbitrary. There figures in the sources will themselves be estimates, and the percentages are to one decimal place anyway, so the rounding probably exceeds the error due to currency spread.

To get back to the point, I stand by my statement that these figures ARE NOT "in US dollars" and to include that text is incorrect and confusing. The most you could say is to put in the bottom of the table, below the links to the sources "Calculated by converting all reserves into the equivalent amount in USD, and then calculating the percentage of the total", but I think that is totally unnecessary.

AfD nomination of Axis plans for invasion of the United States during WWII

An article that you have been involved in editing, Axis plans for invasion of the United States during WWII, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Axis plans for invasion of the United States during WWII. Thank you.

Euro adoption x requested for deletion on Commons

Hi,

Image:Euro adoption *.* have been requested for deletion on Commons. Please participate at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Euro adoption x. Thanks. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 21:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miles & More

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Miles & More, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Miles & More. Ridernyc (talk) 22:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alumnus & Alumna

Hi, I noticed you undid my changes to the alumnus article and wanted to clarify a few things. To the best of my knowledge, alumna is not a latin word. I can't find a reference to it in any latin dictionary. If you can, please let me know, as I'd be keen to have a look at it. Regardless, the claim that alumnus has four forms in the nominative case is patently false. Alumnus is a 2nd declension noun and is masculine: the only forms in the nominative case are the singular and plural forms. As Latin nouns don't change their gender, I don't know where the idea that the "feminine" forms exist came from. Perhaps you could also clear this up for me. Rakwiki (talk) 02:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Merriam-Webster does have different view on this [2]:

Main Entry: alum·na Pronunciation: \ə-ˈləm-nə\ Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural alum·nae Listen to the pronunciation of alumnae \-(ˌ)nē also -ˌnī\ Etymology: Latin, feminine of alumnus Date: 1879 1 : a girl or woman who has attended or has graduated from a particular school, college, or university 2 : a girl or woman who is a former member, employee, contributor, or inmate

That seems to be quite sound to me, don't you think? Cheers, MikeZ (talk) 21:20, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't dispute that 'alumna' is a word in common English usage as the Merriam-Webster suggests. My contention is that it is not a Latin word. You'll notice that my edits were confined to the origin section of the article that claims exactly that: alumna is a form of alumnus, which it is not. Even if you ignore this admittedly small matter, the alumnus article makes some blatantly false claims about the way Latin nouns are declined, which again if you check my edit, was the main thrust of my changes. Unless you can provide some explanation as to why these claims should remain, I will remove them again.Rakwiki (talk) 09:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your clarification, I do see your exact point now. Unfortunately, I don't prossess my old big Latin dictionary anymore and I was not successful in finding a proper online Latin dictionary. - Wouldn't it be a good idea to keep the common English usage of alumna in the article, while at the same time add your point that alumna is most probably a later vocabulary addition not known in classic Latin? MikeZ (talk) 19:10, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a reasonable suggestion to me. Do you want to make the changes, or should I?Rakwiki (talk) 01:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead, as it's your suggestion. :-) Cheers, MikeZ (talk) 15:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BMW 5-Series images edit war

Constant reverting is unproductive, particularly with explanations confined to an edit summary, so let me reiterate what I have been saying: It is inconsistent with WikiProject Autos precedent to ignore image quality in selecting the head image for an article. The head infobox illustrates the entire vehicle line, not just the newest model, and may therefore include any generation. There is only one infobox that must be specific to the newest model, and that is that generation infobox. It isn't complicated. There are literally dozens of other auto articles where you can find the better image coming from an earlier generation, and thus gracing the head infobox. Stop reverting on the 5-Series page. IFCAR (talk) 02:57, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You both know better than this - take it to the 5 Series talk page! Gosh! ;-) Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 16:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Europe/Asia

Hallo MikeZ, I see you have visted or lived in Israel and Turkey. You are 100% correct to put them in Asia. So why does the Eurovision Song Contest allow Turkey and Israel to compete in a European competion, when they are in totally in Asia?? - Culnacréann-(talk) 20:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Culnacréann, I personally think that's because cultural links and similarities don't stop at continental boundaries :-) - Cheers, MikeZ (talk) 20:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Germany Invitation

Hello, Michael Zimmermann! I'd like to call your attention to the WikiProject Germany and the German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board. I hope their links, sub-projects and discussions are interesting and even helpful to you. If not, I hope that new ones will be.

--Zeitgespenst (talk) 13:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for Wikipedians for a User Study

Hello. I am a graduate student in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at the University of Minnesota. We are conducting research on ways to engage content experts on Wikipedia. Previously, Wikipedia started the Adopt-a-User program to allow new users to get to know seasoned Wikipedia editors. We are interested in learning more about how this type of relationship works. Based on your editing record on Wikipedia, we thought you might be interested in participating. If chosen to participate, you will be compensated for your time. We estimate that most participants will spend an hour (over two weeks on your own time and from your own computer) on the study. To learn more or to sign up contact KATPA at CS dot UMN dot EDU or User:KatherinePanciera/WPMentoring. Thanks. KatherinePanciera (talk) 01:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: official languages of the European Central Bank

Sorry about the wait. The only source I can offer you is this page. I assume they are all official languages and they are the ones that should be listed. – Zntrip 02:00, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frankfurt motor show and IAA disambiguation

Hello Michael, I am sorry but I must strongly disagree with your move of the former IAA page to specific disambiguation page (and there was not talk on that move whatsoever) and that the name IAA itself should be occupied by the mere abbreviation of "Frankfurt Motor Show's" German name.

There is lot of important terms on this disamiguation, lot of institutions and just the mere substance Indole acetic acid is of high importance in chemistry and biology, each of such terms would outweighed the abbreviation for the show and might deserve IAA page name even more then it. I propose to revers the move: Let's disamiguation is on the IAA only.

I know how inconvinient it might be to use the abbreviation of Frankfurt motor show in talks or in articles when it leads to disambiguation only, but when it leads to a completely different article then it is even worse. That is the situation just know for any other use then for the motor show.

Just have a look on google fight: [3] and IAA in plant physiology is actually used much more often then the full name of the compound.

Reo ^ON | +++ 15:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just seen your reply on Reo On's talk page. This seems to be a situation rather like Adel, below. An ambiguous term should only be redirected if it's the Primary Topic. For USA, the country really is the primary topic. For IAA, I strongly disagree with you, as, I suspect, would almost all of the editors who have edited this page in its five years existence! I am far more likely to look for the Irish Aviation Authority or many other topics, than for the largest motor show in the world. In this case, the disambiguation page has to be at IAA. I have changed the redirect WP:BOLDly to point to the dab page. I will do a formal WP:RM. Please don't disruptively move any other disambiguation pages in this way. PamD (talk) 19:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adel

Hallo, I don't think that German nobility is the primary usage of "Adel", so I believe that your change to make it redirect there was inappropriate. I've redirected the redirect to point to the disambiguation page, but have also made a formal "Request to move" to get the dab page back to the plain title. The place for discussion is at Talk:Adel_(disambiguation)#Requested_move. While I was looking at the dab page I tidied up and expanded it: the amount of information in each link is supposed to be kept to a minimum per WP:MOSDAB ("The description associated with a link should be kept to a minimum, just sufficient to allow the reader to find the correct link."), so I also pruned it somewhat. PamD (talk) 17:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although I listed both this and IAA at WP:RM as "potentially controversial" requests, an admin has already made the requested moves. Please do not change the name of these pages or similar dab pages in future without further discussion. Thanks. PamD (talk) 07:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Just to note, you are currently in violation of WP:3RR on List of countries and outlying territories by total area. Although you've been on wiki a long time, I figure there's no harm in posting a warning and requesting you revert your most recent revert to that article.

I would then ask you to explain on talk what your problem with the edit concerned is, bearing in mind that there is no reason in policy why a decision made in the past cannot be revisited or changed if there is consensus for the change (and that silence implies consent in creating consensus). Pfainuk talk 17:32, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Late Happy New Year !

Dear Michael, I wish you as a fellow EU editor a successful, healthy and happy new year. I hope you keep up expanding high quality EU content at Wikipedia while also maintaining achieved standards. Keep up motivating others to contribute or to correct EU-European content. Viva Europa Lear 21 (talk) 00:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep on commenting: EU inclusion in lists. Would be much appreciated. Keep on reinserting the established version. It sucks I know. all the best Lear 21 (talk) 00:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Toter Papagei Lear 21 (talk) 17:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits to Bulgaria and the euro

Hi there,

While I completely agree with your recent edits to Bulgaria and the euro and I honestly know and believe it is true, would it be possible to add sources for that statement? I have added a few request for sources in that section as well, just for your information.

Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 00:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done :-), MikeZ (talk) 14:50, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:List of sovereign states #Positioning of EU, SMOM and so on

"Since no-one has chosen to explain how on earth these three constitute part of the inclusion criteria of this list, I can only conclude that my arguments are accepted and that they do not. Thus I am moving them back to the bottom of the list--Pfainuk"--217.112.186.47 (talk) 01:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of sovereign states

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_sovereign_states&diff=prev&oldid=264524995

--217.112.186.73 (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

German mark

In reference to an artical about the currency of Germany, you said:

Well, in my understanding neither of these statements are completely correct. On 01-Jan-2002 the euro banknotes and coins were introduced. Until 28-Feb-2002 both the old German Mark banknotes and coins, as well the new euro ones, were legal tender. All goods could be bought by any combination of currencies, and the seller was obliged to accept both currencies during these two months. After 28-Feb-2002 the German Mark did not exactly became invalid, but ceased to be legal tender. The Bundesbank will exchange old German Mark denominations (banknotes and coins) into euros for indefinite future, so the German Mark banknotes and coins are not invalid. However, the acceptance of German Marks is up to the seller's decision. If he's willing to accept the burden of exchanging at the Bundesbank, customers might be able to buy something for old German Marks even now. In fact, several companies did some marketing actions ("we still accept your old German marks"), to benefit from people still in procession of German Marks. I do understand, that there are still billions (!) of German Marks out in the world, that haven't been exchanged as of now, 5 years after to introduction of euro banknotes and coins. - So, just my two cents. Cheers, MikeZ 19:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC).

My question is how would one go about turning in a large amount of coin? Would you have to go in person? Would they accept it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.101.236 (talk) 21:27, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the Bundesbank is bound to accept any amount of coins and banknotes of German marks for exchange to euros, no matter how large your amount of coins really is. You need to go into a branch office of the Bundesbank in person, though. - However, companies are not required to accept marks any more, so they could refuse if you would turn up with a very large amount of mark coins - even though there currently is a marketing campaign ongoing. - MikeZ (talk) 22:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Euro#Linguistic_issues

I see you have added "non-legally binding" to the statement on the EU translation style guide recommendation. This does not appear to be supported by the citation, referring to the current version of the Style Guide (Section 20.8). The older version did indeed have a restriction

" Do this when amending or referring to legal texts that themselves observe this rule. However, in all other texts, especially documents intended for the general public, use the natural plurals ‘euros’ and ‘cents’ "

but this has now been removed. Other sources suggest that the non-variant plural rule applies (or at least applied) to EU legislation. There now appears to be no such recommendation for national laws, contracts, pronouncements of the ECB, or other legally binding documents. The ECB seems to use the normal plural everywhere. There is more detail in the main article Linguistic issues concerning the euro#English. See also the discussion at Talk:Euro/Archive_6#.22Euros.22_and_.22cents.22_as_non-legislative_plurals.--Boson (talk) 15:42, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see - thanks for the clarification. Cheers, MikeZ (talk) 09:53, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Hello, just a heads up re: this edit you made: [4]. Per Wikipedia guidelines there is nothing wrong with references to sources that are behind a paywall or require subscription. See WP:SOURCEACCESS. Regards, Siawase (talk) 15:01, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found Painting

What was the reason you reverted my edit to Found (Rossetti) concerning Albrecht Durer? Was it original research? That would be a hard claim to find a citation for, but The Hare is probably the only painting by Durer that the quote could possibly be referencing. Or are you aware of any other candidates? I think you might have tagged it OR instead of simply deleting it.--♦♦♦Vlmastra♦♦♦ (talk) 02:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Early computer characteristics

Template:Early computer characteristics has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 14:05, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Wings

Hi Michael! At Blue Wings I noticed this edit where you stated the HQ was Bochholt. But in archives of the Blue Wings website they state that the corporate headquarters were at Dusseldorf Airport. Did the imprint give the address as Bochholt, but the actual administrative offices were at Dusseldorf Airport? WhisperToMe (talk) 17:29, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WhisperToMe, thanks for reaching out to me. However, I don't have the exact reference at hand that I used for this particular edit. But if you google BlueWings and "Sitz" (German for Headquarters) you will come up with a ton of different references all saying that Bocholt was indeed the corporate headquarters. Do you still have offical information/documentation from Blue Wings at hand that state that their headquarters was in Düsseldorf? MikeZ (talk) 11:54, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do have material from Blue Wings which says the HQ is Dusseldorf; archives of their website.

http://web.archive.org/web/20050612004602/http://www.bluewings.com/html_e/contact.html "Blue Wings AG Duesseldorf Airport Terminal A 5. OG 40474 Duesseldorf, Germany"
http://web.archive.org/web/20090314082701/http://www.bluewings.com/cms/start00/?no_cache=1
http://web.archive.org/web/20030323153329/http://www.bluewings.com/

And there's also a page saying so in the "World Airline Directory":

"Directory: World Airlines." Flight International. 16-22 March 2004. p. 99. "Airport Dusseldorf, Terminal A, 5. OG, 40474"

For Bochholt, the problem is that those sites may be relying on Wikipedia mirrors which said. Also it's possible the company declared Bochholt as its registered address (an "impressum" would say if this is the case) but the actual admin offices would be at Dusseldorf Airport

WhisperToMe (talk) 19:17, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I know the Düsseldorf airport quite well (it's my home base), Terminal A is the LH and Staralliance terminal, "5. OG" means "level 5", "40474" is the zip code for the area of Düsseldorf the airport is in - I have the strong impression, that they did have a mailbox and maybe a small office in the actual airport, but the main headquarter offices somewhere else. There's just not much office space in the actual terminal building available. MikeZ (talk) 14:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Languages of the European Union

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

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Lfdder (talk) 23:21, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Kapitän

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Kapitän requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article consists of a dictionary definition or other article that has been transwikied to another project and the author information recorded.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Thunderstorm008 (talk) 22:43, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Michael Zimmermann. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]