Talk:Europe/Archive 3

message: The population of Europe is wrong at 799 million. Area shown green on a map in this article witch is geographically part of Europe stands at about 680 million. The number of 799 million is probably meant if Europe includes whole Turkey and Caucasian countries, witch it does not. Calculate it for yourself!
:Totaly agree, If you have already checked the numbers - correct the page please. Maybe the area calculation is similary wrong - including/excluding the whole Turkey and/or Russia.Alinor 10:25, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I calculated the total population and corrected the figure. I included the european part of Russia (the population of which I calculated to be about 111,8 million) and the caucasian coutries but excluded Turkey.--Lumijaguaari 03:19, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The population of Europe 

message: This sentence was removed by TAKASUGI Shinji-san
::"As such several countries are split between Europe and Asia (see transcontinental nations)." 
("as such" -> because there is no clear distinction between Europe and Asia).
I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but I would like to size the opportunity to underline the naivety of this. A significant proportion of European nations are transcontinental nations because of their empirial past (For imstance, France is part of organisations of American countries (because of her possessions of Guadeloupe, Guyanne, Martinique), and has possessions in the Pacific and Indian Ocean. Similarly, the United Kingdom remains an "Empire on which the sun never sets", etc.) Rama 06:29, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  transcontinental nations 

message: The Race section is almost entirely lifted from http://www.racialcompact.com/nordishrace.html, a site advocating racial segregation. "Nordish" is also a neologism only used by McCulloch and followers. The detailed racial classification given is based on Carleton Coon's "The Races of Europe".--JWB 03:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Race

message: The article Culture of Italy has been listed to be improved on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. You can add your vote there if you would like to support the article.--Fenice 14:20, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement Drive

message: It has been proposed that uses of terms Macedonia¤, Macedonian¤, and Macedonians¤ in articles mentioning the Republic of Macedonia¤ should be accompanied with the following disclaimer:
:  template about to be deleted per TfD. -Splash 02:39, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Macedonia¤-related poll 

message: Is the lack of "culture" and "economy" sections a conscious decision? If so, why? --Oldak Quill 19:25, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Culture? 

message: What is the "Linguistic-cultural Regions in Europe" section meant to be? I have never heard of Europe being divided into linguistic regions. The existing section is misspelled, and gramatically incorrect. I have removed it for now. Does anyone think we should keep a section on Linguistic divisions of Europe? -- Hexagon1 06:58, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The linguistic division is not at all necessery and does not correlate to "culture clusters" as hinted in the above. E.g. mediterranian Europe could surely be considered one cultural cluster albeit different "language groups" (latin, slavic and greek). Equally the nordic cluster differs very much from a central European cluster even though the languages in the North are unrelated with each other and some of them are closely related with central European ones. If such a liguistic division be made, at least the stated facts should be checked beforehand: I've just removed a sentence which said that the Uralic Finnish and Estonian are related to Altaic Turkish! Moreover, the Uralic or Finno-Ugric languages can be considered equally "European" (or equally non-European) as the Indo-European languages because both have been spoken in Europe about as long. Clarifer 16:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe this section is need of much pruning and refinement, not to mention proper sources regarding linguistic relatedness, and perhaps requires a discrete article. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 17:05, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dividing Europe linguistically? 

message: No longer shall i accept yee communistic ways of calling europe a continent
Bold text
== EUROPE IS NOT A FUCKING CONTINENT!
 ==
Maybe it will be good to say from the beginning that Europe is commonly called a continent but folowing the definition it is only a peninsula of Eurasia.
In brief response:
* (a) do not swear;
* (b) cite and support your contentions and references properly.  Otherwise, the 'communists' will win.
Ta! E Pluribus Anthony 21:27, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: For the love of Lenin ... E Pluribus Anthony 01:03, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Hello; I'm sorry, but this is only one POV that should coexist with other definitions, if applicable, and not prevail.  For example, two dictionaries – Oxford and Webster's – both list and reckon seven continents: Africa, Antarctica, Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, and South America.  Feel free to verify this.  Of course, other definitions are based on culture, geology, seismology, ecology, et al.  E Pluribus Anthony 00:57, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: E Pluribus Anthony, I wasn't suggesting that this should be the prevailing view.  I was merely pointing out to the spastic reader above that if he wants to be so passionate about it, then he can say the same thing about Asia, as it is the other part of the true continent of Eurasia that it shares with the allegedly imaginary continent of Europe, and thus has no more "continent-ness" than does Europe.  He could also claim that Africa isn't a continent either, because it is connected to Eurasia, and is really just a big peninsula, like Europe, though moreso.  It is my understanding that some, like the Spanish, consider North and South America to be one continent, and this seems reasonable as they are connected to eachother and separated from the other major landmasses.  However, you are right about there being a general agreement that there are seven continents, and that there are other continents defined in ways other than geographically, mainly culturally, like the Indian sub-continent.  I just felt an obligation to say what I thought about the exclamation that "Europe is not a f***ing continent!" --Jugbo 05:54, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey there; I agree and understand!  I was more responding to the ... Leninist amongst us.  Happy ho-ho! :) E Pluribus Anthony 06:14, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Europe is not a continent 

message: The Scotland Portal is now up and running. It is a project in the early stages of development, but I think it could be a very useful resource indeed, perhaps more for general readers (the vast majority I presume), rather than committed editors, who may be more attracted by the great possibilities of the notice board format: Wikipedia:Scottish Wikipedians' notice board.
Give it a Watch, and lend a hand if you can. It is (hopefully) fairly low-maintenance, but if we run with the "News" section, that will take dedication: time which I cannot commit to presently myself. Most other boxes need replacment/update only weekly, fortnightly, or monthly, plus the occasional refreshment of the Scotland-related categories. Anyway, I assume this is how the other Portals are run, so we can follow their lead.
Please add the following code -  - to your own User page, and you will have the link to the portal right there for easy access. I will investigate how other portals use shortcuts too.
Assistance from Wikipedians in the rest of Europe, and indeed everywhere, would be greatly appreciated!--Mais oui! 08:55, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Portal:Scotland|Scotland Portal]]