Talk:List of countries where United Nations peacekeepers are currently deployed

message: Why no flags for Kosovo (Flag of Kosovo - hmm, a redlink - and Flag of Serbia?) , Golan Heights (Flag of Israel and Flag of Syria?) or Middle East (where are the peacekeepers anyway?) ? -- ALoan (Talk) 11:23, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Middle East one appears to be mostly administrative, lending support to others in the area, so I don't think it really is centered in any conflict. Considering that no one really knows which of three countries Golan Heights is part of, I am not sure how a flag would work. I searched for a flag of Kosovo, but couldn't find one (though I can't believe there isn't one). Again, considering the conflict, I thought a Serbia flag for Kosovo would be inappropriate. Blanks seemed to be the best option, and understandable, since these are the three non-countries. --Dmcdevit 20:49, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK - Middle East seems general; Kosovo doesn't seem to have a flag (I guess it is not the first thing on the list...); but surely Golan Heights can have the three nations that claim the heights? -- ALoan (Talk) 22:15, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Have done so, how's it look? --Dmcdevit 22:34, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Great - looks fine to me.  I wonder what others think.  It would still be nice to find something appropriate to add for the other two (particularly Kosovo). -- ALoan (Talk) 02:35, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I actually solved the Kosovo flag. Albania's flag is used for the Albanian majority, Serbia's for the Serb minority. For the Middle East, all I could think of to put was a map. Like it? --Dmcdevit 03:04, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent - good idea. Perfect :) -- ALoan (Talk) 00:06, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Absent flags

message: Should UNMISET be listed on this page or is it not suitable? Philip Baird Shearer 2 July 2005 20:30 (UTC)
:From the UN website: "UNMISET successfully completed its mandate on 20 May 2005." So that's why, it's not current. --Dmcdevit 2 July 2005 20:37 (UTC)
There is a new mission: Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste (UNMIT). – Zntrip 21:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure whether it's a peacekeeping mission or rather only a *police* mission... —Nightstallion (?) 13:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for bringing this to my attention (twice, actually, thanks!), I've amended the respective articles.  —Nightstallion (?) 17:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: East Timor

message: Why that isn't classified as a peace-keeping operation? --Pudeo (Talk) 13:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[International Security Assistance Force|ISAF]] in Afghanistan 

message: O, Dmcdevit Mighty, who goes against the vote at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of countries where United Nations peacekeepers are currently deployed, have you even checked where the redirect goes? The other article is 100% the same. Wikipedia does not make new articles by copypasting a part of another article without any changes. I can't understand why anyone would like to keep this article. Every byte is same as in the other one, this has no use. It's easier to edit one article anyway.  --Pudeo⺮ 12:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You can see the reason this article was created earlier in this talk page. You don't seem to have bothered, or bothered to actually check it they are "copypasted," as that is false. You haven't offered anything except a handful of people that wanted to delist it from FLC as a reason for removing the article entirely. Incivility isn't helping, nor is calling the article spam. Dmcdevit·t 21:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact the two articles were indentical (the main text was exactly the same, except saying "where peace keepers are currently deployed"). Even the images were in exact same positions. True, the templates weren't exactly the same because List of United Nations peacekeeping missions had been updated to include the website, which is better of course. Would you like to create List of countries where United Nations peacekeepers were deployed? I wouldn't. That information can be found in the main article, there's no point creating new lists for subsections like that (unless it grows really big). --Pudeo⺮ 09:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean List of countries where UN peacekeepers were deployed? That was the original article, but I suppose you didn't bother to actually read the short discussion above like I pointed out. Again, please actually look at things before you make these claims that are patently false, and demonstrably so. One is a list of missions by date, and another is a list of countries alphabetically. I find it ironic that I made both these lists, (this one first, mind you) by recommendation after it went to FLC, and now I am being accused of "creating new lists for subsections." I'm sure there is something useful you could be writing about (most of those missions are stubs!) to help the project, rather than needlessly debating this. Dmcdevit·t 22:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe maybe, but what's exactly the problem with the redirect as it redirects to the right subsection? It has the same template, same information. I just don't get the splitting of this. --Pudeo⺮ 20:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's hardly an argument for removing it. It has struck myself and others as valuable to have a list of countries where there are peacekeepers operating currently, as well as the general list with all historical missions. I'm not sure how else to put it. Dmcdevit·t 02:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well yay then, +1 article count for Wikipedia. You win, practicality loses. --Pudeo⺮ 22:07, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant