User talk:Adamdaley

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Removing image requests[edit]

Please don't remove image requests from articles, as you did in this edit, or move them from more specific categories to less specific categories, as you did in this edit. Thanks. —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:21, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

The Marcia Anderson article has already got two images. Why more images on such a small article? Adamdaley (talk) 23:29, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Oh, I must have misunderstood the reason for your edit. The image request was added by someone specifically asking for an official military portrait. If you disagree that one should be included, then removing the template is probably appropriate. However, you shouldn't remove the comment that the user added, and you should explain the reason why you're removing the template. Otherwise it just looks like a mistake. —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:58, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
[1] Please stop removing image requests for no apparent reason! —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:58, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Firearms[edit]

First of all, great work on all the articles, I appreciate it. Use the {{cn}} tag, though instead of the other one, if you could because the other can be confusing and frustrating due to the message it generates, although it is perfectly acceptable on articles with no inline cites. You may want to join Project Firearms if you have not already. Thanks again for picking up the slack, I really do appreciate it. Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 00:42, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Should you come across any "fake" articles, please flag them. That's guns that never existed beyond a patent or other "vaporware". I've been having them deleted as I come across them but it's always good to have another pair of eyes. Thanks again for all your work! Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 21:13, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Why are articles like this one Dirty Harry round, deferred? Adamdaley (talk) 00:19, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Dunno, those were done by my predecessor(s). The only time I've ever agreed with that is in the case of certain Anti-gun organizations or politically charged articles. They have firearms at their root, but people like me should probably not be editing them. I'll trust your judgement on those if you feel like tackling them. As for the Dity Harry round; I've been a shooter of all types of firearms for close to 30 years (pistols, rifles, shotguns, machineguns, submachineguns, flint, percussion, etc) and working in the industry almost as long and it's the first I've heard of it. Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 00:26, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again for all your hard work. What do you think about combining some of the smaller S&W revolver pieces into more comprehensive articles based on frame size? Even as a die-hard S&W collector I see little reason to list all these models where the difference is either the finish or type of sights. Thoughts? Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 07:23, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Concerning the S&W articles, that's upto you and the WikiProject Firearms. There has been almost 100 articles, that had "photo required", even though some already had image(s), so less work for WP:Firearms. Adamdaley (talk) 09:20, 26 September 2014 (UTC)


Coordinator of the Military History Project, September 2014 – September 2015

Hi Adam, in recognition of your successful election as a co-ordinator of the Military History Project for the next year, please accept these co-ord stars. Thanks for standing and all the best for the coming year. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:48, 29 September 2014 (UTC)


Hi mate, just in case you hadn't seen the note there, you might like to consider adding a more detailed rationale to this AFD nomination. While your standing with WikiProject Military History might give you more insight into particular issues, it doesn't mean much at AFD. Involvement in a WikiProject is irrelevant at AFD for a range of reasons, but one of them is that those who don't know your work there won't be able to translate that into a cohesive argument. Maybe consider just expanding what's there with an additional note. Cheers, Stlwart111 12:38, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Kamerun Campaign[edit]

Had a dash at the citations, could you have another look please? Keith-264 (talk) 09:55, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Eythenkew! Keith-264 (talk) 08:04, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Mike Murphy[edit]

Hi Adam,

Thank you so much for adding info to my article about Mike Murphy, the Bee Gees drummer for the One For all Tour. Do you know how we can improve it some more so it won't be removed? They wanted more sources of reference, I guess. I couldn't find any more. I tried to find a copy of one of their albums to see if he was listed, but couldn't. I tried contacting his wife, she replied once to my email and then not again. I don't want to bother or pester her. Maybe she doesn't even want anything about him on Wikipedia. I think he's note worthy. If you look at the One for all entry on Wikipedia, it lists Mike as Personnel: Mike Murphy - drums. But his name isn't highlighted, I assume it was because there wasn't a link for him: Right now there is but I don't how to link it up. Do you know how to link our article with the One for all one? I would surely appreciate your continuing help. Are you game? Cjmoran (talk) 14:56, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

What's the page name for "Mike Murphy"? I'll link his page on the "One For All Tour", since there are quite a few Mike Murphy's on Wikipedia. Adamdaley (talk) 23:55, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Winter operations 1914–1915[edit]

Winter operations 1914–1915 – You might be interested in developments here since you've edited the page. Keith-264 (talk) 22:02, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Greetings again, I was trying to get the coordinates right and failing miserably. I think I reverted your edit by mistake. Keith-264 (talk) 23:19, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews[edit]

Hello Adamdaley. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Cost per acre[edit]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

How would I calculate £8 10/- from 1883 to the present $AUD for 350 acres? Adamdaley (talk) 00:36, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

  • First you would have to find out how many $AUD was worth in £8. Then, find out what the change in value is for 1 $AUD in 1883 to now. Finally, scale your 1883 $AUD value and scale it to the current worth. I'd also do it the other way. I'd see what £8 from 1883 would be worth now, and then convert to $AUD. There very well may be a difference. In the future, the best place to ask questions like these and get answers is to post them on the reference desk. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 02:34, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open![edit]

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:40, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Wikipedia editing[edit]

Hi Adam. You reviewed and declined our Wikipedia submission for Peter Winter, digital media executive and entrepreneur, back on October 19. You were quite correct, we had used wiki references as citations and not independent sources. We have corrected that with new citations and re-submitted today. Thank you.

One thing. On your user page the word "military" is spelled incorrectly, as in "WikiProject Militay History"

All best.

Nena Martyn (talk) 22:42, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open![edit]

Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Talk page layout[edit]

Gday Adam. Thanks for taking the time to clean up so many article talk pages recently. One thing I did notice though is that {{talkheader}} really should be above the article history, not below it. Pls see Wikipedia:Talk page layout which has the suggested order. Of course its a fairly minor thing but given that I have changed a few back (the ones that have come up recently on my watchlist) I thought I'd better let you know. All the best. Anotherclown (talk) 11:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry New Year[edit]

Whatever beliefs you have, merry New Year! We all mark that with new calendars, whether we like it or not! Regards, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 14:11, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher talk page archiving[edit]

"You may as well add the rest of the archived talkpages (from December 2011) back to the main talkpage. As for the archiving ... Yes, I will admit at some stage it was archived too much, while the one that you changed from 2160 to 18000, the "2160" was the standard for archiving. Adamdaley (talk) 05:03, 22 December 2014 (UTC)"

  • I'm not against archiving, but the 6-8 archive pages at Talk:Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher were of 1-2 threads each. I changed the parameters and dearchived most threads because several are germane to the recently proposed page move. —  AjaxSmack  02:51, 24 December 2014 (UTC)