User talk:Ballofstring

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

setting an email[edit]

Your account doesn't appear to have an email set. You may wish to set one. Alternatively, you may wish to send me an email at This is in relation to New_Zealand_Open_Source_Society#New_Zealand_Open_Source_Awards. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:22, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Stuartyeates: thanks for the heads up about the email address – I've fixed it now. I got part way through reconfirming my email ages ago and typed in the wrong email and then forgot about it! I'll send you an email :-) — Ballofstring (talk) 06:42, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi @Stuartyeates: I sent you an email in reply - let me know if you didn't receive it! (Having trouble with my emails being marked as spam after switching providers...)
Hi again @Stuartyeates: I sent you another email - apparently we need to let the woman organising it quite urgently about who's coming on the two free tickets + dietary requirements etc. (Sorry for all these pings - I just want to make sure you get my messages...) Ballofstring (talk) 21:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jamie Whyte, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Seymour. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:54, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Robert Chapman (academic) has been accepted[edit]

Robert Chapman (academic), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

C679 21:48, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 28 January[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that some edits performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. They are as follows:

Please check these pages and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:29, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Moving named references back in source text is "tidying up"?[edit]

Hi, I noticed you made several edits to Evolution (software) which moved the named references from the "References" section back into the text body. Back when I worked on this article I made a conscious decision to use named references in the "References" section because it makes the text body source easier to read. This is supported by WP:LDRHOW. Right now the text body source is a mess again because the very long references make it difficult to read. Most importantly, the policy WP:CITESTYLE forbids moving over the citation style without seeking consensus first. So I'll undo your changes to the citation style, but keep your other changes intact. --AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 08:22, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi @AlexanderVanLoon:! Thanks for leaving me a message. I wasn't really aware that listing the references in the reflist was a legitimate way of doing references, as I've only ever seen it done in a couple of articles (and just assumed it was a eccentric style). So thanks for linking that WP policy! I'm definitely of the view that having references in the text makes much more sense, but I do understand where you're coming from. Undoing my changes sounds good. Sorry for coming in and changing the style without consulting everyone. I'll be more careful in the future :-) Ballofstring (talk) 08:32, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your understanding and apologies from my side if my first comment came across as slightly blunt. --AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 08:42, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

New Zealand central govt politicians[edit]

Hi Ballofstring, regarding this edit, I thought I'd point out that there should never be a redlink when you link to a former member of parliament from either the upper (Legislative Council) or lower house (House of Representatives), respectively. Every politician that we've ever had at the central government level has a page, so you should always achieve a functioning link. Schwede66 08:56, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Schwede66:! Thanks for the letting me know. I don't think I was aware that every former parliamentary politician had a page. I'll try and be more conscientious in the future :-) Cheers Ballofstring (talk) 23:30, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Toby Manhire[edit]

Hello, Ballofstring. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Toby Manhire, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

  1. edit the page
  2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
  3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Smirkybec (talk) 09:05, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Smirkybec: you're probably right about the notability of that article. I've tried to find sources but came up with a whole lot of things written by him but not about him. Could moving it back to a draft be a compromise? Cheers Ballofstring (talk) 22:49, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
If I may chip in - moving to draft would work if you think that you will find other sources (offline, I presume) at some stage. I think articles can be kept in the draft area for up to half a year. I guess what that means is that if Manhire just isn't notable, then it's not a solutions either. Schwede66 00:33, 18 February 2015 (UTC)