User talk:Chris55

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Semington-bridge.jpg This user is a member of WikiProject UK Waterways

Contents

List of waterways[edit]

Just dropping by to let you know of these discussions: Talk:List_of_waterways#We need a Lists of waterways article and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of waterways Regards —G716 <T·C> 19:54, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me to this. The first page seems to have a problem - I can't load it and I don't think it's my network. I personally think that article is very badly conceived. For a start, its definition of a waterway doesn't include the vital word "navigable", and it is different in several other respects from the other uses in Wikipedia (not that they are bang on either). But if it could be completed it would have thousands of entries and there's no point in that. A pointer to a category would be far more useful. But I'll have a look round when I have a moment. Chris55 (talk) 13:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

June 2009[edit]

Stop hand nuvola.svg The recent edit you made to Hospice has been reverted, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. The text you added seems to have been copied from http://www.thecarer.co.uk/TheHelpOfAHospice.html, which site bears a notice that it is protected by copyright. Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:23, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

fair cop. The section really needed a brief statement of what the 'modern' idea of a hospice was and it's always easier to use someone else's formulation. I've now used my own words, not so good, but... Chris55 (talk) 08:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

James Brindley at Turnhurst[edit]

Hi Chris55. I have akeen interest in Turnhurst Hall and wrote that page on Wikipedia. I am interested to see that around June 2008 you added the following text to James_Brindley:

At this time Brindley had never built a lock and he first built an experimental lock in the grounds of Turnhurst, a house he had bought near the summit, and this determined the design of the narrow canal lock which characterized most of the canals in the Midlands.[1] These were for an elongated version of the boats which were designed for the underground system at Worsley, the so-called 'starvationers', and this decision was to cast a long shadow on the English canal system.

I understand that Brindley rented part of Turnhurst Hall from the Alsager sisters, the other half being rented by my forebears the Cole family. I am also aware of the local tradition that Brindley built an experimental model canal at Turnhurst. I have also read an archaelogical report following excavations of the site, prior to the building of the present Brindley's Lock pub, and have severe doubts as to the authenticity of this tradition. I note that you cite L.T.C. Rolt as a source, I wonder do you have a copy from which you could copy any relevant section relating to Turnhurst?

Kind regards, Billysugger 17:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Billysugger,
I can't find your user page so I'll reply here. (Use 4 ~'s to generate a proper signature).
Rolt's statement in Navigable Waterways (p40) is "There is a long-standing tradition that Brindley first built an experimental lock in the grounds of Turnhurst, the old house conveniently near the summit of the Trent & Mersey canal which he bought when, at the age of forty-nine, he married Anne Henshall."
Not exactly definitive is it! The main reference for Brindley is to The Canal Duke, by Hugh Malet, David and Charles, 1961, but he also references Samuel Smiles, Lives of the Engineers, in that chapter (not noted for accuracy). Hope that helps. Chris55 (talk) 18:48, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm reminded of the miniature canal that Pierre-Paul Riquet constructed in the grounds of his house a century earlier when constructing the Canal du Midi and I've added a note to that article about it. In From Sea to Sea, Rolt says "One is irresistibly reminded of the miniature lock which James Brindley built in the grounds of his house at Turnhurst". There also he questions the need for the models, tho he says that the remains of the model at Bonrepos can still be found. It's not impossible that the Brindley story was based on the model of Riquet. I've now checked the Google books version of Smiles and it mentions no models but does mention renting Turnhurst from the Alsagers. Chris55 (talk) 08:23, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Rolt, L.T.C. (1969). Navigable Waterways. W & J Mackay, Chatham. 

NowCommons: File:Zhenghe-sailing-chart.gif[edit]

File:Zhenghe-sailing-chart.gif is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Zhenghe-sailing-chart.gif. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Zhenghe-sailing-chart.gif]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 04:41, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:TrevithicksEngine.jpg[edit]

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:TrevithicksEngine.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:13, 20 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 12:13, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

File:TrevithicksEngine.jpg missing description details[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:TrevithicksEngine.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:14, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

The Battle for God[edit]

I've replied on my talk page. Cheers, — Scientizzle 16:04, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

File:CA House.jpg needs authorship information.[edit]

Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:CA House.jpg is missing information as to its authorship, or if such information is provided it is confusing.

If possible, please add or clarify this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

When adding authorship information to self published work please do NOT use describers such as 'I made this', 'own-work' , 'self-made' or personal names, without making your user name explicit.

This is so that media can be more accurately traced, if it is transferred to Wikimedia Commons.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:44, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:44, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Hatfield Chase image[edit]

Hi, I have been working on the Hatfield Chase article, and noticed that the map was uploaded by you, and says it was copied from a booklet issued by the Bishop of Sheffield in 1993. I wondered if you had any more information, such as the approximate period of its origin. That is, does it show the results of Vermuyden's work, or is it later? Bob1960evens (talk) 12:17, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Re. ALLC[edit]

Hi! I just checked the deletion log. The initial edit was nothing but some gibberish and a few external links and the second edit was to blank the page. Nothing on which to build an article, I'm afraid. However, please feel free by all means to create a new article under the title. It sounds like it's more than worthy of inclusion. Thanks for letting me know! Best, PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:17, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

L.T.C. Rolt[edit]

Hi Chris; I have two photos of Bridge 164 on the Oxford Canal (to save you looking it up, it's at Banbury and named "Tom Rolt Bridge"). I also have a photo of the plaque attached to one abutment of that bridge. Before uploading, I first would like to know if these would be suitable for the L. T. C. Rolt page; second, should they go on Wikipedia or Commons; third, what should the licensing be? I think that the bridge photos can go on commons, where they will fall under {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (ie commons:Template:Self enclosing commons:Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0 and commons:Template:GFDL). The plaque, I'm entirely unsure about. It's made of cast iron, with raised lettering. Being basically text, it's probably copyright, and not a work of art. It's dated 27 July 1999, and has the logos of the IWA and British Waterways; these are almost certainly copyright. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Redrose - thanks, I was wondering about getting a friend to take a photo. (My boat's too wide!) Yes, I'm sure they'd be suitable. I assume that you took the photos yourself. If so, then I'd suggest the Creative Commons 3.0 attribution. As you may see from my talk page I've had problems with this in the past. If you're using the new look theme, there should be an "Upload file" link on the left hand side and yes, they go in Commons. But remember to fill in explicitly your user id in the form where it has the "I created this by myself" line (tho I see it now has 3 ~ so maybe you don't need to) AS WELL AS selecting the appropriate attribution option. Otherwise the bots will be after you. To place them on the page, copy one of the existing thumbnail image links already on the page and adapt. Taking a photo of words on a plaque isn't something that infringes copyright in Wikipedia's eyes. It's only the photo itself. ok? Chris55 (talk) 16:15, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Smashin' - I've uploaded to commons before, my work (such as it is) may be seen at User:Redrose64#Images, and as you can see, none of these are photographs of art which itself had been created by others within the last 75 years. That's where I was unsure about licensing. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:28, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Uploaded, and gallery added to article. I wasn't sure which could go within the text. They're not brilliant - the two plaques are on the slant, I think I tried to get one side vertical, and didn't notice the other wasn't also. I've never been particularly good at photography - I only notice the mistakes afterwards. Plus, I was a bit distracted that day by a person accompanying me... --Redrose64 (talk) 20:00, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
That's fine - I've put the Chester plaque further up and put the Oxford pic next to the text. I straightened your other pic on my home machine and then realised that only you can update it. How do I get it to you? Incidentally I've played with the "website" entry according to the guidelines and it seems to come out the same as before. Is the template wrong, or me? Chris55 (talk) 21:05, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm sure I've come across cases where one user has amended another's commons image before. If you go to the image's page on commons, at the bottom of the "File history" section, you should be able to see a link like Upload a new version of this file.
As for the website in the infobox, it's now showing a bit better than your previous version, which showed as
[[1] Official website]
My alteration was intended to remove the "[1]", and gave:
Official website
You have altered it to:
[ltcrolt.org.uk Official website]
I don't think it's right though. As you noticed, the documentation for the |website= parameter of {{infobox writer}} states:
The proper syntax is: [http://www.example.com/ example.com] or {{url|www.example.com}}
but immediately prior to that it states the opposite:
Enter just the url. Do not use syntax such as [http://www.example.com/] or [[http://www.example.com Great person]].
Having examined the code of the {{infobox writer}} template, I see that it passes |website= through to the {{official}} template, which does a job which overlaps somewhat with the {{url}} that you used. Therefore, it expects a bare URL, and not one that's been processed in some way - and the last sentence of the documentation is therefore incorrect. Since I can't amend the template to match the self-contradictory documentation, I shall amend the doc to match the actual behaviour. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I didn't scroll far enough! Have updated the pic. As for the website link, I think what's there is the best of a bad set of options. You can see the name of the website as well as getting a link. If you put in the bare url you get an anonymous link. Chris55 (talk) 08:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Bertrand Russell[edit]

If I may say so, your latest edit, I believe, may have unintentionally added unsourced information to the infobox at the top of the article. Could you cite the references for the "influenced by"? (P.S. Is the "influenced by" section collapsed? Cause I can't see it.) :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 23:49, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

I saw you deleted a "influenced_by" attribute with similar information and checked that it should actually be "influences" so I changed that and corrected the list where necessary (only Whitehead actually). From my knowledge of Russell's work it seemed an eminently sensible list (except that I wouldn't have included Einstein). Since none of the other information in the infobox has sources, I don't see why that's a problem. On my page there is a "show" button which reveals the sources. I tried the attribute in several positions and it always came at the bottom. Perhaps it is a "deprecated" attribute. I didn't track down the source of the template. Chris55 (talk) 07:57, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
It's at {{Infobox philosopher}}. As with all other Wikipedia templates, the order in which named parameters are supplied to the template is irrelevant; it is the template source itself that determines the order of presentation. The parameter |influenced_by= has never been valid in this template. The template source permits both |influences= (which shows as Influenced by, but prior to 14 January 2008 it showed as Influences) and |influenced= (which has always showed as Influenced), and the documentation agrees: both are mentioned, and neither is described as deprecated. The difference between them is that |influences= is for the people who Russell was influenced by, and |influenced= is for the people who were themselves influenced by Russell. The template source has both of these set up as collapsible lists, and so by default they will be hidden: a link like [show] should be present, unless your browser is very old. If present, they show as ninth and tenth items in the infobox: there's only one item displayed after them, the signature.
Entries like these need not be referenced in the infobox, which is supposed to be a summary of the key points of the article: thus in the section of text describing Russell's studies and early career, all the people named in the |influences= should be mentioned, with references; and in the section describing his later career (those who studied under him, or who studied his work), all the people named in the |influenced= should be mentioned, again with references. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:07, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
no problem with any of that. The influences are mainly mentioned in the text -- though some (e.g. Santayana) only in their own articles. Wittgenstein is interesting as the influences clearly went in both directions. But I doubt if an "influenced" item would be of any value with someone as famous as Russell. Chris55 (talk) 14:07, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Then we need to include Santayana and Peano, in the article, complete with refs and all, to legitimize their mention in the infobox. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 21:39, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Permanent way[edit]

Following your recent edits I was trying to check whether there were any anchored redirects that linked to the 'Fish belly' section that is no longer a heading. I didn't find any, but I did find lots of mentions of fish-bellied rails in other articles, which may benefit from linking to this article (perhaps with a new redirect?)

Just a word of warning: I discovered that fish belly exists as a redirect to List of ethnic slurs, although there is no indication why it should, and I have left a query on the talk page to alert the editors of that fact.

Cheers -- EdJogg (talk) 12:15, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Fascinating. Googling it shows a large variety of connotations, even lingerie :-) I did consider adding an extra section on cast iron edge rails but thought it was ott. But thanks for reminding me that linking to section heading occurs. Incidentally, I don't believe the reference in Rolling (metalworking) except that, as with any patent, Birkenshaw tried to cover all the options. But I don't have access to the book and anyway it wouldn't belong in this section. Chris55 (talk) 21:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Silliman Memorial Lectures[edit]

Copyright-problem.svg

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Silliman Memorial Lectures, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/SeriesPagePrinter.asp?Series=78. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 06:52, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Fact tag[edit]

I have no idea why you keep removing this, but I am asking you to stop. Dougweller (talk) 20:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I didn't "summarily" remove it, as you claim. I changed the claim in order to make it more obvious. I realise that in the age of television it's not really sensible to use the word "taught" when you can see images of the earth from space any day of the week. Maybe you find it hard to imagine what it was like before television.
A citation needed flag is often used as a way of flagging up a questionable statement and the appropriate respones is often to change the statement. I certainly wouldn't bother to remove the tag again. Chris55 (talk) 01:01, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
ok, thanks. Dougweller (talk) 12:55, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

July 2010[edit]

Stop hand nuvola.svg Your addition to Silliman Memorial Lectures has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Theleftorium (talk) 18:00, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, I should have checked the talk page before removing the copyrighted material. However, the way you put the text into the article, without attribution or quotation marks, is plagiarism. The next time you copy something from the public domain, please insert a template such as Template:Source-attribution somewhere in the article. Feel free to undo my edit to Silliman Memorial Lectures and add the template. Thanks, Theleftorium (talk) 20:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
You still need to include some kind of attribution (such as Template:Source-attribution). A footnote is not enough. Please read WP:Plagiarism. Theleftorium (talk) 20:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Shape of the Earth Merger Discussion[edit]

Your comments are welcome at the discussion of the merger proposals involving Flat Earth, Spherical Earth, and Shape of the Earth. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 21:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Lenski10.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Lenski10.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 19:08, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Tide mill[edit]

Hi Chris55. I see you identified this edit as vandalism but it looks as if it could have been good faith. If you have time, it may be worth looking at again. If I'm interfering in an ongoing debate, please accept my apologies. --Northernhenge (talk) 16:52, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm replying here: ok I see what you're getting at. Each "terminology" category leads in two directions so that the original category is maintained. Yes it's probably good faith - he's been doing this all over the place. But it seems to be unnecessary and misleading. Should a "terminology" taxonomy be mixed up with a taxonomy of real entities? Chris55 (talk) 17:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. It's a shame s/he didn't leave an edit summary. I can't see the point of the change. --Northernhenge (talk) 18:56, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Samuel Shenton[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Samuel Shenton, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.kevinlaurence.net/phpgedview/individual.php?pid=I206&ged=20050323.ged.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 14:36, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Dialogue with Andrew Schlafly[edit]

Hello Chris55. I am just letting you know that I deleted Dialogue with Andrew Schlafly, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. GedUK  09:55, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Geo tagging[edit]

Nice work adding geocodes to UK articles. I'm trying to do some as well, but it quickly becomes tedious. Care to share how you go about it, in case you have some tricks to speed up the process? I'll be happy to share how I do mine–if either of us has a more efficient process, it would be good to collaborate.--SPhilbrickT 19:38, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes it is tedious - so it helps to be tagging things that have some interest :-) I doubt I've unusual techniques. I'm basically using Google maps - it appears to be encouraged. Right-clicking on the (centred) location and choosing "what's here" puts the coordinates in the search block. I have a set of templates in a file such as |coor = {{Coord| |type:edu|format=dms|display=inline,title}} which can be pasted in, using "format=dms" to convert the decimals. Finding educational institutes in Kenya is pretty easy as Google finds the majority of them or one gets a lead from the home site, but old priories in Oxford are harder - I give up after a few minutes if there are no traces. So what tricks have you found? Chris55 (talk) 21:20, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
In short, I'm using a javascript to pick up the coordinates. I'm away from my computer until tomorrow, so I can share it with you then. Oddly, I once read about the technique you used to get the coords, but I must not have understood it at the time, because I didn't get it to work. I just tried now, and it did work. I'm going to have to experiment to see if it I faster than my javascript. I copy the results of the javascript into an OpenOffice spreadsheet to convert the pair of coords into the components. I found that OpenOffice works better than Excel, but there's room for improvement. (I have to reproduce the convert text to columns each time, I wish there were a way to save the settings, or more likely, there is a way, and I wish I knew it). I prefer decimal coords, so I always convert to a decimal format rather than degrees, minutes and seconds. I think both are acceptable, but I prefer decimal. The other "trick" I use I I recently added in a functionality to Mozilla that allows me to open multiple links at once, so I can load a dozen or so locations in a couple clicks. I've noticed if I search in Google maps and it finds a unique location, the position is centered, so I can get the cords immediately. Otherwise, I right-click and use the "Center Map Here" option. I wish there were a way to feed a batch to Google maps and get coords, even if only for the unique hits. --SPhilbrickT 21:36, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I thought I'd have to use javascript till I found the other way. Letting the template do the decimal->degrees, minutes, seconds is much faster than doing the conversion yourself and has the advantage that someone can still get it back from the source document. The only conversion is , to |. I don't know if dms or decimal is a "preferred" notation, but assumed the former as that's what usually is there. Incidentally, some Infobox templates use latitude, longitude instead of coordinates and they take priority. I wish there was some consistency in the infoboxes! Chris55 (talk) 22:29, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I was trying to decide whether to use your technique of getting the coords from Google directly, but wanted to check one thing on the javascript I was using. I did a Google search, and interestingly, it popped up a site with a better javascript - of course it was a wikipedia page. See Obtaining geographic coordinates, specifically Wikipedia:Obtaining_geographic_coordinates#Google_tools, and the look at the second javascript. It returns a completed Wikipedia format. I've found it speeds up my process.--SPhilbrickT 16:14, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
That's cool. It'd be easy to customize that in various ways by having several bookmarks. The only thing I don't like is the spurious precision, but .lat() and .lng() do take an integer parameter for the number of decimal places so .lat(5) &c will work too. 17:51, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Drop of new users after March 2007[edit]

Approximation of Wikipedia long-term growth, projecting a slow decline in the numerous types of new, follow-on articles being added each year.

I have repeated this drop-in-new-users topic, under WT:Modelling_Wikipedia_extended_growth, as to why enwiki user levels slowed after March-May 2007, so you can invite other WP users to read and reply with any explanations they might offer. The new-articles graph (at right) shows a similar slowing in the addition of new articles, as though the major factor(s) which generated new articles had also been thwarted in early 2007. Some analysts have noted how new users often create new articles about musicians, artists or authors they know (sometimes a current girlfriend, or themselves), to expand the bio pages. Meanwhile, I feel strongly that the drop was mainly due to the notorious banning of Wikipedia in various schools and colleges, as demanded by more academic officials beginning in February 2007. Recall the essay about those bans, with 19 news articles:

Other bans were suggested in England. Those early bans, coupled with the typical 3-month school vacations (June-August) seem to be what thwarted the English Wikipedia. Continue this at the above project talk-page, if interested. -Wikid77 23:47, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

The Citation Barnstar The Citation Barnstar
For this edit, which added a great source of data to Wikipedia:Wikipedians that should have been there long before. So obvious many others passed it over! Steven Walling 02:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Catharism[edit]

I have re-removed this material per the guidelines in WP:VERIFY. If you feel it is non-contentious and should be in the article despite a lack of sourcing, and despite the fact that the article was tagged for a lack of sourcing for over one year, please start a discussion at the article's Talk page. From my perspective it is inappropriate and frankly unjustifiable to include the material without sourcing; there's no way to prove that it is not original research as-is. Thank you. Doniago (talk) 14:27, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

There are plenty of sources in the article: I can count 32 references at the bottom of the page in addition to those cited in other footnotes. The article may be lacking in in-line citations WP:CITE but it's stupid to remove one section which is essential to the meaning of the article. Chris55 (talk) 15:50, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Then there's nothing stopping anyone from re-adding the material with appropriate in-line citations. Doniago (talk) 16:48, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, did you recently email account@stargate-wiki.org about an account. Please only reply from this account not an ip. 120.146.71.41 (talk) 11:52, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Thorium fuel cycle & SimpleNuclide2[edit]

Please read this: it explains that FF2 compatibility was dropped as there are too few people using it and those that do really should update. You are using software that hasn't had any security fixes in three years and are at serious risk of having your computer compromised.     SkyLined (talk) 21:46, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Digital Fortress[edit]

Hi. Regarding the concerns you raised in the edit summary that accompanied your reversion of my edits:

All material added to Wikipedia articles must be found in a reliable, published source that is explicitly cited in the article. Material that is derived from personal observations or original analyses of that material, but is not found in that source, is called synthesis, which is a form of original research, and is not permitted. 71.0.21.44 did not cite a source for the material he/she added, so it had to be removed.

Material needs to be written in the third person, not in the second person, which is inappropriate for the formal tone of an encyclopedia. One does not say, therefore, that if a reader cracks a code in a book that "you get 'WECGEWHYAAIORTNU'". It should be written along the lines of something like "If the reader cracks this code, then the letter sequence WECGEWHYAAIORTNU is revealed". One does not directly address the reader with "you" in an encyclopedia, and should only use that term in cases such as a directl quote.

I included links to the policies/guidelines that govern these two points in my edit summary, and included them again above.

As for the citation you added, material on websites that is user-generated, such as personal websites, blogs, web forums, wikis, imdb, etc. is not permitted under WP:USERG, since anyone can post in those venues, which certainly does not make them a reliable source. While Alex Kasman himself could be considered a reliable source, none of the material added by 71.0.21.44/yourself is found in the portion of that webpage written by Kasman, but comes from visitors to his website. The phrase "we are watching you", for example, comes from a 16-year-old visitor named Sam, the number sequence and the 4 x 4 square is derived from a pair of posts by visitors named Becky and Gino Tramontelli, and the letter sequence "WECGEWHYAAIORTNU" doesn't appear on that page at all. Nightscream (talk) 21:15, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Nightscream, what you're saying is utter rubbish. Wikipedia does not require that "All material added to Wikipedia articles must be found in a reliable, published source that is explicitly cited in the article". At most it warns that material that can't be so found may be removed. Your "third person" argument is totally inapplicable when applied to quoted material.
As for the citation,the guidelines include the provision: "Self-published material may be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." The author is a recognised mathematician in a reputable university. Any idiot can confirm the decryption as I did partially before responding and the fact that the author of the page left that comment standing is evidence that he thought it worth reproducing. In fact, Wikipedia does not allow people to reproduce material verbatim unless within quotes. Chris55 (talk) 21:34, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

It is not "rubbish", it is Wikipedia policy, and it indeed indicates what I have said it does. It does not reflect your assertions about it. The material in question does not come from Kasman, it comes from a visitor posting on his website. Many notable people have websites on which people can post. I myself often visit Peter David's blog and post there. That does not mean that I can add material to his article on the basis of something said by me in one of my posts. In addition, many trolls and flamers make uncivil posts on his blog, which David usually leaves up, as he wishes to foster an atmosphere of free expression. One cannot conclude, therefore, that this is "evidence" that David thinks these missives are "worth reproducing". The same applies to Kasman. You cannot conclude what Kasman thinks on the basis of posts to his website, as this is simply your interpretation.

It does not matter what you think "any idiot can confirm", as this is not the threshold for the inclusion in Wikipedia articles. The threshold is support by reliable sources. What an anonymous nobody says on someone's blog does not qualify.

Lastly, that letter sequence, WECGEWHYAAIORTNU, does not appear anywhere on that webpage, yet you re-added that as well.

As for WP:YOU, the material in question was not a direct quote, it was paraphrased in third-person wording, which is precisely why it indeed applies.

Since you've racked up over 3,300 edits since March 2006, you should know this by now. But if you don't, I suggest you familiarize yourself more closely with the relevant policies, and feel free to ask anyone else with good knowledge of them, and they'll corroborate their proper application for you. Please do not re-add that material without citing a reliable source that supports this material. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 00:14, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Nightscream, let us take this one step at a time.
1. Your claim that every statement must be "explicitly cited in the article" does not correspond to WP:NOR.
2. It is not mandatory to remove any material that does not have adequate citations. A common procedure is to add a citation needed marker. Many of your edits on that article are abrupt and partial as they apply to any material that doesn't present the novel in a good light. WP:V includes the advice: "It has always been good practice to try to find and cite supporting sources yourself."
3. In your revert you claim "It is not established that Kasman edits the posts". It is perfectly clear that the page is edited by him and that he selects what is there. He is acting as a good teacher by encouraging his correspondents to voice the opinions. Nor is the person an "anonymous nobody"; it is signed. I don't agree with your analogy with other blogs and there are other posts in the same article which confirm and corroborate the opinions expressed there.
4. The website is not a blog but a compendium of information about "mathematical fiction" and widely recognized as such. Kasman is the author of "Reality Conditions, Short Mathematical Fiction" published by the Mathematical Association of America. ie. he is an "established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications" You previously removed a link at the bottom of the article to the same site which underlines your partiality.
5. I've edited the other uses of "you" in the paragraph. You could have done the same and it would be a more courteous and helpful contribution than simply removing the whole thing.
6. Are you seriously challenging the truth of what is stated in this paragraph? Because this is the basic premise of WP:V and is why it is relevant that the truth of the decryption is easy to confirm. The fact that he or she spelled out a step not given in the cited source is typical of any mathematical demonstration. The number/chapter code and rail fence cipher are the only two essentials.
It would be more helpful if you could discuss improvements to the paragraph than simply deleting it and being condescending to me. Chris55 (talk) 12:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit on March of the Penguins[edit]

Could you comment on this edit that you made on the March of the Penguins article? Specifically, it is about the reference to http://www.celibritywonder.com/ :

  • The url does not point to the information it is supposed to be a reference for, nor does any other page on that site;
  • the access date is incorrect.

I found a different source, but I'm also trying to understand how the above reference ended up there. Han-Kwang (t) 11:45, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Hankwang, it looks like the site has been moved and now uses a different organisation - not unusual. A bit of googling shows the original interview here. Though the reference you've substituted sounds more scholarly, there are no citations and it might be they drew on this original interview. But I can't find the origin of the Jacquet quote even here. It looks like they've chopped up the material in a different way.
You're right about the mistake in the access date, should be 2011. Couldn't find it on the wayback machine. Chris55 (talk) 12:17, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
OK, I've added your second reference to the article. Han-Kwang (t) 22:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Ofwat, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RPI (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:44, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Thames steamships[edit]

Nice work & an interesting read. Kind regards, nancy 17:17, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 15[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Thames steamships, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kingston and South Eastern Railway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:57, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Fred[edit]

It's good to see someone with a copy of the great Thacker. Regards Motmit (talk) 17:59, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Chris. :Two independently added bits of information do appear to create an alignment problem. The entries for "Distance to next lower lock" come direct from the EA source whereas old weirs were added from perusal of Fred. That heading does not mention "reach" but does have the ambiguity of "lower" that hasn't in this instance been replaced by "upstream" and "downstream". It would probably make sense to change the heading to "Distance to next lock upstream" and move the distances down if you fancy having a go. Some time I'd like to register the old ferries, but I think they belong in a separate article about the towpath. Regards Motmit (talk) 17:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Most of the ferries were mainly used to take the tow horses across the river so did not survive beyond the age of steam. All the extant ferries are listed under crossings. I only added the former ones I had had some dealings with - often showing a picture of the site and quoting Fred. It may be possible to find appropriate links for some others or even create articles. Regards Motmit (talk) 11:53, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

French election[edit]

please dont remove the tag without it being answered, mve it if need e nand Hollande is NOT president becuse he is not sworn in, makes the summary deceptive.Lihaas (talk) 09:03, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I did move it and I only said he was elected president not that he was. Chris55 (talk) 23:14, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

CVUA[edit]

CVU Academy.svg
Hello, Chris55! I have seen your hard work reverting vandalism, and I would like to thank you. But do you want to go to the next level? Would you like to know how reverts, warnings, reports, blocks, and bans all come together to keep this Encyclopedia free from disruption? Then consider enrolling today! Leave a message on my talk page or visit the Academy's information page. ~~~~

Electriccatfish2 (talk) 20:04, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Your rollback request[edit]

Hi Chris55, I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request. Please be aware that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam/blatantly unconstructive edits, and that using it to revert anything else (such as by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with) can lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning, depending on the admin who becomes aware of any misuse. If you think an edit should require a reason for reverting, then don't use rollback and instead use a manual edit summary. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 20:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Please confirm your Wikiquote usurpation request.[edit]

Hi. Please confirm here whether you are the editor seeking to usurp User:Chris55 at Wikiquote. Cheers! bd2412 T 13:44, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes. Chris55 (talk) 14:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
It is done. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Citation needed tag on Foss Dyke[edit]

Hi. I have removed your citation needed tag on the Foss Dyke article, as the ref covers the whole paragraph, and explained the situation on Talk:Foss Dyke. Bob1960evens (talk) 15:08, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Right- and left-hand traffic[edit]

Hi, Chris55. The title of the subject article is under discussion again. I am alerting you because you participated in a previous discussion on the matter. —Scheinwerfermann T·C01:32, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eddystone Lighthouse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Start Point (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:33, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lake Suigetsu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anoxic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:07, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Black Death, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Plague (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:43, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 16[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Prime meridian, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Godfrey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

split proposal for Aqueduct[edit]

I note your contribution to Talk:Aqueduct and I would like to bring to your attention a proposal that the article Aqueduct be split to Aqueduct (watercourse) and Aqueduct (bridge), with the original article directed to the existing page Aqueduct (disambiguation). Please feel welcome to comment on the proposal at Talk:Aqueduct#Split proposal (2) Please note a similar proposal was made a couple of years ago (see about halfway up the talk page).Nankai (talk) 21:01, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Chris55. You have new messages at Talk:E. coli long-term evolution experiment.
Message added 22:37, 15 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— raekyt 22:37, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

thanks[edit]

Thanks for sorting out the history of Aqueduct; I'm horrified to learn that I didn't do the split properly, but believe me, I tried. These things are fraught with peotential for going wrong.Nankai (talk) 20:12, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Evolution as fact and theory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amazon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:52, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Plague[edit]

Hi, re this edit. The entry was previously

  • The disease caused by Yersinia pestis. There are three major manifestations:

which has one bluelink. You altered it to

which has two bluelinks. At MOS:DABENTRY it states

  • Include exactly one navigable (blue) link to efficiently guide readers to the most relevant article for that use of the ambiguous term. Do not wikilink any other words in the line.

Therefore, one of the two links must be removed - either the one that you added, or the one that was there previously. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:15, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Ok, finally understand. Presumably that was the original reason for the oddly placed link to Plague (disease) Chris55 (talk) 09:38, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

February 2013[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from ‪Evolution as fact and theory‬ into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 20:13, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, have done. I made it clear in the edit comments at both ends. Chris55 (talk) 23:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Blue Riband, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black Ball Line (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 13:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to John Elder (shipbuilder) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:00, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Flyboat may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:05, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Scott Russell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Great Eastern (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:13, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James Alfred Ewing Medal, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Edward Appleton, Hugh Ford and Eric Eastwood (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:42, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Chris55. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas Yeoman.
Message added 11:15, 27 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please help with referencing, if you can. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:15, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Johannes de Sacrobosco, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Toledo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:15, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Grant[edit]

I've replied to your comments on my talk page. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 18:51, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I've replied to your last on my talk page. SteveMcCluskey (talk) 03:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Flat Earth and historical sources[edit]

Chris,

I'm becoming increasingly troubled by your claim to find "hints" in the sources that Columbus's opponents argued that the Earth was flat when the two texts you cite (Robertson and Ferdinand Columbus) both explicitly recount arguments that are based on the sphericity of the earth. Such a tendentious reading of the sources really challenges the fundamental assumption of good faith.

If you want to state, contrary to modern historical research, that early sources demonstrate that Columbus's opponents were arguing on the basis of the flat earth, you should cite specific reliable sources in support of your position. Allusion to undefined hints doesn't qualify as citing reliable sources. SteveMcCluskey (talk) 18:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

The texts from which you are apparently drawing this inference of a flat earth are as follows
"Others, who incln'd more to cosmographical reason, said that the world was so prodigous great, that it was incredible three years sail would bring him to the end of the east, whither he design'd his voyage, and to corroborate their opinion, they brought the authority of Seneca, who in one of his works, by way of argument, said, that many wise men among them disagreed about this question, whether the earth were infinite, and doubted whether it could be sail'd, and tho' it were navigable, whether habitable lands would be found on the other side, and whether they could be gone to. They added, that of this lower globe of earth and water...." (Ferdinand Columbus, p. 520).
"Others concluded, that either he would find the ocean to be of infinite extent, according to the opinion of some ancient philosophers; of, if he should persist in steering towards the west beyond a certain point, that the convex vigure of the globe would prevent his return, and that he must inevitably perish,in the vain attempt to open a communication between the two opposite hemispheres,..." (Robertson, The History of America, p. 88).
Although both of these texts introduce the argument that some philosophers (F. Columbus specifically names Seneca) considered the possibility that the earth was infinite:
  • They are considering an infinite earth one of several possibilities.
  • Infinity does not necessarily imply flatness, philosophers discussed infinite spheres.
  • The discussions of infinity are directly coupled with discussions of the sphericity of the earth.
To infer from these texts that they were arguments for a flat earth smacks of original research, especially without testimony from modern historians who have examined these texts and find them to support a flat earth cosmology. SteveMcCluskey (talk) 18:43, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
If the infinite earth is one of several possibilities, why did you delete it? An infinite sphere is infinitely flat. I didn't exclude the discussion of sphericity - clearly there were several views expressed. Chris55 (talk) 19:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Any reasonable review of these sources makes it quite clear that at the Spanish court no one explicitly said that the world was flat while they repeatedly referred to it as being spherical. There was one opinion that the earth was "prodigous large", perhaps even, as Seneca had said, infinite. To cherry pick this one ambiguous passage as evidence that there may have been a belief in the flat earth falls upon Wikipedia's policy on fringe opinions. When dealing with primary sources, like Ferdinand Columbus, we are to rely on the interpretations of scholarly professionals, not to make up our own interpretation.
It's quite clear that a one-on-one discussion on a User talk page is going nowhere. I'm copying this discussion to Talk:Flat Earth in order to bring in further comments. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 19:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Thomas Yeoman[edit]

Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Gould, Genesis and Magic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:05, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Ramsden theodolite[edit]

Hello Chris55. Your name seems to come up on many English language articles I consult for mine on nl-wiki. I repaired one of your citations on Prime Meridian just yesterday. I've seen you've done some work on the Ramsden theodolite, but I can't see whether you were aware of this source, which I found te be pleasantly informative. Regards, Sander1453 (talk) 18:45, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Sander, I've added this reference to the article. Chris55 (talk) 08:43, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wandering star (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 13:19, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Two New Sciences may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • of the experiments and even indicated the particular results that led to the time-squared law).<ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:30, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Two New Sciences may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • were discussed in [[Physics (Aristotle)|Aristotle's Physics]] and also the Aristotelian school [[Mechanics (Aristotle)|Mechanics]. It also provides an introduction to the discussion of both of

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited De Magnete, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heraclides (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:25, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aegean (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:43, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pierre Gassendi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Parhelia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:00, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Scientific Revolution[edit]

Hi there,

I just undid your reversion of the scientific revolution page, as the quote from J.D. Bernal is not from Dialectical Materialism and Modern Science (which is available here http://www.marxists.org/archive/bernal/works/1930s/dsams.htm). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ollieha (talkcontribs) 00:08, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Scott Russell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Strand (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:59, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Flat Earth Society‎[edit]

It took me a while to figure it out, but that was a migration to a different server and domain.[2] Dougweller (talk) 16:45, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

That explains it. Having done several such migrations - they can be very painful with open source software! - it will probably take several months before things settle down: it may be they mean to leave the old server as an archive, we shall see. Also the "tfes" domain name may be simply for the transitional period. Chris55 (talk) 21:03, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation[edit]

Your upload of File:CarewTideMill.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:31, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Another one of your uploads, File:Changeactivenewcomers.png, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:22, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Arthur Ransome, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Ross. 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) 08:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 30 July[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:38, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Split, name[edit]

I invite you to the discussion here, since you were interested in that question recently. Asdisis (talk) 20:37, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Commons[edit]

Aloha! :-) You just got a new message on Commons. Best regards, --Hedwig in Washington (TALK) 14:22, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

TemplateScript[edit]

Hello Chris55. I updated your common.js page to the latest version of TemplateScript. This is just to enable automatic updates, so you shouldn't see much difference. If you notice any problems or have questions, let me know! :) —Pathoschild 02:18, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 24 August[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited River Whitewater, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pike. 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) 09:04, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Malta[edit]

Chris I'll get on this. Dapi89 (talk) 17:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thomas McLaughlin (engineer), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Christian Brothers and Killaloe. 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) 08:58, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Black Death[edit]

Your edit to this article seem to have removed the sources for this claim entirely from the article. Could you please fix that? Rmhermen (talk) 22:50, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

If you want to get access to a previous version, click on "View history" and click on the version that contains the reference you want. (You need to use desktop not mobile version.) I don't think this should go in the lead: it's a good story but is a detail dealt with in the article. Chris55 (talk) 23:02, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

BNA access[edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Chris55. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

Chris Troutman (talk) 21:21, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Rutherford and Thomson[edit]

Hello. Could you look at my question at Talk:Ernest Rutherford#Thomson's role in ER obtaining McGill position? concerning the statement that Thomson offered Rutherford a job at McGill. The revision history indicates that you inserted that statement in January 2013, so I would be interested in your comment. Dirac66 (talk) 03:28, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Grantham, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Rennie and Killaloe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:13, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Dutch inland shipping company 1864-1950[edit]

Hello Chris55. I know I've been here before, but I can't remember what about. Anyway, would you like to have a sneak preview on what's in my User:Sander1453/sandbox? And if so, any comments are welcome of course. Sources are yet to be added, but they will be mostly in Dutch, I'm afraid. Regards, Sander1453 (talk) 17:51, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Never mind, Chris55. I'm taking a different route. Regards, Sander1453 (talk) 22:37, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Newspapers.com check-in[edit]

Hello Chris55,

You are receiving this message because you have a one-year subscription to Newspapers.com through the Wikipedia Library. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:

  • Please make sure that you can still log in to your Newspapers.com account. If you are having trouble let me know.
  • Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, to include citations with links on Wikipedia. Links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. Also, keep in mind that part of Newspapers.com is open access via the clipping function. Clippings allow you to identify particular articles, extract them from the original full sheet newspaper, and share them through unique URLs. Wikipedia users who click on a clipping link in your citation list will be able to access that particular article, and the full page of the paper if they come from the clipping, without needing to subscribe to Newspapers.com. For more information about how to use clippings, see http://www.newspapers.com/basics/#h-clips .
  • Do you write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let me know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate it if you filled out this short survey. Your input will help us to facilitate this particular partnership, and to discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you,

Wikipedia Library Newspapers.com account coordinator HazelAB (talk) 22:07, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sex and the Church, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Enlightenment (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:51, 26 April 2015 (UTC)