User talk:Hmdwgf

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

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Hmdwgf! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Button sig.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Squash Racket (talk) 06:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles
Miscellaneous

Jim Clark[edit]

Thanks for your additions to this article. There seems to be a spelling error (only one 'n' in finesse) and a missing word (should be 'caressed it into doing'?). Could you check against your source and, if I am right, correct the quote. Could you also add a reference to the quote - see WP:REF for the guidance and articles like Brabham BT19 for a practical demo. Many thanks. 4u1e (talk) 12:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Sebring International Raceway 1967-1982.gif[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

Thanks for uploading File:Sebring International Raceway 1967-1982.gif. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 12:11, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

1970 1000km of Brands Hatch[edit]

Hello Hmdwgf, I just thought I'd let you know that I saw your article 1970 1000km of Brands Hatch in the New Articles list-- The layout of the article makes it very clear.However, I think the article seems to contain a few errors: the references in the article do not follow Wikipedia guidelines. There is a tutorial on formatting citations at Wikipedia:Referencing.It would be great if you could also improve the related article Chevron Cars.

And have a beautiful day! Cheers, Amy Z (talk) 03:41, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Sebring Raceway 1967-1982.jpg[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

Thanks for uploading File:Sebring Raceway 1967-1982.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 23:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)


Request for an Interview[edit]

Hi Hmdwgf,

I recently sent you a message about 1970 1000km of Brands Hatch.

I am a researcher at Carnegie Mellon University examining how to make interaction in Wikipedia more effective. Our research has shown that certain types of feedback encourage Wikipedians to edit more while others seem to discourage them. Experienced and less experienced Wikipedians seem to have different reactions to very similar feedback. I am interested in interviewing you about your reaction to the message I sent you. A discussion with you will help us better understand the types of feedback that can encourage newcomers's participation to Wikipedia without turning off old-timers.

I can talk with you via online chat, on Skype, over the phone, or just through Wikipedia messages if you are more comfortable with that. The interview should take take less than 60 minutes. You do need to be over 18 years old, and consent to be a part of the study in order to for me to interview you. This study has been approved by Carnegie Mellon's research ethics committee (the IRB), and the Wikipedia Research Committee.

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to hearing from you soon. We will be glad to send you a draft describing our research results right after the interview.

Amy Z (talk) 15:09, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Michael Corleone[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive revisions to Wikipedia, as you did last night – Michael Corleone – your most recent editing would appear to constitute possible vandalism and has been reverted.

Regards -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 08:01, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry for causing any problems, but have you even seen any of those films? --Hmdwgf (talk) 17:12, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
No trouble at all, my friend (I hope) – and yes, I have, each one, four or five times after seeing them in the cinema. I have the 25th anniversary box-set on good old-fashioned video tape. All the best! Kind regards, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (GG-J's Talk page) 17:37, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Postscript: Ha ha! I'll let you keep Kay! Left you a note there. Let me know that you've seen this please. Cheers! -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (GG-J's Talk page) 21:04, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Non-free file File:Targa Florio 1906-1911, 1931.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Targa Florio 1906-1911, 1931.jpg. The file is currently tagged as non-free and has been identified as possibly not being in compliance with the non-free content policy. For specific information on the problems with the file and how they can be fixed, please check the message at File:Targa Florio 1906-1911, 1931.jpg. For further questions and comments, please use the non-free content review page. Thank you. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 17:11, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

On vandalism, crystal balling and AGF[edit]

Hmdwgf,

If you're going to accuse someone of improper editing practices, then I suggest that you actually familiarise yourself with the practices you are accusing them of.

Firstly, you suggested that I was making speculative edits. If you read the policy on speculative edits, you will see the following:

All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred.

The edits that I made are supported by four separate reliable sources - 1, 2, 3 and 4 - with the only difference being that the edits were made to temapltes, which do not use sources the way articles do.

Secondly, you suggested that my edits were vandalism, simply because I am a long-term editor should have known that they were speculative. However, if you look at the policy on vandalism, you will not the following:

Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Examples of typical vandalism are adding irrelevant obscenities and crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting obvious nonsense into a page.

Given that I have made the edits with four separate reliable sources in mind, and that I have been a long-term editor (who mostly sticks to editing pages rlated to the content I was adding), there was obviously no malicious intent. I suggest you familiarise yourself with assuming good faith, particularly this part:

It is the assumption that editors' edits and comments are made in good faith. Most people try to help the project, not hurt it [...] editors should not attribute the actions being criticized to malice unless there is specific evidence of malice.

So, just because you think an edit is out of place, that does not automatically make it vandalism.

Perhaps you should consider the bold, revert, discuss cycle. Instead of simply removing content that you think it objectionable, you should discuss it - because if a long-standing editor has put that material in, they evidently do not think that it is objectionable. So instead of removing that content and shutting down any opportunity for debate, perhaps you should consider coming to a consensus on the issue first. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 04:18, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Hockenheimring 1982-1989.jpg)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Hockenheimring 1982-1989.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 08:31, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

August 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to French Grand Prix 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:
  • ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns24864.html |title=2014 French grand prix possible > F1 News > |publisher=Grandprix.com |date=26 February 2013 |accessdate=2013-04-22}}</ref>
  • [[File:French GP map.png|thumb|400px|Map of the French Grand Prix locations)]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Australian Grand Prix map[edit]

Phillip Island is not really in the Melbourne area, it's two hours away. Also Point Cook is in Melbourne and known today as RAAF Williams. Leyburn is as far away from Brisbane as Bathurst is from Sydney. And you say five parts of the country? Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Longford, that's six and that does not include Bathurst. Needs a few corrections. --124.179.98.190 (talk) 04:15, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Noted. I apologize; I have to admit I personally have never been to Australia and I was conducting my research through other means. I will certainly make the corrections; and I am aware of the fact that Point Cook is now known as RAAF Williams but I have to refer to it as Point Cook because that's what the location apparently was known as in 1947. There are so many different locations, it's crazy, really. --Hmdwgf (talk) 04:47, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Merge discussion for British Racing Motors V16[edit]

Merge-arrows.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, British Racing Motors V16, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Spiderlounge (talk) 15:34, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

December 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Brazilian Grand Prix 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:
  • {{about|the Formula One race}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:37, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Chapter titles[edit]

Well now you see why placing years in F1 chapter titles isn't such a great idea. Chapter titles aren't supposed to be a calendar or a timeline, just a sumary of the contents. --Falcadore (talk) 22:45, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Years act as good marker points of history. And yes but I never did anything nearly as spectacularly messy as the user in question. He listed just about every year all of the continential European Grand Prixs on all the seperate pages.--Hmdwgf (talk) 15:27, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Hmdwgf![edit]

Good to see someone else working on expanding the Moss article! The pic with Innes Ireland is a great addition. You'll see I've changed the content of the Mille Miglia section back to the version before your changes. I've given the reasons for my edits, both in the edsum and on the talk page, and I hope the explanations (based on WP:OR) are agreeable to you. It would be nice if you could add any additional verifiable and reliably sourced information to the article as there's still much room for improvement :) . Best wishes, Writegeist (talk) 18:59, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Madonie Medio 1919-1930.jpg[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

Thanks for uploading File:Madonie Medio 1919-1930.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:25, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Hockenheimring 1990-1991.jpg[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

Thanks for uploading File:Hockenheimring 1990-1991.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:28, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

File:Andrea De Cesaris 1983.jpg[edit]

Hi Hmdwgf. I notice you recently created File:Andrea De Cesaris 1983.jpg at Wikimedia Commons. I was wondering why you named the file "Andrea de Cesaris 1983.jpg" - the original photo you cropped looks as though it was taken at the launch of the 1982 Alfa Romeo, so I would have imagined the photo was taken in 1982, not 1983. (Note: I have left a similar message at your Commons talk page - if you respond here (or on my talk page), you don't need to reply there as well). Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 03:58, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it is the 1982 image; I got it wrong. Someone needs to change the name of the file. --Hmdwgf (talk) 04:30, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I'll organise it. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 04:37, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:FIFA World Cup Final Matches[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:FIFA World Cup Final Matches has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. – PeeJay 16:35, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Get rid of it. I didn't even know there was a navbox that already had all those matches. --Hmdwgf (talk) 20:36, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

1994 FIFA World Cup Final[edit]

You didn't move it to the bottom of the article, you moved it to the bottom of the lead section. This isn't your fault, but that article is in a terrible state and needs properly expanding. Furthermore, you haven't provided any source for the fact that Al Gore presented the trophy. – PeeJay 15:53, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Don't talk to me about improving articles. Nothing that I have seen you do here is constructive- only destructive. You better not keep this selfish attitude of yours up any longer- it doesn't help anybody. Hmdwgf (talk) 17:32, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Your comments about Pasadena being near Los Angeles are totally irrelevant. What difference does it make that the venue is a few miles away from another large city? Furthermore, to add that statement immediately after Brazil's dedication of their win to Ayrton Senna is a total non-sequitur; the fact that the game was played in southern California has no bearing on the dedication or the fact that Al Gore presented the trophy. Finally, you can't just add a section header and expect that that makes a difference, especially when the section header you added is irrelevant to the content that comes beneath. In what way does the content of that section constitute a report? I will find a way to incorporate the Al Gore info, but your obsession with mentioning Los Angeles is somewhat concerning. – PeeJay 17:40, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
I do not care what you think. And I can maintain that attitude- the fact that the Rose Bowl is near Los Angeles is not as relevant as the match itself, obviously- but no one around the world knows where Pasadena, California is- but more people know where Los Angeles is. So why not add it? It gives creedence and even more vaildity to the match itself because it was played very close to a major American city- which has hosted the summer Olympics twice, no less, and is where Hollywood is. Do you know what is really cause for concern? I'm obssessive? You are Howard Hughes-obsessive compared to me. Your manic, obsessive, reckless and aggressive behavior on these World Cup articles, your obsession about something so small and unimportant, and your blatant edit-warring- which you have been warned for before, is cause for concern. Your behavior and attitude towards your editing, as I have said before, is totally destructive. Almost every edit anyone ever does that you don't personally like on these World Cup articles, you go after them- you impulsively redo the edits without looking through them or trying to find something in those apparent mistakes that could enhance these articles. But to be honest (this defeats the purpose of my argument, I know, but I'm throwing it in anyway, because I'm sinking to your level right now) this is argument is utterly stupid- it's such a small detail- that Los Angeles and Al Gore edit I included it does nothing but slightly enhance that article- why are we arguing over it? I am only defending what I have done, I can't speak for you. And also- that Ayrton Senna thing- that has been on that for some time- I didn't include it. Once again, reckless. Remember what I said- if you change that edit on that article- I'm reporting you for edit-warring.Hmdwgf (talk) 18:01, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
You've clearly missed the point of what I was saying. I'm not saying the Ayrton Senna fact is irrelevant. It's unsourced, sure, but that's easily remedied. My problem is with the way you seem to want to follow Ayrton Senna with an odd comment about how big the stadium is, then you completely change tack again by mentioning Al Gore. None of it fits together! – PeeJay 20:09, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
OK, OK, fair enough. I will come up with a new way to format that paragraph.Hmdwgf (talk) 20:34, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

KAL 007 Infobox[edit]

"Infobox Airliner accident" has been deprecated in favor of "Infobox Airliner occurrence". E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_Airliner_accident now redirects to Infobox Airliner accident. I respectfully request that you revert Korean Air Lines Flight 007 back to my conversion to the new Infobox standard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelmalak (talkcontribs) 00:33, 2 March 2015 (UTC)