User talk:Karl1587
|
Rivington[edit]
Thank you for editing the Rivington article on Wikipedia. I should however, point out that your edits to images breach the policy for image size in articles.[1] As a rule, images should not be set to a larger fixed size than the 220px default. Also they should be positioned to illustrate the particular aspect of the text. The Rivington article is about the settlement and that is why an image from the village was selected, not one of the Pike which has it's own article.n You have also lost a referenced section on Demography, I am reverting your edits for the above reasons. It is hoped that this article might one day have Good Article status and so it is important to stick to policies. If you wish to discus images in the article please use the Talk page. If you have a photograph of a general view of Rivington village it would make a useful addition to the article.--J3Mrs (talk) 14:23, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Infobox image size[edit]
Hi and welcome
Please be aware that the standard settlement infobox is designed to take a 240px image. For the rest of a page the policy is not to specify a size so that users can set their own preference.--Charles (talk) 13:47, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
alt text and edit summaries[edit]
1: If an image already has quality alt text for visually impaired readers, please don't replace it by another image without providing the same detailed level of alt text, as you did at Leeds.
2: Please remember to use edit summaries to explain your edits. Thanks
PamD (talk) 14:00, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
image captions & size in infoboxes[edit]
The use of <small> tags for image captions in the settlement infobox (as you did on Wells) was deprecated some time ago - also the image size is standard & specifying 250px is not helpful for display.— Rod talk 11:02, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Edit summaries[edit]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. --Jza84 | Talk 11:37, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
August 2010[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page List of tallest buildings and structures in Birmingham has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Ocean Shores Formerly TEK (talk • e-mail) 00:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry. In the future, please explain your edits using a WP:Edit summary. Thanks, Ocean Shores Formerly TEK (talk • e-mail) 00:05, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
You have been advised by several editors to keep infobox images to the Wikipedia infobox standard size of 240px and to stop using the <small> </small> caption coding in the infoboxes, which has been deprecated, and also to use the edit summary to explain the reason for the edits. Having re-edited 126+ of your offerings, with many others already reverted by other editors, I must again ask you to do as requested and to also refrain from replacing good images with lower quality ones. Additionally rather than trying various options for image placement and sizes please use the preview button, before the save page. That will make it easier for other editors to follow your edits in the future! Corrective editing is very time consuming on other editors and disruptive. Disruptive editors tend to get blocked from doing any editing. If you would just like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Richard Harvey (talk) 09:40, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Warning[edit]
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. You made a number of spurious edits to articles about Cornish places including Saltash, Torpoint, Liskeard, Wadebridge, Padstow, Truro, Redruth, Camborne, St Ives and Newlyn. All these have had to be reverted. Constructive edits are always welcome but repeated use of deprecated mark-up, incorrect capitalisation, substituting inferior images and removing links that meet WP:EL amounts to vandalism. It also wastes editors' time. Stop vandalising Wikipedia or you may be blocked from editing. Andy F (talk) 07:31, 8 August 2010 (UTC).
Further to your message[edit]
Hi Karl1587,
Thank you for your response on my talk page. In the light of what you say, I will assume good faith. However, as you will see from the comments and observations of other editors (above), many of your edits have had to be reverted. Before editing further, please read the pages of guidance listed in the welcome at the top of this page. That way you will avoid some elementary pitfalls. In particular, please familiarise yourself with the Wikipedia:Manual of Style.
Also (again as others have said), please experiment using either a sandbox or the edit screen's preview facility -- that way you will avoid saving multiple very minor edits (see the edit history on Falmouth, Cornwall as an example). Andy F (talk) 12:23, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- Actually the example of your editing Chorley that you suggested on Andy F's page is a prime example of your editing style that is causing other editors problems, as are the additional edits by the two sockpuppets you have used. The first being:- 90.221.164.88, where you received an additional warning about your editing and good advice that you failed to heed, by Simple Bob. The second being:- 94.10.196.246, which you also used to edit Chorley. The editing style of all three is too consistent to be another person. I not you are a new editor and like Andy F I will also assume good faith, but only on your past edits. If you continue to edit in the style you have, in light of all the warning and advice you have received then you can expect an administrator to place a block on your editing access!. Richard Harvey (talk) 13:28, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
September 2010[edit]
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Vancouver AND Winnipeg, Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Bristol you may be blocked from editing. Karl it appears you do not have a grasp on the concept of infobox images. While many of your photos are very beautiful. Perhaps even more beautiful than the ones there, most of them fail the purpose of the infobox image. For example in Vancouver you had a city skyline photo that was expertly shot but did not have the mountains nor capture most of the skyline except one section. Hardly the image we'd want representing our city. I'm giving you a level 3 warning as it appears numerous editors have already been telling you the same. To be frank Karl, stop adding your travel photos unless you gain WP:CONSENSUS. Mkdwtalk 20:51, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Healey Nab, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.friendsofhealeynab.org.uk.
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) 11:15, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
January 2011[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Healey Nab, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Please add sources to this article. Thanks. Zachlipton (talk) 20:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
February 2011[edit]
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Plymouth Cathedral, you may be blocked from editing. You have been asked before not to use depracated small text
Charles (talk) 23:23, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
April 2011[edit]
Please stop your disruptive editing. You have been asked before not to use small text. Charles (talk) 16:58, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
You should also stop adding sizes to thumbnails in the body of an article. Lead images and infobox images are different (although in the case of the latter you should let the infobox default take precedence if their is one). You can specify upright for a portrait image but please don't use a size unless it is specifically warranted. See MOS:IMAGES and ask if you are unsure but please don't ignore as you seem to have done with every other suggestion made to you. --Simple Bob a.k.a. The Spaminator (Talk) 17:09, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, please don't continue to use small text, as you did at Greenwich Park and Liverpool City Centre. Could you also try not to use upper-case for words that should be in lower-case in captions (eg, view, facade and entrance). Thanks, Ericoides (talk) 06:52, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
May 2011[edit]
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Southwark, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Charles (talk) 16:31, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
This is your last warning; the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Manchester Town Hall, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Deleting content without giving a reason is pure vandalism. Please stop. Simple Bob a.k.a. The Spaminator (Talk) 18:45, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Administrator notice[edit]
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Simple Bob a.k.a. The Spaminator (Talk) 18:51, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
List of largest United Kingdom settlements by population[edit]
Your edits are messing the page up. As the opening sentence makes very clear, the list is "according to the 2001 census data from the Office for National Statistics (for England and Wales), the General Register Office for Scotland, and the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency. It comprises the Key Statistics for Urban Areas figures (referred to as settlements in Scotland and Northern Ireland), that attempt to distinguish the populations of towns and cities from those of their Local Authority district(s)." Any figures from other research, that do not come from those sources, will simply be removed on the grounds of inconsistency. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Further to your message on Ghmyrtle's talk page, where do you get your 2011 census information from? I ask because the ONS has stated that data will be published in a number of releases beginning in July 2012. The level of detail necessary to give city/town population figures won't be published until stage three of the second release - something that doesn't yet have a publication date. --Simple Bob a.k.a. The Spaminator (Talk) 15:12, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
File:Chorley Theatre.jpg listed for deletion[edit]
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Chorley Theatre.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:42, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)