User talk:MapsMan/Archive 2007
| MapsMan (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • email) |
Fantôme[edit]
You're a poor flatter :p
My maps are so ugly :p
Well anyway, I've uploaded every interesting pictures I have to commons.
I'll try to make more pictures, entrances should be easy, but the weather is not good for now...
Gonioul 00:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
|
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 17:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Hans Auer[edit]
I failed to locate inappropriate links on my Hans Auer Wikipage.
At your request, I went through each link criterion.
The links I offered simply point to on-line resources for available references that I would think most readers would appreciate, especially given the fact that English-language readers may not be familiar with what may be bibliographically available.
Am I missing something? Is this project about supplying worthy, accurate and timely information or is it so constrained by formal rules that -- this is something I have noticed is a philosophical problem with a dispersed editorial agency like Wikipedia's.
Thanks for attending to my submission!
AppliedIconology 01:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Wikiproject architecture[edit]
Welcome to the project. Here's the bulletin - if you don't like it just delete it from your talk page, it gets automatically updated. Feel free to make any anouncements you like in the announcements section. Regards --Mcginnly | Natter 01:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
DSQ[edit]
I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article DSQ, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Jeepday 02:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
fr portal/project Transports en Île-de-France[edit]
fr:Portail:Transports en Île-de-France and fr:Projet:Transports en Île-de-France are starting, you're welcome!
Gonioul 23:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned fair use image (Image:DBCLogo.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:DBCLogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 02:41, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Tyne and Wear[edit]
Hi there, I'm currently considering making a wikiproject called Wikipedia:WikiProject Tyne and Wear and I'm just wondering if you would be interested in joining if and when I'ts created as I noticed from a user category you live in Newcastle-Upon-Tyne. It would be all about improving and creating wikipedia articles relating to Tyne and Wear. If you have any questions, comments or would like to show interest then please tell me on my talk page and if you know any other users who maybe interested in joining please feel free to tell them as it will need a few members in order to make it run smoothly. I will also be willing to create the project page and templates etc if there are enough active members. Thanks. TellyaddictEditor review! 15:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Advice requested[edit]
I've been attempting to overview and tidy up the geography cats which involve the places where people live. From the top level down to local neighbourhoods. There has been some overlapping and various mis-routings. It's been interesting looking at it all. However, there appear to be two useful ways of doing it - by region, and by size. And these can operate side by side quite usefully. The by region isn't a problem. But the by size has become difficult because User:Hmains wishes to use the term settlements to cover all sizes of communities, and has altered dictionary definitions [1] to fit his own understanding of the term - [2]. Community appears to be the term used most often to describe the places where people live, regardless of size. This is the definition of community - [3]. I did some sorting, placing the cat Human communities under Human geography. Human communities splitting into Urban geography and Rural geography. And those splitting into appropriate sized communities - cities, districts, neighbourhoods, villages, settlements, etc. Hmains has reverted much of my work, and insists on settlements being the term we should use - basing it on this decision, which was a declined proposal to rename Settlements by region to Populated places by region. What do you think? Is settlement an acceptable term for covering human communities ranging from well established cities down to refuge camps. Is Human community a viable alternative? Are there other choices (apart from populated places of course!)? I have started a discussion here and here, with the above wording, but no response as yet. Am I doing the right thing? SilkTork 19:19, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Discussion taking place at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements)#Settlements SilkTork 11:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Age category[edit]
Hello! If you are receiving this message, that means that your user page is in a specific year category. Per a recent user-category per deletion, all specific year categories are to be deleted. If you wish to continue using year categories, you have two options:
- Using an age group category, such as Category:Wikipedians in their 30s
- Using a decade category, such as Category:Wikipedians born in the 1970s.
If you wish, you may do both. Hopefully, this change in categorization will be quick and painless. Happy editing! --An automated message from MessedRobot 12:57, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
My RfA[edit]
|
Thank you for your comments on my my recent RfA in which I withdrew because the oppose votes were almost equalling the supporters. I then decided to leave my account (Tellyaddict) and start fresh under a new username, however I quickly decided to reconsider after another user persuaded me not to leave the account - I am now glad I did reconsider because leaving that account and creating a new one was too hasty so I've decided to improve rather than starting again! I hope we can remain civil and that there were no negative feelings caused. Again, thanks for your support even though you opposed and I withdrew it, your vote is much appreciated! Regards - Tellyaddict (Talk) 19:56, 10 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
Hello! I noticed you often edit articles which relate to North East England so we at WikiProject North East England, would like to invite your to become a member of the WikiProject. We work on creating, expanding an making general changes to North East England related articles. If you would be intersted in joining feel free to visit the Project Page. |
Hey[edit]
Hi, how did you get the time sized smaller in your sig? Thanks, ~thesublime514 • talk 07:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- There seems to be a small problem. I tried fixing it a number of ways, and had no success... any ideas? ~ thesublime514 • talk {{SUBST:CURRENTTIME}}, {{SUBST:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{SUBST:CURRENTDAY}}, {{SUBST:CURRENTYEAR}} (UTC)
- Yeah, I tried it both ways. When type my sig, it doesn't work, but when I type the same code that I used for my sig, it does..
Code: ~ thesublime514 • talk 19:11, May 6, 2024 (UTC)
My sig: ~ thesublime514 • talk {{SUBST:CURRENTTIME}}, {{SUBST:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{SUBST:CURRENTDAY}}, {{SUBST:CURRENTYEAR}} (UTC)
- It automatically adds a "SUBST:" at the beginning of templates.. But is this normal? [4] ~ thesublime514 • talk {{SUBST:CURRENTTIME}}, {{SUBST:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{SUBST:CURRENTDAY}}, {{SUBST:CURRENTYEAR}} (UTC)
Edit corrections[edit]
Thanks for the correction - having never been to England, I'm not surprised I made an error. Just trying to get a category on every article I can. Magichands 22:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting response - I was trying to be polite and assumed the same from you. How sad to be mistaken in that. Magichands 19:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
template:area[edit]
Oh dear... That is a lot of squashy-ness. I'm glad you were able to get that fixed. It looks much better now. ~ Amalas rawr =^_^= 16:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Cornog article[edit]
I added more references to the Robert Cornog article. Is this good enough? What causes the "need more references" header (that you added?) to go away?
Gypsydoctor 22:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Calculus newbie[edit]
Hi there - I know calculus is going through a sensitive moment right now, and in any case, it is constantly bombarded by unwelcome edits, so the efforts of editors like yourself at maintaining its integrity is very valuable. I'm here because I happened to notice that your recent edit [5] reverted (what seems to be) a good faith edit by a newbie, who appears to have something to contribute to the project: for example, one of the edits concerns the replacement of the closed interval [a,b] by the corresponding open interval, which avoids the subtle question of the definition of one-sided derivatives.
I don't mean this addition to your talk page as any kind of criticism. I just wanted to draw your attention to this for your information. Geometry guy 00:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps it was late, but it seemed very hard to make out a lot of what he was saying. Maybe being so late, I forgot to AGF, but his edit was repeating itself, and also said things which if they made sense, didn't really assist someone without a pre-existing knowledge of calculus. I found it very hard to understand what he was saying - I think that was evidence that he was either trolling or was adding content which was not helpful. Either way, nobody has reverted yet my edit, so the proof in the pudding is whether anyone comes back with similar contributions.
- As for not wanting to dissuade people from Wikipedia, I personally believe that it is counter-productive to encourage editors. Not that they should be discouraged, but people need to remember that Wikipedia is a serious project, and that it needs to be rigorous and therefore inherently "difficult", albeit not prohibitively so. I've come across a lot of editors who - however well meaning - just don't have enough of a "professional" approach to the project. Even if you are a volunteer, you need to be very self-critical, which is why I am completely in favour of people like yourselves challenging edits like you have done. Wikipedia is an "academic project" and academia is a very self-critical and peer-critical pursuit. Thank you for your observation, I will bear it in mind in the future.
Thanks for your well thought out answer. I agree with a lot of what you say.
In this particular case I noticed that the user had made a more substantial edit 24 hours previously (which was also reverted, though not immediately) from a slightly different IP address. More significantly, the user also left detailed comments (same IP) on the talk page about the article and her/his edits. You couldn't have been expected to pick up on this additional information, but I think the user has something positive to contribute, so I hope he/she returns! In any case, a discussion has been initiated about the article. Geometry guy 17:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
school districts[edit]
The feeling at recent AfD has often been to preserve the articles for the districts, but to make them articles rather than lists, merging in a paragraph for each school. Nobody has actually started doing the work systematically yet. It has also been argued that in some cases the city or county would make a better place, and this may well be true with the lists you questioned. I encourage you to list them on AfD to discuss the matter; I can of course do this for you if you prefer. As you know, there is no real consensus on anything to do with schools. I am generally a deletionist for routine school articles, though more or less an inclusionist on almost everything else. I had no intention of being preemptory, and I am under no illusion that I know the best answer for such articles. My apologies if it seemed otherwise.DGG 22:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Deadly Game article[edit]
I would like to know what specific aspect or section you think I copied. I didn't do so. I'm new to contributing to Wikipedia, so I would appreciate your feedback as to what the problem you have with the article. I am also puzzled by the tag stating that the article isn't properly cited. I didn't use any outside materials for the summary. I only referenced Ms.Feehan's site for the cover art and the list of awards.
Thanks
Jahunta07 23:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I rewrote the article. Please see it I've corrected the earlier problems. --Jahunta07 09:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Many thanks for the help[edit]
Hello,
Just wanted to say thanks for the help with the Guangzhou Zhujiang Brewery Group article - I really should have been paying more attention to spelling when copying bits of information from a Chinese website!
Many thanks
Alifontbin 14:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Île-de-France[edit]
The French Wikipedia is like the English Wikipedia. There are people with agenda who push for things that are not necessarily a good idea. Not only Île-de-France never had a flag (French provinces didn't have flags before the French Revolution), but it never had a coat of arms either, because it never really existed as a province per se. It was the royal demesne, the heart of France. It is only in the 19th century, when it was fashionable to assign coat of arms to the disappeared provinces, that the would-be heraldists of the day assigned the fleur de lis to Île-de-France, because the rulers of Île-de-France had been the French kings. Of course this is post-Middle Age reconstruction. Furthermore, the heraldists could not even decide if they would use the fleur de lis version with 3 flowers (used by French kings after Charles V), or with many flowers (semé, used by the French kings before Charles V). In France you'll find people who will admantly plead that the coat of arms of Île-de-France is the fleur de lis with the many flowers version, in order to distinguish from the 3 flowers version which was the coat of arms of France. Other people admantly plead the opposite. Of course, none of these claims are based on history or reality, it's all heraldist's fantasy world that appeared in the 19th century.
Anyway, not only the fleur de lis was never used by any "Île-de-France official" before 1789 (there was no such thing as an "Île-de-France official" anyway), but it has also never been used by any Île-de-France official since the region was created in 1976, so I see no valid reason to use it. We should stick to the official region flag. If you lived in Paris, you'd know that the current official flag, although ugly, is flown in many places in the Paris Region. I've seen it many times. Here you can see the flag displayed inside the regional council: [6]. This flag appears on every poster or billboard put by the region on roads, building sites, universities, you name it, in which they put money to improve or build something, so people in the Paris Region are very familiar with the flag. Godefroy 17:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- How would you use the asterisk? Can you show how it would look? Godefroy 23:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
RS[edit]
Good job on the RS article :) --Methodius 15:39, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I was being sincere (about the typos etc). If you were thinking of the whole Republic of Srpska, I think that that name is pretty ridiculous too - it sort of clangs on the ears. But they like to use it, so...--Methodius 07:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Context[edit]
He wasn't trying to cause problems, but it would have caused a shitstorm with Bosniak users. To see why he did it, see this extremely long, pointless and unbelievably petty dispute, which sure qualifies for the lamest edit wars list: Talk:Bosilegrad#Tag :) The worst thing is, they don't actually appear to disagree on anything substantive, but neither wants to back down.--Methodius 23:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Neither is rational there. Even a broken clock is right twice a day (adding the WPBG thing was the right thing, but insisting on it so vociferously is a bit :O), but from what I've seen of User:PANONIAN, he seems to be above that sort of thing usually. Ho-hum, business as usual on WP --Methodius 23:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry[edit]
I've been straightforward about my identity. Check out my profile. Matthew Sanchez 18:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Fair use image use[edit]
Re [7]: The use of fair use images on your userpage is forbidden per terms of Wikipedia:Fair_use#Policy item #9. While you may think the images are in the public domain, they have not been tagged as such. Thus, we do not have affirmative evidence that these images are in fact in the public domain. Failing presentation of this evidence, these images can not be used in the way you wish to use them. If you wish to use these images, you need to gain release of them under a free license from the holders of the copyright. To do so, please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Please do not re-tag these images without conducting this work in order to permit their use on your userpage.
Re [8]: Again, the use of fair use images on templates is not permitted per the above cited policy, which equally applies to templates. You must also seek to gain release of these arms under a free license.
Considerable debate has evolved previously over the copyright status of arms. In general, there is no agreement that arms images are in the public domain by default. Permissions must be requested individually for each arms image. Without such release, the images tagged as fair use, copyrighted may not be used on templates or on your userpage. I am reverting your re-insertion of these images on your userpage. Please do not re-add these images without conducting the above requested work. If you have any questions about this, I'd be happy to answer. Thank you, --Durin 19:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Get a life
- I have one, thank you very much. I've reverted your improper relicensing of Image:Aprod-t.png. I cautioned you above about improper relicensing, and doing the work required to gain release of these images. If you continue in this manner, it my result in a block. I'm quite happy to work with you to help you understand the importance of these subjects and how best to manage images on Wikipedia. However, willful violation of our policies is not acceptable. Thank you, --Durin 20:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- I am honoured that you have reverted my edit. I am, however, taking a certain smug glee from the fact you are worrying about the copyright status of a photo of a t-shirt of an anarchist band.
- Enjoy. --Durin 20:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I do not understand what kind of coordinates would you like for Danube-Tisa-Danube Canal. The English article does not explain that adequately, but DTD canal is a network of small canals covering most of Bačka and Banat. Its coordinates are practically same for the entire Vojvodina. This is interactive map where if you choose "kanal DTD" you can see all the canals highlighted. The map is of course copyrighted. Shinhan 21:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
First thing you must understand before engaging a revert is. I am right, I'm not wasting my time telling if I didn't know I was. Réseau Saint-Lazare is not part of the Transilien. Transilien is a brand of serives that run on Réseau Saint-Lazare and other networks. Réseau Saint-Lazare access Transilien branded services as well TER Haute Normandie and Intercité services. There is no relation between Réseau Saint-Lazare and Transilien that warrants it being placed in Transilien due to the parenthood relation it holds. Add Transilien in the réseaux, not the réseaux in Transilien. The very badly edits Transilien articles, Montparnasse, Est et al are appropriately categorised in Transilien. Do not mistake Réseau Saint-Lazare and Transilien Saint-Lazare. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 18:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Apostrophe[edit]
- I won't take grammar lessons from somebody who uses a word like "unappropriate".
- How mature of you. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 09:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Transilien[edit]
- On the other hand, I can see your logic in the Transilien matter; however, there is a massive Transilien logo in the article! It is therefore either misleading or contradictory to have one and not the other.
- Perhaps you should see "Venn diagram" to understand why if a something is not entirely in a category, it still might justify inclusion as it is still part of it.
- The way I see it, yes, RSL is wholly within Réseau Ouest, but in terms of population/passengers, a greal deal of it also forms part of Transilien. I also looked within Category:Transilien and noticed Réseau Est was also included.
- I'm frustrated at this, because I feel you have reverted my good faith attempt in a quite arrogant way before even attempting to take this to a wider discussion.
- You feel frustrated because you didn't expect nor accept anyone disagree with your edits. In your text above you seem to confirm then confusion I'm desesperatly trying to convert: The way I see it, yes, RSL is wholly within Réseau Ouest, but in terms of population/passengers, a greal deal of it also forms part of Transilien. No, I must repeat, RSL does not form part of Transilien, Transilien forms part of RSL. I also looked within Category:Transilien and noticed Réseau Est was also included. Then feel free to remove it.
- Perhaps you should see "Venn diagram" to understand why if a something is not entirely in a category, it still might justify inclusion as it is still part of it. I was considering drawing you a diagram since you clearly don't understand, I won't however, since I no longer upload media to Wikipedia. There is such a thing in Wikipedia as redundancy where article and media aren't categorised in daughter categories. RSL is in no way included in Transilien, once you understand the branding and network difference, I'm sure you'll agree, if you do view Transilien as an operator, owner, network then we're in trouble. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 09:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello[edit]
Nice post on the suicide userbox deletion review! I see that you've had more than 3000 mainspace edits, would you like to consider an admin nomination? If you are too shy to self-nominate, I can nominate you there. Regards. WooyiTalk to me? 21:55, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
User:777a[edit]
I don't have any great solution at hand. My guess is that the person does understand English since one edit earlier today was correcting a few grammatical errors. However, I have a feeling that this person might not care much about copyright law. I'll keep an eye on the material relating to Denmark. I've listed the account on WP:AN/I. Regards. Valentinian T / C 21:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Reply[edit]
Hey. Yes I decided to leave a couple days ago, however, due to kind word from Wikipedians, I reconsidered it and will make the final decision either to stay or leave pending the outcome of two ArbCom cases I initiated, and another ArbCom case I participated in. They will determine if I still have faith in Wikipedia. Now I still sporadically visit and fix some vandalism when taking a break from studying. I can nominate you tonight if I'm not too busy. Thanks for your kind words. Regards. WooyiTalk to me? 23:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
RFA[edit]
Would you accept the nom? WooyiTalk to me? 23:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Assumed GFDL[edit]
Would you mind explaining why you can make such an assumption? Yonatan talk 23:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Replied on your talk page.
RFA[edit]
Thank you for your kind words. As you know, I decided to temporarily stay in Wikipedia and see how the Arbcom decide on two cases I brought to them, to determine if I still have faith in fairness of Wikipedia. For the RFA, I'm glad you accepted it, and good luck. When you finish answering the questions, don't forget to transclude it onto the WP:RFA page. Regards. WooyiTalk to me? 23:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- I object to, "I would like this comment from a non-productive user ignored. The policeman comment was an analogy" I would ask for you to refrain from incivility, Nobody on here should be censored or ignored and the great part about wikipedia is that it is about the people not about those who want to boss people around. I apologize if I am coming off as uncivil but if you want to be an admin this is what you have to deal with. And deal with gracefully--William Henry Harrison 00:39, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- Fair point. But let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
- Thank you for your grace in recieving my criticism--William Henry Harrison 00:53, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Answer[edit]
- Greetings! I don't think that the majority of the Moldovan population supports that unification. The same could be said for the romanian population (or at least the wisely thinking people) because it would be catastrofic for the recently growing Romanian economy a union with the poorest country in Europe, the growing but still not stable and strong economy of romania might not bear that burden.
- I will be sincere: in my opinion romania is large enough and must not became any larger. You know, the larger the country, the stronger. And my country does not need any strong countries around (except for Bulgaria itself: )) A know this is conservative, but I do not support globalism and don't believe that the idea of "United Europe" will become reality; so as the english once said for foreign policy "there are no eternal friends, there are eternal interests" I believe that stronger Romania or stroner Greece or something of the kind are against the interests of Bulgaria: ) Regards, --Gligan 09:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
RfA notice at the top of this and your user page[edit]
Such notices should be neutral, and not solicit !votes of one type or the other. It's a minor point, but as an Wikipian, you are expected to follow Wikipedia policy - even more so when you are an admin. Just a heads up. The Transhumanist 21:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Manchester Meetup[edit]
Hi, just getting in touch because you expressed an interest in the meetup here. Some people have expressed a view that they would be able to make it were the date moved from Fri 8 June to Sat 9 June. Obviously its now getting pretty close, so I thought a quick poll would be the best the way to find out the better day. If you're still interested, it would be great if you could say whether you can make either or both days here. Thanks, WjBscribe 16:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
meetup[edit]
Being a wikipedian in Tyne and Wear, being near Sunderland. You may be intrested in Wikipedia:meetup/Sunderland. Help arrange some plans!. 217.43.213.72 21:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Re: motorways[edit]
There's nothing stopping you from changing the rating yourself :) Will (We're flying the flag all over the world) 12:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Category:Economic Left and Social Libertarian Wikipedians[edit]
I have speedy deleted a category you created, Category:Economic Left and Social Libertarian Wikipedians, as recreation of previously deleted content. Please see this UCFD, resulting in delete. Thanks for understanding! VegaDark (talk) 21:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Hindhead Tunnel[edit]
|
The Special Barnstar | |
| It's nice that you've started a page for the Hindhead Tunnel SuzanneKn 17:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC) |
WikiProject Electronic Music[edit]
Hello there, fellow Brentfordian musical linguist, I came across your userpage a while back and couldn't help noticing you appeared to be a pretty strong editor with an interest in electronic music. I'm currently on a mission to find such editors and ask if they would be interested in joining WikiProject Electronic music, which is in need of some more participants! If you're interested, please add your name to the participants list, and if not, keep up the good work, and I shall see you around! Have a nice day, - Zeibura S. Kathau (Info | Talk) 19:22, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry[edit]
I haven't signed on wiki in a month and didn't get your message on time.
Sorry, ~ thesublime514 • talk • sign 21:24, June 4, 2007 (UTC)
Email[edit]
Just to let you know, I've sent you an email about the Manchester meet up, regards Ryan Postlethwaite 11:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
North Shields[edit]
Regarding article North Shields and your comments. I am fairly new to Wikipedia, especially to amending articles. I have placed a source reference on the North Shields article. Is that what you had in mind? Please let me know if it is not. Dposte46 18:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for correcting my source references in the North Shields article. I have added some further information to this article along with another reference and it looks OK to me. However I have just noticed that there is a separate article (a stub) on the North Shields Fish Quay which is linked from the North Shields article. It seems to me that all of the information in this stub is already contained in the North Shields article, so that there is no need for the Fish Quay article now. Should this be deleted? Dposte46 20:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Template Signature[edit]
I saw you using a template as your signature rather than the old fashion way..which I don't have a problem with and I read somewhere that it isn't allowed so can I ask you to use normal sigs for Rfa voting because the bot in charge of updating that doesn't understand templated signatures yet and my only recommendation is for Rfa's only and I wont stop you from using it anywhere..its your decision..Thank you..--Cometstyles 18:56, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Barnstar[edit]
A friendly, helpful welcome and a barnstar. What an excellent Wiki Ambassador you are. Thank you. --FactotEm 20:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
RfA[edit]
I'm sorry to hear you didn't get this. Certainly I'd support you. I hope you'll apply again. SuzanneKn 21:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
My recent RfA[edit]
Thanks for your support in my recent, unsuccessful RfA. It's much appreciated. IvoShandor 16:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Re: AGF[edit]
I was doing RC patrol then and noticed that—since it was an anon with no previous edits, I assumed it was somebody with no knowledge about policies like WP:NPOV, and reverted it. I simply chose not to ascribe to malice what can be explained by ignorance.
I also do lots of high-speed vandal-fighting, so I can make mistakes regarding small things like this. Thanks for the concern! east.718 21:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Your signature[edit]
Hello MapsMan, it's come to my attention that you're using an overly complex signature. In addition, it uses invalid HTML, which may screw up talk pages that you edit. Splitting up your signature into a source tree, it looks like this:
<div>— [[User:MapsMan| <span style="color:#FF4500;font-weight:bold;">MapsMan</span>]] <small>[ [[User_talk:MapsMan| <span style="color:#00008B">talk</span>]] | [[Special:Contributions/MapsMan| <span style="color:#C71585">cont</span>]] ] </small> — <em style="font-size:10px;">22:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC) </div> </em>
All HTML tags must have corresponding closing tags; <span> must always be followed by </span>, for example. At present, your signature is missing one opening em tag, one closing span tag, and one closing em tag. Please fix this immediately, or you risk disrupting talk pages you edit. If you do not know how, please feel free to ask. I would, however, strongly recommend reviewing the guideline on signatures and shortening your signature a good bit, as it is currently overly convoluted. Cheers, Tangotango (talk) 06:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your reply. You're still missing a span, your signature needs to be like this to be correct:
— [[User:MapsMan|
<span style="color:#FF4500;font-weight:bold;">MapsMan</span>]]
<small>[ [[User_talk:MapsMan|
<span> style="color:#00008B">talk</span>]] | [[Special:Contributions/MapsMan|
<span style="color:#C71585">cont</span>]] ]
</span>
</small> —
<em style="font-size:10px;">22:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)</em>
Also, I removed the div tags as there is no need for them. In fact, they're harmful as they are a block element that disrupts the flow of the text; your signature should be inline with the last line of your messages, not on a separate line.
While the signature above is technically correct, I still suggest you shorten your signature a good bit, per Wikipedia:Signatures. After all, there's no need for a fancy signature to make good contributions to Wikipedia. Thanks, Tangotango (talk) 04:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- P.S., I'm sorry for the aggressive tone, I didn't mean for it to come out that way. I guess it was my feeling of urgency; in the past, many a talk page has been ruined by syntactically incorrect signatures. Cheers, Tangotango (talk) 04:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
You're right about the redundant </span>, sorry about the confusion. That's fine if you want to keep your signature as it is, although I personally feel it looks a tad too long. Anyway, at least the syntax is now sorted :-) Thanks, Tangotango (talk) 17:28, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Andy Jacobs[edit]
That was a quick edit!
Andy has said on many occasions that he once had a fling with his Grandfather's ex-girlfriend,so I doubt he will sue Wikipedia for libel.
I've got a tape of him telling the story of how he came to have a relationship with his Grandad's girlfriend,so that's my source and I'd be willing to submit the tape to the court should Andy ever sue.
I'm almost certain that his Dad didn't know Jim Henson,so I don't know why that is on here and although I know it's true,there's no evidence that he went for six 6's in one over,so that shouldn't be on here either!—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ron Stowmarket (talk • contribs)
Hostmen article[edit]
Thanks for the Barnstar. I had to check to find out what it meant! It's much appreciated. Dposte46 12:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Non-metropolitan district of Bristol[edit]
Actually it is: see [9] for example:
- The county of Somerset and the non-metropolitan districts of Bath and North East Somerset, Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire
Brighton and Hove is also a city and unitary and non-met district.
Lozleader 16:32, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Just by googling around, the preferred term for unitary authorities seems to be the very long-winded "non-metropolitan district councils which have the functions of county councils" (as opposed to "non-metropolitan district councils which do not have the functions of county councils" e.g. [10], [11], [12] Lozleader 16:54, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
I invite you to visit the recently amended Kent Rail website on which you based the above article. Then perhaps you could reinstate all the corrections that I made and which you reverted. Thank you. Signalhead 18:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
RfD and settlements in England[edit]
I didn't notice the template had been moved today. I am proposing this redirect Template:UKLargestCities for deletion as it is very misleading in that, as you have pointed out, only cities in England are covered. For it to work, cities to be included would have to be Edinburgh, Glasgow, Cardiff, Swansea, Newport, Dundee and Aberdeen, to name a few. I have also moved a corresponding list to what it actually shows. Simply south 19:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Smile[edit]
Connell66 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Cleanup[edit]
Hi. Just a note. Such edits add no value to Wikiedia in my view, and just fill the watchlists and the recent changes. I would suggest you perhaps use AWB for more substantial edits, that is, not save the ones which just do a bit of space removal, unicodification etc. I wonder what you think. You can reply here. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- Same about this. If you have energy, perhaps you could focus on fixing spelling, etc. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Dear MapsMan. Perhaps my tone was not the best. But I hope you are seeing the problem here. Your frequent edits have no use, make it harder for others to check the watchlist, and obscure vandalism. Please take it to heart rather than complaining that my message is useless. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 14:56, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- Point taken. But this is useful, however I can agree that perhaps this is not. — MapsMan [ talk | cont ] — 15:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- But here, you put the stub after the category, while it should be before. And yes, some of those edits are useful (marginally perhaps), but if they hide vandalism done on the same day by different editors, and make it harder to check the watchlist, then I am not sure about the tradeoff. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 15:26, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- You are the operator. You are responsible for your edits. I think it is appropriate to consider whether a given edit is worth saving or not. Let's leave the matter here, I hope my point about creating unnecessary edits is clear enough. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I am the operator, and I instructed it to "apply all general fixes" to the articles in my list. Placing stubs after cats is desirable as it provides a better article spacing. Anyway, I have made 1000s of edits, and I believe my contributions to Wikipedia collectively speak for themselves. — MapsMan [ talk | cont ] — 16:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Spelling corrections on London article[edit]
I'd just to like to offer you my sincerest thanks for so comprehensively continuing to rectify the mildly upsetting prevalence of "center" and all such variations on the theme on the London article. I suppose I feel slightly stupid, because my immediately preceding edit rectified just one such instance that I found... so I am very grateful that you went back and did a proper job of it, unlike me! The Geography Elite 13:16, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Replied on The Geography Elite's talk page — MapsMan [ talk | cont ] — 17:53, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
![[4]](http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n41/thesublime514/Normal.jpg){kind=link}
![[6]](http://emblemes.free.fr/images-ile/photo-iledefrance2.JPG){kind=link}
Image source problem with Image:Aprod-t.png[edit]
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Aprod-t.png. 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.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
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 20:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 20:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- Image's page has fixed, Thanks for information. Remember put it allows ;).--{{subst:#ifeq:{{subst:NAMESPACE}}|User talk|{{subst:#ifeq:{{subst:PAGENAME}}|OsamaK|OsamaK|OsamaKReply? on my talk page, please}}|OsamaK}} 13:39, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
GTFO[edit]
What does GTFO mean ? 86.134.252.33 18:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi MapsMan![edit]
Don't tell me - you're on SABRE too??! Yes, I am indeed Sunil_of_Yoxley. best, Sunil060902 09:38, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
"Pretentious and irrelevant"?[edit]
Hi MapsMan, How does that work? best, Sunil060902 23:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
London Overground[edit]
Hi, you undid my change to the preceding state of London Underground. Why do you think it should be UNTIL 2010??
London underground is the current operator of the East London line until 2010. At that point in time it will transfer to London overground and hence London overground will be the operator of the East London line from 2010. So the correct statement should be that London underground is a preceding operator FROM 2010 and bot UNTIL 2010. if it was a preceding operator UNTIL 2010 this would mean it is a preceding operator now and this ends in 2010. This is definitely not the case. 91.65.35.7 19:47, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- Because that's the logic of the succession boxes. Predecessor is unil, successor is from. — MapsMan [ talk | cont ] — 19:48, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I Just went by the logic already uses in the WAGN in which it states succeeded by 'ONE' from 2004. Meaning from 2004 onward 'ONE' is a successor. In This context BR would be a preceding since 1997. and it would be preceded by BR since 1997 91.65.35.7 07:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed. So extrapolating that backwards, a predecessor being the opposite of a successor requires the opposite of "FROM", which is "UNTIL". — MapsMan [ talk | cont ] — 21:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
naming convention[edit]
See Category:Lists of African Americans (as well as the name of the category itself) to see how the lists are named, making the name a 'convention'. See also the category and subcats of Category:African American, which are almost all named without a hyphen. Thanks Hmains 22:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, I probably won't do much else. I can rename articles but to rename cats means going to CfD. The problem with CfD is that when a nomination comes up to just rename something, others can hijack the request and make it a deletion request. This often happens with 'ethnic anything' cats. Hmains 23:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
League of Copyeditors roll call[edit]
|
Greetings from the League of Copyeditors. Your name is listed on our members page, but we are unsure how many of the people listed there are still active contributors to the League's activities. If you are still interested in participating in the work of the League, please follow the instructions at the members page to add your name to the active members list. Once you have done that, you might want to familiarise yourself with the new requests system, which has replaced the old /proofreading subpage. As the old system is now deprecated, the main efforts of the League should be to clear the substantial backlog which still exists there. The League's services are in as high demand as ever, as evinced by the increasing backlog on our requests pages, both old and new. While FA and GA reviewers regularly praise the League's contributions to reviewed articles, we remain perennially understaffed. Fulfilling requests to polish the prose of Wikipedia's highest-profile articles is a way that editors can make a very noticeable difference to the appearance of the encyclopedia. On behalf of the League, if you do consider yourself to have left, I hope you will consider rejoining; if you consider yourself inactive, I hope you will consider returning to respond to just one request per week, or as many as you can manage. Merry Christmas and happy editing, The League of Copyeditors. |
Melon‑Bot (STOP!) 17:51, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Darlingtoncoatofarms.jpg[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Darlingtoncoatofarms.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:59, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Gateshead Coat of Arms 175x149.gif[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Gateshead Coat of Arms 175x149.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:39, 22 December 2007 (UTC)