User talk:MarcusBritish: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Malleus Fatuorum (talk | contribs)
→‎Re WQA: a word of advice that you'ce completely at liberty to ignore, of course
Line 104: Line 104:


:::As long as you don't attempt to coerce me into participating, or let anyone use WQA to sling mud now they know I won't partake, I'm fine. Let him have his little tantrums. I'll get a change of nappies for when he's done. '''[[User:MarcusBritish|<font color="#003399">Ma<font color="#CC0000">&reg;&copy;</font>usBr<font color="#CC0000">iti</font>sh</font>''']]&nbsp;<sup>&#91;[[User talk:MarcusBritish|Chat]]&nbsp;&bull;&nbsp;[[WP:RDP|RFF]]]</sup>''' 00:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
:::As long as you don't attempt to coerce me into participating, or let anyone use WQA to sling mud now they know I won't partake, I'm fine. Let him have his little tantrums. I'll get a change of nappies for when he's done. '''[[User:MarcusBritish|<font color="#003399">Ma<font color="#CC0000">&reg;&copy;</font>usBr<font color="#CC0000">iti</font>sh</font>''']]&nbsp;<sup>&#91;[[User talk:MarcusBritish|Chat]]&nbsp;&bull;&nbsp;[[WP:RDP|RFF]]]</sup>''' 00:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

::::I'm perhaps rather similar in the way I react to you, and I'm at least as sick of the Irish POV-pushing as you are, but I've learned that you need to avoid comments such as "he's an idiot". That turns it into a stupid "personal attack" discussion, and there are more than enough administrators more than happy to block you for the greater glorification of Wikipedia's God-king. Best stick to the facts, with the odd expletive thrown in as a fucking intensifier where appropriate. [[User:Malleus Fatuorum|Malleus]] [[User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum|Fatuorum]] 00:10, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:10, 13 December 2011

I need help sir..

Hi again marcus, its me joey i need your help about my 2nd article its because the surname of my article is not in Capital letter..i dont know how to change it. i hoping for your reply..thank you so much in advance. Joeymcortina (talk) 07:44, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 07:59, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help again..:) Joeymcortina (talk) 08:57, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No probs! Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 13:20, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i need help again sir.. i dont know why is that my added reference is not appearing in my wikipedia article but when i log into my account it was posted there..how can i fix that?? hoping for your reply..sir Joeymcortina (talk) 13:21, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you mean. What reference, on what article? Perhaps the ref is to a website which is blacklisted? I'll need more details though, to know what you're referring to and what you tried to reference, exactly. Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 14:02, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

sorry sir for not giving the clear details..the title of my 2nd article is "Rafael Corpus" and the reference that i added is *Stagg, Samuel (1935). Teodoro R. Yangco. Manila: University of The Philippines Press., it only appears in article when im currently log into my account but when i log out and search again my article my added reference is not posted.. Joeymcortina (talk) 03:32, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what's happening there, I see the ref'd book you gave just fine. Could be a caching issue. Try adding "?action=purge" in your browser URL bar, so that you get http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael_Corpus?action=purge, next time, it might help. If not, it could be that your browser isn't clearing its temporary internet files, and is displaying an older copy. Try pressing Ctrl and F5 together, to refresh the page from the server. Other than that, 'fraid I don't know what else could cause it, sorry. Cheers, Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 03:47, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much sir for the help i will do it and if it still doesn't work, is it okay that i will not need to put the reference in my article?.. 119.93.79.35 (talk) 04:18, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. It is there, no doubt about that. Seems be a problem with the visibility of it, from what you're saying. Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 04:24, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]


then i will not delete my added reference and wait till it will appear in the article without log in my account. thanks again sir. Joeymcortina (talk) 04:53, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for putting my prominent proboscis in here, but I don't understand. The reference is visible when you're logged in, but not visible when you're not? In any case, I'm logged in (which I always am; I don't edit from my IP) and I can see it. Or at least I think I'm seeing it. Maybe you should post the issue at the village pump (which I don't have a link for, but you should be able to find it). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:18, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It might be Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't make sense to me either. Cookies (when logged in and out) shouldn't affect what an article looks like. Unless we're talking different PCS or browsers here. Otherwise, it makes no sense at all. So yes, Village pump might be the best bet in that case. Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 13:30, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Artistic work

Nachtjagdgruppe 10 emblem

I saw your work on the project talk page. Well done! I wonder if you could also create something as complcated as Nachtjagdgruppe 10 emblem? Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:50, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh heck! That's a small image to work from, hard to see the detail, and nothing bigger on Google to look at. I'll give it a go, though. Should be able to get a close approximation with a little time and patience. Will get back to you. Cheers, Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 17:47, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm working on this now.. Photoshopping, but keep getting distracted by ingrates, playing childish games on ANI. What are the letters on the emblem? Looks like "Tllo" or "Illo" - also, because of the low-quality of the one I'm working off, I may have trouble matching the shade of red used on the text and boar tongue. Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 20:46, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See thumb. I haven't done anything in SVG format before, having just got Adobe Illustrator I've converted it from Photoshop format instead of just a PNG. The copyright info may need updating also, as well as categorising. Do as you feel fit, in terms of Commons data. Any problems, with the image itself, please let me know. Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 00:32, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, great job! No sorry I have difficulties myself making out what the lettes are. My guess, and I will try to verify this, is that it is "Illo". It could be a nickname of a wife or girlfriend. Thanks for the time and effort. MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:10, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No probs. Although I created the original copy, someone else has titivated the SVG I uploaded, mainly due to some quality issues based on my lack of technical experience with Illustrator. Cheers, Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 06:33, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
10th Guards tank corps
Thanks for the badge you did - that's great! Would it be possible to go back to that page and create badges for all the corps we have articles for at Category:Mechanized corps of the Soviet Union? Or even one or two? Cheers and many thanks, Buckshot06 (talk) 18:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It would be possible, only I can't tell which insignia at http://www.wio.ru/tank/oz/oz-en.htm relates to which article in the category. It would be easier for me if you indicate which of those images you would like reproducing from the page, and which article they relate to, and I'll see what I can do. Cheers, Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 19:09, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK. No problem - down on the right-hand side is an insignia for 10th Guards Tank Corps; that's an earlier version of 10th Guards Uralsko-Lvovskaya Tank Division. Could you do that one? The others we actually don't seem to have any other line-ups.. Thanks muchly.. Buckshot06 (talk) 19:18, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's the one? You'll need to go to Commons and categorise it. Cheers, Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 19:47, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Did you sort this, as I don't see any articles listed for its usage? Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 04:55, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've added it now. Thanks very much for your help. Might you consider doing a couple of RNZAF squadrons? I'd really like to fix No. 40 Squadron RNZAF. Buckshot06 (talk) 10:27, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What do they need? Insignia? If they need patches with crests like that low-quality on 5 Squadron page, I probably wouldn't be very good, as it's more elaborate detail what will the crown and trim, whereas I'm probably better suited to doing flat icon/logo/flag/roundel type images at the moment, being new to vector images. Can't see one on the 40 Squadron article, though. Let me know what's needed. Cheers, Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 10:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for discussion as to whether the article Davina Reichman should be deleted or kept. I would urge you to confine your contributions on the page to that single question, and not to allow yourself to be drawn into debates on any other topic. Cusop Dingle (talk) 20:44, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:27, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November 2011

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Tempest in a teapot a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Storm in a teacup. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. Eisfbnore talk 08:32, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To coin an old phrase..."oops!" — Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 08:54, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Fisting

Resolved
Did you bother to look at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ADroidfetuses CTJF83 23:01, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Uhhh, that link shows a different one so it isn't helpful. And FYI Simonxag is not banned. How can he be Brucejenner? You reverted Droidfetuses on 9 Dec, and Simonxag on the 10 Dec. Even if they posted the same thing, why is one banned and one not - socks should be banned too. Right? Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 23:14, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the banned user's comments, as I linked to the block log above. Simonxag reverted my removal of that banned user's comments, so I reverted Simonxag explaining the user is banned, and it is proper to remove their comments. CTJF83 23:31, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at my edit summary, "revert Simonxag, banned user, their edits get removed" I can see where the confusion came from, and I'll be more careful specifying who the banned user is. CTJF83 23:34, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, my fault too.. I took the edit summary literally. I thought Droidfetuses was the first sock of Brucejenner, and Simonxag yet another sock repeating the "oppose" !vote. I see now that he reverted your revert and then by moving it he made it look like it was his comment. Sorry, bit of confusion both ways, it seems. Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 23:37, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ya, while I was in the shower I was like Marcus probably just read the summary instead of looking at the difference...so I'll take half the blame if you take half :) CTJF83 23:47, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at the diffs originally, but only made sense of the second one, just before reverting you, and I realised the first diff was a revert itself not long ago, and that was the missing piece to the puzzle. Let's keep it simple: blame Simonxag, he started the mess, lol! Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 23:55, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me! CTJF83 02:36, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies if my opening seemed snarky. CTJF83 23:49, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's fine, was fair enough due to the minor confusion. Sorted now though. Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 23:55, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your knowledge might help

Marcus you state that your knowledge is mainly military , good it might be able to help give me direction in an issue that I was invovled in and trying to figure where to go to resolve it . Here is the artcile on The Troubles , you will see in the info box the correct use of flags the Union Flag and the Tricolour , and nothing for the others , however Warrenpoint ambush has the usage for the flags for the IRA and British army . Disscussion here on this and here on Operation Flavius have lead to inconsistency . From my understanding flags can be used in military infoboxes , and from my understanding the use of flags in these boxes relates solely to the military of that state , in this regard the incorrect use of the tricolour. Am I wrong in trying to remove this from the IRA side of infoboxes? And where would I go to get this sorted ? MOS relating to flags and icons or military history ? Murry1975 (talk) 09:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Flags in articles relating to battles/conflicts/campaigns/wars normally use the most prominent flag of each participant. I don't think it has to be the country flag.. for example, some WWII battles use the Nazi swastika rather than flag of Germany, although either would probably be acceptable. In the case of a terrorist organisations or para-military forces you're going to have to determine if that force had its own flag icon to use, initially. If not, and if the IRA did use the Irish flag, the Republic flag of Éire, then you need to realise that it is just history. By not using the flag they used, even against the population or government's wishes, you would be denying the truth. Wiki is not censored, not toned down just because people don't like things that happened. WWII German Army articles still use swastikas, even though it's illegal symbol in Germany, because it was history it can't be rewritten to suit the detractors. Though I can understand that the majority of the Irish population did not support the IRA, and wouldn't want their national flag tainted by having it represent a terrorist group.. if that's what happened, it happened. No two ways about it. Armies don't always represent the state. The Confederacy of the American Civil War represented itself, the Union Army represented the state. A whole new flag for the rebel cause. Despite claims today that it is a "racist flag" (bullshit) it still flies in many southern states, because it is part of their history, it represents their fight, personal cause, and sacrifices rather than the CSA's desire to keep slaves, as is claimed. I suppose it's equally fair to say that the Irish flag represents the cause and fight of the IRA, but not so much the country and true Irish people, despite their intentions, and lacks the same form of sympathy because of their methods, especially against civilian targets. They were a minority effort. You could ask on WT:MILHIST for advice, although I don't think I've ever seen anyone on there with interest in Irish history, specifically that period of conflict. But they may be able to give general advice and suggestions on whether use of the flag is within norms. Alternatively, as WP:MOSFLAG#Flags states that flags should not be used in infoboxes, and despite the fact that most military articles do it, because it does in fact look good, and not distracting, you could opt to remove them. To be honest MOSFLAG says don't, then gives a load of reasons when you should, which are about all situations, so it just contradicts itself, which is typically unambiguous of Wiki. Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 10:17, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advice and help. The flag pre-dates the state (from mid-1800s) and has always been used by various republican groups since then and by all forms of the IRA (THE IRA , and then the offical , provo ,and so on). It just seems like a contradiction use it in the Troubes to define the security forces of the state and the paramilitaries who didnt recognise the state or its army as legitimate. It is an oddity to look at two infoboxes within the Troubles Cat and see it representing both sides . And again thanks for the help , I agree with Wiki being contradictory - guidelines that state one thing and then state another and the mother of all. Thanks Murry1975 (talk) 13:27, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re WQA

You're not required to participate. It might be wiser and less work for all of us if let the WQA volunteers review the WQA posting and comment before you decided if this is something you want to spend more time on. I am not telling you not to post but I think you've seen I (usually) genuinely try to de-escalate situations. Thanks. Gerardw (talk) 23:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And I admit this [1] was a shitty move on my part that I'm not proud of. Gerardw (talk) 23:52, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
...and I didn't see your comments on WQA about anything posted being removed unread, apologies for posting. Gerardw (talk) 23:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just let him rant. He's an idiot. He's accusing me of highlighting his block to discredit him, when he pulled that stunt against me first. Kettle.. frying pan.. black as bog. Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 00:00, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As long as you don't attempt to coerce me into participating, or let anyone use WQA to sling mud now they know I won't partake, I'm fine. Let him have his little tantrums. I'll get a change of nappies for when he's done. Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 00:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm perhaps rather similar in the way I react to you, and I'm at least as sick of the Irish POV-pushing as you are, but I've learned that you need to avoid comments such as "he's an idiot". That turns it into a stupid "personal attack" discussion, and there are more than enough administrators more than happy to block you for the greater glorification of Wikipedia's God-king. Best stick to the facts, with the odd expletive thrown in as a fucking intensifier where appropriate. Malleus Fatuorum 00:10, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]