User talk:David Biddulph

3RR template

Hi David,

Thank you for correcting my attempt to add a three-reverts template to NVG13DAO's talk page. It was the first time I had used this template, and I still (after further reading) don't know how to do it. I had followed the advice here which recommends "posting a {{uw-3rr}} template message on their user talk page"; and I should have realised that I should also have signed it. But how would I "subst"? Maproom (talk) 09:40, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Maproom: See WP:SUBST. Just type in {{subst:uw-3rr}} plus the four tildes. You can use {{subst:uw-3rr|JT LeRoy}} if you want to specify the article. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:25, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll make a not of that. Maproom (talk) 13:26, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

New newsletter for Notifications

Hello

You are subscribing to the Notifications newsletter on English Wikipedia.

That newsletter is now replaced by the monthly and multilingual Collaboration team newsletter, which will include information and updates concerning Notifications but also concerning Flow and Edit Review Improvements.

Please subscribe!

All the best, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 10:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Theresa May cabinet

Thank you for notifying me of the error. However, please be advised that the change was made in my Sandbox. So, I am unaware of how this was reflected on another page. I have rectified the issue to the best of my ability; and, I hope the issue does not arise again.

Mrsolan22 (talk) 04:35, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

You removed content from Template:Theresa May cabinet 1 vertical twice: this one on 24 September and this second one on 30 September. Your similar edit to your sandbox wasn't until this morning. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:50, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail! Check your mail!

Hello, David Biddulph. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 12:14, 6 October 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

VarunFEB2003 12:14, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to the African Destubathon

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! So it would be a good chance to win something for improving stubs on African sportspeople, including footballers, athletes, Olympians and Paralympians etc, particularly female ones, but also male. Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing a few expanded articles on African Paralympians, Olympians and committees etc, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXVI, October 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D and Hawkeye7 look at recent works Op-ed: TomStar81 on the evolution of the tank Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:17, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

I think I fixed my signature;

-- AI RPer (talk) 12:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Better than it was, but still 427 bytes, rather than 255 max as given at WP:SIGLEN. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:47, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

It also contravenes WP:SIG#NT since it uses 7 parser function calls. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:52, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

FYI, blocked as a sock. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:52, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:31, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Verifying the problem with my edit of adding a comment for editors, a comment invisible to readers

Hi David,

Did I bungle this edit, which is just really an added comment for editors, invisible to readers?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_international_presidential_trips_made_by_Benigno_Aquino_III&oldid=prev&diff=744509487

As far as I can tell, after checking before & after I made my change, & after you made your change of reverting my change, I just really added a comment for editors, which are invisible to readers?

In fact, I made another test edit, which you can verify?

Thanks,

Reggie Reggiehg (talk) 19:32, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

The place for suggestions is on the article talk page, not in the article itself. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:40, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you David!

Re: Theresia Gouw image...I didn't see the message you pointed out. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrosato (talk • contribs) 14:53, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 03:05, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Polish palaces

Hi David, thank you for your knowledgeable help in fixing the Wikidata for pl:Pałac Lubomirskich w Krakowie re Lubomirski Palace (Opole Lubelskie) on 22 September. I completely forgot about my post on the Help Desk and only just found it in my contribs. Thanks again. >MinorProphet (talk) 21:35, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXVII, November 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at two new books on the US military Interview: A chat with our new project coordinators Review essay: Nick-D discusses recent works on the British and Australian Armies in World War I Op-ed: TomStar81 on the end of the Battle of the Somme Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:31, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Allchurches Trust

I have made changes to this page to correct an error and to expand on the content. I couldn't work out how to send you the proposals before making the changes - and have only just done so. Many apologies. I also left a message for you at the bottom of the entry but suspect it didn't reach you - I probably put it in the wrong place. I wanted to alert you to the fact that I am currently a consultant to Allchurches Trust and therefore being paid for what I do including amending their entry here. I believe I have followed the guidelines - apart from being unable to work out how to contact you first and doing it the wrong way round. The page is now consistent with information elsewhere, including its own website. Is the entry acceptable?

References

Joanna Biddolph (talk) 00:59, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

You forgot to provide a link to the article in question, which is Allchurches Trust. There are a number of problems. Firstly you have violated Wikipedia's terms and conditions by not providing on your user a page a declaration of paid editing. Secondly you say "The page is now consistent with information elsewhere, including its own website", but in doing so you have copied verbatim from the subject's website and therefore committed a copyright violation. In general the content of a subject's website is not suitable for an encyclopedia, see WP:conflict of interest, but if anything is suitable for inclusion it needs the copyright holder to donate the copyright by the process given for donating copyrighted material. Thirdly the article is not properly referenced, see Help:Referencing for beginners. Fourthly the #External links section was malformatted, which I've corrected in this edit but there seem to be too many links so you need to read WP:External links. Fifthly (but fundamentally) you have not provided evidence that the organisation is notable in Wikipedia's terms, which means being the subject of significant coverage in published reliable sources independent of the subject. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:31, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for replying so swiftly. I admit to finding Wikipedia complex to navigate. I had looked at all the guidance I thought I had to look at; each page leads to another which leads to another and that is where I get confused. I am also easily foxed by an absence of links I assume will be there - such as a Reply link to messages from you. I expect I am typing this in the wrong place and without a marker that alerts you to it. I just can't find it and the advice I received to a request for help didn't cover how to reply to a message from an editor as I didn't know it wouldn't be clear. On your points in the order you made them: · a link to the article - I did include a link and I can see it above but I assume it isn't in the right format (it is between the <ref></ref> symbols; I have just seen (while typing below) your follow up message; I don't seem to have a user page which is why I posted it there; I have not anticipated being a serial user - beyond using Wikipedia as a source of information as any other user does; I will create a user page after finishing this reply; · declaration of paid editing - I have now done this; I had read the guidelines but clearly not understood them; I expect to charge a fee for one hour of my time for this work; · copyright issues - the information is available to others to use without restriction but I will amend the text so it is different; it is hard to know how to do this with lists since a list is a list; · properly referenced - I will refer to this guidance; I thought I had included links to other pages on Wikipedia and outside links but perhaps I've used the wrong format or misunderstood; · malformatting - again, I thought I had followed formatting rules; many thanks for correcting my errors; · notability - the page existed before I edited it; I don't know how long it had been on Wikipedia or who put it on Wikipedia; I sought to correct a significant error and that was the starting point; I will add notability - it is a relatively large charity but works quietly without seeking coverage so perhaps it doesn't count in Wikipedia terms.

Joanna Biddolph (talk) 15:21, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

I have now made changes to fit with your guidance and would be grateful if you would let me know if there is anything else I should do. Joanna Biddolph (talk) 15:46, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi David, I wonder if we could revert to the original entry - two sentences long, I believe - with a correction to one of the sentences. I am not happy with a page that talks of multiple issues and violations when it is not Allchurches Trust that has made the mistakes; it was me, inadvertently after referring to various pages of guidance but, as I now know, not the right ones. No-one knows who put up the original page; the immediate concern was to correct the error it contained; I sought to improve the page. Not understanding all the issues was my error and I don't want to affect Allchurches Trust's reputation. If the amended version is not acceptable, and it could be reversed to the original, and the warnings and comments removed, I'd be very grateful. I'm happy to make the change to correct the error if that is how it works. If it is for you to do, it is the sentence that stated, wrongly, that Allchurches Trust is affiliated to the Church of England. It isn't. It is independent of all the churches and charities it supports. If the sentence could be changed to that, I would be grateful. The remainder of the page would be as it was originally - the only other information was the Categories which are determined by Wikipedia. I look forward to hearing from you. Joanna Biddolph (talk) 03:12, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for making that change. I really appreciate it. Joanna Biddolph (talk) 00:55, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi David, I see that the statement at the top of the page, about it being considered for deletion, has been removed. Thank you. However, the error that I went on to the page to correct, at the start of this process, has crept back in so the entry is wrong again. Allchurches Trust is not affiliated to the Church of England. It is independent of the Church of England and of all other churches and charities it supports. It is a charity in its own right with no affiliations to any other organisation. Please may I correct the error? Also, the links in the See Also section (The Church Commissioners, etc) give a wrong impression in this context. It is listed as a major grant funder in the National Churches Trust directory but that is because it exists to support the Christian Faith and this is a significant route to reaching Christian charities in need of funding. It also supports Methodist, Baptist, Quakers ... many churches and charities in the Anglican church. It has no special links with the Church Commissioners or the Churches Conservation Trust or the National Churches Trust other than because it is a grant giver to Christian charities. It is important to Allchurches Trust to make it clear that it funds Christian charities generally and that it is not affiliated to any of the churches or charities it supports. I hope that I might be allowed to correct the error and look forward to hearing from you Joanna Biddolph (talk) 20:30, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

The place to discuss improvements is not here, but on the article talk page. As outlined at WP:Conflict of interest, you can make an edit request, & specifically as at WP:Simple COI request. Make sure that any request you make is backed up by published reliable sources independent of the subject. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:50, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. It's confusing given that I've raised changes here and it's hard to know when a change is an improvement that needs to be discussed differently. It's also hard to know how to prove a fact that is simply a fact. Allchurches is a charity with its own registered charity number. It is not affiliated to any church (which is reflected in its name Allchurches). It's the same as asking the Church of England to prove it is not affiliated to the Quakers. There isn't a published reliable independent source that says this - it is just a fact. The statement on Wikipedia that I went on to change at the beginning was posted without verification and I don't know who added it. I was correcting an error. I'll try to explain this on the article talk page. Joanna Biddolph (talk) 03:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

The Help Desk Contributor Recognition

	The Help Desk National Hero Award
	Your work and contributions at the Help Desk are exemplary. With intelligent and most helpful inputs, you are truly a Help Desk National Hero :) Keep up the great work! ❤️ Lourdes 17:27, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks and help with Change you made

Thanks for the great edit on the David Fellman page. I was hoping you could make a change - I kept the citation but removed the external link on purpose, in response to another editor's maintenance box. Could I get an assist from you to remove the external link on footnote 17? Thanks for your attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PickleQuip (talk • contribs) 06:52, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

I have moved your message to the foot of the page, because that's where new messages go. I don't understand why you want to remove the link. Where a link aids verifiability, surely it should be included? I don't understand what you mean by the response to another editor's maintenance box. If you are referring to when the article had the template {{external links}}, that was placed when there were numerous external links in the body of the article. Perhaps you didn't read WP:external links? What was hoped was that you would turn many of those external links from inline links in the body text into references, where external links in the citation are welcomed; see the text of the template message which recommended "converting useful links where appropriate into footnote references". Instead (perhaps through misunderstanding?) you removed the links altogether which makes the information more difficult to verify. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:15, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Apologies for putting my note at the top of your page. I didn't want to remove the link - I asked another person here about the text box removal as I had added so much content about my grandfather to he page since I threw something on here after his death so long ago. The response was a new text box about excessive external links, I did read the page included in the text box. There was a lot of information and about copyrighted materials and linking to official sites and prohibitions. I removed the external links, thinking the citations and internal links is what Wikipedia wants. So, thank you for your feedback on keeping the links in the footnotes - that they are appropriate. I kept all of them and will put them back. I would appreciate it if you would allow me to restore them, as there are some typos and a footnote citation was added where it wasn't before and it's getting confusing to keep track of my own errors and writing this let alone the items popping up from others. Also, I am still in the process of writing it so new content is being added.

I so appreciate your help. I am trying to figure this out and there is a lot to read and a number of people with input. PickleQuip (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PickleQuip (talk • contribs) 14:12, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, David Biddulph. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Steve Buckingham article unjustified edits

Hi David, I need your help on an article I wrote on Steve Buckingham. Thank you for undoing a recent edit by Marc26ru. He is back editing again applying unsourced info from the subject's own web site, which is copyvio as seen here. This issue has been noted and corrected previously by Safehaven86. Apparently, Marc26ru is a personal friend of the subject who "requests" these changes which include an exhaustive listing of almost everything he's done. I would like to restore the article to your edit. He could add a list of artists Buckingham has worked with as a list at the end of the article but nobody wants to read all that in the lead. I'd appreciate your help. Regards, Eagledj (talk) 01:19, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

I have outlined some of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines on User talk:Marc26ru and reverted his most recent edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:23, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

"information removed"

Strange edit clash we just had in the Teahouse. My browser (Chrome) became unresponsive mid-edit, and I can't be sure quite what happened. Maproom (talk) 14:32, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Computers can indeed be temperamental! --David Biddulph (talk) 14:34, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXVIII, December 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at America's nuclear capability at the start of the Cold War Review essay: Hawkeye7 on the Manhatten Project suite of articles Op-ed: TomStar81 discusses leadership changes in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:09, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Only two days left to vote

Hello David Biddulph,

Community wishlist poll

Getting the tools we need

ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE

• Improve the tools for reviewing new pages: Vote here.
• Reduce the reviewer workload : Vote here

For NPP: Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Taxobox

Hi, the | sub ordo = Frenatae is not visible in the taxobox even after the addition of the pipe. Do you think that we can add only the ones listed among the 90 odd pipes like the standards ones? Also can we add images from the citations for the ones which do not have the images? As usual thank you for your kind and polite reply.Adityavagarwal (talk) 17:05, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

That was quick yeah I noticed the change. But still, in general, can we still add the ones if they are not standard?Adityavagarwal (talk) 17:08, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The article Frenatae doesn't exist. What were you trying to pipe? As for images, I've replied at WP:THQ. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:10, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Besternkhan

Thanks for reporting them to AIV. I knew I saw the name of that article before somewhere. If you see it again, create a report here:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Theactingeeker. RickinBaltimore (talk) 21:31, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

@RickinBaltimore: - Swarms more of them, duly reported. Article continually recreated with different variants of title, most recently Sayyad Aman Mian Sharma. - --David Biddulph (talk) 21:59, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Yahtzee!

Sometimes AGF applies even to editors who are actively edit warring. TimothyJosephWood 22:35, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Also thanks for following up on that in more depth. TimothyJosephWood 22:36, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

RE:CL

The English names of Qingdao Metro stations are OFFICAILLY using capital letters by the company and the government. No business of English grammar and WP:Manual of Style. THX! LORD Charles › 留言? 04:04, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

What the company and the government choose to do in their own publications is their business. Here on the English Wikipedia we abide by WP:Manual of Style/Capital letters. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:09, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Draft article for your further advice

Thanks again for your previous (and precious) advice. I have tried to incorporate your suggestions and those of ColinFine into my article. Specifically, I have now modified it to be more like an encyclopedia article in response to your observation that my original version looked more like a journal paper. For reference, please see Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Attaching a picture to the draft, I think it is now ready to be submitted. It is in my sandbox. May I please request you to have a look at it and advice me regarding its suitability? I have also requested ColinFine for his comments. Wishing you a Merry X'mas. Thank you. Mat phys (talk) 19:27, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Doug Weller talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec16a}} to your friends' talk pages.

Removal of AFD notification‬ - ATMIA

Apologies. It was unintended. I was trying to respond. Instructions as to where to respond are unclear.

Best Bernardo

CIM2014 (talk) 09:57, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

The place to respond is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ATMIA, as you are well aware (having already done so). --David Biddulph (talk) 10:00, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

The point being that the deletion of the AFD notice was UNINTENDED

Minor edit definition

Thanks for the heads up.

CIM2014 (talk) 10:03, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Unicon content deletion

Hi David

Do you think it reasonable for talk to delete my content from Unicon (British science fiction convention) twice, even after I addressed his first concern. I view his action as vindictive overkill. Vicarage (talk) 10:10, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, The Banner was quite correct (but the place to discuss it is at Talk:Unicon (British science fiction convention), not here). As there are no independent sources quoted, either in your version or the previous text, I will propose the article for deletion. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:14, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

I will contest the deletion, and if this approach is standard Wikipedia policy now, I don't think I want to be part of it. Vicarage (talk) 10:16, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia's policies of notability and verifiability have been there since long before you joined. If you don't understand them, then sadly you would be better off not being part of it. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:21, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Voting for the Military history WikiProject Historian and Newcomer of the Year is ending soon!

Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:01, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. keeps deleting warning templates and harrasments. please stop removing warning templates. thanks in advance