User talk:PamD

If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.

17:35 Friday 1 November 2024 - - - - WELCOME TO MY TALK PAGE

Please click "New section" above to leave any new message, and please sign your message (just type ~~~~).

If you leave a message here, I will reply here unless you ask me to reply elsewhere, to make discussions easier to read.
If you reply to a message here, please indent it (start the line with ":") and sign your message.

Thanks. PamD

Wikimedia UK initial Board election

A warm hello to all those signed up as supporters of the soon-to-be-rebooted UK chapter! Voting is now open over at meta - there's tons of information online over there, and the mailing list has been very active too. Discussion, comment (and even the inevitable technical gremlins!) are most welcome at the meta pages, otherwise please do send in your vote/s, and tell a friend about the chapter too :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by AndrewRT (talk • contribs) 17:24, 21 September 2008

Typo

You have new messages

Hello, PamD. You have new messages at Chzz's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{user:chzz/tb}} template.    File:Ico specie.png

 Chzz  ►  14:04, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: GenReal

Hello PamD, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I contested the speedy deletion of GenReal - a page you tagged - because: Previously G11 tagged and stubbified by reviewing admin; A7'ing now seems premature; give it a few days to develop. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Tim Song (talk) 21:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Apology

Hello - you are one of the folks that my apology is meant for --- Alice (talk) 00:01, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

When you remove or contest a speedy, please inform the initial user next time. Thanks warrior4321 23:40, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I don't think that is expected - the template just says "If this page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice", and makes no mention of notifying the editor who suggested speedy deletion (while asking that the original editor should be informed of the speedy nomination in the first place and giving the cut-and-paste notification to do so). If you can show me where the documentation asks me to do what you ask I'll start to do so, otherwise I suggest that you discuss at Template talk:Db-meta whether the template should be amended to include your request. PamD (talk) 07:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Stubs

Hi Pam, wondered if you can help with stubs. {{Lincolnshire-struct-stub}} puts the article in Category:East Midlands building and structure stubs but part of Lincolnshire is in the Yorkshire and Humber region for which there appears to be no category or template. The Yorkshire category appears to be out of place as it is an historic county and not a current region as per the other entries in the category. Any thoughts? Give me a prod on my talk page when you respond as I am still working though changes from break and may not spot reply for a while. Keith D (talk) 11:12, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Pam. Just a prod on this one, in case it got overlooked. Keith D (talk) 09:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for getting back to me, I have been trying to avoid the Leeds problems after the troubles we had last time round on that one. I do not think that you have hit my problem which is not really with the Yorkshire ones but the Lincolnshire ones where they are getting put in the wrong region by the stub template. I was wondering if there should be an additional stub template for the Lincolnshire entries that fall in the Yorkshire & Humber region, or are you suggesting that the subs be reorganised by ceremonial county which is a much bigger job. Keith D (talk) 15:56, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

It's a mess - the struct-stub categories seem to be divided by region, mostly (plus Yorkshire), but then the tag templates are by current county at the finer level, so there isn't going to be a tidy mapping from tags to categories. Not sure what the answer is, really - it's a can of worms because the Category:Yorkshire building and structure stubs ought logically to be Y&H, but still leaves the problem that the historic county of Lincs maps into two different regions, EM & Y&H (if I've understood that right). Aaargh. PamD (talk) 21:54, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - September 2009

Delivered September 2009 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 08:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Mondher Rayahneh

Hello PamD, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Mondher Rayahneh has been removed. It was removed by Sana78 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Sana78 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

India International Multiversity

...is not spam, and not promotional in intent.

The multiversity is supported by several key Indian, research agenda-setting bodies, such as the Indian Academy of Sciences. Its faculty is active in international scholarship.

Please:

1. Restore the page, indicating that it is not speediable under CSD G11, on the grounds of notability.
2. Show more faith that fellow editors with over 4000 edits, and who have clocked up many hours of activity on DRV, XfD and AfC, do not make a habit of starting articles on non-notable subjects. If you have doubts about the merits of an article created by long-established editors in good standing, you should take it to AfD.

Thank you. — Charles Stewart (talk) 09:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I see you've 'upgraded' the article to spam-warn - I'm still not going to fix up an article that has the sword of CSD hanging over it. If you won't take my word that the IIMv is notable, why don't you move it to some less ruthless position, such as AfC. Otherwise I'll take it to DRV. — Charles Stewart (talk) 09:24, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh bother: I quite misunderstood what went on. I do think you should, however briefly, check contribs before putting CSD notices on pages. However, you did not speedy the page on sight (which would be a violation of deletion policy, and you are not an admin anyway...) then put db-spam on it: I got all annoyed over my own misapprehension, and apologise profusely for that. — Charles Stewart (talk) 10:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Sent to Coventry

Hi Pam, is there a problem with this stub? [1] I was planning to expand it. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 13:09, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

We don't need two separate articles at Send to Coventry and Sent to Coventry - perhaps I should have labelled it with a "Mergeto" instead. Surely it would be more useful to work on the existing article? PamD (talk) 15:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Have now rescued your text and ref and inserted them into the unsourced and rambling existing article - it needs a good bit more work, but I still think the article is better at the infinitive form of the verb rather than the past participle, and that there's no call to have a new separate article. PamD (talk) 16:01, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't realize there was one already. Stupid of me, I should have checked, and I don't know why I would have used the past participle anyway. I must not have been thinking. My apologies. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 16:10, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Good work Pam; recently I discovered that the Send to Coventry article was basically a copyvio of this before you improved it, so you've saved me the trouble of getting around to fixing it! Cheers. --Red Sunset 17:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, nice work. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 00:07, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Chalst/Sandbox

Hello PamD, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Chalst/Sandbox - a page you tagged - because: As this is in the user's sandbox, it can be worked on and cleaned up here before being moved into mainspace. There is no pressing need to delete the article now. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. NW (Talk) 22:38, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't tag something in a sandbox - the editor copied it there complete with my speedy tag! PamD (talk) 22:54, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Another apology: I wish I hadn't created this page, since I did not have time to deal with unexpected WP process, and I'm sorry that you are getting told off for my carelessness. Having said that, NW really should have looked at the edit history before telling you off. How much more annoyance can this tiny substub possibly cause, I wonder? — Charles Stewart (talk) 08:31, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

dePRODing of articles

Hello PamD, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:

• PROD removed from Lair (hiding place), by User:58.32.188.131, with summary '(removed deletion tab: please give it some time for article to develop)'
• PROD removed from Williamsport Billies, by User:Dincher, with summary '(New York-Pennsylvania League (early 20th century))'
• PROD removed from Williamsport Millionaires, by User:Dincher, with summary '(no edit summary)'

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Yorkshire Museum

Thanks Pam for correcting my contribution to the above. I didn't know there was a main article! I understand that Athelstan was fighting local Vikings (originally from Norway?) but I also remember from the Icelandic Sagas that Athelstan was using Icelandic Viking mercenaries - i.e. two different lots of Vikings were fighting each other. According to the Sagas, Athelstan was paying the mercenaries in silver arm rings, cloaks and stuff, and some mercenaries did very well. So maybe Athelstan was "winning" the arm rings off the Norse-type Vikings and paying his Icelandic Viking mercenaries with them. Interesting thought. The hoard could theoretically have been buried by either side. Only my opinion, though. Cheers.--Storye book (talk) 19:00, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi PamD, thanks for the message - glad to have been of service. I was in York today - a rare trip for me - and had planned to see the hoard too. I walked past the museum twice, but did not get the chance to go in. I was with a foreign visitor who wanted to do the Minster etc. instead. So lucky you - I'm envious. If you took a photo, please upload it?--Storye book (talk) 18:47, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

No, sorry, didn't take any photos! We also went to the Treasurer's House including the Ghost Cellar tour, which was fun. PamD (talk) 18:55, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Treasurer's House and Leeds

Thanks for your note about the Treasurer's House, York. I must admit that it crossed my mind at the time that I was writing the article but then I completely forgot!!

I also wondered, as you are active on Leeds related articles, how realistic you think it would be to draw together a list of these articles to make a "related changes" watchlist. I already use a watchlist of changes related to your excellent Places in Leeds to keep an eye on the places mentioned in it.--Harkey (talk) 08:27, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - October 2009

Delivered October 2009 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 08:23, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Hopkinsville Hoppers

Hello PamD, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Hopkinsville Hoppers has been removed. It was removed by 216.37.200.222 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with 216.37.200.222 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:15, 2 October 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 21:15, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Can you please fix the koochie Koochie Hota Hai

My friend accidentally messed it up using this account pleas can you fix it and p.s. i did the names for the characters in the movie please can you do me this favor i tried fixing it but i couidnt please please fix it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Momina.56186 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Important

Hey Pamd thanks for fixing the koochie koochie hota hai but there were somethings that were left out which are important the things were the 3 more characters name in the table lke you only wrote sharukh you should write the other three if i do it i would ruinit so i am asking you to please and there should be the language section under the country part —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.110.81 (talk) 15:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I've copied the infobox from the 4th Sept version of the page, and I think it now looks OK for you. PamD (talk) 20:14, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

New world order, New World Order, New world order (disambiguation)

There are still problems identifying and locating articles regarding this set! --Ludvikus (talk) 12:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

• I think the best solution is this New World Order arrow New world order (disambiguation) & New world order arrow New world order (disambiguation) --Ludvikus (talk) 12:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I raised this at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disambiguation#New_world_order, and the disambiguation expert who replied reckoned it was OK as it was. I'll copy your comments there, to centralise discussion. PamD (talk) 12:54, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Made the formal Move proposal here (can you check it out & fix things, if necessary?): Talk:New world order. --Ludvikus (talk) 15:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I've mended your mangled Move Request - but I don't understand it, and oppose it. PamD (talk) 15:56, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I am extremely upset by the wording of your comment on my User page & consider it a WP:Personal attack. I also wish to remind you of the WP rules WP:Bold & WP:Assume good faith. I therefore urge you please to WP:Refract those two-words by crossing them out, or otherwise rewarding your query. --Ludvikus (talk) 11:47, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

It was not a personal attack, but a response to your removal of a valid and useful redirect from "Line in the sand" to "Line in the Sand". I will WP:AGF and assume that you did not intend to remove this useful and valid redirect, and have edited my comment accordingly. Boldness is one thing, but removing valid content or navigation for no good reason is not boldness but either WP:POINT or carelessness. I don't actually know what you mean by "WP:Refract" as it isn't in WP:Glossary - perhaps "revert" or "retract"? PamD (talk) 15:11, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant "WP:Factoring," or Wikipedia:Refactoring talk pages. Wikipedia allows you to do these things. It will lift a great burden off my shoulders. You do not know what you're doing by attacking me personally by using these two words together against me/ I think it's unfair and extreme disruptive to my personal ability to work at WP. And its simply not true. --Ludvikus (talk) 15:43, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

New world order proposed move

I've relisted the move proposal for New world order at Talk:New world order#Requested move. Sorry for the inconvenience, but please recast your !vote (if desired) under the relisted request. Thanks! -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Terre Haute Phillies

Hello PamD, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Terre Haute Phillies has been removed. It was removed by 70.44.26.252 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with 70.44.26.252 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 20:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

The Sixties

Thanks for alerting me; I've fixed what still had to be fixed. But just so you know, I didn't "lose" anything by accident; I was intentionally killing the article on the radio show because it isn't notable and didn't have any references. Bearcat (talk) 01:34, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Redirecting a non-notable title to another related topic isn't the same thing as deleting it, and doesn't require an editor or administrator to follow any process except "be bold and just do it". Bearcat (talk) 15:08, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

But you've done it in such a way that no-one else can now undo it - WP:BRD is impossible. Please replace the article, which you have effectively deleted. PamD (talk) 15:11, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

There's nothing to BRD; the show is not notable and is not entitled to a presumption of notability. See Wikipedia:Notability (media). And you need to stop moving the page around willy-nilly, because the five years of edit history that belongs to 1960s needs to point to 1960s, not to CKCU. I'll look into whether there's a way to split the edit histories, but the radio show simply is not entitled to an article until such time as its notability can be demonstrated — the rule around here is "doesn't get an article until you can prove that it does deserve one", not "gets an article until I can prove that it doesn't". Bearcat (talk) 22:17, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

The edit histories are now split — each title is once again pointing where it belongs, complete with its full history. Bearcat (talk) 22:33, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with your approach to this - the article was never tagged with {{notable}}, never PRODded or taken to AfD, and I'm sure it's not in the spirit of the various deletion processes for you to just remove the whole content of an article someone has created, without using any of those processes, but I've had enough of this and will abandon it now. I considered going to WP:AN or WP:VP but life is too short. PamD (talk) 08:28, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello, thanks for fixing my disambiguation page for Servette. LovesMacs (talk) 13:18, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Leeds - thanks

Thanks for adding back information to the Leeds article. You have probably guessed that my strategy is to pare it right back then start reconstruction. I think the article, to use an old Leeds saying, "Goes round Hunslet to get to Leeds" i.e.too long winded!--Harkey (talk) 11:20, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Moving Daniel Jones (religious founder)

Hi there, just to let you know I have moved Daniel Jones (Jedism) to Daniel Jones (Jediism) due to the spelling error in the first title. Many thanks, Kai Tatsu (talk) 20:52, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, sorry about that! PamD (talk) 22:07, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

No worries! Sorry for my mistake also - I have posted a reply on my Talk Page. Kai Tatsu (talk) 22:22, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Your nomination of Warning Siren Enthusiasts for deletion

I do believe the proper method of nomination for the deletion for an article such as Warning Siren Enthusiasts is to propose a speedy deletion, especially for an unremarkable group with absolutely zero citations what-so-ever. ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ② ^talk 03:56, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

name

Hey Pam, I had called Bert Bakker (publisher) because the next article I need to produce is on the publishing company he founded, which is a bigger topic, so to speak, and has the same name. I'm not saying this to criticize your renaming, just to explain that I'm not a dummy. Thanks, BTW, for your stubsorting and categorizing and all that--I appreciate someone doing that monk's labor. Drmies (talk) 12:55, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

I understand now - but it might be useful another time to create the disambiguation page first, or a stub article at the plain topic, to make it clear. Plenty of editors get it wrong and create titles with unnecessary disambiguations, which I fix when I spot them while stub-sortin - I also tend to check that a stub at Foo (something) has a link from the article or dab page at Foo, which often gets missed. Feel free to move your article back - should go OK as the redirect has no complicated edit history. PamD (talk) 13:00, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

THANK YOU

Pam, just to thank you for all the help you've given me on the articles I've contributed in the last few hours: Whitewell, Forest of Bowland, Bashall Eaves, 4th Lord O'Hagan, Waddington, Dunsop Bridge, Slaidburn. Really grateful to you. I'm rather inexpert, as you can tell. You can reach me at swjolly@btinternet.com. Let me know if you need more source citations. I have everything here but a lot of the work is based on primary research. With thanks and best wishes, Stephen Jolly, University of Cambridge 81.154.52.65 (talk) 21:11, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Daniel Jones (Jediism)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Daniel Jones (Jediism). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Jones (Jediism). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - November 2009

Delivered November 2009 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 01:50, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Beacon Fell

Re the Beacon Fell Country Park edit, FYI an anon user seems to be pasting the same 11 paragraphs of information into every single article in Category:Forest of Bowland. These paragraphs are relevant to the Forest of Bowland article itself, but not all the other articles. It was someone else's revert that you undid, but now I'm reverting it too. -- Dr Greg  talk  00:35, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

IPatrol...The Real Vandal

Ok I've been watching IPatrol for a little while now and really his instant rollbacks and reports of vandalism are becoming a problem. I hate to say this but he is becoming the vandal, ruining good adds because not even after a glance, ipatrol deems it vandalism and reverts it. ruining hundreds of good edit that can be mad. not evenyone with an ip is a bad guy. Thank you for any help but I think we must do something he is the vandal. 24.62.114.248 (talk) 07:14, 6 November 2009 (UTC)