User talk:SimonTrew

Kingdom of Hungary co-ordinates

Hi Simon, I see you are one of the most active Hungarians on the web. I added to google books search "Magyarország legkeletibb pontja" and received as first result "János Hunfalvy: A magyar Birodalom Természeti viszonyainak leírása, 36.oldal." The whole book can be read. The exact coordinates of 'greater' Hungary, Hungary proper etc. are given there. I'am not good at math, howewer, If you have difficulties with the Hungarian text, please, tell and I'll try to find out. The map is an excellent idea. Rokarudi 22:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC) Szia Simon, you mentioned "Category: Hungarian geographical name templates", but it is shown red on my page and I can not find it. For search, I receive a reply that it does not exist. I also made Hungarian-related geographical name templates with bilingual content for Slovakia and Romania, unfortunately one of them has been proposed for deletion.Rokarudi 23:03, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Happy SimonTrew's Day!

User:SimonTrew has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as SimonTrew's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear SimonTrew! Peace, Rlevse 03:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC) A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

QED

Thanks for your comments. I'm sure several of the examples there could be culled (or at least checked), but even the French/German/Italian/Russian ones (the important ones, according to the text) were quite hard to read, the way they were! So I just stuck them all in a table; those who speak the languages can sort them out. -- Perey (talk) 08:09, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I edited it a bit because I thought the preamble to the table was redundant, because it says what it says.

Although I have read it a lot before, I think the comment about Adams and the bablefish is not Q.E.D. but reductio ad absurdem. I know that is what he wrote, but it is not a Q.E.D., it is a reductio ad absurdem. Dunno what to do there, cos he definitely wrote that as Q.E.D. Si Trew (talk) 08:14, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I thought somebody would take issue with my "the following table" statement. I only used one because I couldn't think of another (good) way to preserve the information about English, French, Italian and Russian being "important" languages. Of course, that titbit probably needed a {{cn}} anyway! -- Perey (talk) 08:22, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I was worried to take it all out too, because it says important languages etc. The problem is that it was an exhaustive list, and many editors from other languages were just bunging their own translations in (I think Hebrew was the last), and it became a jumble. So you reorganising it is fantastic, it is much better that way. I just think the table can stand for itself and not need an excuse before it, but probably it needs something between the long thing you wrote and the shorter one I did. I am very happy you changed it, so this is just minor details, and please revert if you think yours is better, because I am not sure. Si Trew (talk) 08:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

UP

Thank you Simon for cleaning up the Palacký university, could you please go through also Centre for Clinical Legal Education (Palacký University, Faculty of Law)?Cimmerian praetor (talk) 13:28, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Done, only minor slips and recasting really. Si Trew (talk) 05:05, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

List of unusual units of measurement

"A unit of measure, a standard, is by definition a comparative measure"

A genuine unit of measure is not comparative at all, it is absolute, whereas what you mean by "a comprative measure" is not a measure at all, it's a comparison. I think you are confusing the unit of measure, with the method of measure. Holding a ruler up to an object is a comparitive method of measurement between the ruler and the object, but it is not the units that are being compared, it's the ruler.

When measuring in inches, for example, one does not say: "This object is equal to an inch in length" (comparitive), one says "This object is one inch long" (absolute). You cannot physically compare the unit of measure to an object because the unit of measure is an abstract concept - you can't see or hold an inch in your hand.

If all comparisons were considered genuine units of measure, then every time two things are compared, a new unit would be created, which is absurb - "My sister's fatter than a bus" does not allow sisterly fatness to be measured in buses, and nor does comparing the number of tyres it takes to fill the MCG automatically make the MCG a unit of measure for volume, especially when the reference article (which may or may not be a one off comparison) does not even state this.

Specifically for the changes I made, the articles cited didn't even claim, nor use them as units of measurement. All cited articles simply made comparisons. If you think they are genunine units of measure, you would need to provide articles that either define them as such, or at least use them as genuine units of measure.

Mr Pillows (talk) 04:06, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

First, can I just say I undid your changes as part of the usual WP:BRD cycle, and if you're willing then it's probably best to transfer this discussion to Talk:List of unusual units of measurement.

I'll also say thanks for calling them units of measure, not units of measurement. Why people have to go for that longer form all the time baffles me. And also the confusion between measures, and units of measure (for example that people say "20km is a unit of measure", when generally they mean it is a measure).

Now, to your point about it being comparative or not. By your own definition you have said that "This object is equal to an inch in length" is equivalent to saying "this object is one inch long". That is, the comparison is there in both cases, just that in the latter case the syntax changes. The comparison remains.

In fact an inch (and other units of measure) are physical things. In the case of an inch it is now defined as 0.0254 metres, and the metre is in turn defined as so many wavelengths of the light emission of some isotope of strontium, but until relatively recently there were several "real" metres which could be and were used physically for comparison. The kilogram still is a physical measure; it's not defined in "abstract" physical terms.

If the reference article does not make comparison to the Albert Hall, for example, then of course the reference should be removed. Either at that article or this one, I noted down the volume of the Albert Hall and sourced it, but it was not from the BBC. I don't know about the others.

I suppose what I am saying is that anything that is used as a comparative measure is by definition a unit of measure; something you disagree with either (or both) because we generally do not measure it directly against the standard (we might measure our recipes on an inaccurate kitchen balance rather than carting our flour off to Sevres to have it compared against the international standard kilogram) or because the syntax of the sentence changes, generally because we are using nouns that are not fungible (there are not three Albert Halls, so we find it odd to say something measures three Albert Halls). The abstraction does fall down a bit in that there are all kinds of measures the Albert Hall might represent (its volume, seating capacity, and so on) but the fact is if we've picked one then it becomes a de facto unit of measure, albeit a rather loose one, since nobody actually seems to know how much volume is enclosed by the Albert Hall with any great accuracy.

So what it comes down to is whether an Albert Hall, etc is an unusual unit of measure. I'll make a definition of "unusual unit of measure" so we have something concrete to argue about:

An unusual unit of measure is one that is frequently used informally, whose measure is approximately know, but does not fit into a coherent system of units such as US Customary or SI.

I imagine we could come up with a better definition than that, because that might include things like parsecs or light-years, astronmomical units and so forth: I would argue these should be listed as "unusual", I imagine others would not; certainly they come under the definition (at least if you accept that the definition implies that something is unusual if it is not a neat multiple or fraction of other units in the system, and even then we should probably restrain the factor or denominator to 1, 2, 5 and 10).

So, I am saying that the whole article title may be somewhat misconceived: what does one mean by an "unusual" unit of measure? In the UK, horse races for example are always measured in miles and furlongs, and barrels of real ale in firkins and halves (a pin) and multiples (kilderkin, barrel, hogshead) thereof. But the article lead of FFF system calls them "impractical and outdated units". On the other hand, you are not arguing with the fact they are unusual, but whether they are units of measure at all. I think they are, and that just because the surface syntax changes for some of them (it needn't for things like the milliHelen), that doesn't stop them being a unit of measure. All that remains is to say that "the length of a football pitch", "the size of Wales" is the unit of measure; but we do the same when we say "one pinch of salt" or "two shakes of a lamb's tail", and I don't think one would dispute that we are measuring volume there or time. What would definitely be erroneous is to define "2 volume" or "3 time" as units of measure; but there is no danger of that here.

Sorry to make this so long. Best wishes. Si Trew (talk) 04:49, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

PS. There are at least two things we should do to the article:

• Change title from "measurement" to "measure", and similarly throughout the article where appropriate.
• Change title to remove "list of", as it doesn't seem to me to be a list article in the general Wikipedia sense: it includes more content than is typical in a list article.

Si Trew (talk) 04:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

"In fact an inch (and other units of measure) are physical things. In the case of an inch it is now defined as 0.0254 metres, and the metre is in turn defined as so many wavelengths of the light emission of some isotope of strontium, but until relatively recently there were several "real" metres which could be and were used physically for comparison. The kilogram still is a physical measure; it's not defined in "abstract" physical terms."

I don't want to create an argument, so I will not make any further changes to the article, but:

1. A physical thing is something you can see and touch. You cannot see or touch an inch because it is only an abstract concept. You can define the length of an inch using a comparison (eg 1 inch = 2.54 cm, or 1 inch = 1/12 the length of the king's foot, etc) and you can see a comparative object which is the same length as an inch on a ruler (the wood between the 0 and 1" marks), but the inch itself, along with all units of measure, is an abstract concept that has no shape or form.

2. I'm not saying a Royal Albert Hall couldn't be a unit of measurement, I'm simply saying it isn't a unit of measure in the reference shown and I additionally doubt it has ever been used as a unit of measure. The simple solution is to find a proper reference that measures a volume in RAHs - ie "Britain creates 1000 RAHs of landfill in a year". This would need be done in order to meet Wikipedia:Verifiability.

Mr Pillows (talk) 05:42, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't mind having an argument, providing it's good-natured (and I think this is): that's how we get consensus.

The use of syntactic forms such as "ten milliHelens" can easily be found. Googling for "ten Albert Halls" (exact search) gives three matches; one of which I believe would be RS but unfortunately neither the cached version of the page is available (a subscription trade magazine); of course by extending the search to other numbers and so on i am sure it would pull up something near, but not exactly what fits your definition. i.e. the point of contention here is the use of "size of", "worth", "length of" and similar qualifiers. Personally I don't see that that disqualifies something as a unit of measure, but you do (I think; I don't want to put words in your mouth).

I didn't take "physical thing" as being something you can touch and feel, but something that can be measured, to some known degree of accuracy, by physics, as opposed to being some Platonic ideal. I think that that is common ground, but perhaps not; I think it leads to some odd convolutions, particularly with mass. "Light" in this sense is a physical object (albeit a massless one) but "the speed of light" only a conceptual one, that is, "speed", "volume", "length" et are concepts. In this sense I think you are arguing simply that because "length of", "-worth", and so on are included in the statement, that they discount the thing form being a unit of measure; I disagree because I have a fundamentally different idea of what a unit of measure is, which is "This is one of some quantity, how much is something else a multiple or fraction of that thing?", and whether that requires a certain syntax very much depends on the surface forms we have available in our language's syntax, and does not, in my view, change that it is being used as a unit of measure, i.e the Albert Hall is 1 Albert Hall, a units-worth of Albert Hall.

These days the measures of everything except mass are derived from the universal properties of light (its speed and so on), but the kilogram is just defined as "as much mass as a particular lump of stuff at Sevres has", and that lump is certainly a visible, touchable object. Yet we don't say "as much mass as ten International Standard Kilograms held at Sevres", we say, "ten kilograms", though it means the same thing. So I can't see that the particular syntax of the measure changes it from being a comparison with what, by definition, is then a unit of measure.

Best wishes, I'll copy this to the Talk page. Si Trew (talk) 06:31, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard

Hi SimonTrew,

Well if you are reviewing Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard, as claimed, you aught to go to talk:Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard and click on the link to create Talk:Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard/GA1. I also suggest that you look the instructions at the top of Wikipedia:Good article nominations How to review an article; and also Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles. Pyrotec (talk) 16:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

On reflection, my comment above could have been better phrased: I'm sorry about that. No, I was not suggesting that you are cluttering up space: my concerns were somewhat different. Your comment on Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations started "As a penance for submitting, on others' recommendations, two articles to GAN, I thought I would take one myself for review", which is fair enough. I also happened to look at Old Rouen Tramway nomination, I edited just after you and then I tried to respond on Talk:Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard/GA1, which didn't exist at that time. By all means review articles, I have no wish to stop you; however you appear to be an enthusiastic editor with no experience of a GA review (but had submitted two nominations) attempting to review an nomination but couldn't add the templates correctly on one of your own nominations and the article that you were reviewing (your edit summaries tend to suggest that you were struggling at that stage - and all the steps are documented, some are merely copy and paste actions). "Trying to run before you can walk" came to mind: you are entitled to a competent review of your own nominations in the same way that the nominator of the article you are reviewing is entitled to the same respect. Perhaps I am being and unfair and they were merely typos, we all do that (I include myself), but they could also indicate someone attempting to do a review the way they believed an article should be ignoring the documented processed - these reviews happen (see, for instance Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations/Archive 12#Quality of reviews). I hope that you demonstrate that my fears are unfounded. Pyrotec (talk) 09:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

The "tar pit" is a nice analogy. Drop me a note if you get stuck on reviewing (or the process): I can't help with the French translation though. Pyrotec (talk) 19:25, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

• Is there anything left to do on the Elegy page? I am happy to chip in if there is. And thanks! ^OohBunnies!Not just any bunnies... 16:48, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

• You've done exactly what I tend to do during a GA review Simon, roll your sleeves up and get stuck in. Much kudos to you for that. Malleus Fatuorum 20:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, I clickity clicked and tappity tapped on my keyboard and made an attempt at fixing the issues left. Drop me a note if anything needs further going over or if you have any reservations about my edits. Thanks, ^OohBunnies!Not just any bunnies... 05:23, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Old Rouen tramway

Mifter (talk) 12:03, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Award

		Ukraine Barnstar
		I give you this Ukraine Barnstar for your help in making Valeriy Khoroshkovsky a Did you know ! — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 15:36, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Šnejdárek Wikiquote

Hello, could you please copy-edit this for me? Thank you very much.Cimmerian praetor (talk) 13:30, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you are right, I meant that one. Interesting, for me the link works.Cimmerian praetor (talk) 14:35, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Palacký University Governance

Could you please copy-edit Palacký University, Olomouc#University Governance? Thank you Cimmerian praetor (talk) 15:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the copy edit. I've put there infobox to explain difference between public/state universities in the CR as requested. I am now working on University Facilities and the I plan Student Life. I would like to move the article to "A" level. I really appriciate your help with the language issues. If you have any other ideas or proposals, how to improve the article, I would love to hear them. Once more thank you very much!Cimmerian praetor (talk) 18:58, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I have problem with one of the signs, I don't know how to explain it in english.

Image:B28cr.jpg|No stopping whatsoever (except if whole traffic is stopped, or you have to give right of the way, etc.) Image:B29cr.jpg|No stopping - meaning that you can stop (for a couple of minutes) to (un)load passangers or cargo, but you cannot leave the car there, it differes from no parking. I don't know if I explained it clear or not.Cimmerian praetor (talk) 11:18, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I believe it should be all by now. If I've missed something, please let me know. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 12:23, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I am also not so sure how to translate some. The Dálnice (Highway?) has always at least 2 lanes+emergency lane, 130 limit and no crossroads, the Silnice pro motorová vozidla (Speedway?) is the same, just that it may not have emergency lane, and usually the merging lanes are dangerously short. For driving on highway you have to pay the coupon.

About the language issues. Well this wikipedia starts with EN, not US or AM, right? ;) Cimmerian praetor (talk) 12:28, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

The previous was kind of a joke. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 12:34, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I made Palacký_University,_Olomouc#Facilities. I would be gratefull for copy-edit. Now will write student life. And then... well what else should be there? Could you give me a hint? Since I am wikipedian only a few months :) Cimmerian praetor (talk) 22:04, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

It is a river dock, which is next to the hall, and I think the canoes etc. have a dry dock by the hall too. I found appertain in dictionary, I guess I shouldn't try to learn new words by writing wikipedia, as it seems to mess things :) Cimmerian praetor (talk) 08:13, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

And about the Halls of Residence Bureau. I wasn't sure how to translate it into ENglish. Czech is Správa kolejí a menz (Administration of domitories and dining facilities). IF you have a better translation, please feel free to change it.Cimmerian praetor (talk) 08:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I am no English philologist, so I leave the preference of British english to you. The think is, that here in CR the British English is taught in schools (from primary level to University level), but in last few years I switched to American English, since I meet more Americans then British, and it seems to be more useful also in professional life. However the result is that I am totally lost now and sometimes use English spelling and sometimes American. Is there some kind of dialect which uses both, so that I could say I am using that one instead of the hybrid? :) Cimmerian praetor (talk) 09:39, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I will be glad to be educated about Wikipedia policies, even though I don't know how much longer I will have time to write Wiki. I once got angry that there is virtually nothing about Tatra T77, so I had to do it myself, and then I found that... there is so much that needs to be written here :) Right now I only want to make the Palacky A class or higher, since I put so much effort into it.

I am also thinking, that there needs to be an article about self-governance. (I saw you changed that to Quango, but the problem is, that only very few legal terms, which have specific meaning in English, may be used for similar things from continental law system. The closest the English wikipedia seems to have is local government, but the locacal government is just sub-division of the whole body of self-governance. It seems that even the German wiki focuses on Gemeindefreiheit, although they have it very similar as Czechs. Basically there is 1. territorial self-governance (german Gemeinde) and 2. personal self-governance (i.e. Bar association, if a state officially delegates some functions to it) and 3. other (i.e. University) recognized in the Czech republic.)

When it comes to the, the real issue is, that in Czech language definite or indefinite articles are never used. Somehow it is even easier for me to use it in German, don't know why I keep doing it wrong in English.

When it comes to transportation, I did Škoda 15 T (some Aussie checked the language, so it gets even funnier than US-EN english ;) ) and even though I try hard I still have troubles with Tram/Streetcar/Trolley. Especially now it seems that in US they change the use as they like (Portland_streetcar#History, so I guess it really doesn't matter. In Czech there is tramvaj and trojebus, so it is easy, but naming a tram trolley and then talking about trolleybuses gives me headaches :)

You can always ask me when you need help as in case of the road signs, I will be glad to help you, gods know I own you for the copy-editing. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 11:53, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I added short section to history, could you please check it? It is nothing major. Could you also please reconsider the subsections of the history? I am not very sury how many should be there and what names. Thank you. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 19:52, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Pifeedback

Pifeedback

Could you give your opinion on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Pifeedback.com?ChaosMaster16 (talk) 13:04, 13 July 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Yes, but why me? Si Trew (talk) 13:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Just getting some people to contriute from around wikipedia.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 13:18, 13 July 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Template Changes

Re message: "I've moved {tlc|{Infobox Viceroy of kush}} to {{Infobox Egyptian dignitary}}, and edited all articles transcluding the abvoe templates to transclude that instead, passing the title ("Viceroy of Kush", etc) as the Style= parameter. Thus they are redundant. This I hope is in line with the consensus at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2010_June_30. Best wishes Si Trew (talk) 09:14, 12 July 2010 (UTC)"

Thanks. That is a much better format. Wish I had thought of it :) --AnnekeBart (talk) 15:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Šnejdárek

The secondary commander issue - the rank wasn't changed (he was Second Lieutenant after leaving the military school), but he became second in command of the troop. I had no idea how to translate that, that's why I left there the Czech :) Anyway thank you for checking it after me.

I am not sure about the other one. I was following the ranks as they are at the pages dealing with ranks, and there I just didn't know what should be on that place, as it seemed that it was neither of those available, but something between.

I have just finished reading his memoir, it is written in very pleasant to read way, quite sarcastic too. Some of the information are quite interesting, but not important, should I put that into the article or leave that out?

Once more thank you for checking it. I have one more request. If you click down on the article towards wikiquote, it will show you my really bad attempts to translate his quotes, could you please take a look at them? Thank you very much. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 18:41, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Sheffield

Please take care when reverting edits; this edit was not vandalism or unconstructive yet you reverted it claiming it was vandalism. The edit summar was also incorrect due to this reason. Thanks. -- Jack?! 10:28, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

GA Botanical garden

Thanks for your note Si - the GA was with your assistance remember. Also I liked your GA on the railway - would you consider going the next stage to FA - it looks very smart and complete to me. Best wishes. Granitethighs 10:34, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your offer Si, I will keep it in mind. The all-time favourite French botanical artist is Pierre-Joseph Redouté. I see that at the moment this is just a stub article. There must be access to material that could bring it up to GA I would have thought. Just a suggestion.Granitethighs 10:45, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

That's definitiely an improvement - and you've added some more of his work. I'll try and find some references to him.Granitethighs 23:28, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations!

On the GA! I hadn't forgot about this, but I need a conversion factor sorting out before I can make one of the changes I had in mind. Other than that, it's a case of doing it manually. Will maybe give the article a work-over at a later date. Mjroots (talk) 12:39, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm quite happy with the use of chains. Railway in the UK are still generally measured in mi ch, with the exception of stuff like High Speed One which is measured in km to fit in with the continental system. I did ask at Template talk:Convert#Convert km to miles and chains but haven't had a reply yet. Maybe we'll have to do a manual conversion after all. Mjroots (talk) 13:30, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Forestry in the United Kingdom

See what you think now. :) Cheers—S Marshall T/C 22:35, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for your input into this, Simon. I don't suppose you have the chance to look at Agriculture in the United Kingdom? That'll be my next GA nomination, and I'd be very grateful indeed for a preliminary view from you. Cheers—S Marshall T/C 11:16, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Business chess

Hello. Please see section "Description". I want to replace the phrase "They also can define the degree of importance of each variant by giving it marks (points)" to the phrase "«They also can change the degree of importance of each variant by moving (transferring?) it marks»". It is more correct. Please check the English. Ovakim (talk) 15:59, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

1. Tranmsferring its marks -> moving its points. Si Trew (talk) 16:03, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello. I tried to make the article Business chess clearer. To do this, I moved some phrases and made a small clarification. All changes made before the section "Interactive Cognitive Scenario - Demonstration boards". Please see the new version of the text here User:Ovakim/Sandbox. Please check the English. Make the necessary changes. Your opinion. Is this version of the article more clear? —Preceding undated comment added 17:26, 24 July 2010 (UTC). I forgot to sign. Ovakim (talk) 17:31, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Template:E-toll

If you thought E-toll was pointless, check out some of the templates listed on Wikipedia:Malaysian roads and expressways infobox template. {{McDonalds signs}}? It's longer to type than McDonalds. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:17, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello

Yes, it was just the IP. I think what I meant was a re-direct? One of those words, you look up, then are brought to a page in which provides "People", "Objects"... stuff like that so that they can get what they want. I'm just annoyed because the language reads like a child and that article is a serious military related article and this IP is turning into a mockery. Dapi89 (talk) 16:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC) I like this DAB suggestion. I think that is a good idea. Dapi89 (talk) 16:53, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Baoding Railway Station

I stubbed the article and deprodded it. A quick look at the station on Google Earth is enough to tell me it's a major one. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:39, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

That's as may be, but nobody has done anything about it and so it's not in English at the, er, English Wikipedia. Forgive me my sins but I thought that was what PNT was for, a last gasp at getting something translated before it goes to AfD or PROD? Because, er, that's what it says? So if it is in chinese it is about as much use as a snake in an arse-kicking competition for the English wikipedia, and you translate it if you want but nobody in seven days since coming to PNT bothered to even comment on it. Let it go PROD, I never claimed CSD, and anyway I will take it AfD then. It's ridiculous you to argue this one when you PROD a lot I would keep, old bean, so I don't know what passion you have in it. It must be genuine but I can't see it myself. Take it to AfD? Si Trew (talk) 23:44, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

George Mikes

Hello, Thank you for your comments on the old editing. Expand Hungarian would have been better as an edit summary, but I am not so careful about those as when working on the content of the articles. I am glad to see some useful content has been collected from the Hungarian WP. Best wishes.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 06:18, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello again, Thank you for the compliments. I find that it is hard to focus on one or two fields now but in the beginning most of what I did was related to Cornwall or the Manchester district since I have lived in both. My Latin is not very good anymore as my study of it happened about 45 years ago so I have contributed very little on Latin WP. I have done a little towards translating from French into English but that is hard going since I have used it so little since leaving school. "Felix Folio" was the author of a book about Manchester in the 19th century and choosing a Latin name made sense as it was once the scholarly language of Europe and anonymity is what I prefer. Like you I know virtually no Hungarian. Best wishes.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 11:28, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello again, It is interesting to get your views; there do seem to be things wrong with the administration of WP but I have luckily kept out of trouble most of the time (the only bad experience was with editing Zoltan Kodaly when his article was very poor). I saw the other Simon Trew in a tv programme about the D-Day anniversary but I now know he is not yourself. Best wishes.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:36, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Battle of Buda (1849)

Hello! Your submission of Battle of Buda (1849) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Allen3 ^talk 20:28, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Composite image filter

Everything in the GAN is now addressed I think. Please let me know if there is anything else. SpinningSpark 06:47, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Buda (1849)

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Marie-Josephte Corriveau

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:04, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

ÁNYOS JEDLIK

Hello!

Can you translate the title of these books?

The names of Jedlik's books.

Jedlik Ányos által írt szakkönyvek

1. Tentamen publicum e Physica … ex Institutine primi semestris Aniani Jedlik. Posonii, 1839. 14 p. Typis Haeredum Belnayarum.

2. Tentamen publicum e Physica quod in regia univers. Hung. e praelectionibus … Pestini, 1845. 16 p. Trattner–Károlyi ny.

3. Mathesis adplicata … Pestini, é. n. 68 p. Kőnyomat. (52 ábrával)

4. Compendium Hydrostaticae et Hydrodinamicae usibus Auditorum Suorum adaptatum per Anianum Jedlik. Pestini, 1847. 80 p. Kőnyomat. (63 ábrával)

5. Sulyos testek természettana. Pesten, 1850. XVI, 543 p. Emich Gusztáv bizománya. Nyom. Eisenfels könyv-nyomda. /Sorozatcím: Természettan elemei. Első könyv. A sulyos testek természettana./ (388 illusztrációval)

6. Viznyugtanhoz tartozó Pótlékok. Pest, 1850. 75 p. Kőnyomat. (39 ábrával)

7. Fénytan. Kiadta Jedlik Ányos. Pesti egyetemben természettan tanára 1851-ben. Irta Goldsmit(!) Vilmos bölcsész. (Pest, 1851.) 135 p. Kőnyomat. (105 ábrával)

8. Hőtan. Kiadta Jedlik Ányos. Pesti egyetemben természettan tanára 1851-ben. Irta Goldsmidt Vilmos bölcsész. (Pest, 1851.) 76 p. Kőnyomat. (11 ábrával) (Új bőv. kiad.: Bp., 1990. Műszaki Könyvkiadó.)

Jedlik Ányos által írt könyvrészletek

9. A hévmérő s kellékei. In: Vagács Caesar: Olvasmány a főgymnasiumi középosztályok számára. Pest, 1854. Hartleben. pp. 259–261.

10. A léggolyó. In: uo. pp. 256–258.

11. Német – magyar tudományos műszótár a csász. kir. gymnasiumok és reáliskolák számára. Pest, 1858. VIII, 361 p. Heckenast. /Társszerzőkkel./

12. Ueber die Anwendung des Elektro-Magnetes bei elektro-dynamischen Rotationen. In: Aemtlicher Bericht über die XXXII. Versammlung deutscher Naturforscher und Aerzte zu Wien im Sept. 1856. Wien, 1858. pp. 170–175. + Modification der Grove’schen und Bunsen’schen Batterie. Uo. pp. 176–178.

13. Egyetemes Magyar Encyclopaedia. 1–13. köt. Pest, 1859–1876. Szent István Társulat. /Társszerzőkkel./ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.2.169.160 (talk) 11:24, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't speak much Hungarian. I'll get my partner User:Monkap to translate them for you this evening (UK time). The Latin ones are below. Si Trew (talk) 11:56, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

1. Tentamen publicum e Physica … ex Institutine primi semestris Aniani Jedlik. Posonii, 1839. 14 p. Typis Haeredum Belnayarum.

Public examination on Physics - from the first semester education of Ányos Jedlik. Pozsony (now Bratislava), 1839.

2. Tentamen publicum e Physica quod in regia univers. Hung. e praelectionibus … Pestini, 1845. 16 p. Trattner–Károlyi ny.

Public examination on Physics for election to the Royal Hungarian University. Pest, 1845. Published by Trattner–Károlyi.

3. Mathesis adplicata … Pestini, é. n. 68 p. Kőnyomat.

Applied science. Pest. Published by Kőnyomat.

4. Compendium Hydrostaticae et Hydrodinamicae usibus Auditorum Suorum adaptatum per Anianum Jedlik. Pestini, 1847. 80 p. Kőnyomat.

Compendium of hydrostatics and hydrodynamics. Lecture notes adapted by Ányos Jedlik. Pest, 1847. Published by Kőnyomat.

12 Ueber die Anwendung des Elektro-Magnetes bei elektro-dynamischen Rotationen. In: Aemtlicher Bericht über die XXXII. Versammlung deutscher Naturforscher und Aerzte zu Wien im Sept. 1856. Wien, 1858. pp. 170–175. + Modification der Grove’schen und Bunsen’schen Batterie. Uo. pp. 176–178.

On the application of electromagnets in electrodynamic rotations. In Report of the 32nd Conference of German Naturalists and Physicists at Vienna, vienna, 1848. pp 170–175. Also, modification of the Grove and Bunsen batteries, pp. 176–178.

Si Trew (talk) 12:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Black Army of Hungary

Quotations of Antonio Bonfini about the Black Army of Hungary Can you translate that quotations? Who is your translator Friend?

"Minden hadoszlopnak megvoltak a maga zászlai, amelyek leginkább a keresztény vallás, aztán a Corvinus-ház, továbbá a győzhetetlen magyar nemzet, valamint Dalmácia, Csehország és az ausztriaiak jelképeit ábrázolták; de a lovas- és gyalogoskapitányok zászlai sem hiányoztak, sőt minden egyes lovas is lobogót vitt a kopjájára tűzve, ami a katonai parádét nagyon megemelte.”

"a katonaság nálunk 3 rendre oszlik: Ezek közül az első rendet a nehéz lovasok képezik; ezek minden negyed évre 15 aranyat kívánnak, minden ló után és másképp nem jönnek ide. A másik rend a könnyű lovasság. kiket huszároknak nevezünk; ezek negyedévenként 10 forintot akarnak minden ló után és másképp nem jönnek ide. A harmadik rendet a gyalogság képezi, és pedig különféle osztályokban megkülönböztetve: Ezek közül ugyanis könnyű gyalogosok, mások nehéz fegyverzetűek és ismét és ismét mésok nehéz pajzsosok. A könnyűlovasságok évnegyedenkint egy személyre 8 aranyat kíván, a nehéz fegyverzetűek és pajzsosok, mivel aprósok és szolgák nélkül a fegyvereket és pajzsokat nem hordozhatják és mivel és mivel e gyermekeket használati szükségből meg kell tartaniok, a fegyverekhez és pajzsokhoz mindegyik két személy zsoldjával akarja (megtartani őket). Vannak ezeken kívül nagy arányban puskások, kik tudnak a fegyverekkel és pisztolyokkal jól bánni, de sem nem oly serényen, sem nem oly használhatóak a lövöldözésekre, mint a gyalogság, hanem azért a pajzsosok után az összecsapás elején (...), nem különben a várak ostromára és védelmére legjobbak.”

„ …a vérteseket mi falnak tekintjük, kik soha a helyüket föl nem adják, még ha egy szálig lemészárolják is őket azon a helyen, ahol állnak. A könnyűfegyverzetűek az alkalomtól függően kitöréseket intéznek, s ha már elfáradtak vagy súlyosabb veszélyt szimatolnak, a vértesek mögé vonulnak vissza, s soraikat rendezvén és erőt gyűjtvén, mindaddig ott maradnak, míg adandó alkalommal ismét előtörhetnek. Végül a gyalogság egészét, meg a puskásokat vértesek és pajzsosok veszik körül, éppen úgy mintha azok bástya mögött állnának. Mert az egymásnak vetett nagyobb pajzsok kör alakban erődítmény képét mutatják, és falhoz hasonlítanak, melynek védelmében a gyalogosok és az összes középütt állók szinte bástyafalak vagy sáncok mögül harcolnak, és adott alkalommal törnek elő on.”

"Sehol a világon nem lehet látni meleget, hideget, fáradságot, nélkülözést jobban tűrő katonát, aki a parancsot pontosabban teljesíti, aki a jelre szívesebben indul csatába, aki a halált készségesebben vállalja, aki jobban viszolyog a katonai zendüléstől, a táborban békésebben és tisztességesebben viselkedik, aki vallásosabb, aki távolabb tartja magát a zavargástól és ramazúritól, akiben több az önmérséklet és a szemérem, akitől messzebb áll az istentelenség, a szószegés, a tisztátalan szerelmeskedés.(…) Télen is, nyáron is a táborban élnek. És amit a saját szememmel láttam többször is, hogy a megkezdett ostromot föl ne adják, teljes nyugalommal telelnek a hó alatt a földön.(…) És ha legtöbbjük tagjai elgémberednek is a kegyetlen fagyban, rendíthetetlenül tűrnek mindent; a gyermekeket a táborban nevelik, és ott oktatják a katonamesterségre."