User talk:DuncanHill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Please use edit summaries - if you do not then it is likely that your message will be reverted unread. If I messaged you on your talk page then it's easier if you reply there (I will have watchlisted it), rather than splitting the conversation between two pages.

John Banks (activist)[edit]

Hi Duncan. I stumbled across this article. The main author hasn't been active for four years and you're second on the edit list. This chap doesn't appear to be notable - the cited references are all to literature he co-authored. Best I could find when Googling is a passing mention here, but I can't really see that propping the article up. Any thoughts? --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 11:09, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

I see no problem with regard to notability, bearing in mind his editorial positions. Certainly needs more and better references though. Will have a closer look when I can - won't be for a week or so though. DuncanHill (talk) 21:58, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Editorial positions would be good, if they're for notable publications, not (eg) vanity projects ignored by all and sundry. But I get your point. No rush. Drop me a line? --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 07:17, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey[edit]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

  • Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:50, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Alison Hernandez[edit]

Thanks, looks like I went and did that to all of them so far. This is Paul (talk) 21:03, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

No problem - easily done. I had Alison Hernandez watchlisted before it was created. DuncanHill (talk) 21:04, 7 June 2016 (UTC)


Thank you[edit]

Thank you for your note/work re the article on Diana Speed.Vorbee (talk) 13:47, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Recent reversion on Rothschild family page[edit]

Hello User:DuncanHill,

I am posting just to give you a heads up that your reversion to my most recent insertion (which had the *note* of "reversion", but it really was not a *pure* reversion) was mistaken.

Specifically, if you consult the talkpage you'll see that Johnbod's issue with the provided source (initially only the FT.com link) was that it did not conclusively demonstrate a longstanding relationship to warrant "related families".

I therefore engaged in a stimulating exchange that eventually procured evidence in the form of the most recent Telegraph link, which shows the quote being used as a basis for the inclusion, where Jacob Rothschild clearly stated that the families' relationship is over fifty years.

There is no need to "wait" for a consensus because the new link demonstrates, without any doubts, that there is a relationship between the families.

I think you did blanket reverts because you saw the edit history and (incorrectly) assumed that the most recent insertion ignored the discussion on the talk page, it did not. It addressed Johnbod's (the reverter) concerns by providing an accessible link that, again, using Rothschild and Rockefeller's own words, conclusively demonstrated the longstanding relationship that Johnbod felt the previous links did not convey.

I hope this explanation satisfies you, in case you're not up to reading about our history and how these families willfully, and arguably joyfully, harmed the wellbeing of all Commonwealth citizens, for his own benefit.

I am only posting this as I do not wikipedia much ( ;))) ) and I am trying to keep you informed as to why the reversions originally occurred (first revert was because the FT.com link alone was insufficient, second reversion was because the *first* telegraph article wasn't sufficient).

The most recent insertion does not use either articles as the primary source, so I will remove the FT.com to clear up any confusion. The most recent insertion was an incontrovertible article, as it the "patriarch" of each family is on record acknowledging a five decade relationship.

Thank you again. 31.208.7.22 (talk) 02:33, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, DuncanHill. You have new messages at Northamerica1000's talk page.
Message added 20:55, 18 June 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

North America1000 20:55, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael Barratt Brown, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Temple (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:41, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Not needed[edit]

We were just trying to help so this edit summary was not needed. MarnetteD|Talk 16:10, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Was it necessary to question the very premise of my post? DuncanHill (talk) 16:14, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Neither of us questioned it. We were trying to find the simplest solutions first. That is a SOP. It is a shame that it upset you so much. Please feel free to remove this as I am sure that it is doing the same. MarnetteD|Talk 16:19, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps you should change your procedure. Having "Assume questioner doesn't know what he's talking about" as step 1 is perhaps not the most user-friendly way of proceeding. DuncanHill (talk) 16:24, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
I did not assume anything. Perhaps you need to stop assuming things not in evidence. MarnetteD|Talk 16:32, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Why did you ask me if the article was on my watchlist then? Do you think I am the sort of person who would ask why edits to articles not on my watchlist don't appear on my watchlist? DuncanHill (talk) 16:34, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Earl of St Germans[edit]

He died last night. Am an old friend of his wife, Jacquetta. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sproke (talkcontribs) 13:19, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

The West Country Challenge[edit]

I presume you have heard about The West Country Challenge?

The The West Country Challenge will take place from 8 to 28 August 2016. The idea is to create and improve articles about Bristol, Somerset, Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, Dorset, Wiltshire and Gloucestershire.

The format will be based on Wales's successful Awaken the Dragon which saw over 1000 article improvements and creations and 65 GAs/FAs. As with the Dragon contest, the focus is more on improving core articles and breathing new life into those older stale articles and stubs which might otherwise not get edited in years. All contributions, including new articles, are welcome though.

Work on any of the items at:

or other articles relating to the area.

There will be sub contests focusing on particular areas:

To sign up or get more information visit the contest pages at Wikipedia:WikiProject England/The West Country Challenge.— Rod talk 16:45, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Nucklao or Lucknow?[edit]

Hello DuncanHill! Did you ever discover the source of Nucklao/Lucknow? I don't know anything... but I would guess that 'Lucknow' - or 'luck now' - was an English language menomonic (intended: it's how I remember mnemonic :-) for 'Nucklao,' IF that was the original name. Any thoughts or suggestions? Cheers! --Shir-El too 05:27, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Shir-El too:, no I've never been able to find out anything more! Our article Lucknow doesn't mention the "Nucklao" form in its etymology section, so appealing as your theory is I think it must be mistaken. If I ever do turn up anything more I'll be sure to let you know. All the best, DuncanHill (talk) 14:43, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
You are kind: I finally read the Lucknow entry to the end, where it gives the name's evolution. I'm putting together a list of places that Kipling's Kim traveled to for a page on Wikivoyage. Isn't it iteresting how Kipling kept mention of the languages involved at a bare minimum by using the word vernacular? Cheers! --Shir-El too 20:09, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
Do you have (or have access to) Peter Hopkirk's Quest for Kim? He follows Kim across India, and also traces some of the real people who inspired characters in Kim. DuncanHill (talk) 22:21, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

RE: Tim Farron Picture[edit]

We had received permission from the copyright holder of the original image to have it uploaded. The photo which you uploaded did not have clear copyright provisions. Also, your replacement image did not add anything of substance to the page. The original image was, and is, fine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomdff (talkcontribs) 16:29, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Nothing to do with me at all. DuncanHill (talk) 16:32, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
My apologies, I clicked on the wrong page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomdff (talkcontribs) 16:56, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

No need to get upset[edit]

Yes, I see that yours was the first reply after mine, not the 2nd. I disagree that it was a reply to me, though, as you didn't mention my answer, The Cranberries, in any way. As for bullets making indents more difficult, no they don't, if you remember that an asterisk indents the same amount as a colon, so just count up the total and do one more than that. Some examples:

  • One asterisk.
Two colons.
  • Two colons and one asterisk (3 total).
Four colons. StuRat (talk) 01:04, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Not every conversation proceeds by each party always mentioning the immediately preceding comment. If in future you feel compelled to change other people's indentation then at least try explaining what you are up to in an edit summary (something you seem strangely reluctant ever to do). I've seen too many examples of threads derailed and unpleasant misunderstandings arising as a result of someone deciding to be "helpful" and "tidy things up" to be a fan of the practice. I don't go around changing your posts to please my own aesthetic sensibilities. DuncanHill (talk) 01:23, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I see I should have explained in the edit summary. (I don't bother adding an edit summary for a normal reply, because there isn't much to say other than what's in the reply itself, and this gets to be a habit. Some people just put "r" in the edit summary, meaning it's a reply.) As for whether yours was a reply to mine, if you take mine out, then yours should make no sense, if it was a reply to me. And I certainly wouldn't change the content of your post, just the placement of your post. To explain a bit further why the indent is a problem, when I read through a Q I have answered, I pay special attention to those replies which are indented from mine, assuming they are replies to me. So, it's like you pinged me. StuRat (talk) 01:57, 18 September 2016 (UTC)