This is an archive of past discussions about User:Kingboyk. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
And those are reliable sources because... ? w3.org will be primary sources, and of no use to us, the rest is nowhere near being acceptable secondary sources for an encyclopedia. --kingboyk13:31, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
WPBiography Template
In WikiProject Biography, if you assess articles as List-Class they are still in the Unassessed category. I've looked over the template and seen that it needs to be modified to accept this. Should we just not use List-Class, or do you, or someone you know want to implement List-Class in the project? Regards, Psychless Typewords!20:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
This is something of a "frequently asked question" :) In my opinion, lists should be assessed using article classifications. Lists can get featured after all. If that's not what folks want we'll have to get a list-class param added to the template. --kingboyk13:36, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure exactly how you auto assess articles as stubs really, but if it is possible to set your bot up so it can do one category and all sub-categories then you might want to give Category:Sportspeople_stubs a look. --Psychless Typewords!15:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 02:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
That's how it works, yes, it just trawls through stub categories. I've been busy, alas, and AWB needs some work before I can start tagging again, but when I next get the bot fired up I'll try to remember to do those cats for you (after 20th century deaths, which is already queued up). --kingboyk13:37, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Glennray Tutor
added cited sources to Glennray Tutor's biography, biography is no longer a stub. Please update your assessment of this article
Borderline I'd say. However, as it covers all the bases and is referenced, I've upped it to Start class. Hope that helps. --kingboyk16:06, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Template:WPBiography
Hi Kingboyk, long time, etc! Could you please add the parameters "english-royalty" and "scottish-royalty" to the template – as aliases to "british-royalty", for use at a later date, like when we eventually establish the taskforces dedicated thereto. Cheers! †DBD10:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Could do, certainly; you sure it would be useful to go down to that level though?
I've been busy and in catch up mode so please give me a prod in a few days time if I'm active and haven't done it, otherwise leave a request on the template talk page and hopefully somebody else will oblige. (Which reminds me, we still need some more WPBIO admins! Preferably people who know how to edit our template... I'll have to get a request into the next newsletter if there is one.) --kingboyk16:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Adam Morris
I spoke to you a while back about a page for Adam Morris was removed, due to problems with the references. I have now got a reference to a industry magazine, and the article can be found at User:Adamiow/Temp. Please can you put check this article and then put it up on the page, as I have had problem with consulting the administrators as you suggested. Thank you. Adamiow13:09, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, sorry mate, my computer broke down, and I've been busy not least with building a new one!
I've had a look at the article and it's a good effort, but the sources you've used are all self-published or fan sites and can't be considered reliable (see WP:RS). I'm also not seeing much notability (WP:BIO). That said, it's certainly an improvement and a good faith effort; I have no objections to you moving the article back into mainspace and taking your chances. You may find it speedy deleted or nominated for deletion, you may not - prima facie it's borderline :)
I'll have a go at getting it on the mainspace. However, the one of the sources is an article from a radio magazine. It is only on the fansite as I had to ask the magazine to send me a copy and I had to get it put online, as they don't publish their magazine online. Thanks for your help.Adamiow19:23, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
That's fine, if it's a print magazine who don't publish on the web, just cite the magazine (see WP:CITE). It doesn't need to have a web link. --kingboyk21:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi again. I have just checked, and I can't create the page, as it protected. Can you either unprotect it or put the article up? Thanks again. Adamiow19:27, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi. The article got deleted. I can't be bothered trying to do it again, as no-one likes the source, and it is the only one around. Also, it seems that radio presenters aren't really covered by the criteria and it is all very unclear, but the powers that are be are against my quest! Hey ho. Is it possible that you could take the article and put it back on my userpage, so I can keep a copy in case I find another source, so I don't have to rewrite it? Thanks again for all your help. Adamiow17:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
DEFAULTSORT and WPBiography
Good to see you back. I think you might be interested in the following discussions:
Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Polbot 3 - bot approval request concerning sortkeys (on articles and talk pages) for biographical articles, and how to standardise them and use a bot to make the different sort keys consistent and find out which article don't have them.
Finally, I think I now know why talk page DEFAULTSORTing doesn't always seem to work. It seems the PAGENAME function over-rides it. See here. Have fun! Carcharoth14:50, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up. I've had a look at the bot approval request, and posted a couple of questions.
I'll certainly help with the tagging job if I've understood your request properly (see below).
I won't look at the other pages just now; I've had a glance and it seems quite complicated. Ordinarily that's fine, but I have a bit of a headache coming on :) I'll look at those tommorow.
Is there anything else which I need to be looking at or doing?
Oh, by the way, I didn't get any response to my request for more WPBiography members to stand for adminship. Is this something you'd be interested in doing? --kingboyk21:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the vote of confidence. The short answer is: "eventually". At the moment I'm pulled in various directions between some of the interesting-looking admin backlogs, normal article editing, and Wikipedia namespace discussions. I tend to make my varying levels of disorganisation too much of a (personal) obstacle to be overcome, and I do dip my toes in some of the controversial areas as well. I think I'll be able to judge when the time is right in terms of my personal organisation and the areas of Wikipedia I want to work in. Though I am fast coming to (or returning to) the conclusion that I'll never think of myself as 'ready' (and shouldn't think that way in any case), so maybe sooner is better than later. On the other hand, there is a certain minimal level of reading I'd have to do first, as I may currently misunderstand some of the finer points of some policies, and wouldn't want to get any questions too wrong! :-) Carcharoth11:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I have quite a backlog to catch up on (both here and off-wiki) and, yes, I'll hopefully be standing in the Board election, so I expect to be quite busy. Nonetheless, I have my new computer built and mostly working now, so I'll endeavour to look at these issues as soon as I can. Thanks for keeping me updated.
With regards to the bot tagging, I'm not sure how long it will take to get started. The last I heard development on AWB 4 had stalled somewhat since I've been away, because the younger contributors (which is most of them) are busy with exams. There are, I presume, still bugs to be fixed from the logging code I was working on when my old PC failed. What I'm thinking is that it might be most productive to work on AWB first and use the bot run for testing. I'll see. I'm certainly interested to see how AWB will perform on Vista with IE7, both of which are new to me, so on the other hand I might get started as soon as my PC can spare the cycles/net bandwidth. Cheers for now! --kingboyk15:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
OK, I'll make looking at that my top priority en wiki job. I probably won't be able to look at until tommorow though... please bear with me, sorry... --kingboyk16:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Ah, right. That's a tagging job isn't it. Basically, then, you want every talk page listed there tagged with a vanilla (empty) WPBiography template? And the list is pretty much guaranteed to be free of false positives? If that's all correct I'll get onto it right away. --kingboyk20:53, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Provided I can get AWB working on my new machine, I'll get started today. If not, I'll hand the job over to a friend. Either way, consider it done :) There's more replies above for your perusal, btw. --kingboyk11:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! Only 23 skipped out of 900+? That's impressive. I see that some were because the template had been added manually by others between the generation of this list and the running of the bot. I did notice that the WikiProject Beatles tag caused some of the skipping: "{{WPBiography}} removed, {{WPBeatles}} contains same functionality".. This is unfortunate because I was relying on the transclusion list of WPBiography being a complete list of all biographical articles on Wikipedia. What do you think can be done about this? Is this common with other projects as well, or is WPBeatles an oddity? Carcharoth16:08, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
{{WPBeatles}} and {{WPKLF}} both duplicate {{WPBiography}} - I'm a primary author of all 3 templates. Any other template doing the same is unofficial, as we (Plange or I) have never sanctioned any others (see e.g. here. It seemed like a good idea at the time, but it might be time to revisit that idea. Anyway, for now, my plugin is trained to treat the presence of a WPBeatles or KLF template as equal to the presence of WPBiography. (Or, more precisely, if it finds one of the 2 aforementioned templates it skips the page, hence the log message "Biography: Article text matched skip regex").
As for a way to identify every talk page tagged with either WPBio or with one of those 2 templates in WPBio emulation mode hmm... I'll have to take a look... Conclusion: I don't think there is any way, currently. Take a look at the bottom of Talk:Bill_Drummond for example. The easiest solution for now would be to add a "WikiProject Biography articles" category, wouldn't it? --kingboyk16:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes. To all three templates? That would show the talk pages tagged by WPBiography and the biographical ones at the other two, and I presume would be slightly cleaner than a "what links here" list, which needs tidying to remove links that aren't transclusions. The ultimate aim is to have all "people" articles have a mainspace article category (rather than just a talk page category). This population of a "super-category" is done at the moment for Category:Living people, but Category:People is depopulated to its subcategories (which due to the vageries of categorisation include non-people articles). I'm still pondering what the main namespace category for people should be called. Those used to depopulating Category:People will industriously remove any additions of Category:People, so I'm thinking Category:Biographical articles might be good. I suggested adding such a super-category to {{WPBiography}}, and you said you would do this if several people supported the idea. I think the plans at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Polbot 3 show that progress is being made in this direction, but having the super-category in WPBiography won't make much sense until the listas updating has been done. Anyway, I'm just briefly checking in, as I won't be able to do much about this until next week, but I think it would be more logical if all people articles, even the KLF and Beatles ones, used WPBiography on their talk pages. Carcharoth11:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, to all 3 templates (when parameters are set indicating that the article is a biography). Let me know if you need anything doing. --kingboyk17:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC) PS I still have't started that large bot job, although Reedy Boy has been doing some of it (slowly). I might just ask him to carry on but a bit faster! :)
Change please?
I need a change made to the WPBiography template. It's not controversial at all. When we removed the link to the comments pages I saw we needed some way to show the comments. They're now transcluded in a show/hide section. See here for the code. Go to the talk page of that page for an example. See here for the discussion. Psychless00:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Righto. I'm a day or 2 behind on dealing with requests; so expect me to do it tommorow or Saturday. Could you help me out and let me know what other non-controversial edits are queued up? Are you able to actually write the code for any of the outstanding requests for me? If I just paste into the template it's a 5 minute job (test, paste, save) whereas it can take several hours if I have to write it all myself. Ordinarily I'm more than happy to do it, but I have a lot on my plate at the moment as you can probably tell... Cheers, --kingboyk16:49, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
My personal statement - This is a longer piece outlining my platform and my views on the Wikimedia Foundation
Endorsements - All candidates need 15 endorsements; if you've worked with me in the past or merely approve of my candidates statement, please endorse me. Thank you. Endorsements have closed.
I am writing this because you seem to have a negative view towards a webiste that I am trying to set up. I am coming here to ask you how it could possibly be fixed, e.g be more organised, have better content, etc. I have a nice category tree starting, and am working on content. IS there any more suggestions from you, oh Mr. admin sir? -Violask8197616:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
What do you keep asking me for? I'm busy. Wikipedia pages aren't for discussing profit-making wikis which offer no advantage over Wikipedia, and I have nothing to say on the subject. Don't message me about this again, please. --kingboyk16:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Your revert
last time I checked, The Rutles fully qualified as a Mockumentary, in fact it's one of the first. A spoof? Got a wikilink for "spoof" for our international readers? Piperdown16:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
The word "Mockumentary" didn't exist when the program was made, nor is the article adequately referenced, nor, I suspect, is it a British English word. Have I got a link? No. Do I need one - do we link every dictionary word? No. --kingboyk17:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC) PS Please discuss this on the article talk page, not here. It's not a personal issue, and if I got a yellow bar at the top of my screen every time somebody changed or challenged an edit of mine it would drive me mad!
The Peter Nordin page has been tagged as a Biography, when it only contains a profile. I'm not a Wikipedia classification expert (yet), but the Biography page is used on the Biography project page to define the scope of the project - so the definitions and distinctions (including a profile is not a biography) appear to be relevant. I'm not the least bit troubled by requirements to avoid libel etc., but would not like to see the profile rated as a poor biography. Is it possible that this article is misclassified? Rogerfgay15:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand the difference between "profile" and "biography"; either way, both are within scope of the Project I'm sure. Thanks for writing. --kingboyk17:41, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
FYI: The difference is explained in the first paragraph at Biography, which is a page used to explain the scope of the Biography Project. --Rogerfgay09:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to jump in here, but did you actually click on profile? It takes you to a disambiguation page. The closest thing I can find there is "Profile, personal information about a user in instant messaging and online chat applications". The wiktionary definition has "a summary or collection of information, especially about a person", but then uses law profiling (similar to offender profiling) as an example. I understand what you mean by a profile of a person, but it seems to be in essense a "short biography", almost an extended curriculum vitae, and Wikipedia is not for curriculum vitae. I also looked at the Peter Nordin page, and it reads like a biography constructed from a curriculum vitae. Also, many of the "biography" pages on Wikipedia, especially of living people, are in this state. If you wait (say) 500 years, then a proper biography usually gets written, like that for Isaac Newton. In essence, the WPBiography project is really gathering together articles about people, whether they are biographies, profiles or curriculum vitae. Eventually, the curriculum vitae should be deleted. The WPBiography page should be changed to reflect this practice, which I will do now. Carcharoth11:53, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Carcharoth, that's my thoughts exactly. Perhaps we should have been named "WikiProject People"; in essence that's what we are. It doesn't matter if an article on a person is a short "profile" or a feature length "biography", they're both within scope. Cheers. --kingboyk13:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Publicity photos
In your candidate questions, you seem to say that user-created free images would be "more preferable" than studio-created free images. Why? Am I just misunderstanding? — Omegatron03:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Please ask me questions about my candidacy on the meta page, so that all interested people can see :) To answer your question, if I gave you that impression I have not been clear enough or you have misunderstood. I want to see a high quality encyclopedia with high quality images. I don't much care where those images come from. It is preferable that they are freely licenced, because we are a "free content" project. So, in summary, user-created free images are not preferable to studio-created free images. If they're both free, it's an editorial decision (and, of course, editors should choose the "best" picture). Have I made myself clear now? Please tell me if not and I'll try again. Cheers. --kingboyk13:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC) PS Would you mind if I moved this to the meta page?
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Disco_2000_-_Uptight_video.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast20:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
So sorry - it appears I inadvertently missed you with my round of questions! If you can answer on my talk page ASAP, I'd appreciate it. Sorry again. Ral315»05:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi! My name is Ral315, and I'm the editor-in-chief of the Wikipedia Signpost, a weekly newspaper on the English Wikipedia. I'm sending out an optional questionnaire that I hope you'll respond to. There's no word limit on any of these questions, but I suggest that brevity (maybe about 300-400 words per answer) is best.
I'm posting these to your talk pages because they don't really fit well on question pages (since many will repeat questions you've already answered). You can reply to me by e-mail, or at my English Wikipedia, English Wikinews or Meta talk pages.
Thanks again for answering these, and good luck in the elections.
Sincerely,
Ral315
Do you have any other usernames or pseudonyms?
What current or former user rights or positions do you have, and on which projects? (i.e. administrator, bureaucrat, arbitrator, developer, steward, board member, etc.)
Outside of Wikipedia, what do you do for a living?
What languages do you speak?
Why do you want to join the Board? What qualities do you feel you can bring to the Board?
About how much time do you think you'll put into the role?
Ideally, where do you see the Wikimedia Foundation in 5 years?
As a board member, how will you ensure a balance between openness and necessary privacy in board matters?
Recent discussion has centered around the Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. How do you feel the Wikimedia brands should be used, or changed?
Wikimedia projects in developing nations are growing in popularity, but still lag far behind the more popular projects. What steps would you suggest to improve the quality, readership, and number of editors on smaller wikis?
What do you feel should be done to increase participation on non-Wikipedia projects?
As a board member, what strategies would you consider to raise money for the Foundation?
What else do you want to say to voters? (This is a good place to answer a question specific to your candidacy that you think should be answered)
deadline
yo kingboyk, i was rather late as well, but there doen't seem to be too strict a deadline however... good luck and greetz, oscar11:06, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Well it's not so much that I'm late - I only just heard about it! :) I'll try and get it done today anyway and hope that's soon enough. Cheers. --kingboyk11:42, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Biography
I notice that bots go around and tag biographies with the template {{WPBiography}}. Not necassarily this bot though, I don't know but, there are quite a few biographies in this category that don't have the Biography tags. All articles within this category (and subcategories) are biographies.
Hi Kingboyk. Thank you for your support and kind words in my RfA, which passed with 95 support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral !votes. It means a lot to me to have your individual support and the collective support of so many others. I truly will strive to carry myself at a level representing the trust bestowed in me as I use the mop to address the never-ending drips of discontent in need of caretaker assistance.
<slaps myself to stop staring at dripping water> Anyways... I have a biographical category that I can almost guarantee every article in it doesn't have the {{WPBiography}} template on it yet. Category:Uncategorised people. It would add a thousand or so articles to the project I believe. I know your busy, but just wanted to let you know. Good luck on the board election. Regards, Psychless01:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Ooh... I wonder why that one didn't get done? Hmm... Perhaps it was queued up when my computer crashed, which was also about the time that AWB development slowed right down...
Are there any other categories other than this one and 21st century deaths which you believe have been missed? --kingboyk12:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about my late response, just remembered I made the request when a lot of articles started coming into the letter I was working on. I don't really remember making the 21st century deaths request though... If I see any other categories that need tagging I'll make sure to let you know. Thanks, Psychless04:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
No, you didn't request it, it's the last big category left which the bot hasn't touched. Carcaroth has been asking me to finish it. --kingboyk09:57, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh aye! :) Anyway: I've fixed the logging bug, and will work with Reedy Boy to get log uploading working, then we'll set our bots loose on that. Won't be long now. --kingboyk17:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
script?
Yo kingboyk - are you interested in hosting the "assessment script"? I don't want to host or maintain it any more, and you, I think, are a prime candidate given your work on AWB and knowledge of templates. What you do with it (including nothing, other than hosting) would be entirely up to you. I've just updated the thing so that it is less maintenance driven--users set up their own templates in monobook.js instead of requesting them. –Outriggr§05:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Have you asked around? There maybe somebody who doesn't have so much on their plate as I do who could be more of a loving "owner"? :)I see you have a banner! Next paragraph's idea is probably better... If the alternative is it becoming unavailable, sure, User:Kingbotk could host it, since "he" already has assessment-related pages. I can't promise to do any maintenance on it but hopefully it can be user-supported!
Perhaps a better alternative might be to move it into Wikipedia: space or to "donate" it to the WP1.0 team? Then, it becomes more of a community thing - i.e. update and support it amongst yourselves - rather than a one man job? --kingboyk12:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
voting
Hey, I got a question on voting for the board election. I want to vote, but I don't get the script at the top of the pages, I think I dismissed it by accident. How do I vote? The SPI website said to ask an admin if it doesn't come up...so here I am. -Violask8197616:04, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I was really hoping to do some programming work on AWB before getting into bot runs (a feature I added needs some debugging work) and might be a bit busy to do it for a while. I also have some other bot requests queued up. That said, I don't suppose this is a big job so I'll either do it or arrange for somebody else to. The categories are "clean" and free from false positives I trust? (i.e. the bot can safely tag all talk pages in those categories?) --kingboyk12:18, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Okay, thank you very much. Yes the categories are clean - I visually inspected them before making the request. If you can program AWB to have the ability to make a list of articles from a category and then make x change to the Talk page, that would be great. :) --Spike Wilbury♫talk15:53, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
It can already do that. To make a list from a category just type the category name into the box and press make list. Then right click the list and select "convert to talk pages". To have it add a WikiProject banner to the talk page you need to install and configure my plugin. --kingboyk17:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Alas sir I fear I am neither, but thank you for the kind words. When I do the bot run I'll need to create a settings file including configuring the plugin to write out your banner; I'm quite happy to send you a copy of that file if it would help you. Cheers. --kingboyk17:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Please do not take offense, but I find that your (English) summary of the Board election platform on meta:Board_elections/2007/Candidates isn't really well-written. The text doesn't really seem coherent, in that it lists too many unconnected ideas. I belive that the text like this would be more comprehensible if you listed only fewer points but written them as a linked whole. I have read your longer personal statement, so it won't influence my vote afterall, but obviously some people will read only the summary.
It is probably too late to change the summary now, but I recommend you to try harder writing a better text next time.
Thanks for letting me know. I spent a lot of time on it (the best part of a day writing the full statement and the condensed version), that's not the issue. The issue is that a writer should never be the copyeditor too :) As a late entrant, I didn't have time to send my statement around by email asking for feedback; I did get one or two people to look at it by Messenger but am quite happy to accept that the end result might not be the best piece of prose ever written :) If I stand again I'll be sure to enter earlier and be better organised! Thanks again for pointing this out to me. --kingboyk12:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh well - for what it's worth, I read it, understood it, and voted for you. When do the results come out? Tvoz|talk18:11, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
In a few days I believe - they don't tell me any more than they tell everyone else (which is, I suppose, a good thing :)). Cheers. --kingboyk21:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Future of F1
I agree it does have issues as an article, although I'm not sure deletion is necessarily the best option. I've left a note at the WPF1 talk page so that the relevant community has a chance to consider the proposal. I believe you're aware of WPF1, so it might have been a good idea if you had done that yourself - a five day lead time is short enough that people may otherwise not have happened across the tag before it was acted upon. Cheers. 4u1e13:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the message. I don't believe it's salvageable. Also, an article deleted by prod can be undeleted with no questions asked (I would undelete it myself if so asked). That said, please prove me wrong and make a useful encyclopedic article out of it :) Cheers. --kingboyk21:15, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
PS I seem to have the most recent edit on that article still. If you wish for the article not to be deleted, you may (and should) remove the {{prod}} tag. --kingboyk21:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I am a fellow member on the F1 WikiProject. I have removed the prod in objection to it being placed. If you feel strongly, it is okay to set up an AFD for a challenged prod. Guroadrunner22:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes I know that, but it's incumbent on you to fix the article. It's not acceptable as is. "Future" is vague and not encyclopedic, and the whole thing reads like an opinion piece. No more communication required on this here please, thanks. --kingboyk23:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Radio North Sea International
I've spent some considerable time over the past month editing (and I hope improving) Radio North Sea International (RNI). Another editor, KD, is pressing me to provide the source for the use of the RNI vessels Mebo I and Mebo II for target practice by the Libyan Navy in the Gulf of Sidra in the 1980s.
Early in May, your edit to the RNI article said this was "allegedly" the case. Can you help with sourcing the allegation? If so, please update the article and the RNI talk page. Many thanks.Phase412:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
OK, I'll try. I've read that elsewhere so it may well be true; sourcing it is a different matter :) --kingboyk10:55, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Is it possible that you read about the target practice claim here: Broadcasting from the High Seas (Edinburgh, Paul Harris Publishing, 1976), ISBN 0-904505-07-3 ?Phase414:12, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
