User talk:SimonTrew

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

Gone[edit]

So, you've deleted your user page, I do remember it was blank before, and it didn't have anything useful before, so you may as well, like good ol' Gorobay perhaps, but yeah, you never read other people's pages, so you may as well. - TheChampionMan1234 23:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

@TheChampionMan1234: Not gone, champ, I just needed a bit of a clear-out as it was rather stuffed up with done and dusted conversations, and after paring it down little by little, I just went soddit and deleted the whole lot. It's still there in the history of course, so nothing is ever really lost, it was just getting rather cluttered. I see you are "1234" now. I didn't mean to insult you, by the way, I think I apologised publicly for it seeming so, which was certainly not my intention. Si Trew (talk) 04:16, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Is it just me or are you now THECHAMPIONMAN1234 after the conversation on RfD about all caps. If so, well done, I wouldn't know how to change that. Si Trew (talk) 05:50, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Screwdriver, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fool's errand (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) 10:46, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Ovoid the trout![edit]

Rainbow trout transparent.png Whack!
You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

Get it? It's a diet trout. Ovoid the chocolate indeed. :P Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:11, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Ouch, that hurt (but probably not as much as my pun). But that trout will never live unless you give it a diet of worms. Si Trew (talk) 03:48, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

redirect discussion[edit]

Hi SimonTrew -- Following up a discussion, I noted that on the Women in law redirect discussion, you said that I deleted some of your comments: "With extreme prejudice I have to say that with this edit here at RfD, User:lquilter removed all my comments. Whether he or she likes them, they are for discussion. With extreme prejudice I think lquilter did wrong to remove them from the discussion. Si Trew (talk) 08:51, 2 September 2015 (UTC)"

I believe you were looking at the wrong set of edits. You linked to this diff, which is actually an edit by SimonTrew -- you. I had these two edits:

In neither of those did I delete anything substantive of yours. So you're in error in attributing your error to me. More importantly, however, you've now demonstrated your own good faith errors to yourself -- so maybe in the future you'll remember that edits can cross and assume good faith for other people. --Lquilter (talk) 11:11, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

@Lquilter: I have no idea which discussion you are referring to. I don't use mobile phones or all that modern stuff to get automatic tools to inform me when someone responds to some discussion, I just reply on the page. I do assume good faith, and just because I disagree with someone does not mean I think they are in bad faith. I did mention to another editor the other day I thought it was a WP:BADFAITH edit, but since we have sorted that out, without the need for fisticuffs. I think even at that time, I said, I don't believe it is in bad faith but it could look like it was.
I don't see anything in either of the links that you sent that were non other than minor edits. I tend not to mark things as minor edits exactly for the reason that other people, who get notifications, do not always get notifications for minor edits. Come on, these were pretty trivial edits.
I really am not sure what you mean. If I was wrong, and I did disagree with you in another argument, I absolutely sincerely apologise, because I don't mind disagreeing but it is not my habit to assume bad faith. But I can't see that either of the things you said above are either of those.
I didn't spend seven hours yesterday translating from French into English Wikipedia to demonstrate my bad faith. By the way I edit here under my real name, Simon Trew, or Si Trew as I just prefer as a shorthand, but my history seems to be very short not sure why but I had to delete my user page and stuff cos of a stalker, something I dislike doing. I have been editing for quite a while longer than my history suggests. Longer than you. Si Trew (talk) 11:47, 14 September 2015 (UTC)


Look, on this page: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_August_29#Women_in_law you said I removed your comments from the discussion, and you used the phrase "extreme prejudice". I didn't in fact delete any of your edits, as my links show. The link you left, showing your text deleted, was YOUR edit -- so apparently you deleted some of your own edits, then fixed your error, but then attributed the error to me and criticized me for making it. So I'm correcting your misunderstanding and mischaracterization of my edits -- for the record -- since you seemed to have taken it as some kind of hostile action on my part ("With extreme prejudice I think Lquilter did wrong ...". If you're not sure what I mean, you might look at your own edits.
So, if it were me, and someone wrote to me to say I'd made a mistake, I would carefully look at the links, and then I would acknowledge my error and apologize. Like this: "Oh, I made a mistake which I compounded by rudely assuming you had done something wrong. My apologies; please forgive me; I'll do better in the future." What you said, "If I was wrong, and I did disagree with you in another argument, I ... apologise" is actually more a of a pseudo-apology, since you're making it hypothetical and also contingent on us disagreeing somewhere. We haven't ever disagreed, and that's not what I was pointing out to you, so you really haven't said anything useful back to me, and apparently you didn't actually re-read your own lines, where you brought up all this "extreme prejudice" language.
Length of time being an editor isn't going to immunize you from errors. Assuming you've been editing Wikipedia for 10 years or more as I have, then we both have plenty of experience and it's not useful to try to compare.
So I'm giving you some advice, one editor to another. (1) You have made an error in pulling out diffs and attributing them; you might want to be careful about that. (2) You did NOT assume good faith in your discussion of my edit; you might want to do that more. And now, (3) When called out for an error, acknowledge the error and apologize; don't pseudo-apologise.
The advice is free, so you can take it or not. Good luck. Lquilter (talk) 17:40, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
No, I apologised sincerely, since if I hurt someone's feelings I dislike it very much, and I have obviously hurt yours. I did not just apologise on your talk page but "in public". To have a different opinion is ok (in my opinion), that is not the same thing as stalking someone or whatever, and the reason I pulled out your name was specifically so that you had a right to reply. The fact you don't like my answer is not the same as my being in any way hostile to you. I haven't trampled over your user talk page, for example. Once I have sincerely said sorry, if the other person does not accept it, it becomes that person's problem, not mine. Shall we please both get on in making the encyclopaedia better? Free advice is worth every penny. Si Trew (talk) 17:45, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Matt[hew][s] Mahoney[edit]

I'm not sure what you did but Tavix has reverted your close of WP:RFD#Matt Mahoney and I've been working on correcting your AfD for Matthew Mahoney which, I'm not sure how, you managed to nominate under the wrong title; I'm sure you didn't do any of it maliciously of course. I think I've got it: I've moved Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Mahoney to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Mahoney, and I think at this point Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Mahoney (2nd nomination) should be G6 deleted but I'll leave that up to you. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:36, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Oh purely my cock-up, whatever it was. Thanks for sorting it out. Si Trew (talk) 11:36, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Matthew Mahoney (footballer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ruckman (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) 10:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

  • If I remember correctly, you don't like bots annoying you. I've readded {{nobots}} to your talk page so you won't get these notices anymore. Cheers, -- Tavix (talk) 20:26, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
You've no business doing that, even though it should be known to everyone that nobody owns his talk or user page. But thanks. You can add back DPLbot, which I get occasionally although I try my best (to check DABs etc when I turn redirects into articles), is on the whole helpful. I blanked both the talk and the front page some time ago for doing it.
With no disrespect to anyone, I regard myself as an intelligent idiot, and that is where Wikipedia should be, or any encyclopaedia should be: assume maximum intelligence, minimum knowledge. Si Trew (talk) 00:49, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Harry S. Truman[edit]

Can you withdraw your RM proposal? No one is supporting it. --George Ho (talk) 10:40, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

@George Ho:. Done. Not entirely happy with it, but that's WP:CONSENSUS for you. Thanks all for being in good faith. Si Trew (talk) 21:50, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

For the record, the conversation is most current at Wikipedia Talk:Harry_S._Truman&diff=681695557&oldid=681695270. I think it would also be in good faith that if someone asks to comment on a conversation one might give one the link to the conversation rather than one having to spend a long time looking it up oneself. But that is a minor grumble. It usually happens at other deletion, migration and so on discussions. Even {{translated page}} encourages it, and that is usually a sod to do at the last minute on a translation, but does not require it. Si Trew (talk) 22:51, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Still don't work. I give up trying to convince Wikipedia about that. Pseudospaces don't work. I'm off to bed. Si Trew (talk) 22:53, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Sorry about the bad diff but the diff numbers are there. We should cross-ref the discussions at Rfd, RM, and here, I think, if that is OK with your permission? I have now completely lost my train of thought when I woke up thinking of something else at RfD. (genuinely I am a light sleeper, I get about four hours sleep a night and mostly that is interrupted sleep.) Si Trew (talk) 00:44, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Typos[edit]

I'm confused why you make a bunch of typos and then apologize for making them. Wouldn't it be easier to hit "show preview", find the typos, fix the typos, and then you wouldn't have to apologize? That way, we can stay on-topic in our discussions and I can figure out what you are saying a lot easier. Communication is key. -- Tavix (talk) 00:02, 28 September 2015 (UTC).

Huh, yeah I do do that, but it is very intermittently fast and slow, so that I preview it then make a small change thinking oh that will just be fine as a small change to a typo but between TYPING it and it going in it goes in the wrong place, like now this is working fine, perhaps it is just the long pages that this lappy doesn1t like and nothing to do with the internet. The YZ confusion is just cos I am used to tzping on Hungarian layout and this is on US layout, and I do hit preview and so on, but earlier it was working extremely slowly for me. I appreciate that causes you confusion which is the last thing I should want to do, but I had hit save, after reviewing the text in preview, before I saw the mistakes, because some kind of buffer somewhere along the line had then added back in the mistakes that I thought I had taken out! Sorry about that all.

By the way I am going to a job interview today at 2pm our time European Summer Time and so am preparing for that, so am just not exactly wasting time, I hope, but using Wikipedia as a kinda warm up for getting my brain into gear for doing something intellectual instead of watching daytime TV and washing floors. Wish me luck.

S.

I don't mean any offense at all, but I literally can't figure out what you're saying. So please, make an effort to fix your typos. (Especially at RFD, because the discussion should be about the redirects, not about anything off-topic. It muddies the discussion and makes it harder to find consensus.) Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 00:23, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
I agree completely, which is why I said sorry. I didn!t mean to muck it up, just I was getting preview screens well the WP page dowloads were overlapping with the pages and the data, seems calm now but it was very very slow earlier so although I previewed and so on, in fact I went on this lappy thinking perhaps it was just the wireless link from the other computer but I think WP was just very slow so I was kinda getting edit conflicts with meself. You may notice I marked as ec one of mine that you commented on (and that we are in general agreement I think should be split out) and I should have liked to have made myself clearer but just anything I tried at that time was ecíng and so on. The ZY confusion is just mine cos I have to get used to a QWERTY again. My points seem clear, what could you not understand and I shall clarify over at RfD? Si Trew (talk) 00:27, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
I guess I'll just break-down your comments at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_September_26#Foreign_redirects_to_Mrs. to give an example. Your first comment was perfect until you added: "Escuse mz mistakes, very slow Internet link tonight and I am not on my usual kb hence the yz confusion and bz the time i save i have missed typed y instead of y or the other way around (am used to typing on hungarian layout, this is US layout)." That was not necessary at all. You didn't have any typos or mistakes until you added that sentence. It was off-topic, which is bad, and was filled with several typos, making the sentence hard to read. Your next comment: "Yeah, I think so tool Steely. Is Kyria a likelz synonzm for Syria for example? Sorrz for the slow link and all the mostakes." The first two sentences were good, but that last sentence was unnecessary. In the time it took you to type that, you could have fixed the four typos that you had previously. Do you understand where I'm coming from now? I'm just confused why you need to muddy up the discussion by apologizing when you could have just fix the typos yourself... -- Tavix (talk) 01:18, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
And you are quite right to say so. I was having trouble with Internet interference, and I think I solved it, I have a wireless printer (a couple of years old) which seems to have had the heebie jeebies with trying to connect, and moving it to a different room (the missus would not allow me to move it to the rubbish bin/trashcan) seems to have solved the problem, the printer works a lot faster now and I don't have all these typos. I can understand your frustration and I am glad you appreciate mine, because the last thing I should like to do is cause more confusion than we already have. Thank you for bringing it to my attention quietly, I think it is fixed now. Si Trew (talk) 20:45, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
BTW I hope you wished me luck for my job interview. Not sure how it went. Si Trew (talk) 20:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

A fresh start[edit]

The renaming process of my account is underway, so in the interim I am using this account, see here. I recently realised that name wasn't occupied, so I decided to change it. TheChampionMan1234 alt (talk) (I am using this account until my old one is renamed, see here) 22:52, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it really is me, nothing really has changed other than the name, the original one didn't mean anything, I just sorta something random when signing up 4 years ago, so nothing so special about that. I thought it wasn't gonna happen due to some complications at the beginning but it did. Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 05:35, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
@Champion: Well blow me down. Thanks for all your help at RfD, is it OK if over there I still refer to you just as The Champ or Champ? The "see here" is essentially blank for me so I guess thez have tidied that as part of the process. Si Trew (talk) 06:58, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
@SimonTrew: Yeah, notice I might have to change the signature soon, you know. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 08:01, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
@SimonTrew: BTW, I have moved your YX essay to the userspace because I don't think it is ready yet. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 08:06, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
That is essentially a joke. Hope you liked it. Si Trew (talk) 10:29, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
In mz opinion there should be more jokes on Wikipedida. Not in articles, they a re serious, but in ttittel-tattle I dont know why people have to be so serious, the way we get things done is to amuse ouytselves an you say (you say potato and I say krumpli). You are one of the best at it, I hope I am not the champion but maybe a close second. I don't understand why people have to be so serious, surely making articles is a serious business but discussiong them can be fun. Well zou and I seem to have fun, anyway. Ecxcue the typos I can"t tell Y from X. let alone Z. I am chpooing a tree to make a bench for my seven-year'-old!s neighbours son, if I get it right he will have four stools and a table *Hungarian azstal) but it is a bit hard work for me cos it is old wood. So far the table balances perfectly and things run off it like shit off a shovel, but now I have to do the four little seats. I got some cheap wood yesterday from next door that they were throwing out but not sure what to do with it yet. Si Trew (talk) 10:29, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
The son is seven years old not the neighbour. She is thirty-two I think... she is very cute though. Si Trew (talk) 12:49, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, SimonTrew. You have new messages at Champion's talk page.
Message added 01:55, 3 October 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 01:55, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

You have been randomly selected to take a very short survey by the Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team![edit]

https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_9mNQICjn6DibxNr

This survey is intended to gauge community satisfaction with the technical support provided by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikipedia, especially focusing on the needs of the core community. To learn more about this survey, please visit Research:Tech support satisfaction poll.

To opt-out of further notices concerning this survey, please remove your username from the subscription list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2015[edit]

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. -- Tavix (talk) 02:52, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

You are mistaken, as discussed at your talk page and at the article's (Talk:The hole with the mint in it). This is not about a person so WP:G10 does not apply. I put this up for WP:G7 myself shortly after I created it, I believe as part of a discussion on disparaging place names we were having at WP:RFD, then decided to stet it. I am happy for it to be deleted, but the WP:G10 scared me, cos that is not my modus operandi. Si Trew (talk) 03:14, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Don't worry too much about it, Twinkle doesn't let you turn off this notification if you pick G10. It's pretty heavy-handed, if you ask me. Not to mention that the notification doesn't say which page was nominated. Ugh, this is terrible, actually, now I'm worried about it. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:47, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, at the very least there should be an AGF version of this warning, because this warning is not what I had in mind when I tagged that page. -- Tavix (talk) 21:36, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
@Tavix:, @Ivanvector:, thanks both. "Scared" was a bit strong but "Startled" or "Surprised" would probably be the case, since I know I cock up and accidentally offend people, but would never do so on purpose. No worries, I requested G7 and it went thanks to User:Graeme Bartlett and another who changed the listing at the CSD. Si Trew (talk) 22:39, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Songs about Wikipedia/March of Wikipedia[edit]

You are invited to take a look at Wikipedia:Songs about Wikipedia/March of Wikipedia. Thanks. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 22:59, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

WP:CHEAP[edit]

I know you think you are doing good work in re various Citizens United related redirects, but see Wikipedia:Redirects are cheap. You'll just end up using up more "air" fighting about them than they take up in the first place :p -- Kendrick7talk 03:45, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

@Kendrick7:I'm quite aware of WP:CHEAP and WP:NOTBROKEN, too. But although redirects are cheap, a lot of uses of Citizens United were broken, and some of the redirects had been bot-fixed as double redirects when the redirect was moved back in July. So I had, essentially, to check all of the links (redirects included) for Citizens United, Citizens United (organization) and Citizens United v. FEC anyway: and I only listed the ones I thought at all contentious, the others I just WP:BOLDly changed.
I used to be a 100% inclusionist, but I now take a slightly more cautious view that when there are "too many" redirects to an article (where "too many" is a purely subjective number that I am keeping secret) then they can actually hinder a search, because depending on how they search readers might be presented with a load of links that look like they might go to different articles but don't – a WP:SURPRISE or at least a waste of their time – or editors when wishing to put a link in an article just guess one (reasonably enough) and find it works, without realising there is a "better" one (where "better" means "greater than some number on the scale of 1 to the number I previously thought of").
For those reasons I feel that judicious pruning is a reasonable part of Wikipedia gnoming. Si Trew (talk) 05:31, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
OK, you are actually way more on top of this than I had assumed :) Keep up the good work! -- Kendrick7talk 23:44, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Is this the river?[edit]

Follow me to join the secret cabal!

Plip!


For pontificating on where trouts ought to be put, here is a little one to splash about on your user page. ;) Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 15:28, 29 October 2015 (UTC)}}

"Strengthen then, thou two, our children to defend, to love, to hold“[edit]

I have made this one now Wikipedia:Songs about Wikipedia/The Call of Wikipedia but it is harder than the previous one mainly due too rhyming. Can you please take a look? - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 22:59, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

The rhyme scheme is abcb, yes? (Second and fourth lines rhyme, first and third need not).
You could try "heed ya" or "need ya" to rhyme with "Wikipedia", e.g.:
At thy call we shall not falter, firm and steadfast we shall heed ya,
At thy will to live or perish, O our Wikipedia!
Obviously you don't want it to stray too far in meaning from the original, but that might be close enough.
"Wiki"is more tricky, to rhyme it can sound dicky.
There's a few problems with the meter in the last two stanzas. I'm in the middle of translating a French article at the moment so it's probably best I leave this while I am thinking in French. I'll have a look in a day or two. Si Trew (talk) 00:16, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
I have now fixed it a little, it may require further expansion. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 20:10, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
The rhymes are sweet but where's the scanning?
That requires some simple planning:
Take the words and then you twist ém
Double meanings? Sheesh, you've missed ém
Get your rhyme scheme right at first
The scansion comes, but yours' the worst
You're no poetic licencee
So follow me, now do you see?
That whole lot went aa bb
It is quite elementary
But if you should prefer a sonnet
Put on your thinking cap or bonnet.
Si Trew (talk) 21:06, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

The Internationale might be a good one, but I guess it has been done. Si Trew (talk) 21:15, 30 October 2015 (UTC)~~

No that hasn't but I'm considering Horst-Wessel-Lied. How about that? - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 21:22, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Actually I've started on this:Wikipedia:Songs_about_Wikipedia/Wikipedialied. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 21:30, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Oh, I doubt you will get far with the Horst-Wessel-Lied before someone invokes Godwin's Law. Bejesus, I just did. Si Trew (talk) 21:41, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Halloween cheer![edit]

Thanks @Northamericq1000:, and yourself. Si Trew (talk) 04:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

London bus routes[edit]

Hi Simon!

  1. If you have several requests for editing these redirects, it may be easier for you (and me) to list them all in one location rather than making separate requests for each page.
  2. Do you think these redirects could be unprotected now?

— Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:42, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

@MSGJ:: Thanks
  1. I realised a little too late that there are a lot of these, and yes, I'm now saving them up. So far I've made a list for 21, 32, 91, 124, 181, 199, 200, 242, 333, 474. I'll let you know when I'm done.
  2. I don't think they need protection, but I'm not a regular on the transport project. I'll make a list from that list when I've checked their history, I think many have been pre-emptively protected.
Also, I've been putting in the route number as a parameter to {{R from London bus route}}. I haven't got this working yet, but my intention is to pass that through as the sort order for the category (any pointers in how to do that, e.g. another template that does it, would be great: I'm OK with doing templates I just don't know quite what magic I need).
Thanks again Si Trew (talk) 11:49, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
The template idea sounds very good, happy to help with that. Hopefully we can get these unprotected so you can carry on with your work without hindrance. Protecting admin was JamesBWatson. JBW: do these still require full protection in your opinion? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:17, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
I started it a long time ago, then kinda forgot about it. I was reminded by an analagous situation with species which don't have articles but appear as blue links in a list. This one's not so bad as they are not linked in the list unless there is more to them than the redirect loop (at least, if people keep the list updated). Si Trew (talk) 12:21, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Can you give me links to the protected pages, so that I can see which they are, and check why I protected them? I checked Template:R from London bus route, and a few of the pages that transclude that template, and didn't find any protected pages. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk)
@JamesBWatson: I'm not finished but so far I have: 21, 32, 46, 91, 95, 119, 124, 181, 190, 199, 200, 222, 235, 242, 273, 295, 316, 332, 333, 344, 345, 423, 430, 491. I've been taking this from a redirects-only "What Links Here" of List of bus routes in London so I'm going through them in that order (3rd page now). Some definitely do have a history of vandalism, but I'm not looking at the protected ones much. My naming scheme is as follows:
  • A long time ago I added anchors for sections #1-100, #101-200, #201-299, #300-399, #400-499, #500-599 etc. I realise I changed my horses midstream here but we can always add duplicate anchors #1-99, #100-199 and #200-299 as the only edge case is bus 200, I think. Lettered buses are #Axx, #Bxx, #Cxx and so on, and #withdrawn for former services.
  • The template I use is {{R from London bus route|nnn}} where nnn is the exact route number, I aim to have these sorting properly, but haven't wired that up properly in the template yet. I think I might have proposed this template, I can't remember.
So for example service H17 is List of bus routes in London#Hxx {{R from London bus route|H17}}.
I'm plodding away but let me know if I can help any more. Saving this quickly without checking so apols for bad formatting etc. Si Trew (talk) 12:55, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
  • After a little searching I realised you must mean London Buses route 21 etc. I see I protected most of them in September 2014, but I protected London bus route 295, London Bus route 21, and London bus route 21 in July 2015, so the disruptive editor has evidently continued to be active. That relatively recent problematic editing does give me a little doubt, but I'll lift the protection on the ones listed to semi-protection for now. If you find any more, perhaps Martin can change the protection. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:24, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
@MSGJ: OK Martin. Let me know when you've lifted, and I'll do them right away and you can put back the protection, how's that? There's also 423, C10 and 145 – maybe more later. Si Trew (talk) 13:27, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
  • I have lifted protection on the numbers listed above, including the three that I protected in July, except for 491, as London Buses route 491 has never been protected: maybe it was a typo for some other number. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:39, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
@JamesBWatson: OK I've done all of those viz. 21, 32, 91, 95, 119, 124, 181, 190, 199, 200, 222, 235, 242, 273, 295, 316, 332, 33, 344, 345, 423, 430, 490. If you want to put the full protection back, fine by me, thanks. There are more but I'll batch them up and ask again later, if that's OK with you. Si Trew (talk) 13:59, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Although i personally don't agree with redirects on London Bus Routes, you've done a very good job with altering the redirects, I think its made them a lot better. Also, because you spent quite a bit of time on this, I award you this Barnstar for your hard work and effort. Keep up the good work :) Class455fan1 (talk) 22:56, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Brink's-MAT/Brink's-Mat[edit]

I disagree with your rename, and have commented on the talk page. Can we continue the discussion there? Roybadami (talk) 23:29, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Sure. Si Trew (talk) 05:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Just to let you know - AfD culture[edit]

Just to let you know your edits may/have been discussed at: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#AfD_culture. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:05, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Si, I'm late to this, but there was a comment you wrote in an RfD over a year ago which was brought up in this thread as a personal attack. I pinged you because I thought you might miss it, and should have the opportunity to respond. I think it's probably past the point of debate now though. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 21:53, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I got the ping or notification that I'd been mentioned, but it was so long ago that I have no idea what it was. Ithink I added a Comment to the discussion; my watchlist and browser history is full up with minor edits from RfD et. al. that I would never find it and I think I did it on the other computer, anyway.
@Ivanvector: Thank you for sticking up for me (and taking the flak when the reply was something along the lines of "do you know him personally" in the sense of oh he lives next door or something: Hah!) I only replied to ask what it was about, really: I know I ramble and I know sometimes I am rather too terse and bat things off, they cannot see the smile on my face when I do so and I am averse to doing smileys and stuff. I prefer a good bit of laconic wit, something of the Stephen Leacock kind.
No worries, but when I am sorry I say sorry: and if people don't accept the apology, at that point, the problem is theirs, not mine. I cannot say sorry for something I don't even know what I did; and kind as it was you are not my spokesman. They should have asked me. After that point, my conscience is clear. Si Trew (talk) 22:07, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Well yes, I have no cause to speak for you anyway, I can only speak for one account here, since my cat does not yet have an account. If she did it would of course be User:Sockspuppet ... aww, that username is already blocked. Dang. Anyway I meant my comment more as descriptive of the collegial atmosphere at RfD, not descriptive of you necessarily. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:11, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
No worries. Our cat is called Fat Cat, we have had him I think now four years or something. He is a stray who was just walking along our street and miaowed for a bit of food, so little by little we adopted him. My missus I think you know is User:Monkap but she doesn't like WP any more, after translating some English-language articles into "Requested articles" at Hungarian WP and being told off for it. (They put in the approved edit thing that was rejected here at EN:WP, and admins went wild in saying "I am the professor of X and Z, so I know more about it than you, even though you live in England and this is about some place in England and you have been there took the pictures went round the little museum and did the back research"), it's understandable: in Hungary what you have on paper is worth more than what you actually can do. I have never, in England or Wales, been asked to provide a reference or provide any qualifications. I assume the reasoning is thus: Either he has the degree, so why waste money, or he doesn't, and if he doesn't, either he could have if he is good enough, or he is not good enough so we fire him. No point in any of those cases to ask for certificates. As for references, either he has no friends so he makes one up, or he has at least one friend so he sends him a eulogy to sign, with a panegyric if he that will cure him of his insufferable Greek, ahem, as we forgive them their trespass against us, Mr. A. Men. pp. Simon Trew and letters after it longer than my name... blesséd I be with a short name.
The cat likes food too much, he is a tabby something. He is about 10 years old, we're not sure, but he gets through a lot of cat food. He has his own cat passport for travel in the EU. He weighs about 17 lb (7.7 kg) hence the name, but he's had his balls off before we took him in, so they tend to grow a bit more if they do that young. He has stayed in the finest autobahn motel in Munich (sneaked in, €170 a night but I knocked em down to €110 and nicked enough stuff from the breakfast that we didn't have to buy anything to eat for three days, also some towels and of course the gunk and stuff... perhaps taking the pillows was a bit de trop), and has lived in England and Hungary. He costs a bloody fortune in cat food. Si Trew (talk) 22:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Short answer: I don't give a shit about AfD. I don't hang out at AfD. AfD has not asked me the pleasure of its company, so I have no intention of asking its. Si Trew (talk) 22:38, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Circular redirects[edit]

Responding here so we don't clutter a closed thread. By definition, a circular redirect is two redirects which point to each other: page A is a redirect to page B, and page B is simultaneously a redirect to page A. Or it could be A -> B -> C -> A, and on and on and on. The software knows to only follow redirects for one hop so it doesn't break things, but as you can imagine they're useless for navigation. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:51, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

@Ivanvector: Sure no worries to reply here (but I am glad we seem now to have consensus it is OK to point to a postscript after a discussion has closed, not to modify that discussion, and to try to be brief, but as a post mortem).
Can you point me to any policy that says that? I had assumed a loop meant what it said, that if one clicks on A then one ends up back at A, or within a stone's throw of it (i.e. in the same article). To me that does not mean A -> A, which is patently useless, but A -> B and B mentions A. The problem then is whether A should be a WP:REDLINK. In the case of Milton's Walk, I presume having looked at the target but not the history that someone took the expedient of removing the brackets so that it is no longer linked, which is one way of cutting the knot, but not perhaps the best one: writing an article on Milton's Walk would be the best one, but WP:NOTPERFECT. (I was about to start one; it's got little to do with John Milton, for example; more likely to do with Milton, Cambridgeshire,among many others from which Milton may have got his surname. I had somewhere a history of Cambridge place-names, but now I am just going from memory, and it is not clear cut if it is named after the chap or the place.)

There is a great deal of difference

Between biography and geography: Geography is about maps

And biography is about chaps
— Edmund Clerihew Bentley Biography for Beginners


Sorry for the ramble but that's the kind of loops that I am on about: it is simple to me, I think, that if clicking on A in article B leads you back to A, however it does it, is a WP:SURPRISE. Perhaps that is all that needs to be said, and not G8 but SURPRISE? Si Trew (talk) 23:05, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
I get what you mean; like if I make a page User:Ivanvector/SimonTrew which contains only "#REDIRECT [[User talk:SimonTrew]]", then if you click on that link you end up right back here. There is a name for that and it is specifically discouraged, but I forget what it is just now. Actually I think what I described above is a redirect loop, so it could be that you're right all along. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 23:30, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
We are probably both right, but going by different routes (as indeed do the redirects). I think WP:SURPRISE and[[WP:RFD#D2] "confusing" cover these, don't you? I was wrong to quote G8 or is it R8. Si Trew (talk) 23:42, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
More really I am considering the case of User:Ivanvector/SimonTrew. Si Trew (talk) 23:45, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
I don't think it's quite a WP:SURPRISE, which is more like redirecting apple to pineapple - you wouldn't expect it but it's not quite nonsense. A bounce-back redirect (that's what I've decided to call it) is useless, but that's really more of a problem with the page where the link is placed, rather than the redirect itself - the redirect might still be useful if it's linked from somewhere else. If I create Si Trew's talk page! and redirect it to your talk page, then it's useless as a link from here, but quite useful as a shortcut from my own talk page - the problem is with the link on your talk page, not with the redirect itself. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 04:20, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings![edit]

Use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Seasons' greetings, Si![edit]

SimonTrew, Hope your holidays are happy, and have a happy new year! Steel1943 (talk) 17:24, 23 December 2015 (UTC)


--Rubbish computer (Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 16:24, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year SimonTrew![edit]

Happy New Year, SimonTrew![edit]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year[edit]

Happy New Year .jpg
Happy New Year!
Hello SimonTrew:

Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels?

Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters.

North America1000 03:34, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, SimonTrew. You have new messages at Northamerica1000's talk page.
Message added 06:45, 1 January 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
  • I'd like a link to the "3-gang that fits every socket known to man". Sounds like a winner. Face-smile.svg North America1000 06:45, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Draft:List of French civil unrests concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:List of French civil unrests, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_May_4#Quietscheentchen[edit]

Well, this talk page is a forum where I can point out you were totally wrong in a deletion discussion. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 16:47, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Don't mind you personally attacking me, but you went on to point out other editors' faults as well and that would be better off at WT:RFD, not on a user talk page. So I was wrong, sue me. Still WP:RFOREIGN, and you may notice I continually do give reasons for deletion; just because someone else disagrees with that reason (or that the conclusion follows from the reason) does not mean no reason has been given. Si Trew (talk) 16:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Pointing out that you were wrong is not a personal attack, and your argument was based at least in part of an erroneous opinion on what is or is not German. Drmies (talk) 17:13, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
"You were wrong" is an attack on a person; "your argument was wrong" is an attack on the argument. Drop the stick. Si Trew (talk) 08:48, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) [reply to this version] @Drmies: I assume Gorobay was alluding to the opinions of WP:RFOREIGN, though I agree it should have been made clearer, and you should have been notified as the author. I strongly disagree with the idea that "no reason ha[d] been suggested for deletion" as usual (the quality of the reasoning can be challenged, but reasoning was given). There are stark differences between 日本映画プロフェッショナル大賞 and Quietscheentchen. The first is specifically related to Japanese film, hence the name in Japanese is redirected, while the latter subject (i.e. rubber ducks) has no particular affinity to German (at least with the content currently in the article).Godsy(TALKCONT) 17:05, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Godsy, that is an argument that looks like a decent argument--thanks. Drmies (talk) 17:13, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
@Drmies and Godsy: I repeat, I don't think that this user talk page is the appropriate place to have this discussion. Can we move it to WT:RFD, please? I blank this page, or parts of it, sometimes. (Usually I blank praise and retain criticism.) Si Trew (talk) 08:47, 31 January 2016 (UTC) Si Trew (talk) 08:48, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


National Children’s and Youth Law Centre[edit]

Hello.

I've noticed that you've marked National Children’s and Youth Law Centre as a possible copyvio. The article was written by me. But if you see the original posting, I had written a very brief article. Later others added too much stuff - copyvio or not I don't know. So my request is either restore the original article or the one edited by others, if there aren't any issues. --Muzammil (talk) 12:31, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

@Hindustanilanguage: Hi there. I don't know if it's COPYVIO either – the wording looks similar but that various words have been reordered, substituted etc. in trivial ways. I'll leave it to others to decide. Thanks for letting me know. Si Trew (talk) 03:04, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Whom should I contact? --Muzammil (talk) 06:09, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
See at Wikipedia:CP#Responding to articles listed for copyright investigation. Si Trew (talk) 02:37, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

ACUI[edit]

Thanks. That spurred me to finally get around to ACUI Collegiate Pocket Billiards National Championship, which has been waaay back on the rear burner for about 10 years...  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  18:40, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

@SMcCandlish: oh, and I thought I was doing well by finally fixing a misquoted number at Rationing in the United Kingdom that I introduced five and a half years a go. I think Horace said that a liar should have a good memory! Si Trew (talk) 20:10, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Heh.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  20:11, 4 February 2016 (UTC)