User talk:Michael Drew

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome! (We can't say that loud/big enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page.

We're so glad you're here! -- Essjay · Talk 05:08, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Styles

Hi Michael, welcome to the wiki. I notice that you have added some prenomial styles to a few articles. Just so you are aware, this is a touchy subject around here, with many people outright opposed to their inclusion in the first line of the article, rather than mentioned later on. In anycase, the prenomial stylists seem to have prevailed for the moment, but there are still a few guidlines. First, the bolded part of the title should really only be the article title, or something that might reasonably be a redirect — so don't bold Honorable, or the postnomial initials, etc. Also, simple courtesy titles like professor, or Mr. are generally not included. Also, don't put wiki links within parts of the title that are bolded. So Sir Wombat Twitworth, not Sir Wombat Twitworth. Note that Sir is a bit of a special case, as it formally becomes part of the persons name, and so does tend to be bolded but not linked. Again, welcome! Fawcett5 16:46, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Titles

I've noticed you added the title 'Sir' to the 1st Duke of Wellington's article, which was reverted by the admin Proteus. Please note that a 'Duke' is higher in rank than a 'Knight' therefore the 'Sir' is no longer used in his title. 62.252.96.16 00:50, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Please also note that "Sir" does not always signify a knighthood--Pakington was a baronet, not a knight. Mackensen (talk) 20:59, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia style

I see that you have been modifying a number of articles to add prenomials and postnomials. You should probably check out the Manual of Style, which says:

If possible, make the title the subject of the first sentence of the article (as opposed to putting it in the predicate). In any case, the title should appear as early as possible in the article — preferably in the first sentence.
The first time the title is mentioned in the article, put it in bold using three apostrophes. Here's an example: article title produces article title. You should not put links in the title.

Since "The Honourable", "PC", "MP", "BA", "CC", LLB" and so on, are not part of the article title, they should not be in bold. This is not my preference: this is part of the Wikipedia Manual of Style.

This is why so many of your previous edits have been modified. I hope that you will adhere more closely to the prefered guidelines in the future, now that you know. I hope this helps. Thanks, Ground Zero | t 21:32, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Also, according to Wikipedia style, words in sub-headings, other than the first word, are not capitalized unless they would be capitalized in an ordinary sentence, so: "External links", not "External Links". Following Wikipedia style helps maintain a visually consistent encyclopedia, and reduces the workload for other editors. Thanks. Ground Zero | t 21:45, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Order of Merit

No one is a "recipient" of the Order of Merit because it is an Order (rather self-evidently), not an award. You'd know this if you'd actually read about it. Your category is fundamentally wrong. Proteus (Talk) 17:50, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi. I'm responding to your request at third opinion. Just as a guess, the Category renaming seems to have been handled improperly. However, there doesn't seem to be any obvious place to go for help with the problem. "Third opinion" doesn't get a lot of attention. You might want to try the admin noticeboard, but I am neither an admin nor have a perfect understanding of procedure, so that may not be appropriate. I'm leaving the Third Opinion request up. Hope this gets sorted out. Jkelly 04:17, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Parliament Biographies

Hi Micael,

Just a quick heads up that instead of adding the Political Biographies with:

You can do it instead with the following convenient template:

{{Subst:Parlbio|ID=1991}}

Notice that the language inserted is now a little bit different, but there were some complaints about the fact that the information there is not really a biography, and it included only the persons federal political experience and not any colonial, provincial, or municipal experience. Please feel free to substitute the new template for the old language whereever you see it, just keep the ID numbers the same... Cheers, Fawcett5 17:35, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] categories and their sub-cats

Hello. just wanted to point out that the convention on wiki is to not include an article in a category where it is also in that category's sub-category. (for instance where Christopher Plummer is already catted under Category:Torontonians he need not and conventionally is not be catted under Category:People from Ontario). the idea is to keep both the length of individual cats from becoming too long and to keep the number of cats per article at a reasonable length. (my little wiki hobby is catting pages better, by the way). regards, -Mayumashu 04:05, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Allen Bristol Aylesworth

The category Category:Historical Members of the Canadian House of Commons is in the process of being replaced by smaller and more manageable subcategories. Could you please not readd it to the articles that I'm removing it from? Thanks. Bearcat 21:25, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pembroke College, Oxford

As the College isn't one of its own former members, why have you added it to the former members Category? The Category page already has a link to the College's article. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:46, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

You keep re-adding this, without bothering to respond to my question, and without even giving edit summaries. Given that it's incorrect, I can only keep removing it. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:49, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
You're quite right, they're wrong too. I've changed all of them; if you come across any others, please let me know. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:54, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

But there is a link on the page (though for some reason it was in slightly the wrong place; I've moved it), just as there is on most articles about Oxford Colleges. That's precisely what I was arguing — a link on the page rather than an incorrect category. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:39, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Senators

Michael, "Senator" is a job title. I do not believe that ex-Senators continue to use the title. In any event, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies) does not indicate that this sort of title should be in opening of the article. The US presidential articles, e.g., Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, do not have "President" before the names even though former presidents continue to use the title. Even George W. Bush does not have "president" even though he is still president. Regards, Ground Zero | t 17:57, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Prince Arthur, Duke of Connaught and Strathearn

I notice that you added in the style The Most Noble to Prince Arthur, Duke of Connaught and Strathearn. Please do not add in styles. WP policy as and from August this year is that styles should never be used in articles. Instead a style box is used to define royal styles in the text. FearÉIREANN 01:21, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Sure Michael. Its in WP:MOSBIO. Right now it only applies to royalty. Previously a bitter edit war had erupted over whether to use styles in royal articles. (It was one of the worst edit wars in WP history and spread over large numbers of articles.) I proposed a compromise which to my amazement won 95% agreement from all sides. Basically how it works is that styles feature in articles (keeping the styles side happy) but not at the top (keeping the anti-styles people happy). Instead a styles template is added into each article listing the diplomatic style, alternative style and spoken style used. As a result styles have been deleted by all sides from all articles on royalty and the template installed. It is now an automatic formula that is used. Where styles appear in articles they are instantly deleted by whomever finds them, and replaced by the template (an infobox). You'll see the format in the above page, the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies). I hope that clarifies matters. FearÉIREANN 15:32, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Edward Shreyer

Hey Michael,

Can you belive it ! Shreyer is running for the NDP !!! - Jordan

[edit] Academic post-nominals

It's not Wikipedia practice. Go and look at a few articles and you'd see that quite clearly. And I don't really care what you think is advisable, it's not your own personal article. Proteus (Talk) 21:51, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Oxbridge MA ...isn't a 'real' degree, being just a long-service award on top of a BA. So the MA subsumes the BA (you don't hold both at once I think) Bob aka Linuxlad 00:39, 5 January 2006 (UTC) (and I was quite happy to just stay with the BA thanks :-))

[edit] Category:Order of Merit recipients

I marked this {{cfd}} only because it had no parent category and it looked like it had been discarded in favor of the other category. I have removed my cfd and assume that you are working things out with User:Proteus. -- Emact 23:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sarmite Bulte

Hi Michael, it was me that removed the MP categories, sorry about that, I see they are for past and present members. Thanks for putting them back. Doesn't a person lose the title 'Honourable' however once they leave parliament? I'm pretty sure they do but can't find anything specifically stating the situation. -- Blorg 09:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Did some more research, I see she keeps it as a member of the Privy Council. I've included that info in the article. -- Blorg 09:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Categories again

You've suddenly re-added the inaccurate categories which we discussed some time ago (see above). I've removed them again; please don't re-add them. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:04, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] academic degrees

I don't think it is usual to include academic degrees (e.g. Ph.D.) in the first line of a biographical article. I don't know what the policy is for honorary degrees, but it is certainly not conventional for academic degrees (see, e.g., Bill Frist, Rush D. Holt, Jr., Rashid Sunyaev, Linus Pauling...) I have removed your addition to the John Kenneth Galbraith article. –Joke 17:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Members of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada

I've been cleaning up uncategorized articles and noticed you had removed some of my changes.

Why is this? If you know of a better place for them, please let me know. -- ProveIt (talk) 01:22, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Stanley Cup Champions

Hello, I am wondering why you changed the category I created Category:Stanley Cup champions to Category:Stanley Cup Champions. I worked rather hard for a long to to add names to that category, and now I am not even credited in the history of the page. Please respond on my talk page. thanks. Michael Drew 01:17, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

This category was Category:Stanley Cup Champions, I renamed it to Category:Stanley Cup champions after processing a Speedy Category Rename Request. As there were several edits to the original category, I listed attributions for the original category, including yourself, on the new talk page. All links to the category have been updated, so the work you did in categorizing the articles still exists. As category pages can not be moved like other pages, it is not possible to merge the edit histories on them, this the reason I posted the attributions on the talk page. In doing so I believe I've fufiled the GFDL attribution requirements. If you think this is a licensing violation, please let me know ASAP. Otherwise, I hope my reply here clears things up, if not please reply back! — xaosflux Talk 14:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Capital letters

Hey Michael, I have been noticing alot of new hockey player pages you have been creating and that is great! However, many of your articles are using captial letters incorrectly. "He" and "His" don't need a captial "H" in the middle of a sentence. You've done this on Gerry Ehman, Bill Dineen (hockey), and Larry Hillman among others. Also, you have failed to use commas where needed. You can see some of the corrections I've made on Steve Black. I'm just trying to make Wikipedia a better place for everyone with articles that are clearly defined and readable. Please check punctuation and spelling before submitting the final page and feel free to check out the Manual of Style. But good work and good research on the articles you've written! Thanks! --Schmackity 15:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I like ice hockey but note Category:Swedish ice hockey players NOT People from Sweden Wiipedia is far more developed than this! and {sweden-bio-stub}Ernst Stavro Blofeld 21:42, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi yes I noticed this I knew wxactly what your message would say before I read it!!! I strongly suggest then to set up a category Swedish ice hockey managers then or something. Managers can cover people who run the teams and who manage talent spotting. I'll set it. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 21:54, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Walter "Gunzo" Humeniuk

Hey Michael Drew, found this info on Walter (sometimes Wally) and thought you could use it. Not sure why he was called "Gunzo". The first link is here with info in the about section. Also found this .pdf that has info and a award that is given out as the "Gunzo" award. It also says the "late" Walter Humeniuk, but I couldn't find a date for when he passed away. That .pdf is here, an the article is about three pages down. Also found out he was inducted into the Illinois Hockey Hall of Fame in a (long-loading) .pdf here Hope this helps! --Schmackity 14:03, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Jack Portland

It's no problem man, I know exactly what you mean about getting articles started. Just don't want to see pages cleared for plagarism. Anyway, all your other contributions are great, keep up the good work. Later. --RiverHockey

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/i/c/User_talk%7EMichael_Drew_17f8.html"