User talk:N.MacInnes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Autopsy Albums
Why are you slamming nonsense tags on perfectly legitime Autopsy (band) albums? Spearhead 23:26, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Because they're not legitimate album pages. --Nathan (Talk) 00:33, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
- Oh, I see now. See my comments on FCYTravis' talk page. --Nathan (Talk) 01:11, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Freiburg Münster
Thanks for your help in translating. I just did some cleanup and more translating (the physics section is not about the cathedral and not needed in my opinion) and added pictures from the Wikimedia Commons. It would be nice if you could go over it again and try to improve it even more, as I am not a native English speaker and am sure to make stylistic errors. For example, I am not sure if your "chamfering cloth" might be better than my "Lenten cloth". Thank you, and happy editing! Kusma (討論) 03:07, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- I'm glad you have an opinion on the physics section, because I couldn't understand it. I don't really speak German, but I am familiar with the language and so understand it reasonably well, but that physics section totally baffled me!
- Chamfering cloth was the best thing I could find in a German dictionary, but Lenten cloth does seem to be better.
- I'll carry on improving it. At the moment, even though it's in English, because I directly lifted it from word for word translations, some of the sentence structures are very German, so although it makes sense, it sounds a bit weird when read out loud. Hopefully a few others will have a go at it too though, and make it into a high quality article. --Nathan (Talk) 03:21, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re:Ranmoor
Hi, I have been trying to think of a compromise regarding Ranmoor that we would both be happy with. I admit that my arguments are a little flawed because we do not currently even have an article on Ranmoor, it is just a redirect. When I first came to wikipedia I created a lot of redirects like this one. I then wrote articles like Fulwood that collected a few districts together in one article—my thinking was that eventually we would get enough information about each district that we could branch them off into there own articles. For this reason I have been thinking of Ranmoor as a placeholder for an article that will be created one day. My question is then, if that article did exist, what would someone typing Ranmoor into wikipedia expect to see; that article or the article on Ranmoor House? I would argue that most people would be expecting an article on the suburb.
In most similar cases to this one, rather than having a disambiguation page, the article at Ranmoor would start with text something like This article is about the suburb of Sheffield, for the University Hall of Residence see Ranmoor House. But as Ranmoor is just a redirect we can't do that. I am a little bit reluctant to do this as there are currently only four sentences on the suburb of Ranmoor, but would it be acceptable to you if I used the text on Ranmoor that is curently in the Fulwood article to create a Ranmoor article that contained the above disambiguation text?—something like this. JeremyA 18:20, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- I went ahead and started a Ranmoor article. Let me know if this solution is OK with you. JeremyA 23:19, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- Sounds good to me. --Nathan (Talk) 01:06, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Sheffield
Thanks. Over the last year I have mostly worked on articles related to Sheffield, so it's great to finally see the main Sheffield article on the Main Page. JeremyA 01:40, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
