User talk:Deon Steyn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
The Template Barnstar
For your tireless efforts both for assisting with the creation of firearms infoboxes, and general assistance in other areas of firearms-related Wikipedia subjects, this Template Barnstar is both well-deserved and long overdue. --Commander Zulu 12:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


/Archive1

Contents

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VIII - October 2006

The October 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 21:11, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

Sorry for my remark in the last edit summary to Koevoet article. Emotions took advantage of me at that time. - Darwinek 12:28, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CW: references, weasel, rigour

I agree that the Craig Williamson article requires some references. But I am guessing you read the newspapers, you know what was said at the TRC? Just a slight rewording of the paragraphs you have tagged "weasel", etc would make them encyclopedic. The effect of your edits seem to cast more doubt that necessary on the article. A slightly different approach would give a better article. Some of the allegations remain just that, but they were made and CW has as good as given them the wink. I think better to go for a slight rephrasing rather than plaster the article with "I don't agree" labels. Paul Beardsell 09:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

And it seems that is what has happened and all are happy? The whole point is to end up with a better article in the end and that is perhaps what you provoked. Paul Beardsell 10:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Koevoet

The "Rooi Gevaar" has passed, no? I think you are using partisan language from the past. Whatever! But your edit seems to say that ONLY swapo accused Koevoet of dirty tricks. I think there is a tendency for everyone (me and you included) to try and get their own particular spin into the introductory paragraph. Sure, commie backed, but that almost seems incidental, now. And Koevoet was apartheid-backed. That is NOT in the introductory paragraph. I imagine a discussion as to what was the greater evil, apartheid or communism, is not one you want to enter into. Paul Beardsell 09:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

refs very untidy. suddenly got busy. will revisit. Paul Beardsell 14:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Right wingers from the past

There does sometimes seem to be a strong revisionist presence at some of the SA related articles. Perhaps I am too sensitive. I agree with you entirely that references are to the good. Paul Beardsell 11:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, a pity that some people want to balance out the above right-wing POVs by shoving left-wing POV adjectives, descriptive phrases, quotes or even content into such disputed articles. What a way to get things neutral! --WickedHorse 11:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Please ignore this poster's uninvited commentary. I suppose if one person accused me of being a right winger and another of being a left winger I'm doing something right?
Why should anyone "ignore" my commentary? I made a valid point about a trend I observed as described in my comment. I did not refer to you specifically but found Paul Beardsell's comment above a good place to leave my comment afterwards. My comment was an expansion of what he said. Using left-wing gimmicks to cancel out right-wing POVs (and vice versa) is not on. This comment is not necessarily directed at you but at anyone who reads this. --WickedHorse 12:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I was having a "conversation" Paul when you chimed in, my discussion with you ended last week and I have asked you not add more to it, yet you persist. I can only surmise that you are watching my talk page, please desist it is for my use not yours. Please stop making these irrelevant, unwelcome comments. --Deon Steyn 13:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

They shoot horses, don't they? Paul Beardsell 14:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Military history Collaboration of the Fortnight

You supported ISTAR, which has been selected as the Military history WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Fortnight. Please help improve this article to featured article standards. Kirill Lokshin 00:48, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Harley-Davidson engine template

Awesome work with the template. I've tried to add some of the rest of the "family", but feel free to revert if you'd rather implement that in another way. –BozoTheScary 18:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ducati table

Hey thanks for adding that, it looks great. I've not used the Wikitable before, so I've learned something new! Izaakb 13:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue IX - November 2006

The November 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WR progressions

Nice work!!! I have changed the table format slightly on World record progression 200m medley by using a simpler - and more standard - wikitable layout. I also added a separate column for the nationality with a full country name (it is sometimes difficult to distinguish countries by flags alone, e.g. east/west germany, ussr/china). I also reduced the wikilink density. Let me know what you think and if you like it, I can do the other pages too. Thanks again for the great page! Deon Steyn 10:02, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Want my honest opinion? Don't like it all, although it's a more standard wikitable layout. Having said that, standards are there to be broken, from my perspective. There's not enough space, too much density in info, that's why I used "width: 18em" for instance. So I'm not very pleased with your changes to be honest. Regards, Darius Dhlomo
You can shrink, but that doesn't change my opinion; I think the standard I used lookes much better - and is much more effective in presenting data - than the simple table format, which seems to be common. Darius Dhlomo
You can shrink, but that doesn't change my opinion; I think the standard I used lookes much better - and is much more effective in presenting data - than the simple table format, which seems to be common'
I just thought a common wikipedia look is preferred to a unique look that might not appear best with all user settings, because it's quite distracting when you view many different pages and stumble upon one that looks completely different? Even if you stick to swimming topics, most pages have tables and most have the standard layout? I reduced font to 90%, does it look better now? Deon Steyn 10:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
I believe in diversity, not in dull unity, so I'm not convinced at all. Or should we change the standard format? How can a page distracts you when the data is presented in a clear manner? I really don't see the point. I thought it would be a good idea to use this format, as explained above, and to edit the other events in this style as well, but right now I'm thinking of changing my mind.Darius Dhlomo
I see your point, but it could get a little messy if every table looks differently? If we use standard construct users can set their preferences accordingly? Your format currently takes up more spaces vertically (less rows are visible at a time). I suppose there is no rule or guideline against the first format. Some things do need to change though, especially the link density. I would also prefer full country names and no flagicons for the location? Deon Steyn 10:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
No, it doesn't get messy when all swimming tables are run in the same way. About the link density: ok, but the same counts for the country names I suppose. Full country names yes, no flagicons no.Darius Dhlomo
It could be perceived by other readers as a little snobbish, apart from just annoying them?
Is this an argument or what? Snobbish, for all edits I've done? Ever heard of the "feel free"-principle? I think we are getting in the dark zone now. But annoying? Yes, that does ring a bell....
Sorry, I didn't express myself clearly enough. I meant that other readers might perceive the swimming content as "snobbish" for trying to be different to the rest of wikipedia. I was just trying to help and point out that it is nice to be part of the larger community instead of trying to be too different? Deon Steyn 11:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Well, I see. But you're actually not helping me by demotivating me and pointing out that we should stick to something old. Where's the progressive way of thinking here? Try to see it as a new format, although I agree it takes up more spaces vertically, and we can bring back the link density. I still am part of a larger community, simply by adding information to Wikipedia. Being different is a compliment, being the same as everyone else is not from my perspective. Darius Dhlomo
I just pointed out a simple standard tool that I thought would make your life easier. Being different isn't always a good thing, that is why wikipedia has so many guidelines (granted this isn't one... ). Would I be progressive and cool and creative if if I made an article background blue and text red and font size larger? Sure, but would that be a good thing to do? I thanked you for adding these excellent pages and still want to award you another wiki medal as encouragement. I was going to add them to the see also sections of their respective events if you haven't already, but just wanted to point out some tweaks that might improve them which is what Wikipedia is all about after all: incremental communal improvements. Deon Steyn 06:45, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006

The December 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:31, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Johnson (runner)

I've reverted your recent edit because it was factually incorrect. Ben Johnson's disqualified record time was 9.79 (from September 24, 1998), not 9.83 (which would have been surpassed first by Maurice Greene in Edmonton in 1999 - ahead of Tim Montgomery). The 9.79 time was eventually bettered by Tim Montgomery on September 14, 2002 when he ran 9.78). Thanks. Yankees76 14:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sniper (Lon Horiuchi)

Why have you removed the entry for Lon Horiuchi? I don't understand.... HiramShadraski 12:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that list has grown very long in the past and teh article itself its already way too long. In a recent effort we have trimmed down the article and this list and sniper that are a lot better known have been dropped from the list. There is some discussion on the discussion page about this... personally I think a separate "list page" is a possible solution. As for the Horiuchi case specifically I don't think he is that remarkable (as a sniper) and not that well known either (even in the U.S.) so if we have to keep the list trim he wouldn't make the cut. I didn't check, but his page should be in the sniper category (another alternative to just adding it to the sniper page). --Deon Steyn 13:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, that makes sense. I also agree that he's not remarkable, but disagree that he's not well-known (the name may mean little to the average reader, until Ruby Ridge is mentioned).
I thought that the objection might be that he is a police sniper, not a soldier, and the article specifically makes that distinction earlier.
At any rate, I see your point about keeping the list down to a manageable size. I'll check his page for categories. - HiramShadraski 13:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007

The January 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Afrikaans

Als je Afrikaans bent/kent, dan kan je vast ook wel een beetje Nederlands ? :) SportsAddicted | discuss 10:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Natuurlik, goed genoeg om jou te verstaan :-) Deon Steyn 11:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Altijd leuk zoiets :) Mijn zus is er twee maal geweest en met hele mooie verhalen thuisgekomen. Ik moet er zelf ook zeker een keer langs. SportsAddicted | discuss 12:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Ja, miskien kan ons huise ruil! Ek is in Kaapstad, die mooiste stad in SA :-) Deon Steyn 13:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Haha, ja Kaapstad lijkt me inderdaad een geweldige stad om eens te bezoeken. Een huisruil? Dat klinkt interessant, hoe had je dat in gedachten? SportsAddicted | discuss 13:26, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Huisruil is miskien te ingewikkeld :) Maar jy is welkom om te besoek, miskien kan ek verblyf reel! Ek het my wiki e-pos enable, dat ons kan e-pos stuur... Deon Steyn 05:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Ik heb nog nooit met wiki email gewerkt, maar ik zal is kijken of het lukt :) SportsAddicted | discuss 07:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I'm trying to learn Afrikaans, however I must say, to the English eye, it can look a bit like a lot of randomly scribbed words.

I suppose any foreign language would look like "randomly scribbed words". Please create a Wikipedia account and sign your comments to make communication easy and simple (see Wikipedia: Talk page guidelines). Deon Steyn 06:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:MILHIST Coordinator Elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!

Delivered by grafikbot 10:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Military History elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!

Delivered by grafikbot 13:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Firearms

Welcome to the WikiProject Firearms. I hope you enjoy being a member.--LWF 22:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deon I have a solution to the Goedgevonden/ Ventersdorp incidents

I think that they are totally seperate incidents and were about totally different issues, however I've looked at your comments and I agree that since Goedgevonden incurred no fatalities it's not a battle, I'll rename it the Goedgevonden Incident but that the ventersdorp one was.

BOV1993 00:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Cool thanks. Ventersdorp is technically also not a battle, but the names stuck, because it became known as such in the press. It should ideally have been called The "Battle" of Ventersdorp, but there you go. Also be careful when reading sources on the topic as many are extremely biased. --Deon Steyn 05:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Deon, just so you know, BOV1993 has been blocked for a month for some edits he made anonymously and under a previous username. Zaian 21:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up. Unfortunately his edits up to this point looked decidedly biased, but we should soon be able to clean up most of it. --Deon Steyn 08:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Goedgevonden incident

No I reverted it because I had a "stupid moment". :) Apologies. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 08:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Well it was just a matter of recognizing my stupidity. Not sure how much sorting out that takes. :-D --WoohookittyWoohoo! 08:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
One revert and one talk page post.... heeeehehehe --Deon Steyn 08:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 14:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Banning of Martinusvanschalkwyk's username

Verskoon my, maar ek wil net weet hoekom jy oor my gebruikersnaam gekla het. Ook hoekom jy so geintereseerd was in my aksies? Ek is nie 'n vandaal nie. Antwoord gerus. MJ -Martinusvanschalkwyk- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.106.118.117 (talk) 23:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC).

Eeenvoudige antwoord: die naam breek 'n wikipedia reel en die adminstrators het dit ook so gesien en gevoglik die account vir eers gestop.
Lang antwoord: die paar edits wat jy gemaak het (as jy inderdaad die oorspronklike user is), was duidelik biased, want jy het sommer heel stukke verwyder en met swak edits vervang wat niemand help nie. --Deon Steyn 08:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Firearms userbox

A discussion on the WikiProject Firearms userbox is currently underway on the project talk page. Samples of various proposed userboxes can be found here and here. As a member, your input is valuable and appreciated. If you would like to contribute to the discussion or vote on your favorite, please visit the Userbox section of the talk page. Thanks! —Thernlund (Talk | Contribs) 01:05, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page protection

Just to let you know, adding {{sprotected}} or {{protected}} to a page is only a means for an admin to notify users that a page is protected. This does not actually confer protection to the article. If you need help protecting a page, please contact an admin or request it. Thanks! (re: List of One-day International cricket records) —Moondyne 02:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey, no need to apologise! I was just letting you know. Cheers. —Moondyne 10:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007

The March 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 18:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Prestige differences from novel

Deon Steyn, I just wanted to let you know that since you suggested adding a Differences from novel section to The Prestige (film) article, there have been no further comments either in support or against. This issue has been dormant for well over a month (no edits or comments have been made to the temporary page whatsoever since its creation). Consequently (coupled with the article going to GA since the issue was first raised), I'm assuming the question of whether to include a "differences" section to the article is answered for now.

This notice has been added to the The Prestige Talk page, and unless someone has any objections, I'm going to request that the temporary page be deleted within the next 24 hours. I will archive the content on one of my user pages, however. Thank you for your interest in improving the article.

— Jim Dunning  talk  :  12:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/e/o/User_talk%7EDeon_Steyn_7c46.html"