User talk:38chad
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
I am sick and fed up with people who leave a message here about an article and fail to provide a wikilink to the article. How do you expect me to read the article if you don't link to it?
I reserve the right to ignore any message which does not provide links where appropriate or has not been signed with ~~~~. Even if the article has been deleted, you should still link to it.
And if that sounds like a grumpy old man, it's because I am ...
[edit] Element TD
May I request a reason for why the Element TD page was deleted? I looked over the discussion for its deletion, and none of the administrators brought up any good points. I believe the problem is that the mods/administrators are NOT familiar with Warcraft 3. As a result, I do not believe you should be deciding if an article is important or not, when you know nothing about the game it is for. --Karawasa 03:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Element TD. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Karawasa 06:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Denvilles halt
Having given way to the temptation to tidy up Denvilles halt I found during the work, from my copy of Butt's The Directory of Railway Stations (P.78), that the LB&SCR opened Warblington Station as Denville in 1907. I thought you might find this ironic given events during the dispute. Someone at the time thought so; they renamed the station within the year (Ha! now I look at book more closely, within the month!) This may explain why you found Warblington and the only Denville you could find suspiciously close, as per your comment on the article's talk page. Butt has no reference to this Denvilles halt. Your comments are welcome on the quality of my changes to the article. Britmax 10:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] OSGB36 and WGS84
I know that you are aware that Template:Oscoor converts grid references to OSGB36 lat/longs, but the Map sources/GeoHack page expects WGS84 lat/longs. It means that Template:Oscoor, and all the templates that use it, e.g. Template:gbmapping, are of little use if you want to pinpoint the exact location of a building or street. (Similarly, the grid references generated via Template:coor are also inaccurate by 100m or so.) However, User:The Anomebot2 (a bot) is correctly converting grid references found within articles into WGS-84 latitude/longitude in Template:coor title d. Such articles then contain two geo refs which are displayed as about 100 metres apart.
Would you be able to modify your software to perform the datum change? See here for details how to do this. This gives even more detail.--Dr Greg 18:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Advert
Just need your comments as whether the following articles should have an
 |
This article or section is written like an advertisement. Please help rewrite this article from a neutral point of view. Mark blatant advertising which would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic for speedy deletion, using {{db-spam}}. (March 2008) |
tag:
Skagen Designs, Ltd. Armani FLO-CERT Bulgari Heidelberg Cement Hanson plc And if not, why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Feelfunky (talk • contribs)
You must be living on a different planet (or in a monastery) to have not heard of Armani or Bulgari! Of course none of them are adverts. I told you not to worry about the advert tag on voided biaxial slab but clearly you are still fussing about it. So I have voided that tag and replaced it with
 |
The creator of this article, or someone who has substantially contributed to it, may have a conflict of interest regarding its subject matter. |
. Again, don't worry, don't remove it. Think on this: the maintenance tags create incoming links to the article (via categories) and thus announce the article's existence. Instead of worrying about the tags, I suggest that you create a few more incoming links. 38chad 17:42, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] CircuitLogix
Hi, Thanks for the edits you made to the CircuitLogix article. It reads much better now. Best regards, --Carl142 23:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
