User talk:Andrewa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

G'day! This is Andrew Alder's user talk page, you knew that. Welcome! If you have a suggestion for an article you think I might particularly help with, please add it here, above the first horizontal line. Give as much or as little detail as seems good to you, but do give a link to it! Any other comments wherever you feel they belong, but the bottom of the page is conventional for new topics.

Please don't censor my talk page. Just because you don't support what someone is saying is no reason to remove it. Is it now?

On the other hand, if the edits you are removing are by banned users (or their socks), then please feel free to do it. That's not censorship, it's administrative drudgery, and I thank you for taking it on. But if there's doubt as to who the contributor really is, or if the proposed ban is not yet in force, or both, better to leave me to clean up my own page. A non-abusive heads-up on the antics of the contributor would still be appreciated! TIA Andrewa

Contents


[edit] Archives of this page

Wow. This page has now again grown to 30k, and there are some things there that I want to remember but a great lot that I don't expect to grow any more so despite earlier comments I'm now going to simply archive a great slab of it. If you want to continue any of those discussions, do so on this page please and link to the item in the archive. Andrewa 21:41, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

And wow again... now to 40k. See user talk:andrewa/archive2. Andrewa 01:32, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

And again... see user talk:andrewa/archive3, user talk:andrewa/archive5. Andrewa 05:44, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

User talk:andrewa/archive4 is dedicated to Return of the Time Cube. Andrewa 18:35, 28 May 2004 (UTC) This continues in User talk:andrewa/archive6 along with other issues. Andrewa 19:39, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

And now:


[edit] Wiki FAQs

Hi Andrew. I was thrilled to see your contributions on FAQ Farm (aka Wiki FAQs) the other day. Not all our FAQ Farmers are thoughtful and well-spoken, unfortunately, so I'm always happy to see Wikipedian-quality participants. Let me know anytime you have suggestions, criticisms, or questions about the site. I'm constantly working on making the site better.

Chris Whitten, FAQ Farm Webmaster.


[edit] Wikiversity

I saw your name on the Wikiversity participant's list, you may be very experienced in mathematics already, but I'm trying out instructing a Calculus course if you're interested, go to Wikiveristy, check out the mathematics department, pure mathematics, and in the course list is included Calculus. Fephisto 22:51, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/School_of_Mathematics:Calculus. Looks interesting. Andrewa 13:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Invite

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Christianity

The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

--WillMak050389 19:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. I was trying to invite all the Christian Wikipedians to WikiProject Christianity because it said to spread the word. This is considered spamming though, so it was removed from your page. If you care to join, the link above should work and you can help Wikipedia expand the Christian articles. See the page for complete details. Thank you for inquiring. --WillMak050389 03:55, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Very interesting! Thanks for the invitation.
Of course this wasn't ever spam, and its deletion was censorship. But hey, remember we're the good guys! We must be prepared to put up with injustices like this.
And of course the Jason Gastrich disaster didn't help. Andrewa 00:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
I would like to thank you so very much for your comments on my talk page about my "internal spamming". Though I realize (yeah, I'm American) I maybe should have not invited every Christian on Wikipedia and limited my invitations to those who have taken a large interest in Christian-related articles, I believe that the attack by others was too harsh. We Wikipedians that hold tight to our beliefs need to stick together and have the will power to ignore those that choose to attack us. I hope to be talking to you again, and thank you for your comments.
I also would like to award you this well-deserved accolade. (I'm giving it to you here because I didn't know where you keep your awards.) --WillMak050389 16:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
For being there and having the power to stand up with me against those who are opposed to our beliefs. --WillMak050389 16:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
For being there and having the power to stand up with me against those who are opposed to our beliefs. --WillMak050389 16:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, I'll have to think about that. It's the first award I've ever received. Thank you, it's appreciated. Andrewa 02:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Solar updraft tower

I noticed that you have made a number of constructive contributions to Solar chimney in the past. That article has been cut/pasted/reassembled/morphed/transmogrified into Solar updraft tower. I have been trying to put in an unbiased assesment of its strengths and weaknesses. The problem I am facing now is that the article has been totally revamped by an editor from Australia, most likely somebody who is on the payroll of EnviroMission, and who has pretty much edited out anything that is even remotely critical of EnviroMission's POV. It now pretty much reads like a brochure of EnviroMission. For comparison you may want to have a look at my Revison as of 23:11, 7 July 2006 to see what is going on. Going back in the history of that article reveals that this kind of stuff has been going on before, and that you were one of the people who tried to counter it.
I intend to revert it to a more unbiased POV once the guy is gone, but I would be very appreciative of any support I can get for that endeavour. Specifically I noticed that some time in the remote past you put in the following paragraph:

This principle has been proposed for power generation, using a large greenhouse at the base rather than relying on heating of the chimney itself. The main problem with this approach is the relatively small difference in temperature between the highest and lowest temperatures in the system. Carnot's theorem greatly restricts the efficiency of conversion in these circumstances.

This paragraph is one of things that went by the wayside recently. I actually engaged the guy in a dicussion of that issue; see Talk:Solar updraft tower#Carnot engine. Anyway, I hope that you are interested to put the page on your watch list, and monitor what is going on. JdH 19:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to make Solar tower a disambiguation page

We are having a bit of a discussion about a possible name change of the Solar tower, see Proposal to make Solar tower a disambiguation page. Your input would be appreciated. JdH 17:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You have mail

at missiontechwiki (once I've written it).


[edit] Image:Spkrdinplug.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Spkrdinplug.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. This is becuase I have uploaded a clearer image of speaker DIN plugs, Image:Speaker din male and female.jpg. Please look there (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. boffy_b 00:31, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Support this deletion. Thanks for the better image, and the heads-up on it. Andrewa 14:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I reverted your talk page

Just leaving you a note to explain why I reverted your talk page: the text I removed was a spurious/vexatious request from User:HotHotSoup, the latest sockpuppet of User:PoolGuy, spamming the talk pages of admins (and a few non-admins), and apparently working alphabetically. Contributions of a banned user may be reverted by anyone, but if you would still like the message to be included here, feel free to revert back. Stifle (talk) 17:40, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

No problems, and thanks for the heads-up. I have no objection to your reverting edits by banned users. Thanks also for the effort you are putting into this. Andrewa 13:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Creed

I have linked to your creed from my userpage; well done. KillerChihuahua?!? 19:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Research Survey Request

Hello, I am a member of a research group at Palo Alto Research Center (formerly known as Xerox PARC) studying how conflicts occur and resolve on Wikipedia. Due to your experience in conflict identification and resolution on Wikipedia as an administrator we’re extremely interested in your insights on this topic. We have a survey at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=201962477432 which we are inviting a few selected Wikipedians to participate in, and we would be extremely appreciative if you would take the time to complete it. As a token of our gratitude, we would like to present you with a PARC research star upon completion. Thank you for your time.

Parc wiki researcher 01:35, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
PARC User Interface Research Group

I have restored this edit quite deliberately. There seems nothing in Wikipedia policy to justify its removal. Perhaps there should be, but there isn't. Andrewa 07:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pale

Hi, thanks for doing the Pale move. Is there a reason why you didn't also move Talk:Pale to Talk:The Pale??--Srleffler 03:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

It didn't seem necessary to me, or even a good idea. The various talk pages all have significant page histories. I didn't move Talk:Pale (jurisdiction) either.
The significance of the history of a talk page is completely different to that of an article. With articles, we're primarily interested in complying with the GFDL. With a talk page, we don't normally need the history for GFDL compliance, as the contents are already signed. What the history still gives us is an assurance that the signatures and timestamps are accurate.
Similarly, the contents of talk pages don't have the same significance as those of articles. The important thing with an article is the coherent final product. With a talk page it's more being able to follow the strings of discussion.
I felt that it was more confusing to move the pages than to leave them as are. If you find the current setup confusing, my suggestion is just to add explanatory comments to the relevant talk pages. Of course, that isn't an option with an article. There's also less problem with putting pointers to relevant section of the other page, or even cut and paste moves. But looking at the existing contents of the tslk pages, I didn't feel these were necessary anyway. The aim should be, make what has happened obvious to future readers, so they don't need to reinvent the wheel. If a move would help with this, then it's worth the trouble.
Do you think the talk pages should be moved? Why? Andrewa 06:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
It seemed less confusing to me to keep the talk pages with the articles they related to. Having the talk page from what is now The Pale remain with the article at Pale (which was formerly (Pale (jurisdiction)) just seems confusing. Instead, I archived the former talk page from The Pale at Talk:The Pale/Archive 1 and made appropriate links, so both articles end up with a mostly-fresh talk page, rather than a talk page full of discussion about a different article.--Srleffler 06:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

Thanks for the heads-up, but I don't recall editing that page, nor do I see myself in the history -- are you sure I'm the person you meant to notify? Regards — Dan | talk 07:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah, right. Well, I still don't remember it, and I have no particular opinion on the issue, so long as the related articles end up consistent (either all capitalized or all not). Again, thanks anyway for the notification. — Dan | talk 20:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, how odd -- apparently someone moved it and I moved it back. It seems (judging by conversation on the talk page) I was mistaken about it being properly capitalized as a title. No matter; I'm sure it will end up in the right place this time. — Dan | talk 21:49, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nuclear power as a renewable energy source

Have you been following Talk:Renewable energy? I don't have time to keep up this fight against the people who want to remove all mention of it from the article. See my post on the Village pump. — Omegatron 21:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Obviously, this particular debate will continue in Wikipedia for some time! Thanks for your input.

Sigh. I wish it didn't...

I haven't been monitoring these particular articles lately,

I know. I've been accused of leading a one-man crusade to maintain the consensus from last year, since everyone else left.

and suggest that if you do (and I hope you will), you take Wikibreaks from them from time to time, and contribute less controversial stuff. This will help your own perspective and motivation.

I did, along with others. The section is now being deleted by every well-meaning newcomer who swings by, not understanding that it's not our place to define terms and make decisions; just to report on the debate.
Can you comment on Talk:Renewable_energy#Nuclear_energy_debate? — Omegatron 13:00, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Done. Andrewa 15:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I should probably take your advice and just drop it. But I know it will be removed as soon as someone isn't looking, and it really belongs in the article, as several people agreed a while ago. But they all stopped paying attention to it, so maybe I should give up, too.  :-/ — Omegatron 16:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
nnnn nnnn Hang in there. Andrewa 16:44, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] requested move

Hi there, thanks for intervening in the University of Wisconsin discussion. It seems that the debate has come to an end. Could you please move the article to its unambiguous name University of Wisconsin-Madison? From the long discussion, I can see that creating a disambig page for University of Wisconsin is acceptable to most editors there. Thanks. Miaers 19:21, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

See Talk:University of Wisconsin#Proposed move - Resolution. No objections yet. Assuming there are none within 24 hours of my posting that proposal, it will be done. Andrewa 05:11, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi there, this is to remind you that there has been no objections about the proposal and it is now ready for you to make relevant changes. Miaers 15:32, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

The move of University of Wisconsin-Madison has broken the links on a whole bunch of templates. I see that you included %20 for space and such - is it possible to fix the page to properly be the page University_of_Wisconsin-Madison? • master_sonLets talk 12:47, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Can you be specific as to what templates are now broken?
I think you may be mistaken about the %20. Possibly, the problem is the dash. Andrewa 22:00, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

(i tried to fix one, but the others don't follow yet.)

Actually if you visit any of the pages on {{University of Wisconsin}}, you will find that the sattelite universities use a hyphen. You used an "em dash" which is an odd character in urls. and it is also not consistent with the sattelite universities.

Just rename the page as University of Wisconsin-Madison to fix it.--• master_sonLets talk 22:38, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately just rename would lose significant history. But I think it's fixed now. Andrewa 01:27, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

The templates now work good. The templates were pointed to the disambig as were some 1200 other articles in Wikipedia. Luckily I have AWB rights, so I went through all but 900 and change of them and corrected the links so that the assumption is made. It might be a good idea to put a disambiguation tag on the page (but just a suggestion...)

Please sign your posts on talk pages.
I'm a bit skeptical that the change you've made is correct in 900 cases. Better if in any doubt to have them point to the disambiguation page... which is already tagged as such.
If you mean we should have a disambiguation tag on the unambiguously named University of Wisconsin System or University of Wisconsin-Madison articles, then I don't agree.
The see also tag at the top of one of them is IMO not very helpful, although not harmful enough that I'd remove it. The article itself should contain sufficient information and wikilinks to enable navigation, which is far better than a link that says see also but doesn't give any idea of why you should see also. If you can think of a better tag, please add it! Andrewa 03:53, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jack Straw (politician) move

Why no consensus on this Requested move? There were four Oppose votes and six Support votes. Philip Stevens 13:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

That's not any sort of consensus. If any one person had changed their vote, it would be a deadlock, even numerically. Andrewa 20:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

  • What majority does it take to be a consensus? Philip Stevens 05:47, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

It's not that simple. There was a rejected policy proposal that it be 60%, see Wikipedia:Supermajority, but in the end the existing policy that Wikipedia is not a Democracy was upheld. The 60% figure would be achieved... just... by counting your vote as proposer. I suppose I could have voted against it to decide the issue, but I didn't feel it necessary.

Do you feel that consensus has been achieved? Have you asked any of the opponents to reconsider their views? Andrewa 20:38, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to WikiProject Guitarists!

Hi!, thanks for signing up. We are dedicated to improving all guitarist articles, including bass guitarists and all genres. We also work on guitar equipment articles. Check out our main project page and see the to-do list for places to get started. Welcome! Anger22 22:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Organ pipe, Organ stop and Pipe organ

Hi Andrew,

I have just been looking into the Pipe organ and surrounding articles, and I think that the article you created at Organ pipe is almost redundant thanks to the great deal of work that has improved the Pipe organ page, which seems to now supercede your article. How do you feel about merging Organ pipe back into Pipe organ? I feel that a more specific article should contain more specific information. I don't think this one does any more! Would you take a look and give me your opinion? I'd be interested to see what you think of the Organ stop page, which isn't as good as it could be.

Many thanks,

Mdcollins1984 13:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I haven't had a lot of time for this lately, but I'll have a look. I've no opposition to the merge in theory. Andrewa 19:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reverts of de-wikifying

Why did you undo my de-wikifying of the History of UW Milwaukee article? The guidelines seem pretty clear, that we should not have multiple instances of the same link in the same article, such as the multiple Milwaukee links you put back in. --Orange Mike 03:08, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I didn't intend to revert any of your edits and don't think I did. What I reverted was the deletion of content from the intro by another user. Your edit was a minor (and correct) revision of this minimal introduction; I didn't think it was applicable to the old intro. I actually went back to one of 'your' versions (remembering that we don't really own anything here). See the talk page. Andrewa 03:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Cool. I just removed the excess wikilinks; restored the specific meaning of "socialist" re: Zeidler (and stipulated that he was Milwaukee's mayor, for those who don't know the name); and put all the timeline entries into present tense, as is customary (some were present tense, some past). I hope this is satisfactory. --Orange Mike 03:34, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Looks good to me. Sorry to make you do some of it twice! Andrewa 09:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Afd Request

Hi there,

Would you mind taking a look at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bryan_Brandenburg

It needs more input from seasoned editors.

Thank you, Linux monster 00:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for stopping by

It looks like a good decision was made. I plan on making regular contributions so I'll see you around. Wikipedia is a tremendous resource.

Thanks,

Linux monster 22:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tango TV

The new name of the Luxembourgish television channel is T.TV. I can't move it to T.TV because there's a redirect. The Lithuanian television channel is now the only station called Tango TV. It should be moved to Tango TV. --Franc000 16:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds logical. Thanks for the heads-up. My reply is at Talk:Tango TV#Where to now. Andrewa 19:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ECW Championship

Part of the reason there was no opposition was that it was never mentioned at WP:PW, is there a version of the deletion review for moved pages? The article should be moved back and the members of WP:PW should be told about the move request. TJ Spyke 07:38, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Disagree that the article should be moved back. A Wikiproject is just another colaboration tool. If other editors decide not to consult the Wikiproject and the Wikiproject members don't notice what is happening, the processes just go ahead without them. In hindsight I should have raised it at the Wikiproject, but that's done now.
Yes, there's a review mechanism, which is simply to list a reversal of the move on WP:RM.
My suggestion is that you discuss it on the talk page first. Quick relistings often attract a certain amount of opposition unless there's a consensus of several editors established on the talk page first.
You might also consider making better use of the watchlist facility to prevent this sort of thing happening again. Andrewa 22:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New AfD on LoPbN

You supported retention of the LoPbN tree a couple of years ago. At this moment, vote is 8D to 3K on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people by name (2nd nomination). I assume your views are unchanged, and would appreciate your weighing in again. Thanks in any case, and happy holidays
--Jerzy•t 09:20 & 09:26, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jesus

I recently found that the Jesus article on Wikipedia is the first item that comes up when you search for "Jesus" on the world’s most widely used search engine, Google.

Please edit the Jesus article to make it an accurate and excellent representation of Him.

The Jesus article may be a person’s first impression of Jesus. It would be nice if their first impression was from a Christian or the Bible, but for so many in these new days it probably comes from the Internet. Watch the Jesus page to keep it focused on Him. Thanks a lot.

Also, watch out to follow Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines. It is especially hard for the Three-revert rule and the Neutral point of view policy to be followed because of the nature of the article, but please follow these policies along with citing sources so that the article does not get locked from editing and can't be improved further. Thanks again. Scifiintel 17:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] University of Wisconsin

Hi Andrewa, User:Dekimasu made dramatic changes on University of Wisconsin without any regards to the previous discussions. University of Wisconsin is shared by more a dozen universities. It shouldn't direct to UW-Madison. I think it is better to change it back. What's your opinion on this? Miaers 18:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Agree. I've listed it at WP:RM to get a formal proposal going. In hindsight, perhaps I should have done this back at Talk:University of Wisconsin/Archive 2#Proposed move - Resolution. Ah well! Andrewa 22:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/January 2007/Pajaro4

Hi. It's been suggested I get in touch with you regarding the case of Italian Bellotti Cymbals. Would you be able to take a look at the article and leave a comment on the talk page. Regards. SilkTork 00:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD Nomination: University of Wisconsin (disambiguation)

An editor has nominated the article University of Wisconsin (disambiguation) for deletion, under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the nomination (also see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on why the topic of the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome: participate in the discussion by editing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Wisconsin (disambiguation). Add four tildes like this ~~~~ to sign your comments. You can also edit the article University of Wisconsin (disambiguation) during the discussion, but do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top of the article), this will not end the deletion debate. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 20:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Lg seca ohne.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Lg seca ohne.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] University of Wisconsin (disambiguation)

I have asked for a deletion review of University of Wisconsin (disambiguation). You might want to participate. --Orange Mike 03:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Natural History of South Asia mailing list

This article is up for deletion can you kindly share your opinion on it [1] .

Thanks in advance Atulsnischal 22:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ciudad Real Torre Solar

I would appreciate it if you went down to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ciudad Real Torre Solar and give your opinion about this AfD. Thanks, JdH 13:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peano axioms up for A-class rating

Hi Andrew. The mathematics WikiProject has set up a process to grant articles that deserve it an A-class rating at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/A-class rating. Recently, our article on the Peano axioms was nominated. Unfortunately, there are no comments from anybody who really knows logic, so I was hoping that you could have a look at the article, see whether there is anything there that would embarrass us, and leave a comment on Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/A-class rating/Peano axioms. Thanks. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 08:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] rickenbacher

i notice you left a note on the adolph rickenbacker page. he changed his name later than ww1. if you notice the early guitars say it with a bh. eddie rickenbacker change his name during ww1, then became famous. they were cousins and both grew up in columbus ohio. so to help himself he changed his name to the bk version, so people would associate it with eddie. oh and he died in april of 1974. his wife died in 1969. she was the hier to the union 76 fortune. adolph is my great grandfathers brother. my uncle, who is still alive used to live with him when he moved to california. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.43.152.235 (talk) 23:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Jimbo is coming to Sydney

Sorry to spam you if you aren't interested. See Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney#April 25th for more info if you are interested. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Straw polls MfD

Greetings, as one of the editors who originally helped develop this page into a guideline I thought you should be aware of the MfD about it. Thanks. (→Netscott) 02:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mathematics CotW

hey Andrew, I am writing you to let you know that the Mathematics Collaboration of the week(soon to "of the month") is getting an overhaul of sorts and I would encourage you to participate in whatever way you can, i.e. nominate an article, contribute to an article, or sign up to be part of the project. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks--Cronholm144 17:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Other creeds

Hi. I like your creed. Can you point me to others? Also, are there any sources/texts that inspired you? Thanks muchly, HG | Talk 18:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Please let me know if you think of anything similar in WP. HG | Talk 18:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Enid Blyton Bible Stories.jpg

Hello, Andrewa. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Enid Blyton Bible Stories.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Andrewa/Enid Blyton. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 02:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Ooops...! Done... and a couple of others too. Andrewa 03:23, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:How to Lie with Statistics.jpg

Hello, Andrewa. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:How to Lie with Statistics.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Andrewa/miscellaneous sources. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 08:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ChemDraw

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on ChemDraw, by Simul8 (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because ChemDraw fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

advertisement


To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting ChemDraw, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 16:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:MUSINST Newsletter!

Hello. This is just a friendly reminder that the Musical Instruments WikiProject has released their current newsletter. Please spread the word about the newsletter, our project, and the work we are performing.

You are receiving this notification because you are listed as an honoured guest of the Musical Instruments WikiProject. Opt-in and Opt-out delivery notifications are currently undergoing discussions. Please contribute to expand these options.

For the WP:MUSINST newsletter - NDCompuGeek 19:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Quasiturbine mechanisms.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Quasiturbine mechanisms.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Chowbok ☠ 00:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More replaceable fair use images

  • Image:Quasiturbine with carriages.jpg


—Chowbok ☠ 00:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Songwriters

Hello Andrews, I am categorizing the musicians from my country Cyprus and since you are a member of wikiproject Music, I would like to ask you something. When someone who is considered composer can be considered songwriter and when not? When someone who is considered lyricist can be considered songwriter and when not? If you know I will appreciate if you answer.--KRBN 21:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hey Joe

Are you going to make a disambiguation page? Its a dead link otherwise?--Xiahou 03:13, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes...! Andrewa 03:16, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for intervening at the Tablighi Jamaat and allegations of terrorism by U.S intelligence article, I have no expertise in starting a poll and do not think I am the best person to do it. Would you mind setting up one? How do we invite people to vote? I know that vote stacking or canvasing is against the policy. Please advice. NëŧΜǒńğerPeace Talks 17:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for starting the poll, I have responded. NëŧΜǒńğerPeace Talks 20:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Challenge

I respectfully draw your attention to my recent comments at horse slaughter, whose title change you opposed. BrainyBabe 16:40, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Artisan_275365.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Artisan_275365.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 10:19, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] your vote at Isarco-Eisack

Hi, you probably need to read the consensus that was found at Communes of South Tyrol before making a final opinion. The criteria was 1) clear English usage 2) majority language spoken. We find no clear solution for 1) so we go to 2). Markussep originally listed the villages/towns along this river and posted their language-spoken percentages (from a census). I took those percentages and multiplied by the number of people in order to actually be able to add them correctly. That is where I found 20,000 more Italian-speakers, and therefore a necessity to move the page to satisfy the criteria. Icsunonove 17:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I see no consensus there, and still see no necessity for the move. Andrewa 17:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, look, I've explained how the system they developed works. I don't agree with it, but I do feel it should be applied rigorously. Not to mention other facts as the river actually being in.. well, Italy. Icsunonove 17:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
There's been a lot of discussion. I'm sorry I can't make you happy by saying Yes, I agree, but I don't. I think that a case can be made either way, and that being the case, it doesn't matter a lot which way the article is named. So I don't agree with your idea that there's a necessity at all. I do however agree strongly with the consensus that does exist that the hyphenated article name that you used in the heading of this section should not be used. And that means we need to use one of the common names. Andrewa 18:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
See, I do not care if you agree or disagree, but I do care that people helping us with a decision to move or not move be actually informed. If you don't agree there is a "necessity", then what, the page should have no location, or be deleted? There of course must be a reason to have the German Eisack instead of Italian Isarco or vise versa. It seems one would have to make a strong argument instead to why the page is at a German name, while the river is in its entirety in Italy. Whatever.. Icsunonove 19:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I've actually been following the South Tyrol naming debates for some time. I don't think there's a lot of point in repeating them here. No, I still don't think there's any necessity either way. Andrewa 20:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Guitarists newsletter

The WikiProject Guitarists Newsletter
Issue III - July 2007
Project news

Hey everyone! It's been quite a while since the last newsletter went out but it's time to tune up those guitars, set the amps to 11, and rock out a bit. Or for us old guys, put on the fingerpicks and set the amp to 3. A lot of people have been laboring away at guitar articles and their efforts are to be applauded. If you haven't edited in a while, why not pick an article from Category:Stub-Class guitarist articles and expand it? Or better yet, pick one from the article requests and create it. More tasks can be found on the main project page in the WikiProject Guitarists open tasks box.

I went through the member list and moved anyone who hasn't edited a guitar article in two months to the inactive section. If you're getting this newsletter, it means you are still in the active list. See you around --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 21:47, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Volunteers needed

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself here.

[edit] G5700_xl-1c173563fe67c393dee23bbc65dc08e3.jpg

I have tagged Image:G5700_xl-1c173563fe67c393dee23bbc65dc08e3.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Rettetast 15:58, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gibson_Dobro.gif

I have tagged Image:Gibson_Dobro.gif as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Rettetast 10:54, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Bass_VI_string_pack.jpg

I have tagged Image:Bass_VI_string_pack.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. MER-C 11:40, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Weissenborn_lmfront.jpg

I have tagged Image:Weissenborn_lmfront.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ElinorD (talk) 16:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Weissenborn_lmfront.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Weissenborn_lmfront.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ElinorD (talk) 16:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Weissenborn_teardrop.jpg

I have tagged Image:Weissenborn_teardrop.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ElinorD (talk) 16:25, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Weissenborn_teardrop.jpg

I have tagged Image:Weissenborn_teardrop.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. ElinorD (talk) 16:25, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Weissenborn_celtic_cross_prototype.jpg

I have tagged Image:Weissenborn_celtic_cross_prototype.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ElinorD (talk) 16:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Weissenborn_celtic_cross_prototype.jpg

I have tagged Image:Weissenborn_celtic_cross_prototype.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. ElinorD (talk) 16:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Weissenborn_lmside.jpg

I have tagged Image:Weissenborn_lmside.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ElinorD (talk) 16:29, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Elderly_LM-GLDB_front.jpg

I have tagged Image:Elderly_LM-GLDB_front.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ElinorD (talk) 16:33, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Elderly_LM-GLDB_front.jpg

I have tagged Image:Elderly_LM-GLDB_front.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. ElinorD (talk) 16:33, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Franklin (historic U.S. state)

This had the same text as Talk:State of Franklin. There is no need to keep two copies. Since the article is now State of Franklin (per the discussion on its talk page), I deleted the extra talk page. Ground Zero | t 18:07, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Whoa. How did I do that? My apologies. I have fixed it now. Thanks for catching my mistake. Regards, Ground Zero | t 18:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stray mouse click?

Please take a look at the bottom in this change: [2]. I often see this kind of edits. I always thought it is kinda novice testing. But since you are hardly novice, I suspect thete is an artifact of wiki engine. Can you recall what you actions could have produced this piece of edit? `'Míkka 15:49, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

As you say, an artifact. I've somehow clicked on a button on the toolbar above the edit window. This often happens when the system is under stress, but obviously this time I didn't notice, and saved the result. I think this sort of artifact is more likely to be that sort of error, rather than novice testing. I've corrected a few of them myself, thanks for fixing this one. Andrewa 20:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fender Wikiproject Proposal

Hi, I have proposed a new Wikiproject for Fender. If you are interested, please add you name here. Izzy007 Talk 21:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Here is the project page.Izzy007 Talk 23:31, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Libyan Airways

Hi,

Please check out my response, Talk:Libyan Airways,

Thank you Jaw101ie 12:58, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Porous cities

An {{afd}} tag has been placed on Porous cities, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. All Wikipedians can join the debate at Articles for deletion, where articles asserted to be inappropriate to Wikipedia are discussed. You are encouraged to submit your opinion, and remember that Articles for Deletion debates are not a vote. You can also leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the deletion tag yourself, but don't feel inhibited from editing the article, particularly if doing so makes it clear that it is a useful contribution to an encyclopaedia. John Vandenberg 13:16, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Panic alarm move

I just wanted to say thanks. Yeah, it probably wasn't controversial, but I didn't feel I had enough edit history to do anything like that without going through the hoops. Still learning policy and procedure so I figured the long road was the best road. Thanks a bunch! LadyAngel89 20:44, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Halifax

Hi, sorry about the misunderstanding about Talk:Halifax, West Yorkshire#Requested move. While the two issues are separate, the shambolic state of the Halifax, Nova Scotia situation seems to have precipitated the requested move of Halifax, West Yorkshire. What a mess! --RFBailey 01:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank god for you, too, sir. It has been a long three years. The political iron is still HOT here in Halifax, people still are inflamed with passion. It is frustrating as heck. I personally think that part of the problem is that what the common usage and official usages are have been changing and evolving, and a lot of the people editing that article don't seem to accept that the situation has changed, but further, if we got the article totally "right" that the steady press of time would make that article out of date, in months and years, not decades! It will be very interesting to see how this pans out. Thanks for worrying about good wiki! WayeMason 16:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Halifax

I've attempted to make a first draft of a new Halifax, Nova Scotia article, in my userspace here. It's in a very rough-and-ready form, and needs a lot of tidying, sorting, and being made consistent, as well as a proper opening, before it's ready. But it should give an idea as to what I believe that article should contain. Your thoughts would be appreciated! Thanks, --RFBailey 17:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Facebook about to be deleted

Hi, as one of the people with a picture on Wikipedia:Facebook, figured you might be interested in knowing that it is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Images of Wikipedians (2nd nomination). - Ta bu shi da yu 02:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! Andrewa (talk) 22:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Classification of admins

Hi Andrewa. Please consider adding your admin username to the growing list at Classification of admins. Best! -- Jreferee t/c 22:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gilaki

Modified the move request at Talk:Gileki language per your suggestion. "Guilak" is equally unheard of so I hadn't even searched for it. Thanks. — AjaxSmack 04:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Guitarists notice

Just letting you know that you have been placed on the inactive list of WikiProject Guitarists members. If you'd like to get involved again - that'd be great! Feel free to move your name back to the active list, and we'll see you back in the studio. Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 17:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mandobird_4.jpg

I have tagged Image:Mandobird_4.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. – Quadell (talk) (random) 14:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Em8_front_100.jpg

I have tagged Image:Em8_front_100.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. – Quadell (talk) (random) 14:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Elderly_BSMB4-REDB-RSWD_front.jpg

I have tagged Image:Elderly_BSMB4-REDB-RSWD_front.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. – Quadell (talk) (random) 14:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arabic

We got a little off topic. Sorry I'm passionate about this issue and I've gone over this many times with many people. I have often gotten a response of "who are you to say how to spell things?" and I've thrown in the towel several times. You're a very reasonable person and sorry if I sounded arrogant or demanding. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 02:20, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Understood. But in a way, I've issued the same challenge! When you read WP:NC carefully it's a lot more radical than most people suspect on first reading. I like it, I think it reflects both Wikipedia culture and the best recent scholarship of the last hundred years or so, in many fields. But there are certainly some challenges to the whole approach. Andrewa (talk) 12:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Amphead.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Amphead.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. WinHunter (talk) 15:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:House of Hohenstaufen

I hope the discussion gets back on track. I am more than a little frustrated with it because the editor who reverted my moving of the page recently has a history with me, and though a Hohenstaufen disambiguation page is certainly needed, that he created Hohenstaufen into one—despite the many links to it—I believe stems from lesser motives, though, out of respect for WP policy, I have tried to avoid saying so. Srnec (talk) 00:29, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Saga_Stevens_Steel.jpg

I have tagged Image:Saga_Stevens_Steel.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Rettetast (talk) 20:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Steve Smiths

The issue has not been resolved. The main problem is that the talk pages for the articles are still reversed. Talk:Steve Smith (ice hockey) has the talk page contents that really belong to James Stephen Smith, and Talk:James Stephen Smith has the talk page contents for Steve Smith (ice hockey). Thanks. Snocrates 08:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chris-nz

Could you please userfy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:USERFY#Userfication_process the 'Cancer_Cure' article to Chris-nz --Chris-nz (talk) 23:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

See User talk:Chris-nz#G'day. Andrewa (talk) 23:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

re http://source.pbwiki.com/Cancer%20Cure 'email me for the password if you'd like to work on it there' Sorry I couldn't locate your email address, if you could email me the pbwiki password, thanks for setting that up, most helpful. --Chris-nz (talk) 00:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC) --Chris-nz (talk) 18:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Girl Guides moves

Hi. You recently contributed to the discussion at Talk:Girl Guides about moves and renames of some articles about Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting. I have considered what you said and have opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting#Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting article modifications. I needed to summarise what you said to effectively open this discussion. I hope I have done justice to your remarks and have correctly represented what you intended. Kingbird (talk) 06:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] University College Dublin move request

I added UCC to the UCD move request. Please comment or append your comment accordingly. — AjaxSmack 01:06, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Post-Norman Conquest monarchs of England

Hello Andrewa, I'm glad you brought my attention to the fact the guideline didn't mention how the English lists went from nicknames (pre-1066) to numerals (post-1066). I've now brought that point, there. GoodDay (talk) 15:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Muffin

What's up with the fact that you reverted my edits to muffin? I tried to find a few sources for the darn thing, that's all. Lady Galaxy 15:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Deletion Review for Astro Empires

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Astro Empires. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Butch-cassidy (talk) 21:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Principia Ethica

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Principia Ethica, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 06:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Percussion WikiProject

WikiProject Percussion
Due to your edit history, I think you'd make a great addition to WikiProject Percussion, the WikiProject about all things percussion, from snare drums and John Bonham to Triccaballaccas and Tito Puente.


I saw on the WP:MusInst page that you were interested in percussion instruments, so I thought you may be interested in helping get a percussion wikiproject off the ground. --Evan ¤ Seeds 18:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Operation Straw Poll

Hi, since you took part in the discussion about renaming this article, you may be interested in participating in a most evil poll to determine the public opinion on the naming issue. --Illythr (talk) 20:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article importance scale for WikiProject Equine

Hello. WikiProject Equine is discussing an article importance scale here. Your POV would be appreciated. --Una Smith (talk) 17:06, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ejaculation (grammar)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Ejaculation (grammar), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Ejaculation (grammar). Jasy jatere (talk) 18:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] BMW F650GS page rename

You may have noticed that the page was renamed despite clear consensus not being reached. I have objected to this. If you also feel it should not have been done please add a comment to the appropriate entry at Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Incomplete_and_contested_proposals. Thanks. --TimTay (talk) 09:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Please explain why you think that consensus is necessary if primary sources are unambigious. --87.189.62.43 (talk)
Consensus is always necessary in Wikipedia. The policy reads in part Consensus is Wikipedia's fundamental model for editorial decision-making. Policies and guidelines document communal consensus rather than creating it. So a discussion should only ever be closed when consensus has been reached. A poll or survey can also be closed as a procedural matter if no consensus seems possible, to clean up pages such as WP:RM, but discussion then continues. If that had been done in this case, then of course no move would have been the result.
The problem is, you may think that primary sources are unambigious, and that this justifies the move in terms Wikipedia policy, but I think this is wrong on both counts. So further discussion is indicated IMO.
This case should have been relisted to gain consensus before the moves were made. But it's a small mistake and not all that important. Unfortunately, if it is relisted to reverse the moves that have been made contrary to policy (as was suggested on the closing admin's talk page), consensus is again unlikely, so the moves will probably stand. This also doesn't matter very much; One of the unwritten principles of Wikipedia is that if there's no consensus, it doesn't really matter which way we go.
Of course, if you wish to, you could also relist the move to facilitate further discussion. I haven't yet decided whether I have time to. Andrewa (talk) 01:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
There was a week's time to do the discussion, the only point made in favor of the wrong names were that they would be easier to handle. Since Wikipedia does truth, not convenience, it's not really a point at all.
So, instead of drawing circles around the issue, tell me why the primary sources are wrong. --87.189.121.97 (talk)
Remember, the goal of discussions such as this is to arrive at consensus. While I will attempt to answer the issues you raise, if you dismiss mine as drawing circles around the issue consensus is unlikely. Instead assume good faith and perhaps we'll get somewhere. Andrewa (talk) 02:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] THANK you!!

Re:this Hear, hear! :) --Kuaichik (talk) 02:19, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oracle dabnote

Thanks for catching that. I wasn't paying attention as I was typing. older ≠ wiser 11:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, that's the sort of thing wikis are all about...! Andrewa (talk) 19:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding systematic names, etc.

Hi Andrewa, Someone from the French version of WP left me an interesting note today. He's part of a group over there that has also tried and failed to get scientific name article titles introduced, but they've done some things I thought you might also be interested in. Cheers, --Jwinius (talk) 22:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Comprehensive long lists‎ discussion

Hello, I noticed that you took part in the recent FLRC for List of Arsenal F.C. players and thought you might be interested in participating in a new discussion. The FLRC was closed as no consensus and it is clear the the issue of incompleteness in longer FLs is not over, so a discussion page has been started here. Please feel free to comment. -- Scorpion0422 21:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mustang_trem.jpg

I have tagged Image:Mustang_trem.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Rettetast (talk) 11:29, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unending discussions

Hello, As an administrator, could you please clarify the procedures for unending discussions for me please? The rename discussion on the talk page for Blessed Virgin Mary is literally making all keyboard worn out. And there seems no end to it. What happens in these cases? Can a few administrators mediate or end it? I asked you to clarify the situation, since you once voted on that page and are aware of the context. Thank you. History2007 (talk) 18:21, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

It is going on a bit. Consensus takes a long time in some cases, and in some the discussion never seems likely to end. So long as everyone follows the rules, there's no gag procedure to shorten discussion. Andrewa (talk) 23:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Berlei Building

You started the page Berlei Building in 2005! Thanks.

Can you give a cite for the information you wrote??? Regards, Ariconte (talk) 01:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mototorcycles

I don't know why you used this bizarre spelling in your recent RM, but I corrected it. I assume it was not intentional. The way, the truth, and the light (talk) 19:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks... it was some sort of computer glitch, and I can't understand it either, it doesn't look like any typo I've ever done before. As you say, bizarre and unintentional, and I guess the link was broken by it. Andrewa (talk) 19:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Queen Mum

Hi Andrew, I must say I'm a bit surprised by the tone of some of the objections to what I assumed would be an open-and-shut case, namely, the renaming of Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon to her well-known regal title. I agree, it's hard to assume good faith. ProhibitOnions (T) 11:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The murder pages

No problem at all with you copying my post across to the others. You may want, if you haven't already, to re-read not just the AfD/DRV I linked to, but this discussion, which was the original discussion from which the AfDs, DRVs, rename proposals all stemmed. I suspect that whatever points anyone makes, someone will have already made it somewhere in that discussion. (FWIW, I agree with the move - if you can stand to read through all the rambling, you'll see my arguments on why we have Lindbergh kidnapping and not Charles Augustus Lindbergh, Junior - but I suspect I'm in a minority.) — iridescent 19:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I've just been reading that. Hmmm... Andrewa (talk) 19:25, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Just a quick note that, as nominator, I have no problems with a central place of discussion for the requested moves. I've added a couple of points to the discussion, but basically I'm now rather confused about WP:N/CA. I didn't realize it wasn't a guideline and wasn't trying to mislead at all. Artichoke2020 (talk) 20:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nuclear issues

Anti-nuclear movement

Australia
Canada
Germany
United Kingdom
United States
California
List of groups

I recall that you used to edit pages relating to nuclear power, and I always thought that you helped to bring some balance to that discussion. Can we expect you to be back editing any nuclear pages again soon? There are quite a few new pages which may be of interest to you, including those in the template. Johnfos (talk) 23:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you for voting.

You wrote:

Agree, the procedure described at Wikipedia:requested moves#Moving several pages at once should have been followed. Perhaps it's not too late, there seem no other discussion sections yet so I'll put the multimove templates at the other talk pages. Andrewa (talk) 00:49, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Done... At least I've done Talk:101, Talk:102, Talk:103, Talk:112, Talk:119, Talk:120 and Talk:122 and another anon (possibly still the proposer of course) has subst-ed and modified the template to Talk:999. Andrewa (talk) 01:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually I had already subst:ed and modified the template on all of the above pages. However, somebody else deleted this from the pages in question (except for Talk:999), without notification or explanation, which is why it seemed to you that I had not followed procedures. I shall assume that whoever deleted it did so in good-faith opposition to my request. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 14:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)