User talk:David Kernow/Archive 11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

RFA

Would you consider a nomination for adminship? You appear to be an excellent user. Ya ya ya ya ya ya 00:07, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your very generous suggestion!  This might be of interest, something that was shelved through mutual inertia (if I remember correctly). My cause for hesitation was – and I think remains – a concern that I wouldn't spend sufficient time on admin tasks; it's already been a long time since one of my contributions to the main body of the encyclopedia has been of significant substance (e.g. starting an article as more than just a stub). I fear becoming an admin would make this less likely, so am not sure... Thank you again, though, for your kind thought!
Best wishes, David Kernow 00:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind me joining this conversation, but I was just going to suggest the same thing. I already knew that you were an excellent editor, but I just searched your contributions a little bit more and felt like the administrator community is being dishonored by your absence. I understand why you are not so keen about adminship, but I don't think that it would bring any compulsory duties to you. You should at least try it. If you don't like being an administrator, you can always request de-adminship. But you really deserve to be an administrator. Best regards. --Húsönd 00:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I suppose I was... am... concerned about becoming "over-addicted" to Wikipedia, but yes, I won't know unless I try and, as you say, can always request de-adminship. Would you like to update the previously-shelved RfA, then let me know so I may then accept and move it into the main RfA area...?  Yours, David 02:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
I have finished updating the RfA request. I erased your previous answers to the standard questions, for I reckon you might want to write new ones (if not, just paste the old ones). I wish you all the best with this nomination. Regards and good luck. --Húsönd 04:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
...and I have now completed and transcluded it (correctly, I hope!) at WP:RfA. Although I do so there, I'll acknowledge your glowing testimony here – thank you!
Yours, David Kernow 03:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome. Your RfA was long overdue. Good luck! :) --Húsönd 04:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Just so you know, David, I also was going to suggest the adminship run for you, only a little later :) In any case, if you accept the nomination, you can count on my full support. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I've taken the plunge – thanks for your support even before I finished putting my trunks on!  Chuckle, David 04:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I've added some questions to your RfA. When you have a minute I'd appreciate if you would take a look at them. Thanks. JoshuaZ 02:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
By all means – thanks for your interest – but re your first question ("Could you expand on your response to question 2 above?"), rather than second-guessing what you might like to learn, perhaps you might give me some pointers...?  I'll then happily launch into trying to address all your questions. Best wishes, David Kernow 02:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
In regard to question 2 I'd most like to see pointers to specific articles in main space you are proud of and here why you are proud of them. JoshuaZ 03:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

db-author

[1]? You don't appear to be the author?... nor do I understand why that isn't a useful redirect. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:37, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Oops – apologies for mistake and thanks for spotting!  Best wishes, David Kernow 03:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Divisions

"Divisions" is too generic. There needs to be a qualifier. So yes, "administrative divisions" is the next best thing. However, if they have names, then use those - states of, provinces of, with 'administrative divisions of' being kind of an umbrella article, if needed. (Also, for things like Azerbaijan which has two types of top-level divisions, 'administrative divisions of azerbaijan' would be the best option, with perhaps a later article about the structure, powers, etc. of rayons, sahars, etc). --Golbez 23:17, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

This is also my thinking as a result of looking over this area. If/when you have a moment, you might like to scan this and this; both nearly ready to debut in the encyclopedia – with, I think, amended titles!  Yours, David 23:25, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
PS I have copied this to the WikiProject page and will continue responding there. Hope that's okay.
...Hi again Golbez,
Thought I'd sound you out before going any further: Are you a fan of either of the above descriptions (as in the former Autonomous entity or Category:Lists of subnational entities, etc)...?  Per my rationale for moving Autonomous entity to Autonomous area, it seems to me that neither imply that it is a region or area that is being addressed; a human being might be described as an "autonomous entity", a local company as a "subnational entity", etc. If "autonomous area" an improvement for the former, how about "subnational division" (or, perhaps more accurately, "national/subnational administrative division") for the latter...?
Thanks in advance for your thoughts, David Kernow 06:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
...PS Have just remembered that "subnational entity" used for disambiguation, so perhaps "subnational division" instead...

"Autonomous area" does seem much better than "autonomous entity". And I'm not in love with "subnational entity", division probably works better. --Golbez 06:47, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again for your super-speedy response!  I won't move on anything now – I'll find some more opinions – but at least I know the idea is not a total non-starter. Best wishes, David 06:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello

I saw your comments on the talk page of AE. Do you have any idea: [2]. Thanks. --Bhadani 13:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

No, I didn't when I left my note, but I see you've been asking after him for a while; I appreciate your concern. I guess you've tried sending him an email... Do you know of (or perhaps there might be indications that) another user has met or knows him personally...?  (I guess you've pursued this also...)  At present, I can't think what else might be done... perhaps some clue on another wiki (the Commons?) or from an internet search linking "Anonymous editor" and "wiki*"...?  I'll let you know if another possibility occurs to me. Hopefully, David Kernow 15:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Category:Turks and Caicos Islander people [and "People from New Zealand"]

Hi Eric,
 Re the above, am I being stupid / (still) missing something obvious...?  Thanks, David Kernow 03:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Category:People by nationality has it's own conventions, note we have Category:American people, and not Category:People from the United States. I'd like to make a redirect though, just becase People from New Zealand is a reasonable guess, and if we delete it, some well-meaning editor will create it again in a month or two, and a redirect will prevent the problem from happening again. The naming conventions are somewhat arbitary, and we really can't expect casual users to know whether to use Mountains in Iran or Mountains of Iran. With some good redirects, a reasonable guess will either just work, or failing that at least quickly lead you the right place. -- ProveIt (talk) 05:50, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Another thought ... People from Foo is for residency, not nationality. That may be part of the reason why nations are different. -- ProveIt (talk) 06:01, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I adjusted the cfr tag, there's kind of a special trick to making the discussion link work. As to what the correct name ought to be, I'm not quite sure, since it's really not a nation. I also added it to Category:Caribbean people. -- ProveIt (talk) 15:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Arrg, yes... These distinctions keep coming back to bite me!  If only a consensus to use "from X" (or the like) for all were possible – or at least demonyms such as "New Zealanders", "Turks and Caicos Islanders" etc, rather than awkward constructs such as "New Zealand people" or "Turks and Caicos Islander people" (!). I'm surprised there wasn't/isn't consensus to use these, but maybe I've forgotten something... Meanwhile, thanks for amending the category tags and for your continued sterling work within the category jungle!  Best wishes, David 18:42, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Galicia

I've commented on your move of Galicia (autonomous community) - just letting you know in case you haven't watched it and want to respond. --Blisco 19:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the trouble to let me know; I see the distinction you make (which I unwittingly overlooked) and have added my thoughts to the talk page section. Yours, David 23:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

RE:Galicia

Hi Norrin,
...moved Galicia (autonomous community) to Galicia (Iberian Peninsula): The other title isn't neutral.
Per the talk page section, I hadn't thought of "Galicia (Iberian Peninsula)", so thank you for this suggestion!  (Perhaps "Peninsula" needs to be "peninsula"...?)  However, I'd like to understand in what way you feel "autonomous community" isn't neutral; other similar articles use this disambiguation (as mentioned in the talk page section), so "Galicia (Iberian P/peninsula)" continues to differ from them. Thanks in advance for enlightenment, David Kernow 13:58, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I think that autonomous community isn't neutral 'cos there are people that says that Galicia isn't Spain. Some people think that Galicia is like the Sahara, a [territory occupied by another state]... However, everybody knows that Galicia is in the Iberian peninsula. Sorry for my [E]nglish, I'm from Galicia. --Norrin_strange (Talk) 10:12, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply – I wasn't aware that some Galicians regard or wish Galicia to be independent of Spain. Intriguingly, the "Basque Country" is still disambiguated as Basque Country (autonomous community). Would renaming Galicia (Iberian Peninsula) to Galicia (Iberia) be okay?  Re your English, it's very good – the portions in square brackets above are the only changes I'd make. Yours, David 13:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, put it into Galicia(Iberia)...You talk about the Basque Country...well, it's different: the historical Basque Country/Euskal Herria it's different than the Autonomous Comunnity of the Basque Country, and in the Galician wikipedia we put: Basque Autonomous Comunnity (Comunidade Autónoma Vaca) and Basque Country (País Vasco).--Norrin_strange (Talk) 10:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Have moved page to Galicia (Iberia) – thanks for a little more insight into this area!  Best wishes, David 02:58, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi David. I thought that I should say that I don't think that adding "Iberia" is a better choice for Galicia. I grew up very close to Galicia, and I guarantee that "Iberia" is not a very common term that we use around here (except for the Spanish airline). It would probably sound better if we replace "Iberia" with "Iberian Peninsula", which is a far more common term. Or, in my opinion, simply name it "Galicia". As for the other Galicia in Central Europe, I believe that a disambiguation note would be enough. Best regards.--Húsönd 21:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

First, yes, my thanks for this but more so for restarting the whole process. Maybe when I finally catch up on my immediate to-do tasks I might one day do something administrative! <chuckle>
Before any blushing or demurring becomes overwhelming, thanks also for your thoughts here. If Galicia (Eastern Europe) were considered wholly historical, I was looking to pursue your suggestion to make the Iberian Galicia the "Galicia" article – however, have you seen this and/or the like...?  As you might guess, I'm now not sure what might accommodate everyone...  For the time being, therefore, I've (partially) reverted the name to Galicia (Iberian peninsula). Hope this okay. Thanks agin, David Kernow 00:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
PS I was going to add some general supportive remarks to your Editor Review, but then thought (1) they might risk interpretation as biased; (2) they might be welcome but not strictly relevant.
Haha. That's okay with the review. :-) Thank you for showing me the POV of Irpen, which I deem sound. Maybe it's better to add the location info after all (btw, I noticed that the article Iberian Peninsula writes with capital P, maybe the same should happen with that term on Galicia). I just made a small change to the Galicia disambiguation page, the link was leading to the redirect page, and I changed "Galicia (Spain)" to "Galicia (Iberian Peninsula)" before any Galician nationalists start to complain. Once again, congratulations for your adminship! Best regards.--Húsönd 00:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Re "Iberian P/peninsula", I realiz/se I overlooked capitaliz/sation when returning the article to this disambiguation... Personally, I don't mind which it is; however, "Iberian Peninsula" is a proper noun, which may or may not be accurate; "Crimean Peninsula"/"Crimean peninsula", "Korean Peninsula"/"Korean peninsula", ...?  Yours, David 10:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:RM: Leigh Delamere → Leigh Delamere services

Thanks for the welcome, and thanks for making the change! Cheers, Mr WR 14:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I was wrong to provide strong support.

Hi Bill,
Thanks for your support in [my RfA]!
...On to Main: not one single new article... If you’re going to delete articles, you need to understand how to generate articles...
Hope the (starts of) the histories for items linked via /Archive, most of the italic links on /No longer on watchlist and the subpage links on /To do (in particular those in bold, which are about to debut in the main encyclopedia) haven't gone missing!  Thanks again, David Kernow 10:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

You're my RfA hero! Please accept the "most underappreciated award" (sorry, no special image goes with the underappreciated award). Williamborg (Bill) 12:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

And just in case it was lost in my remarks above, I am sincerely impressed with both your contributions and your diplomacy. You will be an excellent admin. Williamborg (Bill) 13:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
No problem; I did wonder whether something was amiss with the Wikipedia database but wasn't able to check then and there. Such is the background material on Wikipedia, I also periodically miss useful information – with the effect that contributions I make occasionally seem far bolder than I'd've thought!  I imagine you know the experience. Thanks for providing such a generous climax to the RfA!  David 02:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
PS As it seems you're Norwegian (hope I'm correct!) I wonder if you might have a few moments to listen to and write down (or immediately recogniz/se and steer me toward) an approximate translation of a Norwegian folksong?  (It's Heiemo og Nykkjen ("Heiemo and the Water Sprite"...?) sung by Kirsten Bråten-Berg – this link being to the beginnings of an article I had on my PC and have now uploaded!)  If this in any way tricky, worry not; I'm just being opportunistic!

CfD

Dear David,

some categories by religion (which include living people in many instances!) are about to come up. Bellbird 14:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your alert, but I tend to steer clear of such categories as (1) I'm not sure on my position regarding them; and (2) they tend to be POV hotbeds. Hope all works out, David Kernow 02:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Help disambiguating

Hello, you commented on Talk:Athletics regarding the movement of that page, and so I was hoping you could help with the large amount of disambiguation that is now needed because of the move. All the wikilinks to Athletics must now be disambiguating to one of the more specific links. Please see Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links. The list of articles linking to Athletics can be found at Special:Whatlinkshere/Athletics. Regards. -- Jeff3000 00:34, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I'd be happy to; I hadn't realised the move would cause a lot of disruption. Right now I'm about to take a pause from computer work; when I return, I have a few other messages to attend to and some articles to move into the encyclopedia proper, but thereafter I'll be on the case. Hope that's okay, David Kernow 02:46, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the help :) -- Jeff3000 03:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Kirsten Bråten-Berg

Very nice article on Kirsten Bråten-Berg.

You observed, "PS As it seems you're Norwegian (hope I'm correct!) I wonder if you might have a few moments to listen to and write down (or immediately recogniz/se and steer me toward) an approximate translation of a Norwegian folksong?  (It's Heiemo og Nykkjen ("Heiemo and the Water Sprite"...?) sung by Kirsten Bråten-Berg – this link being to the beginnings of an article I had on my PC and have now uploaded!)  If this in any way tricky, worry not; I'm just being opportunistic!"

Much to my chagrin and dismay, I'm only Norwegian by heritage (& half-Norwegian at that). My paternal family left Norway in 1868. I do translate some Norwegian (& German & French & a small bit of Spanish & even a very little Russian) on occassion—more Norwegian than other languages since I'm working on improving my Norwegian. But my ability to read far outstrips my listening comprehension.

Fortunately I do know several Wiki-Norwegians, and given their general Wiki-behavior, it pleases me greatly to be mistaken for one of them. I’ll ask around for an assist.

Skål - Williamborg (Bill) 02:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Glad such a mistake is so pleasing – and grateful for your contacting Frode; not only has he responded, but:
...David, I have just talket to Kirsten [yes, Kirsten Bråten-Berg!]. She was in Stavanger and busy, but said she would send me the text to Heiemo and the Water Sprite when she gets back tomorrow.
How's that for a result...!  Ever the opportunist, I've left a few inquiries in response (see #Re Kirsten Bråten-Berg); hopefully none ask too much or are inappropriate. Meanwhile, I also meant to thank you for uploading Image:1668-Map-of-Norway.JPG to the Commons; I'm one of those folk intrigued by maps and am looking forward to spending some more time aomng them in the Commons again. Best wishes, David 22:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Very pleased, but not surprised, that this worked out so well for you. Wikipedians are generally helpful, and Norwegian Wikipedians seem unfailingly helpful… Of course I cheated—Frode has been one of the most helpful in that past so it is no surprise that he was successful for you. Never would have guessed, though, that he'd make contact directly with Kirsten Bråten-Berg, & so quickly. Not what we came to Wikipedia for, but a great fringe benefit! May all your days work so well. Skål - Williamborg (Bill) 03:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

And congrats on making Admin. Trust you'll still put in some time being a great editor. Williamborg (Bill) 03:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for both; re the latter, adding less content to the encyclopedia was/is one of my concerns as regards becoming an admin – until Kirsten Bråten-Berg, I hadn't made a significant contribution in months. I suppose, though, it has taken time to start those administrative division-related articles (which still await a final burst of concentrated attention in order to move them into the encyclopedia). There's also much unfinished work on the Commons. So, I'm trying to be wary... Yours, David 10:04, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Could'nt open the file. Received this message: Windows File Associations Windows Home Pages | This file in your language is not yet available. View the English version. Then I was redirected to an empty site. --Frode Inge Helland 05:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
David, I have just talket to Kirsten. She was in Stavanger and busy, but said she would send me the text to Heiemo and the Water Sprite when she gets back tomorrow. --Frode Inge Helland 16:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi Frode,
Thanks for your recent messages, especially the second!
...I guess you mean Image:Kirsten Bråten Berg, accompanied Ale Møller - Heiemo og Nykkjen (opening verse).ogg linked via the {{listen}} template, yes...?  If so, sorry not to be able to help: I'm on a PC, so if I try to download the file I can redirect it to Winamp successfully (and/or save to disk); if I click on the "play in browser" link supplied by the template, I'm taken to the (rudimentary) JOrbisPlayer.php page (http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php) where the file then starts playing – perhaps the problem you're experiencing is because it (appears to) use/s Java...?
...I have just talket to Kirsten. She was in Stavanger and busy, but said she would send me the text to Heiemo and the Water Sprite when she gets back tomorrow.
Now this is a tad more exciting – thanks for your work!  First, please include my thanks if/when you next communicate; and if you do, do you think she'd be interested to respond to any of the following...?:
  • Whether or not her surname includes a hyphen – there seems to be conflicting evidence;
  • (Other) errors, inaccuracies and/or major omissions from her article (excepting the obvious empty "Select discography" section which I intend to populate or perhaps expand if other folk begin first);
  • I really enjoy Heiemo og Nykkjen, but perhaps Kirsten would prefer to be represented by a different audio example...?;
  • I was thinking of uploading and including a "fair use" portrait photo in the article (e.g. the one on the New Albion Records external link, otherwise maybe http://test.kulturtorget.no/images/www/user/464/2004_10517.jpg) but have hesitated as Wikipedia's "fair use" management/policy/acceptability seems to be in flux at present. If Kirsten is happy for such a picture to appear in her article, perhaps she might be able to bypass "fair use" by indicating which she'd prefer and giving her approval for it to appear...?  (I realise she may not be in a position to do so, but...);
  • Back to Heiemo og Nykkjen but away from Wikipedia, I'd begun transcribing the version for voice and synthesizer (from which the audio extract is taken) to create a version for voice/s and (wordless) choir; perhaps she might give her approval and any approval I might need if I were to post the resulting score to a site such as http://www.sibeliusmusic.com...?
I appreciate that any/all the above may be inappropriate/asking too much/etc of you and/or Kirsten; as I confessed to Bill, I'm just being opportunistic!
With best wishes and thanks for your interest and input, David Kernow 16:46, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
David, I rexceived this letter when I arrived Bergen:
Dette må du nok snakke med Grappa music , Helge Westby om
Helsing
Kirsten B.Berg
In Norwegian: I think you have to talk to Grappa Music, Helge Westby, about this.
The answer is not very encouraging. I will call him, but Grappa Music will maybe be reserved in matters which include copyrights.
Frode
Thanks for this update, Frode!  I assume Kirsten's response is re arranging the music; please don't feel the need to go to any great lengths over it, as it's merely my opportunism. Did Kirsten include a (pointer to a) translation of the lyrics...?  Thanks again for your networking, David (talk) 02:46, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Dave, No, the above citation was all. But I will call Grappa Music. If you could give me a link to the song, I could try write it down and translate it. I take for granted that copy rights will not be violated by presenting the text in WP. --Frode Inge Helland 06:10, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps Kirsten means we can obtain a translation from Grappa Music. If not, I could email you a low-quality mp3 of the song; the only links to it that I've found are to excerpts. It's ten verses each of four lines, although I think the second line in every verse is identical (in typical folksong style!). I wasn't planning on including the lyrics to the entire song on Wikipedia, although if it is a traditional folksong, this shouldn't be a problem. Yours, David (talk) 17:16, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Dave, I just received this e-mail from Kirsten:
Det går jo an å kjøpe plata Min Kvedarlund, der er teksten i heftet! Får så mange slike førespurnader, og har ikkje tid til å skrive ned dette. Grappa kan sikkert sende eit ex.
Kirsten Bråten Berg
In Norwegian: "It is as well possible to buy my CD Min Kvedarlund, where the text is enclosed in the cover. I get so many requests like this so do not have time to write it down. Grappa may possibly send a copy of the text.
Kirsten Bråten Berg."
This might not be a dead end after all.
Frode
No, hopefully not; I'm happy for Kirsten's sake that her music is so popular. I'm also happy to purchase the CD she mentions and, if it doesn't carry a translation of the song, send the Norwegian onto yourself – what do you think...?  Regards, David (talk) 01:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
PS It would seem from her message that Kirsten's surname is "Bråten Berg", i.e. without the hyphen, so will amend the article accordingly.
David, I called Grappa Music. Helge Westby was not accessible at present, so I will call back 1300 (Norw. time). I also sent Helge Westby an e-mail, asking for the text. I also permitted myself to ask for permission for you to insert a short sound file as an illustration in the article.

To morrow I am facing approximately seven hours driving back to Ålesund. Si if I get my hands on the text, it may still take some time. --Frode Inge Helland 07:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

David, this e-mail from Grappa Music has arrived today:
"Jeg sender deg teksten pr. post i dag. Den finnes i hefte på platen. Med vennlig hilsen Helge Westbye, Grappa Musikkforlag as, Akersgaten 7, 0158 Oslo, Tlf.: +47 23 35 80 00, Faks: +47 23 35 80 01, Mob : +47 90 55 52 58, e-mail: helge@grappa.no, www.grappa.no, www.grappa.musikkonline.no"
In english:
"I send you the text by mail today. There is text enclosed in the cover. Best regards from Helge Westbye, Grappa Musikkforlag as, Akersgaten 7, 0158 Oslo, Tlf.: +47 23 35 80 00, Faks: +47 23 35 80 01, Mob : +47 90 55 52 58, e-mail: helge@grappa.no, www.grappa.no, www.grappa.musikkonline.no"
I'll have it when I'm back in Ålesund.
Frode
Great! – but please take your time; if you're making that journey on that groovy bike of yours, I guess you might have a sore backside as well as being tired... Yours, David (talk) 18:33, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

You're a sysop!

Hi, David Kernow/Archive 11, Congratulations on Becoming a Sysop

Hey there. I'm pleased to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator! You've volunteered to do housekeeping duties that normal users sadly cannot participate in. Sysops can't do a lot of stuff: They can't delete pages just like that (except patent nonsense like "aojt9085yu8;3ou"), and they can't protect pages in an edit war they are involved in. But they can delete random junk, ban anonymous vandals, delete pages listed on Votes for deletion (provided there's a consensus) for more than one week, protect pages when asked to, and keep the few protected pages that exist on Wikipedia up to date.

Almost anything you can do can be undone, but please take a look at The Administrators' how-to guide and the Administrators' reading list before you get started (although you should have read that during your candidacy ;). Take a look before experimenting with your powers. Also, please add Administrators' noticeboard to your watchlist, as there are always discussions/requests for admins there. If you have any questions drop me a message at My talk page. Have fun! =Nichalp «Talk»=

Please also add you name to WP:LA =Nichalp «Talk»= 04:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I was going to let this carry my thanks to most as I recogniz/se copying thanks to talk pages isn't necessarily appreciated (and many folk such as yourself are very busy) but as the below has intervened, here also is my thanks for your involvement!
Please also add you name to WP:LA
Unfortunately WP:LA causes my browser to crash whenever I try to load it; yes, it's Firefox (v1.0.7) but doesn't have the Google Toolbar installed... Maybe WP:LA might be split into two or more pages...?  Best wishes, David Kernow 23:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations

Successful RfA!

Congratulations for your bigger mop achievement! :-) Best regards.--Húsönd 17:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Yippee!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Congrats! Syrthiss 18:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations : ) - jc37 21:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you,
Thank you,
Thank you
and...
Thank you!
Chuckle (chuckle, chuckle, chuckle...) David Kernow 22:43, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

(And thank you for my first roflmao of the day : ) - jc37 23:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Administrator-tan

Hi again Kirill,
I couldn't help but notice the picture you included here and though I'm no particular manga/anime fan, thought I'd use it for the above. Thanks for bringing it to light – if you speak any Japanese, please pass on my thanks to Kasuga for his/her fine work!  Yours, David Kernow 00:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but it was actually Kim Bruning who found the picture. (And unfortunately, I don't speak a word of Japanese.) Kirill Lokshin 01:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Oops – thanks for the correction!  I'll repost my message on Kim's talk page. Yours, David 01:54, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

CfD

Hi Betacommand,
 Please visit User talk:Kbdank71#CfD: British Geograph project and comment/update accordingly – thanks!  Regards, David Kernow 03:12, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

that was my mistake Category:Geograph British Isles images was listed as the new cat but i se it is now striked out I will fix/ Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 03:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt response!  Best wishes, David 03:23, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Sidebar redesign final vote!

It's that special, special time! No, grandma's not coming over. No, not time to clean out the fridge. It's sidebar redesign voting time! Yes, the community has narrowed it down to 3 different options, and a vote for the same old original sidebar is a choice one could vote for as well. Voting for multiple options is allowed, and discussion on the whole shebang is right there on the vote page itself.

You're probably getting this message because the sidebar fairy (JoeSmack for now) noticed you commented on the project at some time over on at Wikipedia talk:Village pump (proposals)/Sidebar redesign. Lovely. JoeSmack Talk 07:13, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Need an outside opinion

Please check out these pages:

and

Especially Evrik's talk page (Juan continually blanks his) for discussions of harrassment, and Juan's contributions list (for apparent single focus).

Personally, I'd like to think that Juan is just being a bit overzealous. But it's starting to get to the point where the wrong lines may be being crossed. And you may have to look through page history, because internal wording, and comments have been edited/redefined "after the fact".

Any thoughts you can suggest would be welcome. (Watching your talk page) - jc37 21:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi jc37; sorry to see you're witness to a communication breakdown. I think it might be a situation best left to cool down for a few days or weeks, as it involves one of those highly personal and/or emotive areas (religion). Perhaps then a straightforward "Please add * Support or * Oppose followed by at most an optional one-line explanation..." (without the emphasis I've added) might work, if the "one-line only" proviso is upheld. (For the record, of the images shown here, I'd favo/ur 14. Perhaps there might be two steps to finding a consensus, first to identify the group of images most favo/ured, then to identify one image within that group. However, need there be a single image for the award...?)  Yours, David (talk) 01:45, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
  • "...sorry to see you're witness to a communication breakdown." - Me too.
  • Considering the current situation, as it stands, the quote I keep thinking of (which I can't seem to remember where it's from): "What if they gave a war and nobody came?"
  • It looks like evrik is going to allow Juan the "last word" on his talk page, and so far, no one else seems to be interested any more. So I suppose we'll see.
  • As for the "two steps", I tried that, but by that point, things were already devolved to the point of "communication breakdown". I tried several things at various times to try to help diffuse the situation. Time will tell how successful those attempts were, I suppose... And I have to admit, it took me a moment to figure out what this meant. (What/where it specifically referred to.)
  • I agree that 14 would seem to have the best chance for concensus. As far as I know, a wikiproject can have any number of awards. The issue would seem to be that typically (AFAIK) they only have a single barnstar.
  • And finally, thank you very much for your response. I appreciate your thoughts on the matter. I was sitting here trying to think of someone who could help diffuse the situation (if necessary) but would likely not cause the situation to worsen (as such situations can, at times). I came up with a few names (of which you were one), and you had the "dubious" honour of being the first to appear on my watchlist.
Thanks again : ) - jc37 02:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Helping out with the backlog

Hi there and congratulations on your brand new sysop flag. Now that you are an admin, you might want to help the community in a way you weren't able to before. The obvious example is clearing out the Category:Administrative backlog :-) You might want to start with Wikipedia:Requested moves which I find the easiest to deal with. If you have any questions, just drop me a note! Enjoy! :-) --Dijxtra 09:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite above – is it a subst:ed template...?  I'll continue my occasional WP:RM updating and intend to start closing and actioning old WP:CfDs, but I'm also wishing to spend more of my Wikipedia time adding content to the encyclopedia. Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 22:02, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
No, it's not a template, it's a good old copy/paste ;-) The intention of the message is not to avert you from expanding our encyclopedia, but to make you aware of the tasks... a sporadic and casual action on abmin backlog is just fine... because if every of our 1000 admins spent just 1 minute a day clearing backlogs, we'd have no backlogs at all ;-) --Dijxtra 10:15, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Good point!  Thanks for your reply. Yours, David (talk) 01:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Talk like a pirate day

Happy International Talk Like a Pirate Day!

Ahoy, me hearty! How 'bout a good ol' jug o' grog? Reg-Arrr-ds Húsönd 13:44, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Why thank 'ee, me ol' shipmate o' mine, for yon timely reminderrrr and wishes – A-harr! A-harrrr! A-<coff> <coff> <splutter> ... I say, this pirate-talk is jolly hard work on one's throat, isn't it, wot?
Chuckles, David (talk) 22:08, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Kirsten Bråten Berg text

Arived Ålesund. The text has arrived also. It's all up to me now.--Frode Inge Helland 15:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Take your time! – and at least rest that backside of yours if it was sitting on a bike for seven hours!
Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 22:12, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
David, have just sent the translation to Kirsten Bråten Berg. This was really tricky, old dialect - from Setesdal I suppose - and beyond my capacity to fing the proper english words.
I sent it to you as soon as she okeys it. --Frode Inge Helland 19:33, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, Frode; I hope it wasn't as tricky as (say) some text in Anglo-Saxon "Olde Englisc" given to a native speaker of English – no, that would be virtually impossible!!  I also hope Kirsten doesn't mind okaying it. Trust this reaches you feeling dry, David (talk) 01:16, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Good idea

...Seeing your signature again, this thought occurred to me: How about making the "nd" of "Húsönd" a link to your talk page...?  Yours, David (talk) 02:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Done. Best regards.--Húsönd 02:48, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

subdivision mass moves

please stop, you are creating inconsistency Tobias Conradi (Talk) 02:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Have stopped for time being, but a period of inconsistency inevitable as I work my way through these articles. (Hopefully you've spotted that I've left those articles that address more than administrative divisions alone – at least, that's my intention!)  Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 02:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

CfD: Category:Inactive bot on Wikipedia

I added some "bot" suggestions at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 September 16, and some comments on several other CfDs, as well. looking forward to your thoughts : )- jc37 03:29, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

...and I've just added a (probably over-subtle) observation. So long as "bot" is made plural and "Wikipedi*" included somewhere, I guess the categories are in order!  Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 09:17, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
After re-reading it, I'm not sure I understood it. In looking at the contents of the category, it's all users (which I presume are bot accounts). How would someone have one if they were not a wikipedian? - jc37 09:21, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking of the possibility of a bot (given a Wikipedia account and hence username) that wasn't created by a Wikipedian... yes, probably too subtle... Yours, David (talk) 09:31, 23 September 2006 (UTC) (and not about to be copied to your talk page!)
<scratches head> Please pardon me for denseness, but I think I'm seriously lost : )
Maybe I'm not understanding your usage of the word subtle?
and chuckle at what I hope was humour at the end : ) I've learned that it's easier to unify discussions, and typically it's more "polite" to unify on the "other person's page". : ) - jc37 09:37, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I guess I was reading "Wikipedian bots" as "bots created by Wikipedians", but, per your most recent comments at CfD, "Wikipedian" can also mean "of Wikipedia" (which is what these bots would be once they gained usernames), so I'm happy with either format. Hope that helps!  Regards, David (talk) 09:51, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
If you mean "helps me (jc37) to understand"... I "think" so. I understood that in what you wrote, I guess I thought you were saying that there was something "additional" that I was missing (something additional that was "subtle"), hence my confusion. Thanks for clarifying : )
Something wholly off-topic, but that I think of every time I see your username in CfD: One of these days, you and I should sit down and write out the correct usages of "in" and "of" in category names : )
Anyway, Have a great day (and thanks again : ) - likely have to head out after your next response. - jc37 09:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Just before you do: I've changed my mind again and gone for something simpler renaming-wise (see CfD) as I reckon I'm just trying to be too clever – hope you're happy with the latest.  Re "in" and "of", thanks for your kind words, but here's a confession to keep secret: I don't really understand the distinctions used here either...  Finally, before we both recall "real life", yes, it was humo/ur (more reassurance) after that timestamp!  Time to stop, David (talk) 10:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I saw that and lent it support. Have a great day : ) - jc37 10:14, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Outlying areas of Europe

Dear David:

Many thanks for your contribution to this article, but why did you remove the smaller entities? It was more informative to have them, more so that theirs are precisely the articles that have little or no other templates, while some of higher level entries may be even 'over-templated'. Best, Apcbg 15:17, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm still working on this template, so stand by; I'll try to re-incorporate them in the structure. Thanks for your prompt feedback!  Regards, David Kernow (talk) 15:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
The original template was based on a rather clear criterion for inclusion: Include those territories that are politically associated with Europe (European sovereignty) yet distant from Europe, typically situated closer to other continents than to any European country. Now with the recent changes, I am not so certain what the current principle might be, apparently not the original one as e.g. Ceuta and Melilla have disappeared with Svalbard and the Faroes added etc. I am afraid that the very idea of the template -- to present in a coherent way all the territories which are the global political extension of Europe beyond its narrow geographical limits -- may somehow get lost in the process. Apcbg 17:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Understood; I'll restore the original content of the template and add this criterion as a comment, in case anyone else decides to edit it. Hope you otherwise approve of the layout...?  Yours, David (talk) 17:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Sincere thanks, and yes an explanation of the principle and the template would be most welcome and useful indeed. My original idea was to stress commonality rather than division among respective nations (some of them have separate templates for their overseas territories), use local instead of English names though, and also use a neutral (e.g. alphabetical) ordering; this keeps the template more compact too. Best, Apcbg 17:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Have finished editing the template; see edit summaries for some comments re rationale. Re commonality, the template itself serves to group together all those European countries with outlying territories; or is there another commonality you have in mind (and I've missed!)...?  I guess the template's size could be reduced somewhat by reducing the row width and removing the divider lines (then reformatting the columns) but I understand if you (or anyone else) reckon it'd still be too large. Thanks for your thanks!  Regards, David (talk) 20:47, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Okay, it seems rather complete now. I have made some minor edits on a draft given below; you may delete it when not needed. Just a couple of points (and I would be happy to answer any further questions you might have). South Georgia is in the Southern Ocean no less than Bouvet or Kerguelen are. The heading background colour -- there are so many grey templates, why another? My proposal for pink is purely for aesthetic reasons :-) Regarding the Italian islands, sure they are close to Europe but still closer to Africa. If we have fixed a principle then we better follow it, otherwise the door would be open for any additions or removals. (Pantelleria is 70 km from Tunisia and 100 km from Sicily; for Lampedusa the distances are 145 km and 215 respectively.) As for the size, it is large indeed but now it has the 'hide' option. With the present structure, it's better to keep the divider lines too. Nevertheless, if you could reduce the enpty rows width to half-row, the overal picture would look finer I guess. Best, Apcbg 13:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Table updated taking into account changes made in the meantime by other participants; in particular, seems like greater details are not favoured, e.g. the subdivisions of the Azores (which by the way were originally introduced by some Portuguese-speaking user) are removed. Best, Apcbg 18:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


Outlying territories of European countries
Territories under European sovereignty but closer to continents other than Europe

Denmark

Arctic

Grønland (Kalaallit Nunaat)

France

Atlantic
and Caribbean

Guadeloupe (Guadeloupe, Saint-Barthélemy et Saint-Martin) • Martinique • Saint-Pierre et Miquelon

Indian Ocean

Mayotte • Réunion • Îles Éparses (Bassas da India, Île Europa, Île Juan da Nova, Îles Glorieuses, Île Tromelin)

Pacific

Île de Clipperton • Nouvelle-Calédonie (Kanaky) • Polynésie française (Îles Marquises, l'Archipel des Tuamotu, l'Archipel de la Société) • Wallis et Futuna

South America

Guyane française

Southern Ocean

Terres australes et antarctiques françaises (Îles Amsterdam et Saint-Paul, l'Archipel Crozet, Îles Kerguelen)

Italy

Mediterranean

Pantelleria • Isole Pelagie (Lampedusa, Linosa, Lampione)

Netherlands

Caribbean

Aruba • Nederlandse Antillen (Bonaire, Curaçao, Saba, Sint Eustatius, Sint Maarten)

Norway

Southern Ocean

Bouvetøya

Portugal

Atlantic

Arquipélago dos Açores • Arquipélago da Madeira

Spain

North Africa

Ceuta • Melilla • Plazas de soberanía menores (Chafarinas, Vélez de la Gomera, Alhusemas)

Atlantic

Islas Canarias

United Kingdom

Atlantic
and Caribbean

Anguilla • Bermuda • British Virgin Islands • Cayman Islands • Falkland Islands • Montserrat • Saint Helena (Ascension, Saint Helena, Tristan da Cunha, Gough) • Turks and Caicos Islands

Indian Ocean

British Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)

Pacific

Pitcairn Islands (Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie, Oeno)

Southern Ocean

South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands


Thanks, Apcbg; I think the table looks great and I agree with all your amendments and corrections. I only wonder what I'm missing re trying to reduce the row widths – not that this is a "must-do". Also given its size, I don't know how to ensure the template's default state is hidden; this, however, is how it current seems to appear in the articles I've revisited. Thanks for creating an interesting template!  Yours, David (talk) 02:35, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks David, you have done a great job indeed; the template is now ready for its destruction by enthusiasts :-) Seriously, as people are likely to wonder why this or that particular territory is included, and yet another one is not, do you think that it would help users if they have a more formal algorithm so that they could easily check by themselves the correct application of the general principle? The relevant text may be put not on the template itself, but only on the template page above the table. Then it would not appear in articles featuring the template, but would be seen when someone goes to the template page. Possible wording:
In order to avoid possible confusion and misunderstanding, the eligibility for inclusion in this template is defined technically as follows. An European outlying territory is a territory which: (1) has any political status other than independent country; (2) has a common sovereignty with some member state of the Council of Europe; and (3) either (a) the nearest independent country is not a member of the Council of Europe, or (b) the distance to the nearest European territory is more than 400 nautical miles. (The distance in (a) is measured to the nearest other territory; the distance in (b) is twice the EEZ limit under the Law of the Sea Convention, ensuring that the respective jurisdictional waters are not contiguous.)
Best, Apcbg 07:48, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Good point; "Territories under European sovereignty but closer to continents other than Europe" is a rule of thumb, but I agree your paragraph is something better to which to point folk toward in future. I've added it to the template's <noinclude> section and a "(see inclusion criteria for further information)" link to the template. Yours, David (talk) 08:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Sincere thanks! Best, Apcbg 08:49, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Flags

Re [3], are you particularly fond of these flags...?  I realise it's only one opinion, but to me they look like "blots on the template's landscape"...  Regards, David (talk) 14:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Well it was just a try; maybe you're right, so I removed them. While on this topic, is it possible to reduce only the height of the empty rows and the rows with horizontal dividing lines? And another question, why some articles open with this template hidden and others don't? Also, sometimes the opening of the template moves other templates around (South Georgia & SSI; History of SGSSI) or overlaps with them (Greenland)? And one last question, do you think that the Bulgarian and Portuguese versions of the template would be better too without flags? I'd appreciate having your advice. Best, Apcbg 14:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
...is it possible to reduce only the height of the empty rows and the rows with horizontal dividing lines?
Should be; I have an idea how, but unfortunately I'm not a CSS/HTML whizz...
...why some articles open with this template hidden and others don't?
Good question!  Maybe there's a straightforward way to find out who designed the "Nav*" classes used to enable this feature and ask him/her/them whether a default may be set...?
Also, sometimes the opening of the template moves other templates around...
Ditto;
...do you think that the Bulgarian and Portuguese versions of the template would be better too without flags?
Do you mean one or more templates on the Bulgaria and Portgual pages, or on the Bulgarian/Portugese Wikipedias/e...?
Regards, David (talk) 15:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
I mean the Portuguese and the Bulgarian versions of this particular template. Best, Apcbg 15:58, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
...As in those links at the bottom of the template's code – sorry!  Personally, I'd prefer them without, per the above, but maybe that's something the users of the Portugese and Bulgarian Wikipedias/e should decide...  Yours, David (talk) 16:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

{{Peri-Antarctic countries and overseas territories}}

Guess what... David (talk) 16:30, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear David:
Many thanks for all your answers and advice. I shall follow your better judgement, and correspondingly remove the flags in several related templates in few Wikipedias. Some wasted time and effort on my part, but that's the price for a lesson too ... Best, Apcbg 17:36, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, it's only one opinion; other folk may take an interest someday and add them again... I'm not against flags per se, but as their shape is angular I guess I prefer them aligned. So, if you'd prefer to keep the flags and can cook up some way to align them... maybe, though, the result might still look too complex... Meanwhile, if I had a dollar/euro/etc for every time some work has been reverted (often by myself!)... Yours, David (talk) 17:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, probably something like Modèle:Pays d'Europe, but you are right also that it would be too complex if the structure showing the relevant world regions and European countries is preserved; besides, the flags of the UK overseas territories are too similar at this scale. Anyway, I removed them all (at least that was easier than inserting them in the first place). Thanks again. Best, Apcbg 19:42, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Dear David, thanks for your note on the line-height problem, I'm following the effort with interest. Best, Apcbg 15:32, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Compact version

Perhaps somewhat déjà vu, but this now carries a compact version of the template in case the tide of opinion favo/urs it. David (talk) 15:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

{{user}} modification

You recently edited the {{user}} template to include a 90% size modification to the text. I typically subst {{user}} into {{fair use disputed}} when tagging images, only to find that the new modification precludes that functionality. Is there anything you can do to repair this? — pd_THOR | =/\= | 17:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Apologies; for the time being I've reverted the modification, so hopefully all should be well again. Thanks for this information, David Kernow (talk) 17:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: {{Infobox Military Conflict}}

Hi again Kirill,
(Revert; the appearance here should be consistent with the other military infoboxes)
Please reconsider your reversion; although the template looks fine in the Battle of Lützen example, for me the mismatch of colons and entries in other places (e.g. World War I) takes the shine off an otherwise excellent template. Also, you may not've noticed the considerable internal cleaning.
Perhaps my volunteering to "de-colon-is/ze" other military-related infoboxes may assist your deliberations. Yours very hopefully, for the sake of a good template, David Kernow (talk) 15:26, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
PS I was also considering renaming the template "Infobox Military conflict", to accord with other infobox templates.

Hmm, a few different issues here:

  • I have no real issue with the colons one way or the other, as long as they're more-or-less consistent. If you remove them from all the infoboxes listed here, I would have no objections.
Okay, but please allow some time for this to occur; I'll aim to start on them a little later.
Ok, that works for me. Kirill Lokshin 16:08, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Your other internal cleanup was a very, very bad idea. Not all browsers will render the non-quoted version of parameters (which are actually incorrect XHTML) properly. In particular, your changes resulted in a secondary box appearing around the fields at the top of the template (at least in Firefox). Having class="infobox" and so forth is actually the more standard version; please don't remove the quotes around such parameters.
Thank you for this information; not being a web designer, I had no idea that this could cause trouble. So, I have another task: to "re-quote" those templates I know I have (or have listed as) amended or created similarly.
  • As far as the name, I seem to recall that most infoboxes actually use title case rather than sentence case (or at least they did when this infobox originally took on that name); I'm not sure that any moves would be worthwhile unless we're standardizing across the board.
Well, my infobox experience thus far suggests the opposite, but as it's something even more cosmetic than the colons (!), I'll move along – especially as I now have a couple more pressing tasks to undertake.

Kirill Lokshin 15:32, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Yours, David (talk) 15:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: "De-coloniz/sation" of Military History templates

Nice work. Some replies:

  1. I'm not sure the explicit text-aligns are needed, actually; I'll experiment with this and see if they can't be removed entirely.
  2. Combining the is_whatevers would be possible in theory; but, in many cases, fields are turned on by any of a number of different is_whatever flags, which won't work with master switches.
  3. Minimum widths for columns tend to look quite silly if only the shorter labels are present, though. If it's actually a problem, playing with the cellspacing values might be better; but I'm not convinced that it'll ever be an issue in practice.

Kirill Lokshin 13:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks; I'm glad you're generally content with the results as I'm keen to maintain the quality of what seems to be one of the better WikiProjects. Re combining conditionals, your caveat occurred to me after I'd posted the above, but it may still be possible (if not a priority); re minimum column width, yes, I agree that this can sometimes produce odd results, but, as you suggest, cellspacing/padding might be something worth trying. One example I've now seen rather than imagined is in Fort Stewart's infobox; I'd say the "Current" is a little close to the "In use" header... Since it was my removing colons that made this possibility more of a problem, would you like me to investigate (with disclaimer that my CSS/HTML knowledge must be inferior to yours)...?  Yours, David (talk) 13:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
PS... Re:
(Remove strange alignment)
Why is it strange...?  Curious, David (talk) 13:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
I think I'll have time to poke around with the CSS today, so there's no real need for you to spend time on it if you have better things to do.
As far as the alignment, all the other fields where the height of the label and actual contents don't match align the two at the top; having centered alignment breaks this convention, and produces gaps of a different size than others seen in the infobox, which I think is a bad idea. Kirill Lokshin 14:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Understood; I guess I favo/ur the alternative view that aligning an entry with the first one or two words of a wrapped-around header phrase (e.g. "Unknown<br>burials") unnecessarily favo/urs that or those words (and in some instances might be momentarily confusing). Hope that makes sense, David (talk) 15:12, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I think I figured out how to do it cleanly in CSS; see Template:Infobox Military Memorial. Is 1em enough spacing, in your opinion, or do we need more?
I'll go ahead and apply this new coding to the other templates shortly. Kirill Lokshin 15:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Looks good to me; I'll try Fort Stewart in a while to see how it looks there. Nice nifty work!  David (talk) 15:16, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Fort Stewart is done, if you want to take a look. Kirill Lokshin 15:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
...and looks fine; thanks. Here's to more infoboxes aspiring to WP:MILHIST standards!  David (talk) 15:28, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
PS Typing "infobox" again reminded me of this... Any thoughts...?
The other templates should all be done now; hopefully I didn't break anything in the process.
I think introducing new namespaces is generally more trouble than it's worth, but that's just my opinion. Kirill Lokshin 15:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Understood; it's just another one of those relatively fundamental corners of Wikipedia that I feel are crying out for tweaking... Yours, David (talk) 16:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Re cleaner code

The prevailing convention is to space out everything; unspaced markup is rather more difficult to read (and more prone to errors like mis-counted braces/quotes/etc.), so there's no real sense in using it. Kirill Lokshin 02:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks; I'm not sure this ultimately benefits the code's readability/chackability (although a CSS/HTML/etc neophyte, I used to be a coder many moons ago) but fortunately (I guess!) I'm not a web designer etc. Best wishes, David (talk) 03:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Comedian/comedienne

Hi. I wondered if you had a source which you could point me at which says that British usage tends to "comedienne" for female comedians? I'm British and although this term is found frequently in older writing, I don't tend to see it at all these days. The article on "comedian" seems to reflect this perception too. Thanks SP-KP 17:58, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I know it's not kosher, but how about a Google search for ["Joyce Grenfell" comedienne]...?  (I'd say retaining the use of comedienne/actress/etc useful for those instances where names are unisex, but appreciate that I'm probably in a minority.)  Yours, David Kernow (talk) 18:13, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
PS Just revisited the page and saw my unforgiving edit summary – apologies!

Subdivisions of France

I think you started messing things up by moving the template and the article to "administrative...". Are you aware that the article was just moved from "administrative..." to "subdivisions of france" less than a year ago, as you can see in its discussion page? It does not look like you read the discussion page. Or do you want to start a moving war? Now the article still has the ZEAT in it, which are not administrative and which you threw out of the template already.Ratzer 05:59, 27 September 2006 (UTC)Ratzer

Sorry if my (unfinished) work on this article (and all other "Administrative divisions of" / "Subdivisions of" articles) seems perturbing. My aim, with support from WP:WPCSub, is to clarify the distinction between administrative and other kinds of national divisions. Although not administrative divisions, the ZEATs are certainly relevant to the administrative division of France, so I've moved their mention in Administrative divisions of France to the #See also section, at least for the time being. Hope this is okay. I suppose a "See also" link to their article could be included in {{Administrative divisions of France}}, but at present I'm not sure if that's wise.
Meanwhile, perhaps you might like to add your views re "Administrative divisions of" / "Subdivisions of" in general to here and/or subsequent threads...?
Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 07:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanky for responding. I'm going to observe this WP:WPCSub thing and see how I can contribute, since I do have an interest in subdivision topics. If there is a drive to create comparable administrative subdivision templates/articles for all countries of the world, then your moving of article and template makes sense, and in this case I will certainly take over some of the work. At the moment, I am just puzzled to find that most subprojects are believed to be inactive... By the way, ZEAT are not solely statistical units, but primarily planning regions that have been adopted to serve as NUTS 1 level. It's enough if you reply on your own discussion page, you don't need to duplicate on mine. Greetings, Ratzer 09:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
If there is a drive to create comparable administrative subdivision templates/articles for all countries...
There is inasmuch as I see it's something that isn't in place; however, the task might not be too daunting as most "Subdivisions of X" articles are actually "Administrative divisions of X" articles. Where there are other notable classes of national divisions (e.g. statistical, planning, electoral divisions etc etc) then a "Subdivisions of X" article would act as a "master" article linking to the articles on the different classes.
Apart from responses from Tobias Conradi, WP:WPCSub is quiet/inactive, perhaps as much as the other related (sub)projects you mention. I guess flurries of activity (such as mine) followed by (longer) periods of inactivity may well be the norm for most WikiProjects.
Thanks for the reminder re the nature of the ZEAT; as there are other countries with equivalent divisions (planning, developmental, statistical regions etc) a page or three for these classes (plus master page/s) seems likely.
Let me know if you're thinking of constructing overview tables or the like; one or two may already be existence in userspace etc for you to adopt/amend/etc.
Yours, David (talk) 10:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

(Tobias)

David, I am quite busy, can maybe only return to country subdiv during the weekend. suggestion: Can you try to integrate the hierarchy into the country subdivison article, or if you prefer put it in the talk there? IMO this way we are faster in reaching a clear mind about the hierarchy. BTW, great work yours. Yours, Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:12, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Understood; yes, there is more to life than Wikipedia!  I'll try what you suggest presently; in the meantime, perhaps with unfortunate timing, I've just entered a few categories at CfD to see what folk think about renames. Yours, David (talk) 15:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
strong disagree with this action. It is disrupting. We should get consensus _before_ the stuff is moved. Again: the word "nation" is not a good one to use. Again: the word subnational is for the same reason neither. Could you withdraw the CfD stuff for now? Let's _first_ work on our thoughts about the hierarchy. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:32, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
But where might we find people other than ourselves and the occasional visitor to WP:WPCSub willing to contribute to finding a consensus...?  My feeling is that we need to take this issue to people, e.g. via CfD... However, if you're not able to contribute until the weekend, I'll freeze the CfD test for the time being, yes...?  Apologies for my unfortunate timing, David (talk) 15:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thx for freezing. inviting others is good. we should present them a whole picture not only some cats. That's why i suggested we improve the country subdiv article. Lets try to make a hierarhy there or in it's talk. We can then also contact some other people we both know allready and we think they may be interested, Ezhiki may be a good example. see you at the article? best regards Tobias Conradi (Talk) 21:00, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Wabbit

Wook at the widdle bunnies : ) - jc37 10:45, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Wuggs speaks

Hi, Wuggs with a little info on my hypothetical astronomical objects work. I am glad you are interested. This is some crazy stuff. You wanted to know a little more about the category work I was doing. Here is a breakdown.

  • category:Astronomical objects is way at the top. This is the offical wikipedia term as opposed to "Astronomical bodies" or "celesial bodies," etc. There are proper redirect pages for these other terms now. This includes all planets, moons, etc. currently thought or once thought to exist in space.
  • Category:Hypothetical astronomical objects is the next broadest category. This deals only with the objects that are disproven or unconfirmed. From here we break it down a little more into category:Hypothetical solar system astronomical objects and category:Hypothetical extrasolar astronomical objects. My current stage of the project is make sure there are proper categories for the non-hypothetical ones as well.
  • Next we break it down into category:planets, category:natural satellites, etc.
  • Further down, these categories go to things like planets branching into category:minor planets and minor planets into dwarfs. You get the idea.

Thanks again for your interest. If you really want to help out, start reading Sitchin's crazy books and help me source some of the really wierd stuff people are wondering about.

Thanks for your message and some insight into your work!  As you may've seen from the threads near your own on my talk page, I'm already heavily involved in some WP:WPCSub work, which, though less interesting, I feel I ought to try to complete. (See also here.) I hope, however, that you/CfD are able to settle on some good names for the categories. If you'd like any comments, opinions or the like in passing, feel free to leave another message!  Yours, David (talk) 16:10, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

for del

Template (auto racing)

I have left a message for you on the article's talk page concerning your moving of the article. Please respond there. Royalbroil Talk  Contrib 21:05, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Apologies; I didn't realise that the article was meant to have wider scope. Have left an acknowlegement and suggestion on the talk page. Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 08:17, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

for merge

Talk:Subdivisions_of_Serbia#Merge_yet_again... Tobias Conradi (Talk) 10:47, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

White space changes using AWB?

Hi - Can you explain the point of this edit? It looks like it's just white space changes with no substantive change at all. I can't find a reference right off hand, but I think this sort of change is discouraged (and if it isn't, I think it should be). I'd prefer if you'd configure AWB to leave whitespace alone (I don't use it, but I understand this is possible). Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:22, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Primarily a template update (see edit summary). Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 18:29, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
The edit summary says "internal". There are no changes except whitespace changes. Are we talking about the same edit (the linked one - the second one, not the first one)? -- Rick Block (talk) 18:38, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Apologies; I glanced at the first summary. Yes, it looks like it's whitespace (maybe a typo correction too) that I would've added during the previous edit but was probably distracted. Hope you appreciate the benefit of this kind of whitespace (i.e. I don't subscribe to all varieties of whitespace being unwelcome). Yours, David (talk) 19:38, 30 September 2006 (UTC)