User talk:Goatchurch
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Nice sources
Great job of finding and adding all the sources to Wood Green ricin plot thats exactly what wikipedia needs. Hypnosadist 23:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Random passer by says: thank you for the Talbot_Street_bomb-making_haul page.
[edit] Al Yamamah etc.
Please see Talk:Eurofighter Typhoon ("Unexplained" deletions). It explains why I have merged Serious Fraud Office investigation into the Al Yamamah corruption allegations into Al Yamamah.
Also please use edit summaries. You made major changes to articles (including removing valid information) on a controversial subject. Letting other users know what you are doing is important. Thanks for your time -- Mark83 16:38, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi. Thanks for your comments. Given our discussion is centred around Al Yamamah, I've transferred the discussion to Talk:Al Yamamah. Better I think not only for relevancy but also for other users to contribute if they wish. Mark83 21:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks...
... for the kind words regarding the Steven Milloy article. You should take a look at Shattered Consensus: The True State of Global Warming... reads kind of like an uncritical book report on what looks to me like Exxon-funded denialism. (Was that too strong)? Brought to you by the George Marshall Institute. MastCell 18:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Notice
In accordance with our policy on the biographies of living person, your article on Daniel Johnson has been severely trimmed. DS 16:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- (Sigh) . I guess that's what we need http://www.sourcewatch.org/ for, because in the wikipedia world bad journalism does not exist, even though you cannot move for it. Goatchurch 16:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- The problem is that Mr Johnson wrote in to complain about how Unbalanced and Unfair the article was. While I may not agree with the majority of Mr Johnson's statements as represented in his writings, he was correct in that it was not strictly balanced or fair. DS 17:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- It really helps to know it was a tip-off and who it was by. It's interesting that he appealed to your authority to wipe out the content, rather than editing the article himself to add "balance" with reference to writings he feels are more representative of his talent. You pointed out that he could do this, I hope. Is it okay to include selected sourced excerpts without comment? Setting aside the issue of being able to destroy evidence, I'd leave out the one that got deleted from the web, although I know someone who has a hard copy.
- I'm really counting on the hope that somewhere deep in the bowels of wikipedia is a list of these incidents (Be nice if it was published). Word gets around these people, for sure. Pretty soon the entire history of the neocon movement will be rewritten by our own fair hands. And then we will be doomed to repeat it. Goatchurch 09:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- The problem is that Mr Johnson wrote in to complain about how Unbalanced and Unfair the article was. While I may not agree with the majority of Mr Johnson's statements as represented in his writings, he was correct in that it was not strictly balanced or fair. DS 17:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Infobox Cave & Mendips
Thanks for adding the Infobox Cave to Goatchurch Cavern (wouldn't be related to your username?) & Swildon's Hole. I had looked for this Infobox & not found it - Ive just realised you created this in the last few days. Can you tell me if the diffculty grade are listed &/or explained anywhere? Would you be able to add this box to the others in Caves of the Mendip Hills as I don't have all the data for the Infoboxes ( although I have got the Barrington & Stanton book "Mendip: The complete caves & a view of the hills" from the library this morning).— Rod talk 13:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. I'm no caving expert & only got into doing these caves because I've been doing other stuff about Mendip Hills (as I live next door in the Chew Valley). There are lots of other topic areas which are just as "far behind" as caving. I'm not sure of the best way to use infoboxes when more than one applies - I've had this with Lakes/reserviors which are also SSSI's etc & not found/created a good solution. NB in the Mendips cave/SSSI also applied to Banwell Caves, Banwell Ochre Caves, Compton Martin Ochre Mine and Lamb Leer as well as Thrupe Lane Swallet.— Rod talk 16:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've put your suggestion about Template:Geobox Protected Area particularly for areas which are SSSis + caves, lakes etc to User:Suicidalhamster who has been working on Template:Infobox SSSI Map & started a discussion on the talk page. The transition looks a bit complicated though. For Lamb Leer I'd prefer a single page with sections rather than 2 seperate pages for the same place.— Rod talk 18:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've used Geobox Rivers on River Chew - see what you think? Re access restrictions - do you know where that data is available & how it is kept up to date?— Rod talk 09:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fat Worm
Thanks for the new link on Fat Worm Blows a Sparky. If you're Julian Todd, then I doff my cap to you sir. The gameplay may well have been fustrating, but the thing still had atmosphere. Marasmusine 20:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Infobox Cave
A suggestion is to modify it to indicate a cave system vs. a single cave Carlsbad Caverns vs. Tom Sawyer Cave. You are also welcome to add the template to my article, Spring Valley Caverns, and see also Cold Water Spring State Preserve, which touches on an important cave system. My current magnum opus, which gets into caves, karst topography actually, is Driftless Area.--Ace Telephone 23:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Regarding articles on CUCC caves
It's my personal opinion that CUCC's expo website should be the definitive source of information on those caves. We seem to have a very hard time keeping it up to date. I feel that time spent duplicating and re-formatting this information for Wikipedia is better spent maintaining the website. I understand your point that the media likes to use Wikipedia, but would rather they went to the source. If our website isn't user-friendly enough perhaps we should make it more accessible.
However, I think a cave wikiproject is a good idea, because there are certainly caves which merit Wikipedia articles. I will assist when I have the time, and try and keep the information which is posted on CUCC caves correct and well-organized. However, I think our first priority should be the website, and am disturbed by the idea of diverting web traffic from it to an inferior duplicate, posted on a site which is supposed to be an encyclopedia, when we haven't even gotten it right in the first place. -Halidecyphon 15:49, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
- WP is not supposed to duplicate or reflect the CUCC expo site. No uncited original information should be there. Think of it as a very very brief executive summary that gives pointers to the definitive information and acts like the text in an index card catalogue filed under the category "Caving expeditions".
- The WP page can be an interface between the info on the definitive CUCC expo website to a place where other caves and caving expeditions might be cited which has the potential to evolve into something structured. Perhaps it will help to show the obvious shortcomings with the real website when seen in the context to what other expeditions state. Ideally there should be some level of consistency and compatibility between all the expedition websites to the extent that in the distant future we'll all use the same CMS. Once that happens, stating things about caves and caving clubs in WP will become redundant, but it will have served its purpose by being part of the process of initially gathering the basic structured information together in a place we are all more likely to put it.
- Also, WP is a place we can outsource some of the information in the website, such as on surveying, drawing up, SRT, prospecting, and a rescue guide that's easier to read (ie reading it first makes the big definitive one easier to swallow). All articles would include links to alternative diatribes on these subjects. This means you'll find them, eg the Guide to cave Rescue from OUCC. Maybe a person in each club might suddenly have the same bright idea to get together and combine them! This tool opens up a process for getting there, since such collaboration has not yet blossomed in fifty years, and shows no signs of doing so. There's a process for putting the basic principles into context in WP, such as at Hypothermia#First_aid which can then migrate to wikibooks once it's recognized that it doesn't fit: [Transwiki:Wilderness_first_aid#Exposure]. In the process one might even learn about new stuff, such as Paradoxical undressing or Terminal burrowing.Goatchurch 23:21, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- Hm. Hope you're right. Care to join the WikiProject? -Halidecyphon 12:21, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] United Nations Parliamentary Assembly
I notice you have an interest in UN democracy. Please vote at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/United Nations Parliamentary Assembly. Thanks, Sarsaparilla (talk) 20:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rumbling hole
Hallo, I spotted this new article because I'd got Gragareth on my watchlist - I'm a walker rather than a caver. I've added location info to internationalise the article, but I wonder if you could expand on "LUSS". I suspect it's Lancaster University Speleological Society, but I'm not sure... and there's nothing in Wikipedia (Luss = Scottish village only, not so much as a disambiguation link). I wonder whether the Cave Infobox template ought to be expanded, or at least annotated, so that "location" includes county and country - especially when the location is a redlink like Leck Fell. I've also added location context to Lost John's Cave. Both articles read very much like extracts from a guide for cavers, rather than items in a general encyclopedia... perhaps you could add some sort of an introductory sentence about them being of interest to cavers, to lead into the "four major vertical routes" bit etc? Cheers, PamD (talk) 10:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Rowten/Rowton
Hallo, You might like to have a look at Rowton cave and Rowten Pot. From OS map and the linked database, Rowten with an E seems to be the right spelling - but I'm not clear whether there's a distinction between R Cave and R Pot (the R Cave article has redlinks to Rowton Pot...). I wondered about just Moving the Rowton Cave article to Rowten Cave, but thought you might like to have a go at making sense of it all instead! Lots of redirects needed, to pick up the pieces and prevent any future confusion. (Spotted this pair while wandering through Category:Caves of Yorkshire) PamD (talk) 11:07, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for tidying these up! I've added a couple more redirects, from Rowten Cave and Rowton Pot, to deter anyone from accidentally re-creating the confusion. PamD (talk) 08:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:Located map
A tag has been placed on Template:Located map requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{tranclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Are you sure they all need their own pages?
Frankly, no, no I am not. At this point (in the low hundreds) a lot of issues are still being dealt with for the same time, the only thing that keeps getting renewed is when the Council re-ups the peacekeepers in Cyprus every 6 months, and I suppose there could just be one page for accepted/rejected applications to the UN. When things start to get redundant I'll follow your example on UNSC 1267. I expect that at least a few resolutions will be combined later anyway, if you see anything that strikes you feel free to merge it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Schrandit (talk • contribs) 23:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] UN copyright
It's nice that someone noticed and found my (modest) addition to that page useful. The person you really should thank is wikisource:User:Physchim62. Regarding your question, I've added some more details about the process I went though to verify what I said in the history comment, on the talk page. Let me know if you have further questions. JesseW, the juggling janitor 07:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Re UN Document template
Wow, thank you so much for your help! That is so nice of you to take the time to help out a new editor like me, and I wanted to let you know how much I appreciate it. I'll work on changing the links on my temporary sources page. Do you mind if I include your info about making the links so any editors who use my sources page can take advantage of that helpful information, too?
Several editors of former Yugoslavia articles have been trying to find out if there is a template for citing ICTY documents. I have asked for help at Talk:International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject International law but no answers have been forthcoming as of yet. Thank you again for your kind help. Civilaffairs (talk) 00:38, 3 May 2008 (UTC)Civilaffairs
- My instructions are to be used by everyone. I wish I had time to look for ICTY documents, but sadly I have too many other projects and must refrain from getting sucked into any more. Often reports are delivered to the Security Council, and they'll have all the document ids within them-- once you have those, that's most of the way there. Please let me know of any SC or GA documents you're having difficulty finding; I'm quite on top of that problem and it won't take me long.Goatchurch (talk) 21:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)