User talk:Josiah Rowe/Archive 9

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 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.
← Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 →

This archive covers discussion from March and April of 2007.


Contents

Context

Hi Josiah, been following your conversation with Essjay. Can you tell me what 'context' you found that sheds more light on this? I'm having problems tracking down the entire trail of conversation for this. Thanks. -- Fuzheado | Talk 03:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your lucid comments on the Essjay situation. - Daniel Brandt 68.91.253.183 05:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to respond to thanks and praise from a banned user, but erm... you're welcome. I think. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 08:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  • By happenstance, it was your opinions that swayed my view on the matter -- so I'm glad to see you've returned from your brief disenchantment. On another note, frighteningly, now that you're on Brandt's radar, he might choose to "out" you on his www.wikipedia-watch.org/hive2.html "gallery" of admins. --LeflymanTalk 11:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Meh. My real name and location are on my user page, and it would be extraordinarily easy to get more details. I figure I've got nothing to hide — I'm neither bothered nor frightened. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 16:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


Abingdon School

If you look at the headmasters section you will find a leet reference in the age, I doubt this is true, take a look User: hutch169

Wow, I'm sorry.

The headline says it all. I do have to be more careful when using Lupin's anti-vandal tool. Abeg92contribs 19:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)!

Congrats!

Well, the Doctor Who award passed!! That just leaves one thing to do...

The WikiProject Doctor Who Award
I, Smomo hear by award you, Josiah Rowe, the WikiProject Doctor Who Award for your outstanding contributions in the field of Doctor Who. May your good work continue. Smomo 21:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I was also a bit concerned that awarding this to you straight away might look a little suspicious, but I thought you deserved it so much it was worth any trouble it might cause, and anyway, its not exactly like we have ulterior motives. Also, it's good to know that you are back here after the Essjay thing. Smomo 10:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Input is appreciated

Dear editor, since you also commented on this recent AfD, I would appreciate your input here: Talk:List of films that most frequently use the word "fuck"#Arbitrary cut-off discussion. Best regards, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 09:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Follow-up

Dear Josiah Rowe,

Thank you once again for your helpful comments! I very much appreciate it! I just nominated the Ohio Wesleyan University article in the FAC process. LaSaltarella 19:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 01:23, 4 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me

Wikiproject Doctor Who Award

Thanks so much! Yes, my inactivity has mostly been due to incredibly busyness as well as the new World of Warcraft expansion :) — both of which take up most of my time these days. I look in every now and then and I should be more active once the new series begins end March. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 06:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: thanks

Josiah, I'm always glad to fight trolls. Hopefully you won't get too many more... --Akhilleus (talk) 16:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Liz Shaw

It is my sincere hope that the Liz Shaw (New Zealand) page will not be recreated. Of course, this is always a possibility on Wikipedia (as you well know). I think it's safe to move the Liz Shaw (Doctor Who) article, but I can't make any promises. You've probably been following the recent articles which were deleted because of BLP concerns and then undeleted through DRV. Basically, I don't know, but I hope it stays deleted. Mak (talk) 06:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Police box

well, for one thing I know that they didn't have CCTV cameras in 1950s police boxes; plus, it's a 1997 box.

Yes. Hence the word 'style'. What's the problem? --90.240.102.48 13:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Well you're the only person who seems to have an issue with it so far, so it's more appropriate to address you. The police box is modern (with new technology such as CCTV) but it is in the style of the 1950s. That should be perfectly clear to a reader, and it's actually more misleading to call it a 'modern police box' on its own as they are no longer being made - that's why I made the edit in the first place. --90.240.102.48 18:34, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Do you mind?

I would appreciate it if little sad loners like you didn't spend their whole time reverting a page called Abingdon School when the institution itself doesn't like the image of the band. I don't mean to cause any offense or to edit it out.. i'll leave you to do it. Go outside! You have a wife don't you? hutch169 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.229.152.18 (talk • contribs) 15:51, March 11, 2007 (UTC)

Space 1999 cast members deleted

I noticed that you managed to find the 'listified' Dr Who Cast members list after someone deleted it. I found that the 'Space 1999 Cast Members' list has been deleted. Can you help find it? Mariegriffiths 22:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

  • It's been established that if a cast list that covers main and recurring actors exists in the main article then the category can be deleted without doing a complete copy and paste of the contents of the category. This is because of the tendency to place everyone who's ever spoken a line in the "actors" or "cast members" category. See for example the Doctor Who actors list which has hundreds upon hundreds of names including any number of people who appeared in just one episode. Such a list of main and recurring cast exists in Space:1999. Speaking of that Dr Who list, the reason I didn't wikify the names is because the bulk of the names should be removed from the list as not being main or recurring cast but since I don't know enough about the subject to delete the names effectively I saw litle point in spending the time wikifying it. A subject matter expert needs to go into the list and clear out the one-shot actors and then wikify the rest. Otto4711 04:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • There is no reason why Mr Duncan's article can't include a filmography and a link to his IMDB profile. Otto4711 05:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

'"It's been established' by who when? certianly not by a large number of wikipedia users. The delete first ask questions later policy is downright vandalism. Major guest stars, ones having their own wikipedia entry certainly deserve to be kept and avoids any mention of insignificant players. Space 1999 had Peter Cushing, Brian Blessed and Joan Collins as guest stars, all of whome have major wikipedia entries.Mariegriffiths 00:40, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Bot edits to archive

Hi, Mets501. I reverted a few edits that your bot made while migrating userboxes: specifically, its edits to archive pages here, here and here. Since those pages are a record of discussions about the creation of the userboxes, it's not appropriate to change them to the UBX version. For talk page archives, it's usually better to have a redlink than to change someone else's comment.

I didn't check to see whether your bot had made changes to other talk page archives, but you might want to. It's not a huge deal, but it'd be better if your bot didn't edit archive pages like that. Thanks! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I kind of disagree, the reason being that if you checked a user's contributions, they would be to the User:UBX/... page, not the Template:User ... page, as the histories were moved. It's also helpful to be able to actually see where the user's edits are, something that you can't find if you're not an admin who can view deleted revisions. What do you think? —METS501 (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, you can still see the user's contribution history. I can see your argument, but I tend to think of archive pages as a historical record that shouldn't be changed. I'll ask at Wikipedia talk:How to archive a talk page to see what the general sentiment there is. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
OK, sounds good. You might want to ask about non-archived talk pages for the same thing too. —METS501 (talk) 17:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Block of Otto

The reason for block was because of his disruptive renomination of a category, so I do not think that the block should be lifted. Tim! 19:20, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

However, if you think I was wrong, as I respect your judgement, if you decided to unblock him yourself I will agree with your decision. Tim! 19:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

re List of Doctor Who actors

Based on the comments made here I've started trying to re-work the list.

I'd like some feedback on what I've got so far here.

Thanks, — J Greb 21:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

It's ideally for external reference links. I'm thinking it may be a bit of overkill. — J Greb 21:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the cookie! --Brian Olsen 16:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Autobiography proposal

I posted a proposal on Wikipedia_talk:Autobiography before realising you had proposed something similar immediately before. I'd appreciate it if you could give me some feedback on the talk page? --Oldak Quill 01:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

High-five

Thanks for helping out with the recent vandalism on the Windows-related articles. Definitely one of the more bizarre cases I've seen... -/- Warren 05:57, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Neutral point of view?

Mr. Rowe, a while back you sent me the following message:

>>Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Doctor Who fandom. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.>>

I'm sorry, but your postings and those by others, calling Doctor Who a 'major cultural icon' and denying that it is a children's programme, are hardly evidence of a "neutral point of view" themselves. (I'll bet there are some who deny that by the late 1980's, it had lost its audience.) What I did was point out that dedicated Doctor Who fans are often viewed, in the world outside Doctor Who fandom, as "anoraks", "geeks", obsessed and a bit silly; if you're unaware that this is so, you must lead a very sheltered life. There is a world outside Doctor Who fandom, you know. Dolmance 13:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback.

I nthis case is nt' a drinibot per se problem, but a pywikipedia framework thing. The bot used did remove the -0 categories, but also moved all the other categories to the bottom of the page, which is the standard behaviour. I looked up the documentation and there's a option you must explicitly specify so it doesnt' happen, but I wasn't aware of it so the bot ran with the default behavior. I'm very busy today, so I will stop using the bot until I have time to debug the new option and will get you back then. -- Drini 16:11, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Cheers

Thanks for the cookie! Angmering 20:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Thomas Nelstrop

Hi Josiah, I accept the deletion although I don't understand why the whole page was deleted and not just the so-called copyrighted material. If I could find the code, it would just take me 2 mins to rewrite and repost as opposed to the hour it took me to originally write it. Plus it was also a work in progress which I was going to continue working on today. Raphaelite 09:27, 16 March 2007

Simon Pegg

Hi Josiah, this a bit of a random plea for help, but you're the only TV based admin I can think of off the top of my head, and Pegg was in Doctor Who! Anyway, an IP editor keeps adding an extremely spurious bit of trivia to Pegg's article (here). I've reverted a couple of times - in fact, I'm not sure whether I've broken 3RR, I'm sure it's vandalism though. But yeah, it's a ridiculous bit of trivia which I doubt is even true (I checked fansites and I don't think Pegg's been on the Moyles at all), and even if it is true it's still fails WP:NOT. So basically, he keeps putting it back - what should I do? Many thanks, HornetMike 18:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Good-o. Thanks a lot, HornetMike 08:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Utopia

Thanks for your message. I know there are sources somewhere which confirm that Episode 11 is set on the alien planet while the other is in Space, but I'm not exactly sure where. I have a look out for it, so I'll leave it as it is for now. Just letting you know that I am right, just that I can't give a sourcer for it right now. :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Derek Metaltron (talk • contribs) 04:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC).

IP block

I think the IP you just recently blocked for inserting those barnstars on all those user pages is back, but with a different IP address. Please see his contributions. 67.170.152.106 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • trace • RBLs • http • block user • block log)  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:57, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Mr chuzzlewit

I've got a slight suspicion that Mr chuzzlewit (talk · contribs) is violating the policy at WP:COI, as I suggested to him on his talkpage and at Talk:Doctor Who: Original Television Soundtrack. His edits and edit summaries seem to suggest that he either is Murray Gold (very unlikely) or else an agent or close friend. He has only edited two articles (the soundtrack and Murray's own article), and then only to remove certain sentences which he claims are against policy (while then refusing to cite the said policies).

One edit summary said that "MG's publishers will shortly be in contact with Wikipedia", and a note on his talkpage said that information about MG's parentage and religion "are considered intrusive, tendentious and unjust by the LIVING persons concerned"; the use of the present tense and the lack of a qualifier such as "probably" is rather suspicious.

What do you suggest I do? Thanks,--Rambutan (talk) 18:33, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Essjay screenshot

Someone posted a link on the talk page to a webarchive of the version of Essjay's user page we've been looking for. Still got that handy webpage->image tool? -- Kendrick7talk 18:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Oddly, the whole section seems to have disappeared. The link is here. I too have largely given up trying to put the screenshots back now, but I imagine at some point in the future this can be attempted. -- Kendrick7talk 19:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Jj0909jj... again

Hello again, this user you blocked a few days ago appears to be back as an anon. Their contribution history is extremely consistent. They've already been blocked by Jossi for 31 hours for another string of bad edits, but it will probably need to be extended... -/- Warren 21:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

help us Josiah Rowe, you're our only hope

I noticed that you had voted to keep the category of Fictional Characters by Superpower on the march 7th CFD. Just in case you didn't yet notice, Raidant!'s decision to listify them was put up for review, and another vote started on the 14th. It seems those of us in favor of keeping the categories are losing the debate, and I was hoping you could lend your voice once more so we can keep them --Piemanmoo 20:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Doctor Early Life

I understand your comment joshua. The reason i put the early life there wasn't because I thought that it was in context with his being half-human, but rather that I could think of nowhere else to put it. It was supposed to be a section of its own, but didn't actually have enough information to warrant its own headline... maybe you can think of some way of incorporating it into the article as I do think its worth a mention. You could also include that he attended an Academy... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JamesRandom (talk • contribs) 11:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC).

Josiah Rowe

Hey is your real name really Josiah Rowe? King Lopez Contribs 06:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks to you both

Hello Josiah Rowe and Brian Olsen. I just want to pass along my thanks to you both for different things.

First, many, many thanks Josiah for the Barnstar. It is always nice to be appreciated and getting this from the Doctor Who project will make it a most treasured award.

Second, thanks to you Brian for your note in relation to my posting on the projects discussion page. I am thinking about taking you up on your offer of joining the project but I have a couple of questions/concerns for you both.

  1. As a wikignome I enjoy flitting all over wikipedia helping where I can. If this leaves me unavailable to focus on Doctor Who work is that okay.
  2. I am not very computer literate so there may be things like templates that I can't be helpful with.
  3. I am afraid that when I get into some of the policy pages my eyes glaze and my brain fills with cotton candy (for example if I had just looked at the main page for the DW project my question would have been answered about the style guidelines for the individual serials pages). I guess what I am driving at is that if I am doing anything out of line I will be looking for help in getting it right.

If you will let me know what you think - when you have time - I will look forward to hearing from you and, once again, many thanks to you both. MarnetteD | Talk 00:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The magic of radio

Yes, I'm sure she wouldn't have found that the least bit odd if I'd mentioned it! ;-) I actually forgot to ask her the second part of my question, which was on a slightly more Welsh note, about whether the Beeb's supposed third Saturday evening fantasy show, Merlin, was still happening. Oh well. The echo put me off! Damn corridors... Angmering 15:36, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:WHO NOTES

You are going to give a hand with this citation list right? I'm not sure how I fill in a lot of these attributes regarding Template:Cite episode. Alientraveller 12:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Cite serial

Hi - I've added some comments regarding a possible "cite serial" template on the Project Who talk page, as part of the citation discussion. I'd love your thoughts on it, when you have time. --Brian Olsen 19:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

no I am not Zora

I apolagize for my imature behaviour by signing my notes with another persons account, please do not feel angry towards me, I will never do so again, thank you for your vast information aswell, you are obviously intelligent in the ways of Wikipedia. thankyou,oh, also, I have created a account--P. Skiddy 07:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)P.Skiddy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.132.196.146 (talk) 07:21, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

I'm here but I'm not here

I have managed to stay away from WP for more than a month and don't want to get sucked into it again. However, the username Zora IS taken. Giving it to someone else would just confuse a bunch of article histories. Zora 05:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Policy Violation?

Hey Josiah, I thought that this edit might be in violation of a policy (WP:NPA, maybe?) and thought I should bring it to your attention before acting on anger. CaveatLectorTalk 14:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Subjects of interest

Having read your user page, we're not so different you and I. I also like Dr. Who and other science fiction and science fact subjects. I also see no conflict with evolution, paleontology, geology and the Biblical record. You may be interested to read a work by Hugh Auchincloss Brown called "Cataclysms of the Earth". I think it may be right up your alley. You can read it on the internet "here". --Britcom 09:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Newton, it is my understanding that Newton's writings on gravitation stated that he did not know and did not make an assertion as to whether gravity was a push or a pull. If you read some of Browns writing on the subject, he makes a good case based on observation for it being a push. I read some recent science articles that say that some scientists are revisiting the push theory, mainly because the pull theory creates a problem with quantum physics. But I think the most fascinating subject in his book is his Mechanics of the Deluge theory. Brown does not propound any Biblical theories, but his description of global floods and mass extinctions every 4-7 thousand years fits the Biblical record quite well. He also goes on to say that hundreds of such floods have happened regularly throughout pre-history and the result is the layers in the geologic record. to my knowledge, Brown is the only one to have successfully created a single theory to explain: mass extinctions, the layers in the earth, global floods in the Biblical record, ice ages, and the formation of petroleum deposits. If Brown is right, or even partially right, then the flood of Noah is credible and correctly dated and the creation story of Gen. 1-1 is actually the aftermath of the next previous flood and its drying stages. This flood would also be dated correctly in the geologic record. If all of this is true, then the ancient earth theory is Biblically acceptable, since it means that Genesis begins with the era of modern man, and not the formation of the planet itself.
Regarding Anti-homosexalism, you can still read the that article here. Actually I hadn't discussed the subject for a while until someone posted a new thread about it on the Homophobia talk page. --Britcom 10:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

CIN Who special

Hi, Minor point maybe, but I'm not quite sure why the CiN Doctor WHo episode is down as uncertain canonicity- it was written by RTD, and featured the two lead actors @ the time- it is clearly set immediately after the regeneration- why is its canonicity being questioned? Rob 12:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Josiah, Many thanks for that! I think the supplemental canon is a better category, as it clearly shows that it fits into the series estalished canonicity while at the same time forming a distinct category themselves. Aye, Gridlock was cracking, after a slow start to the new series- one of the best of the old revival so far!Rob 12:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Missing, presumed... er... gone

I know you said you wanted to do Harvard cites on it, but I've started citing up Doctor Who missing episodes with cite.php templates. Hope you don't mind. If you have any citations you can throw into the thing that would be great, though, as it still needs a lot of work. I'm planning to re-read the Nothing at the End of the Lane articles referenced at the bottom of the page and use them for proper cites soon. Angmering 18:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Josiah. Yes, Gridlock was pretty good, wasn't it? Angmering 11:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Kew Palace

I am contacting you at the suggestion of MarnetteD who as a Wikipedia editor was kind enough to give me some tips on writing for Wiki. But he/she cannot advise me on how to load a photograph on the KEW PALACE page, and thought you might be able to help.

Kew Palace (a former royal residence at the Kew Botanic Gardens in South West London) was fully restored and re-opened last year, when I added some factual details to the Restoration of Kew Palace paragraphs.

Later I took an archival-quality photograph of the main front of the Palace as it now appears.

The photograph would be of value for architectural history users because it reveals that the Thomas Dugdale etching (in the previous section of the article) got things subtly wrong about the Dutch gable adornments, the pediments and fenestration details.

I would be delighted to make the picture available free of copyright to anyone who would like to make use of it but have no idea how to input it to Wikipedia and, more particularly, how to set it up as an illustration for the Restoration paras. Can you help?

I can readily email the photograph to you. Please let me know. Best wishes and thanks for your time:John Thaxter 19:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Later: Angmering tells me you are busy, and has offered to help me load the picture. Many thanks: ````


Dear Josiah

Thanks for your message about Pope's epigram, engraved on the collar of a dog he presented to HRH Frederic, Prince of Wales iin 1738.

What a good idea to put it on the Kew Palace page.

There is no need to make a special case. The luckless Prince in question died in 1751 and his younger brother George became King (George III) instead. But he was much painted by the royal portraitist Philip Mercier, and a superb multiple portrait of "Frederick, Prince of Wales and his sisters" shows the family in musical mode on the front lawn of Kew Palace.

The National Portrait Gallery holds it at:

NPG 1556 Frederick, Prince of Wales, and his sisters by Philip Mercier oil on canvas, 1733 On display in Room 11 at the National Portrait Gallery

and you can see a thumbnail image of the portrait on [1], but I suspect we would have to pay NPG for reproduction rights.

I leave it to you.

Best wishes, John Thaxter 09:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally, the Cream design artist used the Mercier multiple portrait as the basis for a cheeky cover design of VARIATIONS by Andrew Lloyd Webber, an LP issued by MCA Records in 1978.

The front cover shows the royal family as if as performers at a rock gig, with the youngest princess wearing a BORED TEENAGER lapel pin, while the back of the cover has a roadie's truck delivering the amps and speakers to the venue!

Great fun. The record number was MCF 2824 and the variations by ALW were on Pagaini's Caprice in A Minor No 24.

John Thaxter 09:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)



Dear Josiah Thanks for getting the Pope quote and the link to the NPG on the Kew Palace page. I apologize for not giviung you the best link for the Philip Mercier portrait, If you try [2] it takes you to a much larger image which also sits at the top of the NPG page! Best wishes, John Thaxter 23:28, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

PS: Wouldn't it be easier for the reader if the link were attached to the text, rather than via a dogleg to the minuscule reference panel? Just a thought! Best John Thaxter 09:11, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Josiah

Hi Josiah. I have a question and I am curious about this. When a adminstratior blocks a user where is the block button located at? Does it look something like this? Or maybe it is in there block log or there user page? How does it look like? Do you think you can copy and paste an example? Or show me a screenshot of what it looks like. I would like to know. Thank you. King Lopez Contribs 08:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank You

I would like to thank you for answering my question and being so kind to me. Also back in January you put a nice comment on my talk page that said fun with templates. Remember that one? You told me not to put the template {{template:zombie proxy}} remember that? It was hilarious. But as you know now I have changed. I now cleaned up vandalism and warn users about there bad behavior. I would like to do better and maybe become a administratior some day. But I know that might take some time. To show my apprecitation I would like to give you a barnstar for being so kind to me. Thanks again. If I need anything else I will let you know. I have noticed that you don't have this barnstar yet. Put this barnstar in your userpage.

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Awarded for Josiah Rowe for being kind. King

Lopez Contribs 08:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)