User talk:Kbthompson/Archive 3

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.
← Archive 2 |
Archive 3
| Archive 4 →


Contents

Vandal

Can you please help me deal with this new vandal?: User:Georgethorne‎. He vandalised the George Thorne article. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

He's inactive and on a final warning. If he resurfaces with more vandalism, there's a good chance he'll be deep-sixed. Kbthompson (talk) 15:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Newbies

I used to be a teacher so I get very annoyed when someone leaps on a new editor from a great height rather than encouraging them. It is wikipedia policy also not to bite the newbies: which, however, the wikilawyers conveniently forget whenever it suits them. Colin4C (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I think everybody should at least be given the benefit of the doubt, and treated like a decent human being until they prove otherwise. The clash of 'life-crisis' middle-aged male egos is almost worse than the many examples of teenage angst and pre-teen smut around here. As to behaving like a complete * to new people who dare to display an opinion - well, if that were one of my students, I'd have to pass them onto the specialist PC-re-education brigade. Eventually, it comes down to the fact that if ever any of these people were to meet in real-life they would just be embarrassed by their behaviour. I think in about 8 years of running on-line forums for students and lecturers at the OU, I only ever had to suspend one student from contributing - and she went on to get herself chucked out of the university (eh, unheard of - she was seriously barking).
People here are all volunteers, and I've seen some worthwhile contributors just stop after one of those run-ins. There's no reason not to be robust, but WP actually has quite a useful set of rules for people to play nicely. Then there are people who are adept at using those same rules to take any complaint and pass it back to you neatly packaged in red tape. As I say, don't rise to the bait and don't let them get to you. Stick to the article content.
I must away ... people waiting for me to do some real-life w*rk (shiver) ... Kbthompson (talk) 10:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Also I guess that a fair few of wikipedia editors are kids who e.g. are expressing their enthusiasm for some juvenile vampire novel etc. See vampire literature. A bloody shame, if then some fat arse cranky middle-aged git editor starts ranting that said juvenile vampire novel is 'not notable' and gives the juvenile editor the benefit of his bile. I think the wikipedia is a valuable educational resource and that if kids are encouraged to participate rather than being shouted at by bilious middle-aged twats then there is hope for education and developing the life of the intellect in the general population. Colin4C (talk) 10:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
That's the general idea, it is leavened by the need to produce a quality encyclopaedia. One of the notions is 'laddering' (if there is a theoretical basis) - slightly more clued up youngsters provide the less clued up ones with the clues needed to move forward. As to the vandals, you'd be surprised how well the warning system works and they don't need to be blocked - of course there are some that just can't stop themselves. There's as much pent-up anger in the teens as in the cranky old-gits - and as for the ones in the middle ...
Learn patience, Grasshopper, they are not evil, merely differently challenged. Kbthompson (talk) 10:58, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
On my way back, the car in front did a 900 degree pirouette on the A13, before slamming into the crush ... I'm not in the best of moods. Kbthompson (talk) 15:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I always knew you were a fan of The Sweeney. Colin4C (talk) 10:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
ROFL-bonk Kbthompson (talk) 10:58, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Belvedere Incinerator

Hi there, I believe you are an administrator with an interest in London articles, hence raising this with you. I would appreciate a second opinion on whether the recent edits by User_talk:194.60.38.10 should be regarded as acceptable. I have no particular interest in this article but it is on my watchlist since I did a minor edit to it. The IP (registered at UK Parliament Information Systems, with many warnings) has made a number of edits to this article recently, most recently reverting what I felt to be in the interests of political NPOV. I'm not suggesting that local opposition to this plan should not be reported. However it would appear to me as an outsider to be a case of unanimous local opposition, including the (Labour) Mayor of London, the (Labour) MP, the (Conservative) Bexley council, an individual (Conservative) councillor who has organised a petition to central government, and no doubt local Greens, Lib Dems etc. Until recently the article included a link to an article (not on a party website) in which the local MP set out his evidence to a public enquiry. This has been removed and the article now contains no fewer than 6 'references' that are direct links to a party website. The article as currently worded could be viewed as a political puff for an individual councillor in the run-up to local elections. Am I being over sensitive? Pterre (talk) 14:03, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Put a tag on the page and advice on the talk page. I know nothing of the development, so can't really change it without a lot of research - since you're already clued up, maybe you could have a go. I'm sure much of the case against can be made from comments in the national and local press, without resort to lauding the praises of individual councillors and referring to party websites. Kbthompson (talk) 15:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Do be temperate in your dealings with a parliamentary IP address, many people might read it. These blocks have to be reported to the Wiki-press office. They'll probably still make the block, but will dress it up in nice clothes, before releasing the news to the world. Kbthompson (talk) 15:23, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Hope your escapade on the A13 was not serious! Thanks for your response and comments on the article's talk page. I hesitated to edit it again as I felt it would just get reverted, but will have a go later if on-one gets there first. I think a reasonable balance would have something about councillor Leaf (not necessarily named) as he seems to have put a lot of work in, but it should also include the John Austin (MP) link because this spells out the case against as submitted to a public enquiry. As you say, there ought also to be a case in favour. At the risk of being branded a supporter of the scheme (about which I know nothing beyond having lived within wheezing distance of Edmonton incinerator for a while) I'll see if I can find anything that is not a PR puff from Cory Environmental. Pterre (talk) 18:11, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I was plodding at 60 - the 4x4 passed me at about 80, then wobbled to the left, wobbled to the right. Did a triple sulco - and back ended the barrier going the other way. An object lesson in Newtonian mechanics - and not going too fast in the wet. I braked, hit the hazards and full fogs all in one smooth movement (it was pissing it!) .... Just a little too exciting for a Friday ...
the recycling website quotes the director of the incinerator project - so, that should probably go in. It's not a question of being a supporter, it's about providing balance. Personally, I don't see much difference between burning, burying, or dumping waste at sea. We shouldn't be accepting large quantities of packaging in the first place. As to their plan to cut down on plastic bags; I'm required to separate my recycling - essentially into plastic bags - go figure. The council doesn't supply dustbins - heh, there go more plastic bags. cheers Kbthompson (talk) 20:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

DYK

Updated DYK query On 29 March 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Roman Baths, Strand Lane, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Wizardman 02:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Kbthompson (talk) 10:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

East Smithfield

Updated DYK query On 29 March 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article East Smithfield, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 14:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Kbthompson (talk) 14:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Television

I've reverted your revert. Can you please double check? Thks. --NeilN talk ♦ contribs 18:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I was just going to say the same thing. It looks like a little bit of vandalism slipped through. Thanks! Tnxman307 (talk) 18:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

A 'Twinkler' crept in between, well spotted ...! It seems we were all on the case at the same time ... cheers Kbthompson (talk) 18:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Pirates

Do you believe that it is aceptable to now add information about the novel, SILVER, to the popular section about pirates? The novel did receive a full page review in the New York Times Book Review. I spoke with the publisher-the best source-and the editor told me that the book is selling well. I asked this question on the my talk page several weeks ago, but did not receive any comments from the community. What are your thoughts?

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Leaseperfect" —Preceding unsigned comment added by leaseperfect (talk • contribs)

As I said before, without consensus there is no guarantee others will find it acceptable. A mention of the book in that section may well be appropriate - as long as it is not given undue precedence over the other entries. It still seems that there is an issue of conflict of interest. Notability is not determined by sales, but rather by critical interest - you might have more luck if you can reference the book to a national newspaper review, such as the NYT Book Review - NOT a blog or publishers information. Kbthompson (talk) 10:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leaseperfect (talk • contribs) 01:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Music Hall Again

I just made a small attempt to make music hall a bit more coherent by eliminating some of the block listing but it obviously still needs a great deal of work and tidying up. Also put in a mention of the Empire, Leicester Square which we somehow seemed to have overlooked heretofore. This is evidentally a vast subject which is not at all easy to get a handle on and on which the literature is as vast as it is obscure...(which literature, however, I am slowly ploughing through). Colin4C (talk) 20:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I know what you mean. If we're to get it to FA we need a major revision - probably breaking it up into a number of sub-jects. Benny Green is wonderful - but totally unusable as a reference. The Beerbohm stuff is priceless, but how do you reduce it to a sound bite? I'm hoping I'll have a bit more time soon. All the best. Kbthompson (talk) 22:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Think Beerbohm would get himself arrested today...As for Benny he does seem to hang around in Leicester Square a lot: with his ballet dancers and demi-mondaines. What was going on in the East End, suburban, provincial and world-wide music halls is more obscure. I am fascinated by the minor music halls of the East End etc, but will probably have to engage in original research to find out more. The legal technicalities are puzzling also. At the moment I am grabbing any likely looking items from second hand book stores. Also some stuff buried in the basement of our library which sometimes the staff can find if you pronounce the words very slowly and repeat yourself three times whilst doing a dumb show with hand gestures. Colin4C (talk) 09:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
He pursued girls a third his age, so, yes ... a lot of the East End stuff is actually written up - just need to get it together. Of more concern are the little suburban ones - East Ham, Stratford, West Ham - had about 20 of the things! There was a very active entertainment culture. Also the Jewish East End theatres - all this stuff is rapidly becoming lost. Kbthompson (talk) 09:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
I love the political incorrectness of the whole thing including, inter alia, Max Beerbohm's obsessions, tableau vivants, demi-mondaines, black and white minstel shows, corny cockneyisms, songs about avoiding paying the rent, etc etc etc. Colin4C (talk) 10:52, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

London Meetup - April 13th

London Wikipedia Meetup number 8 is happening next Sunday lunchtime (April 13th 1pm) in Holborn. Come along!

-- Harry Wood (talk) 09:55, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

April GA Newsletter

The April issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is now available. Dr. Cash (talk) 03:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Apologies

  • kbthompson - bizarrely for the exact opposite reason that people couldn't make the Pembury.

Being travel issues?? Gordo (talk) 08:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

- roughly speaking ... also don't drink before the sun has gone over the yardarm ... cheers Kbthompson (talk) 08:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Queen's Theatre

Thanks for putting up the article. Well done! The information at the bottom about the various theatres called Queen's Theatre might be copied to some of the others (or put into a footnote in some) to give historical informaton about the name. If you want to nominate it for DYK, I imagine that the hook should either deal with the fact that the theatre was only open for 11 years. Or, you could do a hook about the Pompeii production disaster. The DYK folks like quirky stuff like that. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Done ... thanks for the help - an alternative would be that it was the home of the Odhams Press for nearly a century, and only a theatre for 11! - been tied up lately, need to get a few things to GA sometime. Maybe even gear up for the slaughter of an FA ...? Kbthompson (talk) 15:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Updated DYK query On 8 April 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Queen's Theatre, Long Acre, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Daniel Case (talk) 04:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Kbthompson (talk) 08:02, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

AN/I

this is what I get for not editing Wikipedia for over eight hours. Gah. I was planning on responding the the anon this morning, but business meetings kept me tied up until now. As I understand it from reading the content of the resolved issue, Dispute Resolution is where we have been directed, yes? Sorry for not contributing; I didn't mean for you to deal with the complaint without my input. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 17:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think you have a need to resolve your content issues in dispute resolution; I have no idea which forum - that's essentially something you'll have to agree on. The anonIP was making complaints that have now been resolved in other fora - so, not ultimately a matter for WP:ANI.
As I said to the anonIP, you would both benefit from taking a day off - you appear to have anticipated my advice. Not every post requires a reply, not every revert demands a counter revert. My favourite piece of advice (to anyone) is think twice, act once - something I wish I could do more of. As to getting into these disputes, don't. Walk away - trust other editors to deal with it, or come back when the issue has cooled off.
My immediate advice would be to start over, assume good faith on their part, and above all remain absolutely civil - not everyone has a sense of humour, or the ability to roll with it. It would not go amiss to extend an olive branch, or offer to parley. Y'all take care now Kbthompson (talk) 18:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:1856 CanterburyHall.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:1856 CanterburyHall.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Not really, look at the date - its PD-Old. Kbthompson (talk) 08:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank You

I was a bit surprised to see you had stepped outside your official capacity and made biased remarks to an individual I had lodged a complaint against. Quite awkward. Anyways, your encouragement found a warm ear and willing hand. I am now being stalked around wiki and reverted in articles only I had originally edited in by someone never even in such topics. Old settled issues have been reopened, clear opinions from the Reliable Source Notice Board are being fought tooth and nail, actions are being threatened, etc. You've offered protection to a Troll and it's been accepted. Myself? I now realize that both my attacker and I know that your board will offer no neutrality. Such is life. 75.58.40.232 (talk) 04:57, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

This is the post placed outside the official proceeding, on the attackers personal talk page, that I'm speaking of:

:Personally, I keep the oppose at RFA, already templated and handy - so it can hit the skids before the proposer posts .... 8^). In respect of recent additions consider the executive punishment withdrawn. It does look like someone might be truly, truly two stops short of Dagenham. Kbthompson (talk) 01:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I may be a sep, but even I didn't need to follow that link.75.58.40.232 (talk) 05:12, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I think he left out the part where I kicked his dog and ate the last banger from the platter. I've offered DR, and the request (as well as subsequent posts) indicate that it was rejected via silence. I am not going to file the civility AN/I, but he's swiftly moving into that gnat-like non-agf territory where he gets ignored by me and everyone he pisses off. I had come here to let you know I tried, and even stayed my hand when I could have filed the AN/I that would likely have seen him blocked, but the feller apparently acts w/out thought of consequence. I wanted to let you know that I did in fact try. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 07:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
AnonIP missed out the bit where s/he went on to attack other users, and claim them as Arcayne's meat puppets. At that point I reiterated in the forum that they both need to just sort out their differences and get along; and additionally that AnonIP now had to build bridges with other users. Another admin thought the best way to deal with the situation was to semi-protect the page in question. Let them deal with your foolishness and disruption, I've reached the end of the help I can give you.
Meantime, AnonIP continues by thinking everything posted on wikipedia must be about them. Wake up, it's a big place - avoid each other. Kbthompson (talk) 08:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Absolutely Stunning.75.58.40.232 (talk) 11:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree; your bad behavior is certainly stunning. And disappointing. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 15:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I've just been taunted by a child hiding behind it's Mother's skirt. How positively strange.75.58.39.148 (talk) 16:23, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Help!

Could you help me KB. I'm being bullied on my page by an admin for raising certain well-grounded suspicions at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-04-14 Anti-Americanism Colin4C (talk) 10:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I've told you before: You must concentrate on article content, not behaviour. I think the admin is trying to concentrate your mind on that, and you've risen to the bait provided by someone else. Like Arcayne (see above), you must learn when to leave it and not rise to the bait. As I've said, not every post requires a reply and you need to trust other editors to fix it, or challenge behaviour. Walk away, have a cup of coffee. Above all, don't say something you'll live to regret and seek to calm situations, not inflame them. Every forum now seems to want to specialise as to what they will, and will not consider. The sockpuppet business needs to be taken to that forum - and it was, and the matter appears to have been resolved. Another forum won't consider the matter because they don't have 'checkuser' - which reveals the contributing IP.
Calm down, take a break and really, really, concentrate on content, not behaviour. HTH Kbthompson (talk) 11:52, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
On the Wikipedia: Mediation Cabal page it says "We do not impose sanctions or make judgments." If that is the case why has what I said there been taken down and used as evidence to both judge me and threaten me with sanctions? That is just not fair. Anyway if that is their attitude I am withdrawing from that forum. Alice in Wonderland makes more sense. Colin4C (talk) 13:26, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
As far as most wiki fora are concerned, Catch 22 does seem to make more sense. If you complain you are ipso facto disruptive. Just make your points about content without any complaints about behaviour - no matter how oblique. Think before posting and remember its not a conversation - in which sarcasm, irony and other idiomatic conventions can be made clear. Relax and don't be drawn into the games people play. Kbthompson (talk) 13:41, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
You are right as usual. (That's me being non-ironic for a change by the way). Colin4C (talk) 13:46, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Glory Days (musical)

Hi, Kb. I see that the article on Glory Days (musical) has been deleted as not yet notable. This musical will open on Broadway in previews on April 22, 2008, official opening May 6. It also had a run in a professional regional theater in Virginia. I didn't notice that there was a move to delete it until it was too late for me to explain the notability. Can you reinstate it, please? Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:25, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem, if notability not explained immediately, it is just as likely to be tidied away without further ado - so, pls fix it. cheers Kbthompson (talk) 22:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

London Meetups - Sunday May 11th

We're hoping to have regular meetups in London. The next one is on May 11th Wikipedia:Meetup/London 9. Another Sunday lunch in Holborn. Come along! -- Harry Wood (talk) 11:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

St. or St

Hi there, thanks for pointing that out, I was not aware of that policy. I looked into other churches in London and England before moving so thought that someone missed a period. mark there. If both versions are correct (although I prefer the St. version) then that's fine with me. Gryffindor 12:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not saying it's wrong (either way) ... merely, it makes work to move it. Anyway, your motives were genuine. Cheers. Kbthompson (talk) 12:17, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Islington and Highbury

Vis-a-vis a your editing of Den Wyatt in Notable residents of Islington. Though I am not aware who Den Wyatt is, and granted he may not be "notable", it may be worthwhile knowing that Highbury is an area in Islington as a search for Highbury in Wikipedia will reveal. Therefore, if this person is notable and deserving of WIkipedia then he is a resident of the London Borough of Islington. This may be of future use. Best wishes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NickClarkM (talk • contribs) 10:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Answered there, the borough is not conterminous with the central area. Kbthompson (talk) 10:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Hectares

Hi, I notice you have altered hectares to km2 in a couple of articles. Is there an official policy on this? As a general rule (outside the scientific context, using Scientific notation) I would argue for using units involving the least potential for screwing up due to mis-counting leading or trailing zeros. From this viewpoint we should compare ft2 with m2, acres with hectares, or miles2 with km2, depending on the size of the numbers. Granted the hectare is not an SI unit for scientific purposes, but nor are many of the units we use every day such as the millimetre, centimetre or kilometre. According to SI derived unit the SI unit of area is the m2, which is clearly impractical for many purposes, though it is what I had to use in my (urban) land use survey days. I'm not a great fan of either acres or hectares, but Hectare says "The Comité International des Poids et Mesures classifies the hectare as a unit that is accepted for use with SI", and in practice both are generally used to describe plots of land. Pterre (talk) 13:01, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Hectare is listed as a non-SI unit under {{convert}} - from hectare A 100 m square is one ha. Its base unit, the are, was defined by older forms of the metric system, but is no longer part of the modern metric system. There's a direct relationship between the two, anyway - some I've come across have been listed as sqkm/ha - so, no point there ... Is there any guidance at 'how to write about settlements?' cheers Kbthompson (talk) 17:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Cynthia

It will be interesting to see your proof that Jarrett was not fat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.223.218 (talk) 13:22, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, a 'well built' woman. What's the point of calling her 'fat' in a complete non-sequitur in the article. The addition seems to be calculated to only upset her family and inflame. Kbthompson (talk) 17:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Heart attacks are often caused by fatness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.5.71 (talk) 14:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
No, heart attacks are correlated with obesity. The two are not the same. If you have access to (say) the coroner's report identifying specific characteristics relating to the poor woman's death - in context - then you're welcome to add them. Just making an off-the-wall unrelated observation is merely inflammatory. cheers Kbthompson (talk) 14:22, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Stratford Langthorne

Thanks very much for your message - very speedy! I prefer the above spelling, which you can find in the Victoria County History. I hope to add more to the article when I have time so thanks for the link. Any additions you might want to make also very welcome. Itsmejudith (talk) 13:24, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I liked the categories you added. Interesting to note that the only two articles in the [[Category:Religion in Newham]] are about buildings on basically the same site - the one long disappeared the other only at the planning stage. I wonder if those who wish to build the mosque are aware of the previous existence of the abbey. Newham has a much above-average level of religious observance (Source: an article in the journal of East London studies hosted at UEL). Itsmejudith (talk) 13:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Interesting, in that you often find that the same things have gone on in the same places, in London over millennia, for absolutely unrelated reasons. Previous generations were drawn to that site for water - hence power - modern ones because it is a transport nexus with available land. Normally, that category has at least Category:Churches in xxx in it. No-one's written about any Newham churches! Kbthompson (talk) 14:27, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles May Newsletter

The May Newsletter for WikiProject Good Articles has now been published. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Undelete

Hello. Hope all is well. Can you undelete User:MRSC/Works? Thanks. MRSC • Talk 07:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. It was sent to the printers on Friday. =) MRSC • Talk 17:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, the very best of luck with that little matter. Kbthompson (talk) 17:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Stratford Langthorne Abbey

Updated DYK query On 6 May 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stratford Langthorne Abbey, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 04:05, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! Itsmejudith (talk) 07:29, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Kbthompson (talk) 08:05, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Stuckism International Gallery

Hi, you changed back an edit on this article, but I think you missed the one before that, which I think is by the same person. Can you have a look at the discussion on Gina Bold. Something seriously needs to be done here. Vandalproof is required.

Hamond —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamand (talk • contribs) 19:37, 7 May 2008

It's been reported at WP:BLPN, hopefully they can sort it out. I had a look at the sources and either she's completely rewritten a part of her life - or, the stuckists are being excessively ironic. I'd recommend putting the information back into the page in a completely neutral fashion with cast iron verifiable references. HTH Kbthompson (talk) 20:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Greenwich Millennium Village

Thanks for your view on my problem with removing the link to the resident's web site because of no prior legal owner's permision. You made an interesting point about Wiki servers being in Florida, USA as I knew. The owner of the resident's web site is in England and their site legal info states that it is covered by English law. Because I am a member of their user community, so am I as it pertains to their site. However, the servers for the site are located somewhere in the USA. I'm not located in any of the above. So it would be somewhat difficult if somebody really wanted to do "dueling case law" or "dueling statue books".

Trying to be a good Wiki user, I felt that I should remove the link and do the posts. Especially since the original linker is probably a member of the same on-line community that I am. I'll probably be in for it one place or another, especially since he is probably a big voice in the on-line community.

Actually the web site does have non-member resources available which would interest sombody specializing in a planned regeneration community. Planning documents and some other stuff. The resident's forum is locked though.

I see that you and I share some of the same geographic interests. I've come across your edits a number of times. My big interests are the Greenwich, Woolwich, Silvertown and the Isle of Dogs/Canary Wharf areas. --TGC55 (talk) 01:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem, and you were probably right to bring it up. Sometimes in internet law, you go round in circles until you disappear up your own tailpipe. For instance, while it is doubtful that posting a libel would be pursueable under English law - don't it's against wikipedia policy, since they don't want to make new law - reposting that libel on servers hosted in the UK clearly would.
Generally, webmasters like to know when pages link to their pages, so that when they move them (for some reorganisation), they can link to the new page. Generally they like linking, as it moves their site up the Google ratings (although wiki uses 'nofollow' tags, so there's no benefit to them from here).
Yes, they were the stamping grounds of my youth - a time when a good day out was riding the Woolwich ferry all day... I try to add some quality to articles, sometimes I may succeed. If I get time sometime soon I will try to take Greenwich to GA - you're more than welcome to add some of your local knowledge. (Ah, Greenwich - gathering chestnuts in the park...). Take care Kbthompson (talk) 08:02, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh man! I forgot to mention North Woolwich (part of Silvertown? -- I think) and the, in my mind, much loved Woolwich Ferry. My wife & I spent many hours queuing up on one shore or the other to use the ferry. Mostly on the north shore. I can happily say that some of the best years of my old age were spent in that area. I'm mostly an east Greenwich (pre-1965) guy (Metropolitan Borough of Greenwich), though my life there was for almost 3 years in the 21st century. I certainly do hope to continue contributing to articls relating to the area for years to come.
BTW, wielding the mop isn't all spine chilling bugle calls, thundering hoofbeats, flashing sabers in the sun and, at the end of the day, big shiny gongs, is it? I imagined the Administrators as 'white knights' mounted on enormous (digital) chargers laden down with a large number of powerful weapons, riding in to rid Wiki-land of the scourge of the digital world. It's all about the mop, isn't it. Thanks for cleaning up my mess and giving me the facial wipes.--TGC55 (talk) 13:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Hah, the administrator's role is actually quite tedious - mainly dealing with children leaving "poo" all over the place. It's a bit like being classroom monitor and seriously interferes with actually writing articles. We also supply digital tissues (mainly for the aftermath of quarrels).
I was dragged up (sic) in East Ham, so not so far away - just a river separating us. My father worked at Tate & Lyle in Silvertown, after spending his war in the US Navy (go figure) and some time after in the merchant navy, he washed up there. Not unnaturally, I was born nearby! User:Kbthompson shows where I washed up and boomeranged not so far from where I started. Toodle-pip, dragons to slay ... must sally forth ... Kbthompson (talk) 14:29, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Shirley Windmill

I'm currently rewriting this. Can you confirm the reference for the 1899 lightning strike is George Arthur's article in London's Industrial Archaeology No.3? I don't have the book, but am reluctant to stick a {{fact}} tag on it. Mjroots (talk) 06:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, it's over a year ago. It was one of a number of articles I produced to try to provide coverage of Attractions in each borough for the borough templates. My normal way of working is to note where I got the information from in a ref, as I go along.
Looking back to the last version I worked on, that paragraph appears to be associated with the English Heritage listing details, but I'd say it actually came from here - and I actually didn't take the time to note it - except in the external links.
Thank you for taking the time to extend this stubby little article - and fact checking! Good luck. Kbthompson (talk) 09:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:BlackEagleSitePlan.jpg}

Thank you for uploading Image:BlackEagleSitePlan.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 06:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Non-free use rationale provided. Kbthompson (talk) 08:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Urk?

Hello, KB. Umn, what the heck is this? [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssilvers (talk • contribs)

Hmm, they are billed for three performances - transfer, or in-house company? Not particularly notable, but on the other hand - I'd assume good faith. I'll look forward to your appearance in Godalming (London's Poughkeepsie) gracing the G&S page ... leave it for the moment, scrub it in a couple of weeks as not particularly notable. HTH Kbthompson (talk) 22:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
I knocked up a quick article on Walter Emden - architect of the Royal Court (and others) - to fill a significant hole. Comments and corrections welcome. cheers Kbthompson (talk) 13:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

EH and NT infoboxes

Thanks for your help re the above infoboxes I'll try a few to see if they work.--Harkey Lodger (talk) 13:34, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully, they'll do (in some form); let me know what happens and I'll apply anything useful to the London one's. cheers Kbthompson (talk) 13:41, 26 May 2008 (UTC)