User talk:Richie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. In case you need any help editing, here are a few tips:

Hope you like it here and stick around. Good luck, and happy editing! [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 13:18, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can sign your name on talk pages by typing 3 tildes, like this ~~~. 4 tildes will add a timestamp. You should only do this on talk pages, not articles, however.

Good work on the Cambridge articles and all those [de: links [[User:Dmn|Dmn / Դմն ]] 21:42, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Do you have user pages on EVERY Wikipedia? Even the "inactive" wikis? I didn't know what to say when I saw all those language codes on your user page. Scott Gall 05:37, 2005 Apr 15 (UTC) PS: I only have user pages on en: and Simple.

Yes :-) It's quite useful if you want to change something and you don't need to sign up beforehand, if you have the same username and password everywhere. But most of these 200 wikipedias are actually quite inactive. By the way, my bot is also signed up everywhere. — Richie 08:45, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Wasn't Joseph Needham a Fellow of Gonville and Caius? Varada

Yes. "In 1924, he took his doctorate and became a fellow of Caius College, an institution that (apart from the years which he spent in China and Paris) was to remain his home-base almost till the end of his life." [1] — Richie 15:29, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The reason why I asked you this question was I did not find his name listed among the famous fellows of G&C in the wikipedia article. Thanks. Varada

Thanks. I don't know why he wasn't in there. — Richie 18:42, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Alumni

I suppose I do agree, otherwise the list will be endless. But it's hard to judge the criteria for inclusion in such a short list. For example, I see that Turing is not there (this is based on a glance, so I could be wrong) and nor is Keynes. On the other hand, more WP readers will have heard of Peter Cooke and John Cleese than Turing or Keynes. So do we go by fame or by significance of work? SlimVirgin (talk) 17:04, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

I think we should find a balance between fame and significance of work (focus). This should also be seen more generally and not too UK-centric. I don't know Peter Cook, but think that John Cleese definitely deserves to be listed there. I would also like to see Sacha Baron Cohen (Ali G) listed there, but I accept that some wouldn't like this. I would remove John Harvard (clergyman) Sylvia Plath, Siegfried Sassoon, Ted Hughes and Graham Chapman from the list, maybe also William Harvey. Added Turing. — Richie 19:29, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
Richie, we should probably have this discussion on the talk page there, so I'm copying this to there. However, I'd say that Peter Cook is probably a more eminent comedian than John Cleese, Sacha Baron Cohen I wouldn't include, and I'd see no argument for excluding Ted Hughes as a poet laureate. Perhaps we should just leave it until it becomes too large, which hasn't happened yet. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:51, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

Richie, I feel Richard Edgar is at least as notable as any of the other Robinson alumni, so I regret that you feel my contribution is vandalism. I feel as a Robinson student, I have a better insight into these matters than yourself. Mawkernewek

Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia and as such it is not relevant whether you as a Robinson student feel he should be mentioned, but rather whether the person is notable in the Wikipedia sense. Just listing him as “Richard Edgar, astrophysicist.” in the notable alumni section, without a meaningful article about him, is virtually pointless. — Richie 16:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Divert to Samoa briefly?

As one of only half a dozen registered members of the Samoan WP who have User pages, would you please have a quick look at http://sm.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Community_Portal&action=history and write a comment on the discussion page? - Robin Patterson 06:27, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't speak Samoan and have little time right now, sorry. — Richie 10:02, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cambridge

Hi, I see you're studying in Cambridge. I'm studying there too. Pleased to meet you. --Cruccone 23:45, 19 January 2006 (UTC) talk on it:

[edit] River Cam

Thanks for correcting the revert. I was sure that I only went back one item in the history... Bluap 02:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of universities in Germany

Sorry for 'harshly' reverting your edit, but I actally only noticed the removed FFH entry and not the layout changes nor rerpair of my own layout impact. Take care. Tikiwont 10:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, no problem. — Richie 13:54, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Squires

Can I ask why you deleted the reference to the Caius Squires from the Gonville & Caius page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rer32 (talk • contribs) 12:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC).

Wikipedia is no place for self-publicity (see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not) and the squires do not satisfy Wikipedia’s requirements for notability: “A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.” (see Wikipedia:Notability). — Richie 16:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Please see the following source for a piece of evidence of the Caius Squires in an external web based source. http://www.answers.com/topic/may-week The Squires have also been referenced on numerous occasions in print in Caiustone, TCS and Varsity, and as far back as to the mid 80s. I believe they are a relevant part of Caius' immediate history and current scene. With 900 people attending their annual garden party from around the Uni, and an alumni membership that has been traced back to 1979 and active old boys club based in London, including honorary membership for one of Caius' biggest benefactors. Does this not qualify it for mention? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rer32 (talk • contribs) 13:08, 26 July 2007 (UTC).

The external web-based source you gave is not valid, because it is just an (outdated) copy of the Wikipedia article May Week, where the Squires are not mentioned anymore. Although I agree that the Squires are part of student culture in Caius, I am not sure as to their contribution to ‘Caius' immediate history’. Still not notable according to Wikipedia’s standards. Please feel free to discuss this issue at Talk:Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge to find a consensus. — Richie 22:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peterhouse

Why did you remove the reference to the LSE? It's on a plaque on the wall by the entrance to the building! Mrh30 12:19, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I was just a little sceptical about this anonymous modification. While it might be true, you will need to provide an independent source to support this claim. — Richie 19:13, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
http://www.pet.cam.ac.uk/images/display.html?image=album/hostel/hostel_03.jpg I'll go and update the article, including the photograph! --Mrh30 20:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Well done. Interesting little fact! — Richie 21:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Please do not remove Allama Mashriqi from the list of notables. This matter has already been discussed. See discussion page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.110.155.53 (talk) 14:14, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I think you should accept the consensus reached at Talk:University of Cambridge#Allama_Mashriqi_in_list. — Richie 22:25, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SVG File

I would be glad to reupload the vector image as an SVG file, but I am unsure how to do so. I drew the original picture in CorelDRAW, could you please instruct me on how to do so? CoolKid1993 01:21, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quotation Marks

You've reverted some changes to the Peterhouse page, putting back in curly quotation marks. I changed these to straight ones in line with Wikipedia:MOSQUOTE#Quotation_marks --Mrh30 (talk) 11:18, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

You can hardly call this “Manual of ‘Style’”, if it recommends the usage of ‘dumb quotes’ instead of typographically correct quotation marks. No printed encyclopædia would get away with this and for exactly that reason I will keep improving articles in that sense. — Richie 19:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't think it's a matter of style as such. I agree that for printed material, 'smart quotes' are correct and 'dumb quotes' are categorically incorrect. I believe the Wikipedia consensus to use dumb quotes is based around the fact that it is distributed across the web, and there is no guarantee that a given person is using a browser that supports the extended Unicode character set. There are other considerations as well - smart quotes certainly used to (and may still do) prevent web forms from working correctly in IE6. Mrh30 (talk) 08:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
This might sound a bit radical, but I consider incorrectly displayed characters an appropriate incentive for people to upgrade to up-to-date browsers. If we had always used the lowest common denominator, such as ‘dumb quotes’, we would still be stuck with IE4. Also, ‘smart quotes’ are hardly “extended Unicode”. — Richie 22:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Germany Invitation

Hello, Richie! I'd like to call your attention to the WikiProject Germany and the German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board. I hope their links, sub-projects and discussions are interesting and even helpful to you. If not, I hope that new ones will be.

--Zeitgespenst (talk) 13:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)