User talk:Rudget/Archive/1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| userpage | talk | contact | past projects | userboxes | miscellaneous | awards | archive |
Stell Haggas
All the information in this piece is taken from Cricinfo and Cricket Archive which are clearly and correctly referenced. These are the sources which are always used to reference cricket articles such as this. Perhaps you could click on those links, check them out and remove those tags if they satisfy you? If they don't satisfy you then there's a few thousand other cricket articles which may need your attention. Nick mallory 13:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
You asked me to reply on your talk page, so I will. This is our discussion so far about the 'Stell Haggas' article. Nick mallory 14:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Stell Haggis didn't play any tests or one day internationals so that template is not relevent. Moondyne made a comment on my talk page and I responded to him by clarifying what I thought he meant and then apologising. You didn't mention anything about the template used, you said the Stell Haggis article wasn't referenced, which it clearly was. I think your retort is a tad more aggressive than mine, but I'm a big boy. Anything else I can help you with? Nick mallory 13:59, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
While we're at it, could you point out where I described Stell Haggas as 'excellent'? I've reread my article and can't find that word at all. Thanks for removing the tags by the way. I guess that means I was right in what I said about the article being properly referenced? Nick mallory 14:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and you didn't say anything about it being too short, you didn't actually leave a comment on the talk page at all. You merely tagged it as unreferenced and in need of wikifying, despite the fact that it's full of links. Cheers. Nick mallory 14:04, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Please reply on my talk page Radio orange 14:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
ok. I will. Nick mallory 14:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Hope we've sorted this out now. Have a nice day. Nick mallory 14:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Rfa
Thank You for NMfA - As I have to go urgently please put this on the page, oh, and I accept as well (I forgot!) - "I would just like to say a short appreciation notice to User:Radio_orange, I do do many of the things they noted but I also do more. Thank you for noticing my laborious efforts, I have long strived for notability, and also I would like to repeat as I said before, thank you.">Brylcreem2 18:53, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I have done the generic questions which my enable me to be an Administrator.
-
Thanks once againBrylcreem2 18:53, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Bad Mojo
That article demonstrates notability because ... (if you put hangon tags, you need to explain WHY you have put the tags on) --Fredrick day 14:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 16th, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 16 | 16 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Brutal-conflict.com
ok sorry for that
i am writing new blurb for it tonight i just copy and pasted that last one from aboutus.org till i finished it The preceding comment was added by (Aberus • contribs) 18:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC).
Signpost updated for April 23rd, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 17 | 23 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 30th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 18 | 30 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of The Green Quarter
I've nominated The Green Quarter, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that The Green Quarter satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Green Quarter and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of The Green Quarter during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Pit-yacker 20:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
User talk:CC2009
Thank you for warning this user for vandalism on Martin Luther King, Jr., however, I and another editor didn't see any vile racism from that user's contributions, and therefore agreed that your message was considered biting, and the {{Uw-vandalism1}} would be more appropriete. Now, in other situations, such as the contributions from Billynoors, that would be different, and I would have used the {{bv}}. If you are still think it was vile racism, you can find a forth party opinion, if you would like.--U.S.A. cubed 16:56, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
The Green Quarter
Hello, thank you for contributing your ideas and comments on The Green Quarter, but I really don't see why you have such a worriment against the article. The numerous websites on search engines would seem to represent the scale of this development. Besides, you seem to keep referring to on the discussion page, "as far as I can tell". So unless you are the developer,s omeone who has a degree or similar in a building related subject, a structural surveyor of the site or simply a resident, then I see no reason for you to be so bothered about deleting it. R_Orange 13:38, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
On a good article, I shouldnt need to say "As far as I can tell". The article should tell me exactly why it is notable. Wikipedia isnt meant to be a directory of every building development in the world, it just records ones that have some notability. For example Beetham Tower is arguably notable for its height and as such should get an article. If there is some notability then I am happy for the article to stay. However, at present the article presents no notability and I know of none either. Pit-yacker 17:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I feel frustrated, doesn't the number of websites when you search it signify anything? R_Orange 18:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Depends what the websites returned by the search are. I just quickly googled "Green Quarter" and the sites returned in the first 20 or so were mainly made up of a number of sites from various companies involved in the development, and estate agents trying to sell/let flats in the development. Notability could potentially take a number of forms, for example the size of the site, or something that makes it different from most other developments. For example, the fact CIS Tower generates large amounts of solar engery makes it notable. Pit-Yacker 18:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Revision Revert
I can see I have wrote twice on this talk page now, but this seems to be where I am ending up frequently quite recently. Please could you give me an explanation for reverting my revisions on this article. I don't see why they should have changed, so I'm perplexed as to the rationale. Thank You R_Orange 17:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Apologies. I'm confused to what I did myself. I think I must have edited an old version. I have now repaired the article. The intention was to Geo-tag, categorise, and remove the "They are out to get us" para and the list of subjects taught - if they taught something unusual that might be notable (Latin would be borderline, Ancient Greek perhaps) but the subsjects taught are no different to any other school. Pit-Yacker 17:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Because Barlow is a Specialist Science College is also offers specialist tutoring and lessons on Chemisty, Biology and Physics at GCSE level, should this be included? R_Orange 18:10, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
This should be mentioned in my opinion. But I think it should be stated rather than a rather long list of subjects. Adding to my original reply, I think I was editting an old version. I categorised the article sometime ago, and the categorisation had disappeared. I was looking back to see where the categorisation had been removed. Pit-Yacker 18:40, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Manchester
Please could I ask why you reverted the edit I made regarding Manchester, I clearly stated that I inserted the table but now seems useless since there is alot more to Manchester than just the South of it, if we did a section every village/towns in Manchester then we would have to create another article for it. Besides it seems that other editors are keen to edit out as much as they can out of the article due to it enduring length, as shown in the template at the top of the page. Regards. R_Orange 12:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- In Manchester, perhaps these village names seem important to me, because I have lived in south Manchester for 40 years and I know the places named very well. Anthony Appleyard 16:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I'm sure they seem important to you, but since they no longer substitute as a worthy piece of information on the page, there existence is pointless. The page is clearly over-written and needs cropping, so wouldn't this removal be an effective way of doing so? R_Orange 18:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- South is the only way that the City of Manchester extends away from its central area to the countryside around. That is why there is a village list for south Manchester only. The other directions are occupied by Trafford, Stockport, Salford, etc. Anthony Appleyard 22:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 7th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 19 | 7 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Clarification
Can I ask, can non-admin grant block-free editing to a known blocked user? R_Orange 19:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Can I have some clarification on your comment on my talk page? I'm not quite sure what you mean. --Deskana (AFK 47) 19:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the swift reply, say for example on this page could I, a non-administrator, grant unblocking? R_Orange 19:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- No, that is impossible on a technical level. --Deskana (AFK 47) 19:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks! Just thought I'd ask before I did something stupid! R_Orange 19:28, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of The Green Quarter
An editor has nominated The Green Quarter, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Green Quarter and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 19:11, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Copyright issue with Image:Alan-Smith.jpg
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Image:Alan-Smith.jpg, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from The Man Utd web page. As a copyright violation, Image:Alan-Smith.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Image:Alan-Smith.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.
If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:
-
- If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Image:Alan-Smith.jpg and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
- If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Image:Alan-Smith.jpg with a link to where we can find that note.
- If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Image:Alan-Smith.jpg.
However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Kjetil r 06:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- I am sure this is what you were expecting me to say, but I did not save it from the Manchester United webpage as it isn't even on there, and the one I uploaded was larger than any existing on the site, so please could you provide for me the URL of the page where you saw this picture on the Manchester United internet page. Regards R_Orange 15:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- One can find it at manutdpics.com, search for Smith. The copyright information says "Photo by John Peters / Manchester United via Getty Images." Do you still claim it to be your own work? Regards, Kjetil r 05:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
You're misidentifying the origin of Image:Libdemsposter.jpg.
That poster was a Tory-funded attack advertisement. Are you aware of this? 69.149.249.41 13:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- If you're so sure, we should incorporate the image into a new conserative paragraph. Also, you should contribute by username - your efforts would be much more rewarded. Good Luck for the future! Sincerely, R_Orange 16:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Alan Smith
I am sure this is what you were expecting me to say, but I did not save it from the Manchester United webpage as it isn't even on there, and the one I uploaded was larger than any existing on the site, so please could you provide for me the URL of the page where you saw this picture on the Manchester United internet page. Regards R_Orange 15:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- One can find it at manutdpics.com, search for Smith. The copyright information says "Photo by John Peters / Manchester United via Getty Images." Do you still claim it to be your own work? Regards, Kjetil r 05:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it does say that, but if you click on the "I" (picture information) when the photo is shown, the club's ensign is featured on the picture and right-click is unavailable, so how could I have saved it from that page? Sincerely R_Orange 15:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I guess you found it somewhere else then. It doesn't really matter, because if the version at manutdpics.com is "Photo by John Peters / Manchester United via Getty Images," the version you uploaded is "Photo by John Peters / Manchester United via Getty Images" as well.
- You did not answer my question: Do you still claim it to be your own work. If not, why are we having this discussion? Yours sincerely, Kjetil r 18:47, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it does say that, but if you click on the "I" (picture information) when the photo is shown, the club's ensign is featured on the picture and right-click is unavailable, so how could I have saved it from that page? Sincerely R_Orange 15:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 14th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 20 | 14 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:23, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 21 | 21 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Ankara
Should we move the page to "2007 Ankara Bombing"? R_Orange 17:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'd like to wait till an official announcement. Also would you mind citing your additions to a source, not that I am disputing them but it would save us time. -- Cat chi? 17:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 28th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 22 | 28 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Population of Manchester at List of English Cities by population
The list is not a list of local authority populations, but of Urban Sub-Areas as defined by the Office for National Statistics. An Urban Sub-Area is that area of a conurbation that is defined as being a single settlement, and does not follow local authority boundaries.
Some cities have expanded outside their local authority boundaries (such as Stoke on Trent or Wolverhampton), some are smaller than their local authority boundaries (compare Leeds, the city, with City of Leeds the local authority), and some do both in different areas (like Birmingham).
Manchester is not helped by being surrounded with other towns (or city in the case of Salford!), so its figure will always seem low. If you look at Greater Manchester Urban Area, there's a link to the relevant map showing the urban sub-areas.
Please don't alter the figures until the 2011 census figures are available! Fingerpuppet 15:09, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 4th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 23 | 4 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
My RfA :)
 Again, thank you, and happy editing! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 18:28, 10 June 2007 (UTC) |
Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 24 | 11 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 25 | 18 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 26 | 25 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Illinois Real Estate Educational Foundation
I created and wrote www.ilreef.org. If you do not belive me I can have my lawyer send you note. Please remove the criteria for speedy deletion tag Ssundquist 19:42, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Re: Barnstar
Thanks, but it was really minor. I don't really deserve a barnstar for it. Thank you for the the thought though, it is appreciated --L-- 20:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 31 | 30 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 00:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 32 | 6 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:12, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 27 | 2 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image (Image:ParrsWood Logo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:ParrsWood Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
You helped choose carbon dioxide as this week's WP:ACID winner
Spamsara 22:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 28 | 9 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Rfd and largest settlements in England
I have put your original template name, which is now a redirect to its new name, up for WP:RfD. This is because it was misleading and i have explained why there. Please also see User talk:Superbfc#Rfd and settlements in England. I have also moved the corresponding list to List of largest settlements in England by population. Simply south 19:29, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thats okay. Please check out the RfD as i have also made a suggestion on something else to do with the template. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 July 15. It should also have included any Northern Ireland settlements, not just Scotland and Wales. Simply south 19:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- But it is the UK, not just Britain. I am not sure what to do at this point. I don't want to sound bad but now this is more of a mess than before now, i feel. If it is okay, for clarity and other reasons, could you move this to Template:UKLargestSettlements, or if you don't mind, can i?
-
- I am going to remove the RfD.
- Simply south 20:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- I am sorry i troubled you. Simply south 20:18, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image (Image:Manchester COA.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Manchester COA.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 19:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 29 | 16 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 19:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Re:User_talk:Mike33
Although I welcome imput from every editor on my conduct, it really isn't a great idea to stumble half way through a debate and ask another editor to desist. The editor who's page I left a note on is a possible sock, he left 10 references on the Talk:Manchester page which had nothing to do with anything. It was disruptive and it was a nuisence.
Imagine me posting 10 points of Wikipedia order which have nothing to do with anything? Would you be happy? I wasn't happy and I gave him a big red hand, I am getting tired of all of these socks. I want to make Wikipedia good and am quite prepared to bend to do that. If other people have other agendas fine. There is nothing in my conduct which would contribute a warning from you, and unless you were specifically asked to reprimand me, or stumbled accross my comments, then I would consider carefully what you are doing. Your contribution logs show that we have never edited similar/same articles. In this instance I accept your reprimand in good faith. In future please give me examples of my wrong doing. Mike33 - t@lk 20:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- WP:AIV isn't an option at the moment. The IP changes everyday. You haven't worked on many mainspace articles and I think you would be very upset if somebody was trying to prevent you from getting a WP:GA, its a real insult to other editors. Vandalism wastes time and energy, at the moment his revisions has cut a whole climate box. He has made 8 revisions since UTC 20:00. Please before you start posting comments on other editors pages be aware that other editors may be angry. Mike33 - t@lk 21:38, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Soz never checked your articles properly, you haven't edited Manchester for a while [RO Count]. I raised a note on the person who originally blocked him [see diff] and presumed you were a sleeping account. To tell somebody that their behaviour suks is not wrong - I think its better than a big red hand. Mike33 - t@lk 22:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
(Most probably in reference to) British blimps operated by the USN
Hello R_Orange. MY grandmother Foley left Ireland about 1922. I am trying to sort out the sometimes - often - fragmented, inaccurate, or totally wrong information on the Wikipedia about airships. I am trying to expand and elucidate. I realize just how difficult this information is to locate and organize. I wish I could state with absolute certainty what the 'truth' is, but some times we simply cannot know. Yet, we must present to the public a useful account without dragging them into the depths of what envelope was attached to which car and when. We all owe it to one another to help with the occasional typo, the difficult point, and the unknown fact. I like 'off the cuff." The thing I most miss about the old card catalog, is the loss of the chance for serendipity. Have a nice one! User:Mark_Lincoln 19/07/07.
Sorry, the last text I had under here was a mistake (see revert), as once again this week I've misread the article. Yes, my actions were to distinguish between articles that are good and, to be honest, rubbish on here. It's an important job to be a New Page Patrol (NPP) but I really don't see what I did wrong, all I did was introduce a tabbing to the opening line. So, I don't understand why you gave me a comment back? Could you clarify what you meant on here instead of here?. R_O (Talk) 15:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I can understand the rubbish problem. I am learning by doing. The Navy airships page and it's stubs show signs of being done by people who have an interest, but not the facts at hand. I have seen many instances where old canards were repeated, two that come to mind are the L-1 being in collision with the G-1 instead of the actual L-ship, the L-2. The other was twaddle about the K-1 being the prototypes of the K-ships.
Please bear with me. I am just learning how to edit and write pages. I feel the Wikipedia is a valuable contribution to the world, and a fine pastime for a semi-retired computer nerd. Mark Lincoln 17:18, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- Ok! :) R_O (Talk) 19:39, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Re: Second city of the United Kingdom - Request for Rational Debate
Re: Second city of the United Kingdom - Request for Rational Debate
As a recent, and possibly significant, contributor to the Second city of the United Kingdom article, I'd like to direct your attention to this edit on the Talk Page regarding a Request for Rational Debate on the subject of the article. All the best. Sprigot 15:11, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Re: Reference
Just for clarification, were you referring to me on this page or the IP user in question? Thanks. R_O (Talk) 15:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- I was referring to the IP. XAndreWx 08:38, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
