User talk:Tractorboy60

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This user has retired from this thankless task due to having found that supplying my specialist knowledge is rewarded by some fascist punk complaining about small details in my wikification while paying no attention to the quality of the material. I've got better things to do than this.

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hello, Tractorboy60! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Image:Signature icon.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 13:45, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines
The community
Writing articles
Miscellaneous

[edit] List of people from Bolton

I'm sorry, but I didn't understand your message about this article. As I understand it, it doesn't need moving or deleting, it just requires some additional verification. Jza84 11:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I do apologise, I now see that User:UnitedStatesian altered this article, and not you. Tractorboy60 11:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Molasses.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Molasses.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:05, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to WikiProject Agriculture

Hey Tom, thanks for signing up and welcome to Project. As you've noticed already, even though this is on my user space, it's already a group effort. I'm really surprised this didn't exist already. Also, please add your name on the Project page (not just the proposals page) with any interests, etc. if you like. That way when we move to Wikipedia space we won't have to cut and past users, etc. Thanks. --Doug.(talk • contribs) 04:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Help with class

Hello, I am doing a class project and we need to write a wikipedia article. I was wondering if you could look at my article and see what you think. My article is titled cultivator. Thank you ghmd —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghmd (talk • contribs) 13:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure at what grade you are working at but the article, although small, seems fairly competent. I am not so familiar with US terminology but in England we call the shanks TINES. We talk about fixed tine and spring tine cultivators. A spring tine leg is sometimes called a pigtail tine, because of its shape. You also have heavy and light cultivators. A heavy cultivator with fixed tines is called a chisel plough when the tines face forward. A light cultivator is more like a harrow and usually has more tines. The soil engaging tip of the tine is replaceable and is called a point. The cultivator you have in your photo has 4 wearing parts on the tine, the upper and lower point, and 2 wings. In very dry abrasive conditions, the points may only last a week before becoming blunt and requiring replacement. The wings create a boiling action for better soil mixing. The yellow gear at the rear is called a packer roller. It can be adjusted for height and is used for depth control and compacting the seed bed behind the machine to reduce moisture loss. It's hollow design prevents clogging with wet soil. The tines are arranged in 3 rows with plenty of room between them in all dimensions, to avoid the machine becoming clogged up with weeds and crop residues. I'm not sure about the invention in 1977. Cultivators have been around for more than 100 years. Also, raising and lowering: very large machines - more than 6 metres, usually have hydraulic depth wheels, while smaller machines, being lighter, are raised on the tractor 3 point linkage. Because of modern mechanised cultivation methods, cultivators are far less common than they once were. The machine shown is primarily designed for stubble cleaning, i.e. pulling up the soil after the combine has harvested the crop, sometimes avoiding the need for ploughing, a slow and expensive operation. Low-till tillage, as this is called, is an American speciality and other countries closely follow development in the US. The idea is to create a first tilth, sometimes called a "stale seedbed", to make weeds germinate. When the seedbed is made later on in order to drill the crop, the germinated weeds are killed, reducing the need for expensive herbicides (hopefully). I hope this is useful and not too confusing, it is from memory and not from my old college notes, but good luck with the project. Tom 19:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] my point : Feminism

ok this may be complicated and i may break the rules of what the talk pages are supposed to be use for to explain this.

So the article says

"Feminist political activists have been concerned with issues such as a woman's right of contract and property, a woman's right to bodily integrity and autonomy (especially on matters such as reproductive rights, including the right to abortion"

the way that it is worded it says abortion is a right.

it would kind of be like saying

"animals rights people protest to help animals because animals are important too."

that is not neutral. a neutral statement would be

"animals rights people protest to help animals because they believe animals are important too.

all i want is the article to be neutral. i kind of put my own believe in there and didnt really make clear what i wanted and im sorry. i am in favor for abortion in some cases but i dont want abortion to be called a right. im not trying to start a debate just want to make the article neutral.69.106.250.135 03:20, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Listen, I am only on that page for the history, not the politics. If I might give you some advice, the way to go forward is to do some editing, be bold. For this you need citations. People rarely get anywhere here by lobbying on the Talk pages, it reduces credibility by coming across as WP:POV. By editing you are putting yourself on the same level as other editors, showing your confidence. If you have a properly referenced and credible point, no one can remove it without undermining their own right of contribution. Tom 07:50, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Milk

I replaced the comment by Erudecorp on Talk:Milk. WP:TALK#Others.27_comments indicates generally not removing others' comments from Talk pages. I think that it would probably better facilitate communication, and lead toward a better article, if you were to post your rebuttal to Erudecorp's comment on Talk:Milk. ENeville 22:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't notice it was a "Talk" contribution. However, it is still rubbish, and would be reverted as vandalism if it had been on an article. How can you have a "rebuttal" to such a "contribution"? Utterly pointless... Tom 23:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
ENeville: See WP:TALK#How to use article: Keep on topic: Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject (much less other subjects). Keep discussions on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal. Did you even so much as contact Erudecorp about this? No. Clearly one rule for some and another for others. Tom 12:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I grant that Erudecorp's comment is questionable, I think that it would be reasonable to contact Erudecorp in that regard, and I encourage you to do so if you feel the situation warrants. As to what might constitute a rebuttal on Talk:Milk, perhaps "That's rubbish," would suffice. I am not advocating a position specific to the topic of milk, rather the manner of response. In addition to being against guidelines, it is quite unexpected to find that material has been removed from a Talk page, and unless one is monitoring edits, there's no alert that material has been removed. Consider how you would feel if you came back to a Talk page where you thought that you had made a comment, but found no trace of it. Or, alternatively, if someone had responded to Erudecorp's statement, but Erudecorp had deleted the response, and that such was the state of the Talk page that you saw. If you still think that Erudecorp's comment should be removed, perhaps you could note on Talk:Milk that a comment was made by Erudecorp and that you had removed it, giving a reason for doing so. The point is to maintain clarity in discussion. The reason that I remarked on the removal of material but not the salience is triage. However, again, if you feel that a remark to Erudecorp is warranted, I encourage you to make such. ENeville 02:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
No, like I said before, I did not realize this was a "Talk" contribution. At the time, I just scrolled down the watchlist like one does and didn't pay attention. Comments are pointless in this example, and just draw attention to something that should be ignored. Tom 15:59, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Brownbagging

An article that you have been involved in editing, Brownbagging, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brownbagging. Thank you. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 14:34, 15 December 2007 (UTC)