User talk:Warofdreams/2004/01-06

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives
Warofdreams/2003 Warofdreams/2004/01-06 Warofdreams/2004/07-12
Warofdreams/2005/01-06 Warofdreams/2005/07-12 Warofdreams/2006/01-06
Warofdreams/2006/07-12 Warofdreams/2007/01-03 Warofdreams/2007/04-06
Warofdreams/2007/07-09 Warofdreams/2007/10-12 Warofdreams/2008/01-03

Contents

[edit] Use English?

Hi - we have a policy to use English names (ie translations) for things such as political parties. Your edit to International Socialist Tendency has reversed this (and broken some of the links). I'll have to revert your changes. Secretlondon 18:33, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English)

From the above:

Convention: Name your pages in English and place the native transliteration on the first line of the article unless the native form is more commonly used in English than the anglicized form.

User:Morwen and I have been using this convention for all political parties - look at List of political parties for examples. Basically articles under translated name with (blah language: name in orginal language) in the first line. I consider this to be in compliance with policy. Secretlondon 18:53, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC)

See Morwen's comments on my talk page. It's probably better that we continue this discussion in one place.Secretlondon 19:24, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Republican communism

Republican communism has been put on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion. As it stands it is an awful article. However the debate on VfD seems to be that people don't believe it exists - however there is a Republican Communist Network in the UK etc. It also seems to be used in the CIS - but I'm sure what they are actually meaning by it.

Do you have a decent definition or understanding of the term - I *think* in the UK it is referring to Irish/Scots republicanism - however I may be wrong. I'd appreciate your help with this. Thanks. Secretlondon 22:40, Jan 15, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Requested articles

Just to let you know, you made an edit to the requested articles which I had to revert. The edit deleted a huge swath of the article, and put much of the rest out of order. I suspect this was an accident. Any legit changes you made to the article were also lost, so you'll have to put them in again. Let me know if you have a problem with what I have done. →Raul654 05:32, Feb 3, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] REPECT Unity Coalition

RESPECT Unity Coalition - needs NPOVing. Dunno if you want to have a go. Secretlondon 10:32, Feb 10, 2004 (UTC)

I think your edit is fine. I expect it won't be enthusiatic enough for the SWP but we will see. Secretlondon 23:05, Feb 11, 2004 (UTC)

I have made some edits that remove the slander about undemocratic practices etc. This sort of gossip is better left on chat boards like Indymedia, not cluttering up Wikipedia.

[edit] Islands of the UK

[edit] Administrator

Congratulations! You are now a sysop! I recommend adding your name to the list at Wikipedia:Administrators. Tuf-Kat 22:01, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] French Wikipedia

Nice to meet you. I may see you over at the French wikipedia, where I also practise my French. Deb 18:56, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Shetland

Tell me more about the archaeology of the Shetlands. I'm going there in August. Deb 16:56, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Mercia

Hi Warofdreams, I just saw your changes to the list of rulers in the Mercia article. Do you think it is necessary to identify all of these names further as "of Mercia"? IIRC, many are unique & do not need further identification. -- llywrch 21:27, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] MediaWiki:Yorkshire

Re Template:Yorkshire - I'm uncomfortable with it using Humberside in the same message text as East Riding of Yorkshire, considering one was abolished at the time of the creation of the other. This is annoying as it is one of only cases in which region and ceremonial county boundaries clash. (the other being Cleveland, which is all in North East England but half ceremonially in North Yorkshire.) Maybe the Humber? Morwen 17:20, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)

Fair enough. By the way, in case you are interested, I've started a list of boroughs/districst that need to be split from their main article - see User:Morwen/districts. Morwen 18:02, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Trailing / in URL

Hi - in South West Trains, why do we need to lose the trailing "/" in the external URL? I'm very confused about this not least because I think I remember not all that long ago that people on the wiki used to shriek if there wasn't a / on the end. All enlightenment gratefully received! :) Nevilley 17:12, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Oh! Heheh. Oh well, it doesn't seem to be needed anyway so I suggest we leave it and see if anything happens .... :) Nevilley 17:21, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Region box things

As I've already said to Morwen but had little reply to, those region box things you and Morwen have been adding are very ugly, and in many cases are larger than the entire text on the article. Do you think it might be possible to make them collapsible or something, so they are collapsed as defualt but can be opened up? just an idea.

Also many of the maps dont make a distinction between local government districts and towns which share the same name, and maps of districts have been added to articles about towns, which if you ask me is not terribly helpful and likely to confuse readers. G-Man 18:51, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Addictive, isn't it? Morwen 22:12, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)

Replied on my talk. Morwen 22:46, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion

Hi, could you please delete Fluoranthene again? Looks like you deleted it while I was adding a {{msg:delete}}, and now it's there again... Lupo 14:09, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Apparently it is because sysops keep missing this fact. Anthony DiPierro 15:36, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] vfd

Regarding: [1]. Keep in mind that, in my idea, it's better to let all vfd entries stay there for at least 5 days before deletion, especially when there are votes to keep it (no matter by who). No need to take action on this, it should stay deleted. Optim·.· 17:44, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)


[edit] Deformed workers' state


[edit] Wikipedia:Recentchanges

I think WP:RC should include a link to all available Wikipediae, as there is no link to the full list. --Monsieur Mero 18:46, Mar 12, 2004 (UTC)

My response is there. --Monsieur Mero 18:50, Mar 12, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Islamic Party of Britain

Warofdreams, I see you moved the IPB from the miscellaneous party section of List of political parties in the United Kingdom to the fascist/far-right section. What is the justification for this? Big Jim Fae Scotland

Cheers for getting back to me. I will probably move it, as to be honest I don't think the IPB are particularly what you could call a religious fundamentalist group. Also, even if they were, could that be considered as 'far-right'. I am not so sure. Perhaps this also means that the CPA should be moved too. What do you think? Big Jim Fae Scotland

Re: the changes to the List of political parties in the United Kingdom that you referred to - good thinking. This seems a sensible way to approach this area. Big Jim Fae Scotland

[edit] Thank You!

I want to thank you DEEPLY for your support in the vote to promote me to a sysop. I promise to do my best to be as helpful, sensible, and neutral as possible. Your friend, Ryan.

[edit] Region boxes

Regarding the district/region boxes, how exactly do I edit them, because I would like to try making the font smaller so they arent so enormous. G-Man 14:56, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thats an improvement to the district box things. BTW how did you decide that Bulkington wasn't a town, it is certainly large enough to be a town (population 8000).

Regarding Marxism, I think if you compare the impact of Marxism in Britain with that in other European countries it is fairly tiny. I think British socialism has alwys been more influenced by Methodism, non-conformism etc them Marxism. G-Man 20:32, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] City Beautiful

Thanks for your comments. They are very much appreciated. :) -- Decumanus | Talk 17:55, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] History of British Socialism

I think it's fine now as it no longer reads as a hagiography of the Labour Party. The problem now will be what do the social democrats think? Secretlondon 22:07, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It looks fine now in terms of neutrality. There is more work that can be done on it of course in terms of depth ;) but it no longer leads like labour party press release. Morwen 22:09, Mar 23, 2004 (UTC)

I shall at some point. Got lots of MPs to write articles about first though! :) Morwen 22:16, Mar 23, 2004 (UTC)

Warofdreams - I cannot see any reason why the article cannot be allowed to stand as it is now. Doesn't read as biased as it once did, certainly less so since Alun E stopped contributing to it! I see the neutrality dispute header has been removed and I think that is the right thing to happen. Cheers, Big Jim Fae Scotland, March 24, 2004, 11:29

[edit] Communists

If he "allows articles to be NPOV" he cannot be a Communist (as opposed merely to a theoretical Marxist) in any serious sense. If he is a Communist in a serious sense, he (a) doesn't believe in NPOV and (b) is incapable of it. So, yes, I do believe that "Communists should not edit this encyclopaedia." Adam 00:22, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Pablo and Mandel

No that's fine to change it back if that's the case; didn't know that. - Hephaestos|§ 17:32, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Bulgaria

There's a map on Bulgaria of the subdivisions, I hope whoever made that has larger versions to make locators from ;) Sorry, not much use. Morwen 15:23, Apr 12, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Architecture

Hi, I noticed that we share an interest in architecture. Right now there seems to be a fair amount of architecture material on Wikipedia, but not a lot of consistency. What would you say to starting Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture? It might be helpful to have a place to talk about general standards, naming conventions, and so on. Isomorphic 01:30, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Years in Architecture

Hello Warofdreams,

I started a discussion on your "nnnn of architecture" pages, to try to get a community opinion on them. The discussion is here. It can be seen in context here. I started it on the VFD page because I didn't know of a better place, I meant no offense.

Please stop by and post your opinion, especially about the intended scope of the project (i.e. how many centuries) and the necessity of having individual years vs. having decades.

Brockert 02:55, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC)

I just wanted to say I really like the year in architecture pages and hope you dont mind that I added 1936 in architecture. Danny 03:18, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Splitting Welsh principal areas from towns

Hi. Now I've finished the Wikipedia:List_of_English_districts_to_disambiguate project, I'm looking at what to do with Wales. I note many of the county boroughs cover a large area than the town they are named after.

Looking at a map I guess we should split part of Wrexham into Wrexham (county borough). Other possible candidates could be Swansea to City of Swansea, Bridgend to Bridgend (county borough), Caerphilly to Caerphilly (borough). Do you have any thoughts in the matter?

[edit] Thanks

Thank you - I am going to try and come back. I am going to do random articles for the moment. I am not working at the moment so have time. Secretlondon 18:15, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Plurality Condorcet

Plurality Condorcet method Hi Tomruen, I'm wondering why you removed this article you created. Could you please explain so administrators can decide whether to restore or delete it. Thanks, Warofdreams 19:55, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for your note on my talk page. I deleted the article intentionally. I study election methods and I've long noted that Plurality and Condorcet could be combined as a generalization of the Two Round System. It is a good election method, and worthy of consideration, but I was unable to find any evidence that anyone else has tried this approach. So I decided it was not defendable as an encyclopedia entry. I kept a copy of the article for myself, in case I can do something with it later. Thanks! So deleting is ok. --Tomruen 20:22, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
P.S. If there's anything special I should do in the future to (help) delete a page, please tell me.

[edit] Popular articles with few interwiki links

Howdy - you mentioned a few weeks ago that you were interested in finding popular articles with few interwiki links. I've now had a chance to analyze inter-lingual links. Initial results are at popular pages with no interwiki links and popular pages with few interwiki links, all feedback welcome. - TB 13:55, 2004 Jun 1 (UTC)

Okay, I've finally got around to creating a report which I think meets the need you mentioned. Have a look at User:Topbanana/Reports/Survey of interwiki links on popular articles please. Creating the database behind this report's a real pig, but generating the same report for other sets of articles in the 'en' namespace is easy enough. All feedback welcome. - TB 12:43, Jun 6, 2004 (UTC)
Eeep - I see you've edited the HTML table on the above URL, if I'd know you'd want to do that I would have designed the page differently. Have a look at User:Topbanana/Reports/An interwiki link is suggested for a friendlier list of missing interwiki links with automatically generated suggestions. It'll only take a minute or two to run off one of those for the languages of your choice, please just ask. - TB 18:37, Jun 8, 2004 (UTC)
No, you're very welcome to edit the table - I meant simply that it's rather dense and hard to edit. I could break it into a set of smaller tables and put comments in the TD's to indicate which language they're for and such. Or I could just regenerate it once a week when the new wikidumps are available ;) I did play with putting in 'hints' on the yellow entries - I have the necessary info but am still working out how best to handle mixed character sets in MySQL, particularly the wide-character ones. The list with suggestions is a list of the first few hundred 'blue' non-reciprocal entries for the German language wikipedia (articles in en that are linked to from de, but do not themselves link there). The suggestion is the first article of potentially several in the German wikiedia that links to the en article. The full list for de->en->de is 4000 entries long, I can generate the report for any pair of languages (in either direction) in a minute or two - TB 19:11, Jun 8, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] MediaWiki talk:Europe#Poll: Which items should be listed?

I am confused by your vote to support the CoE flag, though opposed CoE members. Could you please explain here? Thank you, Pædia 03:58, 2004 Jun 4 (UTC)

CoE (and EU) adopted it as 'European flag', but how do non-members (Belarus, the Holy See, Kazakhstan, and Monaco) feel about inclusiveness? Thanks again. Cheers, Pædia 14:09, 2004 Jun 4 (UTC)

[edit] Email

I've tried sending you an email with 'E-mail this user' so you should have my address now. ;) Morwen 18:38, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] List of places in Berkshire

I was trying to balance Berkshire and Buckinghamshire in this respect. I suggest that List of places in Buckinghamshire should be similarly squashed or else let List of places in Berkshire evolve - perhaps even move the places across from Berkshire? Icairns 18:13, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Bureaucratship

Hello. I noticed your request for bureaucratship and I had a couple of quick questions I've been asking all of the recent candidates. Do you support adminship being widespread and generally "no big deal" or do you feel adminship should be more exclusive? As a bureaucrat would you give controversial user's and troll's votes equal weight to the votes of respected contributors? Best regards --"DICK" CHENEY 15:06, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Please feel free to move my questions and your answers to RfA. Best regards --"DICK" CHENEY 18:24, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] disambiguation for geographical places vs U.S. cities

Hello, I noticed that you have been adding links to islands using the form of island, political entity. The standard form for disambiguating geographical places is place (political entity) or in some cases something more specific than political entity is needed. The form of place, political entity is really only standard for U.S and Candadian cities and towns (although it is controversial even for that usage). Some other countries have started adopting that form for cities, but for geographical places, the standard is to use a parenthetical form. One major reason for this is that it allows you to use the pipe trick, which makes it easier to make a link display without the parenthetical disambiguation. older≠wiser 16:11, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Districts

)

My next piece of trivia is to find the district that borders the most other districts. I can't wait till the next local government reorganisation so we can get everything even more up to date ;)

Idea for article: List of islands by population Morwen - Talk 17:22, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

You have been reading my contribs page and I claim my five pounds. Morwen - Talk 17:35, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

To address your points in no particular order: I shall think about it. ;) I don't mind, I feel slightly in favour of the brackets, because [[Beaver Island (Falklands)|]] is easier to type. Yay. Btw, I met someone who is on your LJ friends list at Leicester Pride. This world is too small. Morwen - Talk 18:08, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Traditional counties of England

This article has, I feel, far too much point counter-point crap. It needs refactoring entirely

How does this look as a skelton? Morwen - Talk 19:41, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Define. Note that they have fallen out of general use for geographic purposes but that some people wish to see them retained.
Map and list
Subdivisions
Authenticity issue. Explain the dispute between the people who accept the 1844 changes and the people who don't.
Stuff about the historic anomalies. towns traditionally being split, enclaves. We might also mention a few bizarre county boundaries like in Cornwall where it diverts from the River Tamar for no good reason - in this case the admin boundary is actually probably older.
Section about geographic use (or lack of it). We can provide good evidence that the media has effectively stopped using these, via use of Google News. Note that though the counties were never formally abolished by Parliament, they have fallen out of common usage and perhaps could in that way be said to no longer be 'traditional'. This is where we mention the conurbations growing over county boundaries issue.
Note the places where the trend is bucked - ie middle-class areas of Outer London, and in Greater Manchester. (This is confirmed by google tests) [is there a Marxist analysis of the traditional counties movement]?
How they came to be so important to people in the first place - hundreds of years of use, (although this is usually exagerrated by the traditional counties people). That generally this is acknowledged by politicians, but they have refused to actually implement any of the concrete demands. Successful campaigns for restoration of Rutland and Herefordshire - not so succesful in Huntingdonshire. I dont' think we have enough information to do an analysis of the traditional counties movement, but I think the note in the pargraph above, plus notes that UKIP, and the English Democrats Party want to restore them, should be enough. (I can't find anything on the BNP website about them, beyond a bizarre statement that A system of local government based on the shires (counties) which has served this country well for over 1000 years is about to be utterly destroyed by "2 Jag's" network of undemocratic "regional government" [2] Morwen - Talk 19:41, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Thanks. I'l try playing with it on a temp page, see how far I can get. Morwen - Talk 12:47, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)


Have a look at User:Morwen/trad - see what you think? Morwen - Talk 13:29, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)


I've got Owain's approval now and have put it just at Traditional counties of England. Am feeling quite pleased with myself. ;) Morwen - Talk 07:22, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks very much for your thoughts on Rutland! Sadly, without a car, it will be more difficult to reach such towns as Cambridge and Ely, but we will certainly try. And I'm glad there is something to see in Oakham -- we'll be staying quite nearby. Anyhow, thanks again for offering your thoughts -- we'll have to look for those horseshoes :-) Jwrosenzweig 16:08, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Bureaucrat

Congratulations! You're a bureaucrat. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats and m:Bureaucrat before making any new sysops. Angela. 00:05, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Food Not Bombs

Do you know anything about this lot? The article needs NPOVing. Secretlondon 14:04, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Hexhamshire

I discovered Hexhamshire by accident a while ago. I've not done any real life reading about this yet, but from the interweb, I have found [3] which appears to indicate it was only incorporated into Northumberland in 1572 - it was previously a county palatine. Morwen - Talk 18:24, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hmm. I this this calls for reading of local history books! Who wants to volunteer to go to hexham?  :) Morwen - Talk 18:56, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Where did you get that it was before associated with the Diocese of Durham? I got the impression it was with York all along, and just got removed from his secular control (but remained in the spiritual control). Morwen - Talk 19:41, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Ignore that - I have read the article properly now. Morwen - Talk 19:56, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

According to [4], the Domesday Book didn't cover Durham/Northumberland (which were at the time synonyms). Morwen - Talk 20:03, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

No idea. I think I may go to the library this weekend and try to find a good description of the Domesday Book.

One thing that strikes me as suspicious about Gloucestershire/Somerset is the way it ought to include Bath, but the border makes a random detour from the River Avon to include Bath in Somerset. Very administrative! I found a really old map on the old maps site showing Bath appearing to be in Glos, but that just may be incompetence. Morwen - Talk 18:43, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hmm. Yes. ps you should come onto IRC or something ;) Morwen - Talk 19:11, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)