User talk:Egg Centric/IP Talk

testing[edit]

Do you want a London with that Derry?
Hey! You! Are you interested in the naming of (London)Derry on Wikipedia? You are? Well - let's have a discussion! Take a trip over here and make sure your view is counted.

Hello[edit]

You placed yourself in the category of wikipedians looking for help. What is your question? [CharlieEchoTango] 19:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, was asking if I could put the above banner on some talk pages. Having looked at them I don't see much reason I can't so I'm going to do it. The second question - is there any specific place I can "advertise" a discussion to all and sundry? Cheers 86.178.52.148 (talk) 19:35, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Canvassing may be of some help to you. RashersTierney (talk) 19:40, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Followed the links and found a couple of notice boards but can't really work out where I'm supposed to post in most of them... 86.178.52.148 (talk) 19:44, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2011[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as on Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Ireland-related articles), you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. RashersTierney (talk) 20:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Egg Centric. You have new messages at Giftiger wunsch's talk page.
Message added 20:34, 7 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Edit warring[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. O Fenian (talk) 20:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Egg Centric. You have new messages at Giftiger wunsch's talk page.
Message added 20:43, 7 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Egg Centric. You have new messages at Giftiger wunsch's talk page.
Message added 20:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Proposed deletion of Hans Hermann Junge[edit]

I see you haven't given any reason for deletion. you should fill n something where it says "concern = ". You don't need to write an essay on it: just a brief sentence should do. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:59, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2010[edit]

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Rail transport in Ireland. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. O Fenian (talk) 21:24, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural wankery - take a look at the rail gauge article and you'll see I'm right. But you're far more experienced at wiki procedures than me so it would be something of a fruitless task for me to waste time sourcing it now... I'll go to bed, wait till I'm at work, and do some of it then. In the meantime, perhaps you should read some Dale Carnegie. 86.178.52.148 (talk) 21:28, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:Afterlife10. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Rockpocket 22:58, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bad external links[edit]

Here is your edit from Rail transport in Ireland:

Europe, with the major exception of Spain, tends to be standard gauge. Ireland, for historical reasons dating right back to the time that standard gauge became the de jure standard (hence its name) in the rest of the British Isles uses the unique to the Northern Hemisphere 1600 Irish gauge.<ref>of railyways act</ref><ref>[1] ERTMS implementation strategy</ref>

You have tried to reference to external websites, but neither link works as you probably intended.

The first displays in the References section as "of railyways act", and clicking on it attempts to link to "http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docsummary.php?docID=60%7CGauge", but ends up at "http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/error.php".
The second displays as a small double arrow followed by ERTMS. Clicking on that goes to the Wikipedia page European Rail Traffic Management System, which has no meaningful reference to Ireland. Clicking on the double arrow attempts to link to "http://ec.europa.eu/transport/rail/interoperability/ertms/doc/edp/national_deployment_plans/ireland_ndp.pdf%7CIrish" which first goes to a "The requested page does not exist" page and then redirects to "http://ec.europa.eu/atoz_en.htm".

In addition, you have piped some internal links contrary to WP:MOSLINK and in particular WP:EGG. This is why I undid the revision (twice). Tim PF (talk) 22:55, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your latest edit still has piped internal links contrary to WP:MOSLINK and in particular WP:EGG; please further rework your edit to comply with the house style. Tim PF (talk) 20:49, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have added (or amended) the following piped links:

[[standard gauge|standard]] -> standard. This may be confusing to some readers, as you have placed it immediately before the existing link for [[track gauge|gauge]] (gauge), so it could just as well be [[standard gauge]] (standard gauge. It is certainly not clear that there is another link there, as you have effectively masked it.
[[Railway Regulation (Gauge) Act 1846|the time that standard gauge became]] -> the time that standard gauge became is a curious phrase to link, and the reader shouldn't have to click on or hover over this piped link to find that it's an Act of Parliament. It would be better state more explicitly that "...the time that standard gauge became the de jure standard ... (see the Railway Regulation (Gauge) Act 1846), ..."
[[Rail gauge in Ireland|Irish gauge]] -> Irish gauge, originally pointed to Irish gauge, which is a perfectly appropriate article, which you diverted to Rail gauge in Ireland unbeknownst to the casual reader. Again, it would be better with two separate unpiped links: "...1600 Irish gauge (see also Rail gauge in Ireland)."

I'm not really keen on refactoring your text as I think that much that you added is not needed; the external links already exist in the Rail gauge in Ireland and Railway Regulation (Gauge) Act 1846 articles. The fact that Irish gauge is now only used in Ireland, Brazil and SE Australia can be found by following that link. "Uniqueness" or "unusualness" is difficult to succinctly express without detracting from the flow of the article, which is why I think your original edits were reverted. I'd go for just:

The track gauge is 1600 Irish gauge, which was mandated by the Railway Regulation (Gauge) Act 1846 (see also Rail gauge in Ireland).

Has that lost too much of what you wished to express? If you think that it has, it may be better to add it into the History section instead, but then the top section would have to be reverted to avoid too much duplication. Tim PF (talk) 00:17, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I realised that Brazil extends into the Northern Hemisphere, but I cannot easily find if its Irish Gauge tracks do too. I also thought more about moving it into the History section, but comparison with the equivalent Australian and Brazilian led me to add an additional Track Gauges section before the History section.

I'm now going to remove that entire paragraph on gauges from the preface. If you wish to make further changes with regard to Track Gauge you should just need to make them in the new section. I hope that is now ok with you. Tim PF (talk) 17:37, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 12:23, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help request[edit]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

I know there's a template to put in an article to suggest that a section is spun off into its own article. Where can I find this specific template, and more generally where should I look for this sort of thing in future? 86.178.52.148 (talk) 20:41, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is located at {{split section}}. In the future, you can look at WP:TM for more template messages. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 20:44, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

Yep, and/or Wikipedia:Maintenance templates, Category:Wikipedia page-section templates / Category:Wikipedia utility templates Chzz ► 20:46, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That could be the same tag I added to Rail transport in Ireland#Passenger services‎ the other day; you may wish to check that one out. BTW, are you from Stroke City? Tim PF (talk) 21:06, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I should have said to reply here, as I've added this page to my watchlist to await any replies. Tim PF (talk) 21:41, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sure, well as said I'm not. Egg Centric (talk) 21:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I had read it before posting the above. Tim PF (talk) 21:50, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]