User talk:Abc30

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! RJFJR 16:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

195.92.109.20
Whether he is a vandal or not, editing once every week is not a cause for blocking, and it very well may be a dynamic (changing) IP. — Mets 501 (talk) 00:31, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Real estate broker versus Estate agent
I've posted rationale for NOT merging these articles. Please take a look. Vivaverdi 15:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Real estate broker versus Estate agent
I've posted rationale for NOT merging these articles. Please take a look. Vivaverdi 15:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Jill Dando
I saw the article history and read the discussion and decided to put the small piece in as the intro to the programme went over the ground that was in the article. Also, before advising people to do things it may be a good idea to see if they have a history on here before talking down to them. (Pally01 20:57, 5 September 2006 (UTC))


 * Whilst I agree that it is better not to edit articles etc. I felt that there not being any mention at all of the programme in the article as lacking a fundamental update to the Jill Dando murder, especially as more people would watch this programme than read the Independent on Sunday. I would have put something in the discussion page but obviously your typing skills are better than mine. As for the compromise, I agree but there needs to be something that doesn't make it sound, how can I put it, tabloidesque? (Pally01 21:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC))


 * Thanks for your note. I don't know of any wiki source on the English versus British identity question. I suspect there isn't one as it's too detailed. Things seemed to have calmed down a bit now. Nunquam Dormio 18:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Julian Brazier
I know you didn't intend to do this, but when you reverted Julian Brazier on 3 January, you also removed some edits which placed him in correct categories which had been renamed, and also those placing him in the categories of MPs by Parliament. These categories are used so that we can make sure we have articles on every MP. Sam Blacketer 19:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandals
I appreciate your annoyance with vandals, but please refrain from making personal insults on their talk page. It is better to add more standard warnings, for example -- ~ puts Template:Bv on a user's page. For particularly bad repeat cases, you can alert an admin if a vandal needs to be blocked. See Vandalism for more tips on dealing with problem users. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 00:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Jill dando.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Jill dando.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 10:07, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Commercial use of Image:British people.JPG
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:British people.JPG, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:British people.JPG is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only" or "used with permission for use on Wikipedia only" which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3).

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license GFDL-self to license it under the GFDL, or cc-by-sa-2.5 to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use PD-self to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:British people.JPG itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 03:12, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Blair
good catch on the him always being Rt. Hon. Whenever something like this happens, some Wikipedians are too quick to jump the gun. Have you heard anything about when he will officially take the Hundreds?  young  american (ahoy hoy) 17:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for your hard work on such a busy day. Cheers.  young  american  (ahoy hoy) 23:54, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

hi
well i just did — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donaldhenderson (talk • contribs) 17:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

emial in pic
no, it's not too smart but I don't mind :p I'm more warried about spammers :) thanks for your consideration in checking to see if I knew :D Talk to symode09's or How's my driving? 19:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

is it not vandalism?????????
It's a boy! No, it's a girl! It's a COUNTRY!


 * I know I deleted it but it wouldn't go away.


 * That's ok. &mdash;  Rickyrab | Talk 15:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi
After reading your comment on the talk page of Serbia, here is a map that shows Serbia with Kosovo but with a different lighter color Image:Serbia with Kosovo version3.png. Hobartimus (talk) 16:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008
Hi, the recent edit you made to Pristina has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Scarian Call me Pat 13:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Questions on Kosovo
I'm a journalist considering doing a story on Wikipedians who keep an eye on contentious pages. I saw that you were pretty involved in the page on Kosovo during the declaration of independence on Feb. 17. I was wondering if you'd be willing to talk to me a little bit about some of the challenges of working on such pages. Thanks very much! --Matt 15:45, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure, I guess. How would you like to do this? Abc30 (talk) 16:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

September 2008
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. -- Rodhull andemu  18:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Abc30! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:43, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Paweł Łukaszewski -

Much better routemap
Thank-you. A much better routemap. I have tweaked it slightly north of Peterborough to try and make the continuation to the ECML clearer.

Ajcoxuk (talk) 09:06, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Hitchin Flat Junction
Hiya - just noticed your change to the diagram. While it looks better, is it correct with the actual junction. My memory is that the line joins and leaves the other lines several times, rather than crossing with a diamond as your diagram would seem to suggest. What do you think? Thanks Ajcoxuk (talk) 20:32, 29 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah I suppose you're right. I was just going for something that looks better but yeah I suppose the new diagram could be misleading. I'll change it back. Abc30 (talk) 18:34, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Ajcoxuk/Baldock railway station
Hiya - I wonder if you would be willing to have a look at the page above and let me have your thoughts. I know that there have been (endless) discussions about route boxes and displaying services on the station pages. After some thought and having a look around UK and other countries station pages I have wondered if a services Navigation box would be useful. There is one on the station page - defaulting to expanded at the moment - showing the Great Northern Services for the line. Using this Navbox would have the following advantages:
 * The same Navbox can be transducted into all Great Northern line stations, so removing the need for endless repetition of service information.
 * The route boxes can be simplified as they no longer need to show service information.

I have also tried creating a new stnlnk template which can take the station code and translate it to the station name. This makes setting up the Navbox easier. See Template:Ajcoxuk/stnlnk

Any thoughts would be gratefully received before I try announcing anything in WP:UKRAIL. Ajcoxuk (talk) 13:21, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hey. Looks like a good idea. Only a couple of issues I can see: What about King's Lynn services? And it should probably be made clear somehow that peak-time services are different. Also with it being so big it, perhaps having it expanded by default on the Great Northern Route page, but closed by default on station pages would be the way to go? Abc30 (talk) 18:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks - Yes, I realised that the King's Lynn services were missing last night and I was wondering about adding a "Notes" section at the bottom to say "Weekday Off-peak Service" or the like. I think it would be overkill to try and explain the peak-hour services too - what do you think. I was trying to add it unexpanded to the "Services" section of the station pages, but I can't get it to display narrow if the station info box is still on the right and it leaves a large blank space instead - any ideas? Ajcoxuk (talk) 09:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Re:Chelmsley Wood - Thank you.
-  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 18:59, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Deleting things
What's your view on deleting things? Do you think it better than making them? Leonig Mig (talk) 16:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * My view is that wikipedia should deal with current events in an appropriate manner and shouldn't get swept along with sensationalist media coverage. Abc30 (talk) 16:26, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I guess it just bothers me there seem to be more people on here deleting than creating now. I understand having an eye for quality - but there are a million irrelevant pages on WP, its part of the platform. I just wish people would waste their lives creating rather than deleting. Oh well. Leonig Mig (talk) 16:32, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

May 2010
Please stop. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did to Michael Gove, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Off2riorob (talk) 17:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Request for help concerning energy...
Hi,

I noticed you listed yourself as a participant of the Energy WikiProject.

There are 2 new outlines in this area that attempt to consolidate Wikipedia's coverage of their respective subjects, gathering and organizing the articles about them into one place and including descriptions for convenience. The purposes of these outlines are to make it easier for readers to survey or review a whole subject, and to choose from Wikipedia's many articles about it.

The new energy outlines are:


 * Outline of solar energy
 * Outline of wind energy

Please take a look at them, and....


 * if you spot missing topics, add them in.


 * if you can, improve the descriptions.


 * add missing descriptions.


 * show parent-offspring relationships (with indents).


 * fix errors.

For more information about the format and functions of outlines, see Outlines.

Building outlines of existing material (such as Wikipedia) is called "reverse outlining". Reverse outlines are useful as a revision tool, for identifying gaps in coverage and for spotting poor structuring.

Revising a work with multiple articles (such as Wikipedia) is a little different than revising a paper. But the general principles are the same...

As you develop these outlines, you may notice things about the articles they organize. Like what topics are not adequately covered, better ways to structure and present the material, awkward titles, articles that need splitting, article sections lacking Main links, etc.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Outlines.

Thank you. Sincerely, The Transhumanist 00:21, 2 June 2012 (UTC) P.S.: see also Outline of energy

Request for help concerning energy...
Hi,

I noticed you listed yourself as a participant of the Energy WikiProject.

There are 2 new outlines in this area that attempt to consolidate Wikipedia's coverage of their respective subjects, gathering and organizing the articles about them into one place and including descriptions for convenience. The purposes of these outlines are to make it easier for readers to survey or review a whole subject, and to choose from Wikipedia's many articles about it.

The new energy outlines are:


 * Outline of solar energy
 * Outline of wind energy

Please take a look at them, and....


 * if you spot missing topics, add them in.


 * if you can, improve the descriptions.


 * add missing descriptions.


 * show parent-offspring relationships (with indents).


 * fix errors.

For more information about the format and functions of outlines, see Outlines.

Building outlines of existing material (such as Wikipedia) is called "reverse outlining". Reverse outlines are useful as a revision tool, for identifying gaps in coverage and for spotting poor structuring.

Revising a work with multiple articles (such as Wikipedia) is a little different than revising a paper. But the general principles are the same...

As you develop these outlines, you may notice things about the articles they organize. Like what topics are not adequately covered, better ways to structure and present the material, awkward titles, articles that need splitting, article sections lacking Main links, etc.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Outlines.

Thank you. Sincerely, The Transhumanist 00:58, 2 June 2012 (UTC) P.S.: see also Outline of energy

Courtesy message from WikiProject West Midlands
Hi there Abc30. You are registered with WikiProject West Midlands and we are cleaning our list of members. As you have not contributed to any page for over a year we have removed you as inactive. If you still want to participate in the project, just go back and move yourself into the active list. Thank you. Gavbadger (talk) 17:58, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dubai World Central


A tag has been placed on Dubai World Central requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. [ UseTheCommandLine  ~/ talk  ] # _  07:53, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dubai World Central


The article Dubai World Central has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * no indication of notability. previous questions about deletion were confused by sockpuppetry and canvassing issues.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. [ UseTheCommandLine  ~/ talk  ]# &#9604; 08:05, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

March 2024
This is your only warning; if you add defamatory content to Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.  Acroterion   (talk)   10:59, 14 March 2024 (UTC)