User talk:Alarics/Archive 2012

Central line - earliest section
Leyton to Loughton opened as early as 1856, by the Eastern Counties Railway, according to London Railway Atlas, Ian Allan, 2009, and Colonel Michael Cobb's excellent The Railways of Great Britain: A Historical Atlas. best, Sunil060902 (talk) 20:50, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * A note explaining that would be needed, otherwise it seems to make no sense to the average reader. Could you not put the source in a footnote? -- Alarics (talk) 23:00, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
FYI Kudpung ??????? (talk) 11:08, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

New Year Metro
Sorry its late and happy new year. Simply south...... having large explosions for 5 years 23:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

February Metro
Simply south...... having large explosions for 5 years 23:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Train Operating Companies
Would very much like to help you with this if I can be of any assistance, I am a newbie but one who is willing to learn. LongRobin79(talk) 20:24, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Input request
You have contributed to article The Really Big Show (formerly Rizzo on the Radio). This article is currently being considered for deletion. Please consider providing input at the article's discussion page: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Really_Big_Show. Levdr1 lostpassword ( talk ) 22:34, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

School deletions
I agree with your comments on the WPSchools page. There has been a whole spate of school articles up for deletion recently, often on the flimsiest of nominations. I note that you've added a comment on the Edgeborough School AfD page. It's entirely up to you but if you want your comment to count you should also add a vote in the usual formatting style, though I understand that decisions are made not on a tally of votes but more on policy issues. Dahliarose (talk) 16:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- Alarics (talk) 16:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Civility
Thank you for your remarks on civility, and I agree with your comment I never understand why some people seem so keen to delete stuff that is not doing any harm. Yes, we have legalistic links to various WikiPedia policies, hair-splitting claims, when the whole AfD was not justified anyway. There are junk articles, but not nearly as many as some people need to pursue. --DThomsen8 (talk) 14:06, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It does seem to me odd that people have trouble accepting an article about a long-established and respectable school but apparently there is no difficulty about articles on say, Dude, We're Getting the Band Back Together (a single episode of a TV cartoon series!), or Fight For Japan: Genki Desu Ka Omisoka 2011. -- Alarics (talk) 17:17, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

OK. Seriously. Sto pit.
If you continue to revert other people's reverts you will have problems with other users on Wikipedia. I mean it. Pdiddyjr (talk) 19:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * What on earth are you on about? -- Alarics (talk) 19:08, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

You reverted my revert on the West of England Main Line article, which could easily spiral off to an edit war. Wikipedia's policy says that "users who participate in edit wars risk being blocked or even banned". So don't revert my reverts. Either add sources or the template. Pdiddyjr (talk) 19:13, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * So, you introduce an unsourced claim into an article and then expect somebody else to find a source for it? I suggest you learn a little more about how Wikipedia works before you start throwing your weight around. You might like to start by reading Referencing for beginners. -- Alarics (talk) 19:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Deutsche Bahn
My mistake, Sorry. -- Colt9033 (talk) 21:53, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Class 458
No. Seriously. They are using spare carriages for class 458s or class 460s, not the class 460 carriages already in use. The class 460s are operating as a separate project. I told you that you'd have problems with the other users on Wikipedia! Pdiddyjr (talk) 14:24, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Where is your evidence for that? I have explained on your talk page what is being done. I have carefully cited sources in the piece I added to the article, explaining on the article's talk page the detailed arithmetic that shows the class 460s cannot be a separate project, a fact which is also very clear from Ian Walmsley's article in February's Modern Railways. I suggest you go to the library and read it. What contrary sources do you have? And what do you mean by "the class 460 carriages already in use"? As far as I am aware, they are all currently in store. -- Alarics (talk) 16:20, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Notthere has emailed you
Notthere (talk) 04:57, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Pontificalibus (talk) 15:46, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Pontificalibus (talk) 16:35, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Eton College
(Copied from Iloveandrea's talk page): Have you read the comments below the Tablet article? It is quite clear that there was no anti-Jewish admissions policy at Eton. I have removed your sentence again from the Eton article. Please don't put it back without discussion. As for the other stuff, I have left it there for now, but it is hardly surprising if there was anti-semitism in mediaeval times and the 18th century at Eton, as everywhere else in England at the time, and more recently without doubt amongst the English aristocracy, who always made up so many of Eton's students. That is quite a different thing from saying there was an official policy to ban Jewish boys from attending, which is plainly not true. -- Alarics (talk) 20:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)


 * The article claims that there was an imperfect, semi-official exclusionary policy via a condition on the pupil's father (I guess the same condition placed on the mother, while 'better', would have been too obvious; I'm assuming they assumed there were very low rates of Jewish intermarriage, so a condition on the father was good enough). I've no idea if this unofficial policy ever actually existed; I've Googled about and am limply trailing through various histories to attempt confirmation, but nothing so far. One of the other additions I made to the article (if it's still there) is complete nonsense, again for reasons of irritation: the "illiterate Jew of Eton" bit—no attribution is provided by the source for the statement, so it's an antisemitic description that's perhaps got nothing to do with Eton itself (not unless "the illiterate Jew" was how Rous was generally known at the place, though the "of Eton" part makes me doubt it). The Apocalypse: ditto to what you said—just a piece of trivia, really. Partially more seriously, I will start, though I may well not be tossed enough to finish, the briefest of synopses of Eton and minority groups. Regards and ? ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 20:47, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I must say I don't understand why you put the sentence back in if you "have no idea if this unofficial policy ever actually existed". I had already pointed out on the article's talk page two fairly plausible-looking comments underneath the Tablet article that said it didn't, but you still put the sentence back in. And now you say that one of the other additions you made to the article is, in your own words, "complete nonsense". I shall delete the whole section, and I am henceforth disinclined to take any of your WP edits seriously. -- Alarics (talk) 22:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * A bit of mud-slinging on Wikipedia at such a ghastly institution, the pre-eminent bastion of power and privilege? It's all good from my point of view; I will sleep soundly tonight. I added the article back just to irritate, just as I put in the "illiterate Jew of Eton" to irritate—irritate anyone who loves the god-awful place, that is. Someone like you, it seems! My other Wikipedia edits are usually less frivolous. Anyway! So long! ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 22:53, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I hold no brief whatever for Eton College, but my personal opinion is not relevant to maintaining a good encyclopaedia article about it, and neither should yours be. -- Alarics (talk) 06:53, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * See the Eton talk page. I've put a link to Amazon that will enable you to read the relevant pages of the book, pp. 270–1, for yourself. And the Tablet article was clearly OK along, though it is now superfluous; an obvious possibility is that the Tablet journalist has read the same Ayer biography. Quite why you are so desperate to minimise and, where possible, eliminate all mention of antisemitism at Eton is a question to which only you know the answer. People tend to underestimate their own level of prejudice—maybe something to think about... ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 15:14, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * _You_ see the Eton talk page. I have already said there that your Amazon link to the specific page doesn't work. I have always hated anti-semitism and your insinuation is disgraceful. I am not trying to "minimise or eliminate" anything except your disruptive editing. I am just trying to get the article right so that it is fair and neutral according to Wikipedia rules, something you obviously don't care about. -- Alarics (talk) 15:27, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * @Iloveandrea: Please read up on one of our policy (WP:Verifiability) before commenting any further, also your insinuation here on the talk page of a fellow editor is disgraceful and is nothing less than you making a personal attack. Note that should this happen one more time, I will report you to the Administrators for sanctioning measures, is that understood? -- Dave ????™?1185©??® 16:45, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Biodiversity of New Caledonia, paleobotany forgotten
Hello, could you to work on this article, please? Biodiversity of New Caledonia. It is a very important archaic species group in Paleobotany and evolution.85.251.99.49 (talk) 08:20, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it's not one of my subject areas. -- Alarics (talk) 08:38, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Hwa Chong Institution
Dear Alarics, just in the spirit of fun, since the edits are not harmful (no defamation or personal attacks whatsoever) mind letting the edits linger around for about a day for April Fools? Greatly appreciated and thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.1.137 (talk) 22:51, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Time to archive?

 * Dear Alarics, methink its about time you start to archive your talk page as it takes a tad too long to load in any of my browsers, even the fastest Chrome can lag to kingdom come~! Thoughts? -- Dave ????™?1185©??® 11:32, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- Alarics (talk) 12:29, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Done? FYI, the page is still very big at 84KB... even though you've archived away about 100KB+ of old messages. Apologies for being so anal but I really can't help it! -- Dave ????™?1185©??® 02:08, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * OK I have now archived a further year's worth. -- Alarics (talk) 08:11, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

April Metro
Simply south...... going on editing sprees for just 6 years (as of 28/03/2006) 21:50, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Reflinks
thanks for your message, i don't think one can adjust date format. one major benefit is that it adds the syntax e.g. accessdate=|date=, it also saves a lot of editing time by bringing up all the date info and titles automatically. it doesn't change any existing dates in the article. it does add cite news on a second use of reflinks. Tom B (talk) 12:09, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

2nd Straw Poll
There is a Straw Poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 00:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Request for adminship
There is a Request for adminship taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 05:35, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

May Metro
Simply south...... going on editing sprees for just 6 years (as of 28/03/2006) 23:09, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

You're not going to like this
. -- Red rose64 (talk) 09:48, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

June Metro
On time for once! Simply south...... always punctual, no matter how late for just 6 years 21:37, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

East London Line Extension
[transferred to talk page of the article concerned]

The Shard
Well, well. Look at the front page today. Top of ITN is the Shard being named as the tallest building in Europe. Who could have foreseen that? Oh, me, before your incorrect reversion of my edit to the Shard article on the 26th February. Thanks for that. da nn o _ u k 21:53, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Only for a few months, as the Mercury City Tower in Moscow that is nearly finished will be taller. The Shard's is therefore a very temporary accolade. On the other hand, the Shard will remain for some time the tallest building in the EU, as correctly stated in the text that I restored after your reversion. -- Alarics (talk) 05:10, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

July Metro
Simply south...... always punctual, no matter how late for just 6 years 22:39, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Sgt. Pepper straw poll
There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. ~ GabeMc  (talk 23:07, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Metrication of British Transport (vote)
Hi. You have been involved in editing MoBT in the last few weeks. There is a vote going on about what to do with the ERTMS section. If you wish to cast an opinion, the vote runs until Monday. Steve Hosgood (talk) 16:05, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

August Metro
Simply south...... flapping wings into buildings for just 6 years 22:37, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

August 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you.--John (talk) 10:06, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * "Welcome to Wikipedia"? I have been here for over three years! I am quite familiar with the policies and guidelines, as must be obvious from a glance at my edit record. It was your own edit that was not constructive. You deleted material that was perfectly reasonable and properly sourced. I merely reverted your unconstructive edit. -- Alarics (talk) 10:35, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

October Metro
I'm sorry I missed September but I was rather busy. Enjoy. Simply south...... wearing fish for just 6 years 23:09, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Citation reduction
Greetings Alarics. Thank you for your edits. I seem to recall after a previous occasion some months back I researched the available WP MOS and guidelines and I was not able to location anything in the WP:MOS, WP:CITEHOW or WP:CITET that was explicitly supportive of the position for reducing extant accurate information in citations. Would you be able to share the basis on which you would like to see such changes made? —Sladen (talk) 14:55, 8 October 2012 (UTC)


 * It is not really a question of "reducing extant information" because the name of the publisher simply is not normally included when citing well-established newspapers, either in Wikipedia or elsewhere. Papers like the Sunderland Echo, the Huddersfield Daily Examiner and The Journal (Newcastle) are not "small-time local papers" as you called them but very long-established daily organs, each of which dominates its area. The publishers can change as different conglomerates buy and sell them over the years (Trinity Mirror did not even exist as the owner of local newspapers until the 1990s and has already since then sold some of the titles it acquired on to other media groups). Conversely, the title and the city of publication are typically constant over many decades. To distinguish such a paper from any other with a similar name, it is the city of publication that is key, not the name of the publisher, and that is the standard practice (obviously not necessary when the city name is included in the newspaper title).
 * For instance, the Sunderland Echo has existed since 1873. Its present owner, Johnston Press, has owned it only since 1999.
 * Likewise The Press (York) was founded (as the Yorkshire Evening Press) in 1882. It has belonged to Newsquest only since 1996.
 * WP:CITEHOW does not mention the publisher in its list of the items that citations of newspapers articles typically include.
 * Template:Cite_news says that the "publisher" parameter is normally left blank for periodicals. This text used to explain - or maybe this is explained somewhere else in WP - that "publisher" is useful only in the case of obscure or transient (or perhaps long-dead) publications where there might otherwise be doubt as to which publication is meant. -- Alarics (talk) 13:11, 9 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your reply. The exemplar minimum  given in WP:CITEHOW does not appear to be required maximum .  If the example were a required maximum, we'd all be hurrying around deleting ,  ,   and numerous other parameters.  Template:Cite news states  normally , but again, that is not not appear to be a  .  If it were a requirement, we could easily enforce it in the template (ignore or not display the   parameter, or even ERROR on it).


 * I'm at ease with an editor not wishing to add lots of parameters such as,  ,  ,   and the aforementioned   when entering their own citations; it doesn't look good, but it's up to them and how much time they might wish to spend formatting their citations.


 * AFAICT, I've hunted, you've hunted, and neither of us has come up with anything requiring the deleting of such parameters, (bar some possibly obscure/transient/long-dead memory of a sentence somewhere that neither us can source right now). If   were disallowed, we have better ways of doing that: by (a) having a WP:MOS or guideline, (b) implementing the templates to enforce the WP:MOS guideline, and (c) throwing bot tasks at it to enforce the requirement.  Please let me know if you find something.  —Sladen (talk) 15:21, 9 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Here is a discussion from 18 months ago where it was proposed to delete the "publisher" parameter from "cite news".
 * This was not agreed, but the discussion may be of some relevance.
 * Meanwhile, we cannot speak of a "requirement" not to use the "publisher" parameter where it is superfluous, as in the case of the Huddersfield Examiner and so on, but the guidelines should (in my view) strongly recommend this. I believe they used to do. The fact that a parameter exists does not mean that it is desirable to use it if not otherwise stated. It simply is not normal, in the real world, to mention the publisher in an ordinary mainstream news citation, and it looks very odd. What is normal is to mention the city of publication, where not already included in the title of the organ. This is nearly always the only disambiguation needed.
 * I would point out that WP:CITEHOW -- referring to references with or without the use of templates -- gives the information that is "typically" included in a reference, and notes that "other details may be added as necessary", which to me means that they should not be added when they are not necessary, as in the case in point. -- Alarics (talk) 18:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Alistair McAlpine, Baron McAlpine of West Green
thanks for fixing those refs. Decora (talk) 00:28, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! -- Alarics (talk) 07:52, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Mid Dec Metro
Sorry this edition is so late. Simply south...... walking into bells for just 6 years 11:48, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Question
I have asked a question which you should probably be aware of. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Scallywag_(magazine)#Recent_news_coverage I don't know whether or not it is good WP practice for you to answer that question before the Article's main contributors have had a chance to do so. I am just making you aware that it has been asked.

I hope not to confine my WP activities to this single issue, by the way. The interest which brought me to the Talk pages is the need to protect anybody whose purpose is to keep a historical record. I felt that the issue which you found me discussing last week is an important test of that, hence that is where I have started on WP. I shall move on.Alrewas (talk) 00:54, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I trust that the brief and general manner in which I have logged this matter on my Talk page meets with your general approval. Being new here, I have found your advice conducive to my awareness of WP Policies and where to find them. Have moved on to less contentious issues.Alrewas (talk) 19:44, 23 December 2012 (UTC)