User talk:Andy Dingley/Archive 2012 February

Vandalism?
I have a problem with this edit at Single-board microcontroller. You labeled a content dispute as vandalism. "Anti-vandalism tools, such as Twinkle, Huggle, and rollback should not be used to undo good-faith changes in content disputes unless an appropriate edit summary is used.". --Guy Macon (talk) 23:00, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


 * That's why I warned the editor for vandalism, although he blanked it immediately. Vandalism isn't just about content, sometimes it's behavioural too. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:22, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * No you didn't. See this diff. You warned him for Tendentious editing, not Vandalism. Yet your edit summary said vandalism. The Twinkle admins are very touchy about Twinkle being misused in that way.


 * Vandalism says "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Examples of typical vandalism are adding irrelevant obscenities and crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting obvious nonsense into a page." (Emphasis in original.)


 * Tendentious editing says "Tendentious editing is a manner of editing which is partisan, biased or skewed taken as a whole. It does not conform to the neutral point of view, and fails to do so at a level more general than an isolated comment that was badly thought out. On Wikipedia, the term also carries the connotation of repetitive attempts to insert or delete content or behavior that tends to frustrate proper editorial processes and discussions."


 * As you know, I share your concern for the pattern of editing we are seeing here and I share your frustration over Wikipedia not being able to deal with the disruption it causes. That being said, in my opinion the description "repetitive attempts to insert or delete content or behavior that tends to frustrate proper editorial processes and discussions" is spot on. The description "a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia" does not seem to fit. It seems clear to me that we are dealing with long-term behavior by someone who is convinced that they are always right and everybody else is always wrong, not someone who knows he is wrong and deliberately does the wrong thing. What you should have done is manually reverted with an edit summary that said something like "long-term tendentious editing." --Guy Macon (talk) 17:27, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Calabe1992 15:05, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, Calabe beat me to it. Drmies (talk) 17:24, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Two notes. First, the result was "Resolved: no evidence of any wrongdoing." Second this is the same edit comment that is being discussed in the section above. I find it odd that 208.86.2.205 immediately filed an ANI without first joining in that conversation. --Guy Macon (talk) 10:19, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

μ
There is that, and the fact that it is μ and not ų :) Kyle McInnes[citation needed] 01:53, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hadn't even noticed that! I was just copy-pasting - can't remember the codepoint for either of them. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:55, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

3D printer - resolution
Thanks for reverting the 3D printer - resolution section. I have sent the following messages both to Kww and to Sjö to help them understand the problem with the section.

I noticed you reverted the resolution section of 3D printing. Unfortunately, this has introduced an error into the text. The layer thickness of a 3D printer is typically from 50 μm to 100 μm. This is the same as 0.05 mm to 0.1 mm (or 0,05 mm to 0,1 mm using a comma decimal separator). I believe the author of the resolution section was trying to use both methods of expression because many people considerable less familiar with micrometers than they are with millimeters. Therefore, s/he used both forms in the section. I hope this explains why the units have been altered yet again. Best wishes, CaviaPorcellus (not logged in because I am not at my own computer) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.117.13.130 (talk) 13:28, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

You have been included in a Wikietiquette thread
Greetings, I am just here to let you know I have included you in a request for assistance I have opened in the Wikietiquette notice board, to try and help better facilitate an atmosphere in the MMS talk page, so that we can all work together better. The conversation has thus far not gone as well as I would have hoped, mostly due to my own challenges in clearly stating my reasons for seeking assistance. It is my hope that my most recent comment helps to clear things up, and that we can all receive some assistance from third parties, as to how to better work with each other on the controversial subject at hand without misinterpreting each others actions or responses anymore. --Bema Self (talk) 07:37, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Welcome to WP:BOOMERANG Andy Dingley (talk) 10:08, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Mythy88
I too have been getting a bit fed up with this uploader and have asked Fastily, who has both enwiki and commons admin accounts. Thanks for keeping an eye out. ww2censor (talk) 18:19, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * You might want to be aware of this: Articles for deletion/Dico si Tiganas‎. ww2censor (talk) 14:03, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Knight mascot
Yes, you are correct. I do not know why the requirement was relaxed. Still his requirement though. regards, Eddaido (talk) 21:41, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * But you still choose to edit war over it. Are you going to libel me as "dishonest" again? Andy Dingley (talk) 21:42, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * No need to!!!!
 * Mind you, if you had just broken your wrist trying to start the beast you could very easily put out a useful eye on the spear. Eddaido (talk) 21:45, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 17:11, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Blessed Lama
BRIAN BLESSED WOULDN'T NEED TO USE HIS FISTS WITH THE DALAI LAMA, HE WOULD MERELY NEED TO DECLAIM AT HIS NORMAL VOLUME and the Lama would fall over backward. :-) -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:50, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I believe (from QI) that they did indeed once have a sparring match, both having a past interest in boxing. The Dalai Lama also repairs his own watches as a hobby (Patek Phillipe, no less!). I rather imagine Brian Blessed repairing steam rollers by shouting at them to pull themselves together. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:53, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Brian Blessed having a sparring match with the Dalai Lama is possibly the happiest thought I've ever had in my life. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 12:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Glossary of boiler terminology/TOC
Template:Glossary of boiler terminology/TOC has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Working version of the page, with table formatting, this (quite minor) template, and references.
 * Broken, after Thumperward's edit, with formatting and references gone.
 * Which of these is a better article? Andy Dingley (talk) 11:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Napier Nomad
Andy, following your reversal in the Napier Nomad article, could you please be more specific as to many talk pages passim ?? Or, in any other way, enlighten me as to the differences between a boxer engine and a 180 degrees Vee? TIA, Jan olieslagers (talk) 21:05, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Meanwhile I saw your polite reply on the article's talk page. Thank you indeed! I remain curious regarding the "passim", though... Jan olieslagers (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of John Williams (engineer)
Hi, I noticed your reluctant delete on the John Williams (engineer) deletion debate. I have to say I was reluctant to nominate it for deletion, but like you, I have totally failed to find anything else on him, and I have succeeded in expanding some pretty hopeless cases in the past. Bob1960evens (talk) 13:14, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

3 drum
It is a very well established principle that Wikipedia titles are singular wherever appropriate. "Describes a group" is simply not an argument. Why is boiler singular? That describes an even more diverse group. Similarly for locomotive. If you really think the title should be plural, obtain consensus at talk:three-drum boiler first. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I raised this at your talk page and would have preferred for you to reply there.
 * This is a case under WP:PLURAL #2, "Articles on groups or classes of specific things." Although there are several classes such as the "Admiralty three-drum boiler", there is no such simple device as an unqualified "three-drum boiler" and so this new name is now a WP:NEO. We can talk of "a boiler", but we cannot (except in reference to this abstract class) refer to "one three-drum boiler".
 * It is incumbent upon the editor seeking to make the change to seek consensus first. You did not do this, and your reaction to BRD was to rename it for a second time and then use your admin powers (despite being clearly involved) to lock it against further renames. Please revert the name to the correct form. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:41, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

No. I raised the matter here first and would have preferred to see the discussion to be continued he. In any case I did reply on my talk page - you are simply too impatient. Speaking of "one three-drum boiler" seems utterly reasonable to me. Please continue discussion on the talk page of the three-drum boiler article. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

New Gab valve gear article

 * Thanks! I really shouldn't be wasting time here at the moment, so I'll probably do eccentric valve gear before long and maybe finish high-speed steam engine. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:26, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * William Chapman (engineer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Hull and Sunderland


 * Gab valve gear (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Mineshaft


 * Paxman Hi-Dyne engine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to AEC


 * Steam motor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to V12

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:47, 29 February 2012 (UTC)