User talk:Ben davison

Welcome
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Lst27 21:41, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Hi there - good work on the football articles you've created so far! Just a note about signatures - we don't add signatures to the end of articles, as people can look the history page to see the list of authors. Feel free to sign all your comments on Talk: pages, User: pages and so on, just not the articles themselves. Cheers, sjorford 10:43, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi. I had a question about the Genoa 1893 article. Is the start date for the trainers credited to technical commission meant to be 1883, as it displays, or 1893, when the club was founded? thanks. Nateji77 08:06, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It was meant to be 1893. I've changed it. --Ben davison 15:01, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

William Symington
Your edit and reorganisation with added information is welcome, but a few points have been omitted. These were taken from the references shown under "External links". I'm considering adding these back into the new structure, and would be interested if you have any references that contest these points. Thanks, dave souza 20:26, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Small note on categories
When you put someone in a category, make sure to use the |: as opposed to just  (the former will put Stan Mortensen under "Mortensen" and the latter under "Stan"). I fixed some of the pages you got listed on your user page, but not sure if you made some other ones. Also, we have a new stub for players: footybio-stub. Keep up the great work! --Dryazan 04:54, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Auditory phonetics
Hi Ben: Thank you for your interest in Auditory phonetics. Please would you have another look at the changes that you made and consider whether you may have over-wikied things. It seems to me that it is unlikely that any reader of this article is going to wish to refer to articles on apple, cat, church and so on, whilst reading this. As I understand the wikipedia structure, wiki links should be made only where they will enhance understanding. --Theo (Talk) 00:31, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi Ben: Thank you for taking the message to heart and making those changes so promptly. --Theo (Talk) 10:59, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Ha ha ha ha--Crestville 13:23, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

? --Ben davison 13:24, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

What?--Crestville 19:47, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No, really. What? Leave it out.--Crestville 20:35, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

My '?' means why did you say 'Ha ha ha ha'. Ben davison 21:07, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Ahhhh. Coz you got told off for being a bit rubbish. Just thought I'd stick me oar in. Unpleasant, isn't it?--Crestville 21:17, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Not really. I grew out of taking offence at 'ha ha' when I was about 7. If you'll notice, I took the 'telling off', changed what i had done, and received a kind message in reply. That's what we grown-ups do, I suppose. Ben davison 23:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Nice one. I love the way it's the people who try hardest to offend, who are the first to take offence. Saw a beauty here - and the vandal had spent so long putting in words like poop and cleavage... JackyR 18:08, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

minor edits...
Just a friendly reminder to use minor edits for things like spelling, formatting, syntax, etc. If you are actually adding content (i.e. adding Jeanne Calment to day articles), please do not mark that as minor, and please write in the edit summary what you've done. it saves the time of others :)

Happy editing! Kingturtle 16:29, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Subcategories
Just a helpful comment: it is not necessary to add articles to categories if they are already in a subcategory of that. eg Category:Scottish business people and Category:Glaswegians are both sub categories of Category:Scottish people (as all 'Scottish business people' are by definition 'Scottish people' etc). Also the same for 'Cricketers' / 'English cricketers' etc. Thanks. Vclaw 23:26, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You learn something new every day. --Ben davison 01:03, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure how lenghty discussions between two users works.. so excuse me if this is the wrong way to do it. In response to your redirection questions.. I don't know. Isn't there a history you can look at for the people who set it up as such? Jerec 16:15, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Category:Millennial Wikipedians
Category:Millennial Wikipedians has been listed on categories for deletion. Since you are using it on your user page please weigh in on the vote and that of the other generational categories here. Thanks. -JCarriker 20:00, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Army Postal Corps
The Post Office Rifles founded in 1868 was a volunteer infantry battalion formed from employees of the Post Office. The Army Postal Corps founded in 1882 was actually a postal corps of the regular army. The section of the Royal Engineers article you quote actually says that the RE Postal Section was formed in 1908 and is the direct predecessor of the current RLC Postal and Courier Service. Since the Post Office Rifles existed until after WWI, they can hardly be the same unit. It's the mention of the APC in the Post Office Rifles article that's misleading. They were entirely separate units. -- Necrothesp 20:15, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

I think mention of the APC should be mentioned from the Post Office Rifles article, yes. -- Necrothesp 21:22, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, deleted from. -- Necrothesp 21:28, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

James Clark Ross
Hi. I don't think Ross could have been KBE, as this award was created by George V. Can you check your source. Thanks. Smallweed 09:09, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You've also added to a lot of articles about people who have been knighted. Please don't assume they have been granted the KBE, as most people in entertainment and sport etc. are Knights bachelor. Thanks Craigy [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|15px]] (talk) 08:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Category:Millennial Generation Wikipedians
You are currently listed in Category:Generation Y Wikipedians or Category:Millennial Wikipedians. In a CfD issue, it has been proposed to create a new Category:Millennial Generation Wikipedians to merge these two. Please consider adding yourself to this new category; you might be interested in taking part in the discussion about these, too. --Army1987 14:49, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Jesus
Check out the Jesus article and edit it to keep it focused on Jesus and a biographical account of Him. Watch the Jesus page to keep it focused on Him. Thank you. Scifiintel 21:41, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Football World Cup move
As a contributor to football articles you may wish to vote at talk:Football World Cup Jooler 13:45, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Post Office Rifles
Hi there, I've posted on the discussion page of this article, which you're a major contributor to. Wonder if you could take a look. Cheers, JackyR 17:44, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikiethics
Hi,

We started a proposal Wikiethics to state the existing policies coherently and make suggestions on improving the editorial standards in Wiki. I thought you might be interested in contributing to that proposal.

Unfortunately, a pro-porn and pro-offense lobby is trying to make this proposal a failure. They unilaterally started an approval poll although almost no one including me believe that it is time for a vote, simply because the policy is not ready. It is not even written completely.

Editors who thinks that the policy needs to be improved rather than killed by an unfair poll at the beginning of the proposal, started another poll ('Do we really need a poll at this stage?') at the same time. The poll is vandalized for a while but it is stable now. A NO vote on this ('Do we really need a poll now?') poll will strengthen the position of the editors who are willing to improve the ethics policy further.

If you have concerns about the ethics and editorial standards in Wiki, please visit the page Wikiethics with your suggestions on the policy. We have two subpages: Arguments and Sections. You might want to consider reviewing these pages as well...

Thanks in advance. Resid Gulerdem 00:10, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

I would love your help.
Hi,

I know you are interested in christianity, and I recently started a new wiki over at wikicities which is on the subject of christianity. Christian Knowledge Base is the site.

The goal is to have a knowledgebase on christianity from a distinctly "C(hristian)POV" rather than the NPOV. It is not meant to be a mere Christian Encyclopedia, but to foster a real sense of community. I'd like to include things like current events, news, stories, and anything that would add to both an understanding of Christianity, but also its enjoyment. I'm looking for help to build a resource that could really enrich the lives of Christians.

I know you are busy but I am actively seeking new sysops/admins to help me build this site up, and I would be positively thrilled if you could contribute in any capacity whatsoever. nsandwich 05:51, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Blue plaques
Please add the location of blue plaques to the articles, not just the category; that way the presence of the plaque can be sourced and verified. See Categories for the requirement that it be obvious why X is in the category by looking at the article; for example, with Palmerston, not just that he was PM, and so notable, but which building the plaque is on. Thanks. 18:31, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Declining knighthood
Is this revert is correct, the category should be removed from Maharajkumar of Vizianagram too. Tagore returned it on principle; Vizzy because, I suspect, it was inconvenient. Waiting for your response Tintin (talk) 05:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * List of people who have declined a British honour says in the intro that includes those who refused it and those who returned it. So, for the time being, will it help if I add a line in Category:People who have declined a British honour to say it includes both kinds of people ? Tintin (talk) 10:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I see that you hav added Frank Auerbach to Category:People who have declined a British honour. As far as I see at a quick read, nothing in our article on him substantiates this. Could you please add the information, with citation, to the article, since I presume you are basing this on something. - Jmabel | Talk 22:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I didn't mean to be hostile at all. It's just odd to see a category like this appear in an article where nothing in the text bears it out. Remember, I had no way to know you were basing this on a list. But looking now at the list, there are no specifics there on what Auerbach is said to have declined, and it doesn't have any real citation either: just "a confidential document containing over 300 names of such people was leaked to The Sunday Times". I'm willing to believe that is probably true, but shouldn't it cite an article in The Times that bears that out? Again, nothing hostile here; I happen to have a strong interest in Auerbach as an artist, this was totally new to me, and usually categories are somehow encapsulations of material already in a given article; otherwise, they'd completely slip by the usual requirements for verifiability. - Jmabel | Talk 22:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Looks like the Sunday Times article is no longer available online, and they don't let the Web Archive Internet Archive archive their site. Googling '"Sunday Times" 2003 "Honor Blackman"', '"Sunday Times" 2003 "Frank Auerbach"', etc. turns up some interesting stories on it, including one in The Guardian, but at least among the first few hits there was no comprehensive list. Similar methods would probably verify any given one of these, but a comprehensive list would sure be nice to have. I'll see what I can do to follow this up, too. - Jmabel | Talk 00:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Tintin (talk) 10:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Saw your post on the authors WP
Wasn't sure if that WikiProject was still active? I posted an invitation on the Talk page but I noticed you were also interested in implementing 1.0 assessments. We have that infrastructure in place that you guys would be able to use without having to do the coding yourself. plange 02:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

AfD nomination of 100 Greatest Britons
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is 100 Greatest Britons. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/100 Greatest Britons (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of List of top association football goal scorers by country for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of top association football goal scorers by country is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of top association football goal scorers by country until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. JMHamo (talk) 12:26, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Eliza Gladys Milvina Dean listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Eliza Gladys Milvina Dean. Since you had some involvement with the Eliza Gladys Milvina Dean redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --Nev&eacute;–selbert 18:45, 5 January 2017 (UTC)