User talk:Charlesdrakew/Archives/2009/December

Message from Bvs
All Links added are within the Coptic Church links and are in harmony with the subject mentioned. There is no promotion or advertising taking place. All infromation is accurate to the best of my ability. Will keep my eyes open to any adds on or deletes that take place in the info.

I hope my feelings are wrong but I feel somone is trying to provide you with misleading info. about my efforts and wrong impressions. where is that article talk website for future use?

Thanks for taking the time to educate me.

Bvs —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bvs1925 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking at the past warnings and block on your talk page indicates that you should be aware by now of what is not acceptable. Please take time to read the guidelines.--Charles (talk) 09:53, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the past when I was an FOB can be misleading. I now know what is acceptable and what is not. plus years of experience. Put your trust in me. Will never let you down.

Bvs —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bvs1925 (talk • contribs) 10:46, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I am glad to hear that. You should put new talk page sections at the bottom and sign your comments by clicking [[Image:Button sig2.png]] in the toolbar above.--Charles (talk) 12:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Charles, (Memo from Bvs)
I am requesting edit Protection for [Holy Synod of the Coptic Orthodox Church] page against " Vandalism ", that is taking place on a weekly basis. It it taking a long time to bring things back in order. I think they are just bunch of kids playing around, but it is really hectic, not mentioning that it is a violaton of Wikipedia guidelines for editing. Thank you for your consideration.

Bvs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bvs1925 (talk • contribs) 23:51, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well I do not know what is going on here, but if you disagree with other editors you must discuss it on the article's discussion page so that a consensus can be reached. Failure to do so may get you blocked again.


 * You do not need to save every minute or less even than that. Use the preview button until you have done.--Charles (talk) 09:31, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

There is no disagreement, there is Vandalism going on several times per week. We need to stop that. Please let me know how to add an Edit Protection. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bvs1925 (talk • contribs) 04:46, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Neither of us has the power to add edit protection if it was needed. Put your concerns on the discussion page.--Charles (talk) 11:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey
What I did was not vandalism. The Falklands War ended June 20, 1982 and Conflicts in 1982 is an accurate category. B-Machine (talk) 18:30, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It is unlikely that a heavily edited article would contain such a basic error + This surrender document + New York Times report say 14th.--Charles (talk) 18:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Charlie dear
Do you feel like a little tour of about thirty cathedrals? The well-meaning editor has added over-sized maps to all of them! You start at the top and I'll start at the bottom of the list. Amandajm (talk) 10:46, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Why not. As soon as I have poured my coffee.--Charles (talk) 10:49, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's 10 oclock here in the Land of Oz. I could ask my son to make coffee, but he spills it, the whole way from the kitchen to the studio. Oh dear! I feel a bit of a brute! I must say that I noticed that some of the pages were very badly formatted. I have the advantage of a wide screen which means that I can create something that works on it, then narrow the screen and see how other people are viewing it. I'll have to do the rounds again and push pictures into place. Coffee first! Thanks for the helpAmandajm (talk) 11:16, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I was just looking at the Great Pyramid page, which gets vandalised a lot, both by school children and new age nutters. Guess what? It gets by without a box.--Charles (talk) 11:23, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Cathedral infoboxes
I completely dissagree with you, I really like the maps in infoboxes, particularly as a lot of our cathedrals are national monuments or even World Heritage Sites, its useful to be able to locate the exact whereabouts of the cathdral. I appreciate the larger infobox may distort some of the text further down the article, so I will correct those later tonight. But what I am doing is not vandalism, the infobxes themselves have a maps section, which means it is there to be used. It come down to personal taste at the end of the day, and I like them! Bleaney (talk) 13:07, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Please do not put those maps back without discussing it first to find a consensus. As you see there are at present more people who do not like them.--Charles (talk) 14:09, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You mean like the way you reverted my edits without asking me or reaching a consensus? A consensus of 2 is hardly a huge majority. I notice this has only been a problem with the Anglican Cathedrals, as the Catholic cathedrals have had maps for quite some time... I sense a cabal! I have not finished with this yet. Bleaney (talk) 00:52, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I am sorry if you have had a lot of good faith work undone, but you could have proposed the change at the cathedral discussion pages first. David Underdown has added his opinion that the map is just too much, and is only a click away anyway. Please credit our readers with some intelligence. Wikipedia's aim is to provide articles that are mainly in prose with images for illustration, are attractive and easy to read, not over long and which do not go into tedious detail. People with a deeper interest will follow up the links and references.--Charles (talk) 12:48, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Archives
It would be great if you could set up my page so it does the archive thing automatically. Thanks for offering. Amandajm (talk) 13:12, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thankyou! :-)