User talk:ClemRutter/Archives/2010/December

Re: Talk:Logo (programming language)
Vectoria is in fact a commercial application (priced at 2.99GBP), and link has been added by creator, with a clear aim of promoting application (he openly said: "How can I spread the word to fans of Logo and Turtle Graphics if not here?"). Are you really sure it is within WP:EL? Ipsign (talk) 06:27, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No. But WP:BITE.Looking at Turtle graphics I have more of a problem. It has WP:NOT by being the first known use on a new hardware platform. This iPlatform is totally outside my experience- and if TV programmes merit space- don't we need to document apps. I don't know. I have never written one or used one. I needs discussion and I suspect a WP:iAPPpolicy. Leaving it as a EL at least allows us to look at it before we make a decision. I am more sympathetic to newbies that talk first rather than just post.--ClemRutter (talk) 10:07, 29 November 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem with WP:BITE, though I should note that he did post it first (to 2 pages), and went to talk page only after I've removed it and repeatedly told him he needs support from other editors to re-include. About the link/application itself: you've meant it has WP:N (not WP:NOT), right? As for the merits of iPhone applications in general - IMHO they certainly might be notable (per WP:GNG), but I think having a page for each and every of them will be certainly a violation of WP:INDISCRIMINATE (everybody can publish an app in the AppStore). As for this specific application - I understand that your point is that its merit is related to being the first one on iPhone to support Turtle Graphics, right? Then why not rework this statement into the prose for Turtle Graphics page and to use this link as a reference for this statement? This way I don't expect having objections (depends on wording, but in general - why not?). Ipsign (talk) 06:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Done. Together we need medals for our generosity! --ClemRutter (talk) 13:45, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks. As for medals - :-)), we could obviously award each other a Barnstar, but I certainly doubt it would be appropriate :-). Ipsign (talk) 14:06, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for lending a hand on the Bewl Valley Sailing Club article. Will upload a couple of photographs from Flickr today. Can you also take a look at the article for Kent Advanced Motorcyclists' Group. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nomoney123 (talk • contribs) 11:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Kent templates
Thanks for your kind words at WT:KENT. It seems that BHG has a threshold of 5 valid (in her opinion) bluelinks. Any redlinks I add are to subjects that would pass WP:N should an article be created, and redlinks are supposed to encourage article creation. Apparently, being born somewhere isn't sufficient to be associated with that place. Mjroots (talk) 10:40, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Mjroots is putting words in my mouth; I have not created any such threshold, just used number of links as a device for grouping deletion discussions on dozens of pointless tenmplates.
 * See my reply to Mjroots at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Kent. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:43, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for comment : I always enjoy having distinguished editors visit me here. To business, every area of Wikipedia has its own unique editing problems and its own group of hard working editors. Kent has a few interesting problem that date back to tribal division several hundred years before the Roman invasion resurface with the post Roman settlement. Governance is particularly interesting, and the significance of the parish structure is different in its different geographical regions. In that it was two counties East Kent and West Kent,(we have Kentish Men and Men of Kent as a consequence and that parts of the former Kingdom have been subsumed into the London Boroughs of Greenwich, Bromley Bexley. That the North Kent strip- the industrial bit is mainly settled by immigrants from other industrial areas- Lancashire, Glasgow- and the Kentish coalfield is settled by blacklisted miners .immigrants from Durham... all this is fascinating stuff and it does give relevance to residency. Kent, with its lost provinces could be considered on a level with other minor European countries- but it remains a county, and in parts the principal sub-division has been the parish, and the village that takes itś name.
 * I am not joining in any squabbles- I have been working for the last year on another interest Category:Lists of textile mills in the United Kingdom, well out of area- but I will say that creating a collection of parish tags for parishes in the clay vales, and on the Greensand ridge, and then populating them seems an eminently sensible way to proceed in this case, and does reveal links between individuals that can be important. The Kent Project is self policing, and gets there in the end. If you have concerns I suggest they design a Template: Parish-tag-underpopulation-concern and drop it onto the talk page. --ClemRutter (talk) 10:08, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Clem, all that fascinating history belongs in the articles on the villages, where notable residents can be listed. And while Kent undoubtedly has its own interesting history, so do many other places. I don' see any way in which Kent's particular history requires that  articles on people who lived  there briefly should be cluttered with links to other people who live in the same area at a different time. In most cases that I have encountered these templated individuals did not form any notable part of the history of the village, and not the village have any connection to he persons' notability.   Using a template to add a dozen or more links to the village just clutters the biographical articles.
 * But per WP:NAVBOX, navboxes should not be used be used to link tenuously-connected articles. The guideline says "Ask yourself, does this help the reader in reading up on related topics? Take any two articles in the template. Would a reader really want to go from A to B?". -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:16, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I was merely asked to express an opinion. There are two ways to reach the destination- I just don find it productive to make an issue of th.e fact that someone chooses a different route. In the answer to the WP:NAVBOX question you have posed. "No, not yet.".--ClemRutter (talk) 10:31, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Cotton Mills
Hi, noticed you were busy with Mills in Stalybridge, I just wondered if is any use to you.--J3Mrs (talk) 18:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes. Haynes uses it as a principal source. Just a matter of time, I have just succeeded in staying off WP for a whole 30 hours- just to prove I still have the will-power. Sorry if the reply wasn't instant--ClemRutter (talk) 10:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem, Keep up with the will power! I've been away for over 2 days! Happy Christmas.--J3Mrs (talk) 20:54, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

AN notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - Nothing to worry about. I mentioned you in a post on AN and am therefore required to notify you of the fact. I not above that you do not wish to be involved in the dispute and respect your decision to keep out. The notice is merely procedural and you are not required to respond if you do not wish to. Mjroots (talk) 06:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Naming of Waterway tunnel icons
Hi, we got the naming of green tunnel icons wrong on the UK waterways project. They have a tg prefix, which should be a gt prefix. I have created the new icons, uploaded them to commons, fixed the Welsh, Russian and Japanese (scary!) icon lists, altered all maps that used the tg icons, and am left with a few user pages which still use them. Your /Sandbox page uses BSicon_utgSTR, which needs to become BSicon_ugtSTR. I was going to alter it for you, but since it is a user page, thought I would ask first. Once it is all done, the original icons can be deleted from commons. Bob1960evens (talk) 21:06, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Fine Bob. Anyone can help me out at any time: and while I think about it- you don't fancy coming round and making us a cup of tea- theres some cake on the side in the kitchen. :-) --ClemRutter (talk) 21:32, 26 December 2010 (UTC)