User talk:David Biddulph/Archive 4

Welcome!
Hi , and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

""

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

""

Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: Mailer Diablo 17:34, 17 December 2005 (UTC). This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)

- Mailer Diablo 17:34, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Blocking a vandal
Hi, i was just wondering, since i'm not entirely sure who am i supposed to turn to in case of very frequent vandalism from an ip address, if you could help me block User talk:170.185.55.19 as you have already recently posted a warning to him and because in the 24 hours i've reverted at least 10 of his clear vandalism. Even if you could only point me in the right direction as to whom am i supposed to appeal in such cases i'll be must grateful. thx, --Macarenses (talk) 06:15, 31 August 2011 (UTC)


 * The place you need is WP:AIV. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:25, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Help Desk
I'm not sure what happened, but when you tried to fix a previous error on the Help Desk, 18k of data disappeared, including some questions/answers added in the interim. o_O TN X Man  14:11, 22 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, I put it back to the current questions and answers (Oct 19th to 22nd), instead of the old stuff from Oct 14th to 17th which had been archived but which had been (presumaby accidentally) put in place of the current stuff. I think the question from 17th which you answered today had been previously answered before it was archived. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:31, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

My deleted entry
Thanks, David, for your message. I'm puzzled. There was a discussion, linked from elsewhere, about the inclusion of a date of birth in the Ken P. Chong article. Since I was the person who added the date of birth, I thought I had better join in the discussion. I clicked edit and just added my bit of text. I don't understand what I did wrong – and, worse, I don't know how to add to that discussion without causing the same problem again. Any chance you could enlighten me? Regards — Hebrides (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I've copied the thread and your reply and posted it into the current WP:HD, so we've now got the current questions and answers, together with your answer to the thread which been archived before you had had a chance to answer. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:41, 22 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks :) — Hebrides (talk) 15:14, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Genting Group
Hi David. Please check the article talk. Thanks! 160.83.105.33 (talk) 04:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: Pypbihar
I phail. Thanks a lot for spotting my error! :) Happy editing,  Snowolf How can I help? 16:59, 12 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Message for you at User talk:Cathlec
Hi there. There is an request for your feedback at User talk:Cathlec. Regards  So Why  17:53, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Lords vote
Thanks for your comments. I am happy to change the title from controversy to something else. However, the Bill is controversial, and the decision of almost all Liberal Lords to vote with the government is also controversial given that there is no whip in the Lords. However the information is still a fact; this is how these people voted. It cannot be WP:SOAPBOX if it is factual (not scandal mongering, advertising, self-promotion etc, etc))? I am not planning to alter 80 wikipages, I'll leave that to other people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rondoggy (talk • contribs) 13:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I've replied where the point was first raised, on your talk page. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:50, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Message for you at User talk:Cathlec
David> I have reads some of the articles about using talk pages to communicate. Not sure yeat about a lot of the internnal workings, so took a chance. Basically, this is a test of how to communicate through another users talk page. Excuse my iignorance; hoped this work. My article has been moved because i followed a link about what to do when I finished my articel. Would still like to use you as my primary guide through this process. Thanks again, CatherineCathlec (talk) 21:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Your message got through, thanks, Catherine. Glad to see that your article is making progress.  Hopefully by this stage others who know more about the subject (and about Wikipedia) than I do will be able to help you on from here. You'll have seen that there's quite a backlog at Category:Pending AfC submissions, but hopefully one of the experts there who specialise in new article reviews will get round to looking at it before too long. - David Biddulph (talk) 21:54, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks David. I wondered if it would have to be someone who specializes (new articles, music, discographies, etc.) who would have to review. Hope I don't have to wait to long, because I want to use the article to get help from some other sources that I need material from.. that I would like to include when I do the major expansion on Sergio Franchi's biography. But, Thanks again. (Have visited England many times when I was a ballroom dancer, but not in your region.)CatherineCathlec (talk) 20:48, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Notice of discussion on voting patterns
Hi, I am contacting you to make you aware of a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, as you appear to have been implicitly reffered to within this discussion as an editor who has previously commented on this matter elsewhere or involved in reversions pertaining to this. Any comments to reach a consensus are welcomed. I have endevored to comply with guidelines with this notice. . Thanks, Zangar (talk) 12:31, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Nuclear subs
3

Whoops! Yes, sorry, I was correcting an incorrect "all British nuclear subs were built at Barrow" point in one article, knew that wasn't right, but then read that only Conqueror was not a Barrow-built sub elsewhere... I'll have to amend a few articles! David (talk) 09:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Chesham to Chalfont and Latimer.
Your cite only goes to confirm that the distance between those stations on the Metropolitan Line is NOT the longest distance between stations on the Metropolitan Line. Finchley Road to Wembley Park is still nearly twice as long. There are no intervening stations on the Metropolitan Line. Redrose64 attempted to bullshit his way out of this by claiming that some Metropolitan Line trains stopped at two of the intervening Jubilee Line stations. The Metropolitan Line timetable betrays this as a lie as no trains make station stops between Finchley Road and Wembley Park (at least none that TfL are aware of). 109.156.49.202 (talk) 14:46, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * As someone else has pointed out, the cited ref wasn't talking about distances between stations on the Met line, but between stations on the network. Also please remember WP:civility, WP:AGF, and WP:NPA, and don't accuse Redrose64 of "a lie" and "bullshit". We know that the Met trains don't usually stop there, but they do stop there during service disruptions and (unadvertised) on some early morning and late evening services. See here, for example. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, I conceed the point. The article was ambiguous because it was talking about the Metropolitan Line.  It then vaguely referred to 'the network' without making it clear that this was not the Metropolitan Line network, but the whole tube network, hence my misinterpretation.  Still, it's much clearer now, so a positive result - eventually. 109.156.49.202 (talk) 16:43, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Now clear. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:45, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Leave a message link
I have no idea, I have only just noticed it redirects to another user's talk page. It's fixed now though. Stevo1000 (talk) 21:23, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

WT:CRIC
Hi David. Thanks for your help earlier on. All the best. Jack | talk page 15:41, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Glass
Please see Help_desk. Ta.  Chzz  ► 02:20, 10 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, that was what prompted me to look at the article in the first place. I corrected the obvious error which had put something in front of the existing lede, but it needs more work than I have time for. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:29, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Footnote formatting
Re: footnote layout for Decibel, I have no objection to your change, but you may be interested in WP:CITEBUNDLE. --Noleander (talk) 02:12, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. I hadn't seen that before.  I had originally intended merely to cure a formatting error in the list of new refs, so I'll go back and do that. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

French Military articles.
The sad thing is that with a little bit of training and following of the rules, he (User talk:G St-Germain) could be *really* good wikipedia editor.Naraht (talk) 17:24, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, quite agree. That was why I've been trying to point him in the right direction.  My guess is that it's a language problem.  If all else fails I might try some of my schoolboy French on him, but that may do more harm than good.  :-)  I didn't want to go too far down the road of correcting all his errors, because that way he wouldn't learn what he needs to change.  We'll keep trying.  I didn't want to get too heavy too early, but I thought that after the previous efforts at advice from a number of us hadn't borne fruit, we needed to make it clear that he couldn't carry on the way he was going. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello
Could you explain this edit? 71.146.20.62 (talk) 02:11, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


 * An error, hence the self-reversion a minute later. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:22, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Just to say thanks for your input at the Diane Coyle article. It can be a thankless task dealing with COI editors and I appreciate your help.--Shakehandsman (talk) 18:25, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I sympathise with her predicament, but she didn't seem to be listening to the earlier gentle warnings, and didn't look as if she was going to follow the proper route for getting the problem solved. Good that a number of other people are taking an interest. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:41, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

A404 editing...
I am still a new boy, and much appreciate any help. Thank you for correcting my stupid ,careless mistake. Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 12:13, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. Those of us who have been here for years still make stupid careless mistakes.  :-(    David Biddulph (talk) 12:16, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Warning levels?
Why are you starting with level 4 warnings on standard vandalism, as in this edit? Usually, we use a series of escalating warnings, jumping to level 4 only for extremely poor behavior. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:25, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Because there have been numerous instances of vandalism since the return from a 2 week block last month. If I had thought that the IP might probably have been used by multiple users I might not have been so severe, but the articles being vandalised looked to me to indicate the same persistent vandal.  YMMV, of course.  - David Biddulph (talk) 14:33, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

List of Governors-General of New Zealand
I actually want the point of my edits (removing the acting ones) to be kept but the thechnical faults to be solved.--46.246.230.229 (talk) 13:03, 30 December 2011 (UTC)


 * You've done so many changes, and upset the formatting of the table at so many different changes, that it looks as if it would be easier to put it back as it was, then you can do your changes again but check that you've got them right (using "Show preview") before you save them. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I did that maaaany times. I tried to fix it by any possible means. The truth is that I don't know how to do. Can you or someone do it for me or try to explain me how it works?--46.246.230.229 (talk) 13:19, 30 December 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, I reverted everything. We may take it from the begining.--46.246.230.229 (talk) 13:26, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

OK, OK, calm down. I reverted everything. Can you tell me how to do it without technical faults?--46.246.230.229 (talk) 13:30, 30 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I've corrected the first error on the table. Tables are complicated.  There is some help at Help:Table.  The main thing is to check it as you go using "Show preview" to make sure that the change has done what you intended.  Don't save until you have checked.  If you find tables difficult you may want to avoid that sort of edit. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I've already read it but I did not understand anything. I looked at the code again and again and again... but I could not even understand my error. Can you do it for me, please?--46.246.230.229 (talk) 13:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't have time to spare at the moment. If you can't cope with tables yourself, you may want to try suggesting changes at the article talk page, and see whether anyone else wants to do it. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:51, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

E1 Music
Hi David--

You helped me post a merge proposal for E1 Music last month. In the meantime the article has now been anonymously vandalized with several sequential changes, only the last of which I've undone. I don't know the procedure for restoring it to its pre-vandal state. Thanks for any help here. Milkunderwood (talk) 21:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Done. In future, if you look at the article history and select differences between the last good version and the vandalised version you can then select the "undo" option and that will undo the lot. - David Biddulph (talk) 21:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much. So what you mean is to go back to the initial vandalism, and that will automatically undo the entire lot, with all the subsequent ones? (Just being careful that there are no intervening legitimate posts of course.) Milkunderwood (talk) 21:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * True. For experienced users it is also possible to obtain a "rollback" privilege to allow successive vandalism edits by the same user to be reverted in one click, and there are also various tools (such as Twinkle) to do similar things, but of course any such tools must be used with caution. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm more a visitor than an "editor". I very rarely run into this situation, but I might need to visit with you again some time in the future if I find a sticky one. I knew there a prohibition against undoing multiple edits sequentially, so this tip will be helpful. Thanks again for your help. Milkunderwood (talk) 03:16, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm not aware of any such "prohibition" per se, but if possible it's cleaner to deal with them as a batch. - David Biddulph (talk) 03:44, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh - I thought it was illegal to reverse on a page more than 3 times, is what I've been told, but maybe I misunderstood the context.

Actually, let me ask you an entirely different question also: What is the easiest way to track article "moves" where the title is changed, but it wasn't described as such in the edit summary so that you can just look down through the history? Or is there an easy way at all? Backing up one edit at a time just displays changes in the text, not the title. And sometimes a title is changed without going through a proposal (actually I've done that myself). Milkunderwood (talk) 03:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * A move should appear in the article history, and also in the Move log, and will appear in your watchlist if you are watching the article. Moves can often not be reverted without admin help, but it depends on the circumstances.  A move doesn't need a move proposal if it is uncontroversial (such as correcting a spelling error);  more detail at Moving a page. - David Biddulph (talk) 04:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * That answers my question - I wasn't aware of the Move log.


 * And now that I think of it, I bet the context of the 3 reverts was for the same edit, which would be edit warring. Milkunderwood (talk) 04:14, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * The three revert rule doesn't necessarily mean the same edit, but reversion of "obvious vandalism" is specifically exempted from that rule. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year
Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:56, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

Section headings
Thank you kindly, sir. Have a good day.  Captain Screebo Parley! 12:41, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. If there were any sections that ought to have been sub-sections of the one above, I may have missed them in the change I did, but you'd be able to sort that out easily. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks
Many thanks for your response to my query at Help desk, in view of the mess I made  - inadvertently, I hasten to add  - of the article List of chocolate bar brands. The article is looking good now - the presentation of it is better than it was first thing today (February 16 2012)! Again, thank you for your help. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 15:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. I was in the process of restoring the table header, but someone else got there first.  Now all we need is to be able to taste a sample of each.  :-) - David Biddulph (talk) 15:57, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Facebook's Open source contributions
We already have a topic on this on the talk page. Raysonho (talk) 04:02, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, I have read that. Please read Wikipedia's policies, and stop your disruptive edits to the article. - David Biddulph (talk) 04:06, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I am adding refs - and no, my edits are not disruptive. Raysonho (talk) 04:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * You have been told that Facebook is not a reliable source, and yet despite the warnings you have continued your edit war. - David Biddulph (talk) 04:14, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Then let me ask you again, did you read the talk page carefully? The facebook page is the project homepage of MySQL contributions maintained by software developers working on MySQL. Not every single page on facebook is unreliable. Raysonho (talk) 04:18, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * What is stopping you, or me, or any other Facebook contributor, from posting on that Facebook page? Much better to find a reference to an authoritative publication. - David Biddulph (talk) 04:35, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Only the Facebook engineers who contribute to MySQL can post on that Facebook page, others can comment on the page.


 * And that's the project homepage that centralizes all the MySQL contribution activities from facebook. Raysonho (talk) 04:57, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Let me add that the page is nicer because no other pages group the contribution from facebook better than that page - e.g. More changes shared for the Facebook patch. I've added the link to the source as the 2nd ref, and as the source code does not lie, it is a better "reliable source". Raysonho (talk) 05:08, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Discussion regarding a revert
For your orientation, a revert by you is discussed at New contributors' help page/questions. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:41, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Please feel free to go through all of my puportedly "blind reverts" and see which articles aren't associated with collectables. here. Dreadstar  ☥   23:52, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * was one obvious example, which I have reverted. - David Biddulph (talk) 23:59, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, a mistake is bound to happen when reveting dozens of inappropriate edits. Sorry for that one... So, um, what about those in the list I provided? Please make sure I didn't make more mistakes - I mean, really, is an Antique a collectable?  Nah...bash me!  Go ahead!  I love it!  :)  Dreadstar  ☥   00:20, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The reason I removed Antique from the Category:Collecting is because Category:Antiques is in Category:Collecting. While there is a guideline about eponymous article being in the parent category it is largely ignored, and rightly so in my opinion. It just adds to the "clutter". -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:42, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * That's what I was asking you to explain; now go through the list of the thirty-something removals you did. Perhaps there's sound reasoning for each, but ignoring me and taking me to AN/I for saying "bullshit" totally derailed any civil discussion we may have had.  And these little civilty nannys who jump in here, but aren't anywhere to be found when really disruptive, personal attacking, uncivil editors are on the loose, really disrupt the entire proceedings.  You may be right, Alan, but you certainly haven't backed it up with any dialogue.   Dreadstar  ☥   00:57, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * And sorry for posting this on your talk page David, but this is the first place where Liefting actually discussed this issue with me. Dreadstar  ☥   00:59, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ooooo! Last name terms now! I explained my edits on my talk page and at Category talk:Collecting. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 01:13, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
I appreciate the information about the mistake I made, thank you for your help, I'll make sure to do it right next time. (Esw01407 (talk) 02:02, 14 March 2012 (UTC))

Thanks
Thank you for your warning,i will sign my edits from now on! Odiriuss (talk) 15:26, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Alleged anti-semitism at Eton College
The editor (who I see you have rightly reprimanded on his talk page) put back all the stuff that you deleted. I have now toned it down considerably to remove his most blatant bits of axe-grinding, and removed the reference to an article which is clearly mistaken. The other stuff I am not sure about (unfortunately I cannot access the relevant part of the A.J. Ayer book). Would you have a look and see if you think it will now do? Meanwhile, the argument has continued both on my talk page and on the article's talk page. The editor concerned clearly ought to be blocked or banned. How do we go about that? -- Alarics (talk) 08:01, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * And he is now accusing *me* of anti-semitism! See my talk page. -- Alarics (talk) 15:30, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Eton two veg
I accept your point about adding rubbish, but I must also insist you've come in halfway through on the Eton article, and so only got half the story on my editing. The material that is unequivocally "complete rubbish" ("illiterate Jew of Eton"), which I added purely to irritate those with a soft-spot for the place, is now not in the Eton College article; I've not re-added it, and will not. The other bit of info, the antisemitic admissions policy, that I thought possibly might at least be exaggerated—since I was originally having trouble finding even another mention of the policy, let alone confirmation of its dirty details—actually turned out to be true, since I found an additional source (as requested) to augment the original, unacceptable Tablet article. 99% of my edits are OK; I direct you to my contributions history. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 15:06, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Examples of articles I've either written or massively improved: *Fracking *Fracking in the UK *Sir Mervyn King *Mau Mau And please now make adjustments for Alarics, whose views toward me are now stoked by my having shown him to be wrong on something he obviously cares a great deal about. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 15:29, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * He hasn't "shown me to be wrong" at all. It was commenters to the Tablet article who pointed out that the information in that article was wrong, or at best a gross and unfair oversimplification. I certainly do not "care a great deat about" Eton. What I care about is making the Wikipedia article about it fair and neutral, with facts backed by reliable sources, not wild unsupported assertions. -- Alarics (talk) 15:34, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, shown wrong. These were your words: "It is quite clear that there was no anti-Jewish admissions policy at Eton." I rest my case. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 20:39, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You have not shown that there was an anti-Jewish admissions policy. What you have shown is that a 1945 statute (which according to one commenter applied only to King's Scholars, a small minority of Eton students) was thought by A.J. Ayer to have had "a whiff of anti-Semitism" about it. Whether it did or not, it lasted only for about 15 years, so cannot be described in the sweeping terms you originally stated as a long-standing deliberate policy to exclude Jews. You still have not explained how a policy to require applicants' fathers to be born in Britain could be expected to result in the exclusion of Jews, when so many Jewish families have been in Britain for centuries. And as another commenter pointed out, there have been many Jewish boys at Eton (including A.J. Ayer himself), so it is obviously nonsense to suggest any systematic discriminatory admissions policy. Your initial statement in the article was at best a grotesque and misleading exaggeration and it was, and remains, clear that it was not justified. I rest my case. -- Alarics (talk) 22:35, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * (David, I am sorry this has all ended up on your talk page. Would you like to move it to the article's talk page?) -- Alarics (talk) 22:40, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

This is really getting tedious now, you're wasting far too much of my time. Let me make the following clear: I never claimed, not even to irritate, that there was a centuries-long exclusionary admissions-policy; my irritating words, which I knew would be snipped out the moment they were discovered, stated simply that the place had "a long history of antisemitism". There is a clear distinction between the two. I have also never claimed, not even to irritate, that the post-1945 policy constituted bulletproof exclusion. Indeed, that may not have been the actual intent of the policy: the intent may only have been to keep the number of new Jewish Etonians at some sort of absolute minimum. (Obviously bring in here mention of Elliott's memorandum, p. 270 of Rogers' biography: "College did not want too many boys of foreign outlook"). A policy based on either the partial or the total exclusion of Jewish children is a disgrace, but just listen to this guy: "only fifteen years". If it had applied to only one year's intake it would have been an absolute disgrace—why can't he grasp that? I have my own suspicions, mentioned as an aside below, that are steadily reinforced each time I read his mealy-mouthed apologetics.

"according to one commenter..." A negative assertion about his precious Eton made in an article in the Jewish press is deemed unacceptable without a further source to back it up, yet he's now arguing that an unsourced comment on the same article is to be taken seriously as a way to combat a book from a major publisher. No further comment is required, but let's hold him to his own standards: his task is to find a credible source to show that the 1945 policy applied only to King's Scholars. Actually, I'll save him the effort: looking at it again, Rogers' Ayer biography can serve as the source. On p. 270, we learn that the Jewish son of a foreign-born father was the person "who wanted . . . a scholarship"; as I suspected, when I put the word 'Colleger' into the search bar of the book preview on Amazon, the first search result, on p. 28, yields the following: "As a King's Scholar, Ayer joined College, a group of seventy pupils who occupied a special place in this special world. Scholars or Collegers, as they were also known, came together with the other boys—Oppidans—in the Corps, on the sports field, and in chapel." Finally, marrying up the definition of Colleger with the other info on p. 270—"a statute requiring that the fathers of Collegers should be British by birth"—I think we can agree without hesitation that the 1945 policy, regardless of its motivation, only applied to Collegers/Scholars.

Scholarships to one side, you mangled the Ayer biography slightly: the evidence presented there, pp. 270–1, is not only Ayer's sense of a "whiff" or "flavour" of antisemitism, but also Ayer's testimony that Provost Sir Claude Elliott admitted the policy's true focus was Jewish children. Which Jewish children? See below...

As an aside, I will mention "Mele's putative four sources of motivated bias: 1) Negative misinterpretation; 2) Positive misinterpretation; 3) Selective focusing; 4) Selective evidence gathering. Three more well documented sources of bias: a) vividness of information; b) availability heuristic; c) confirmation bias."

"there have been many Jewish boys at Eton (including A.J. Ayer himself), so it is obviously nonsense to suggest any systematic discriminatory admissions policy." I was initially rendered unconscious by the stupidity—nay, just desperation—betrayed by those words, but I've recovered and am now able to type again: The period of the exclusionary policy began in 1945. Ayer was born in 1910, and so would not even have been at Eton during the relevant period, let alone applied for a scholarship during the same. How Ayer, and the existence of other Jewish Old Etonians, can possibly be adduced in the cause of proving there was no anti-Jewish admissions policy for the period after 1945 is quite beyond me.

"You still have not explained how a policy to require applicants' fathers to be born in Britain could be expected to result in the exclusion of Jews." Use of the word "still" is not merited, but I understand the reason for this question: I misapprehended the original Tablet article when it said students' fathers must be "British by birth". For some reason, I took that as having an ethnic connotation. After reading the Ayer biography, which uses the exact same phrase of "British by birth", which in turn tempts a suggestion that the Tablet journalist was copying the biography when he wrote the article, I for some reason realised my mistake and understood it meant just being born here, no ethnic connotation. Anyway, you can observe my corrected understanding in my biography-sourced addition to the article.

As for your requested explanation: look at the year the policy was instituted: 1945—"though the nation did not open its arms unreservedly to Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazi regime in the 1930s, it did allow some 40,000 Jews from Austria and Germany to settle in Britain along with 50,000 Jews from Italy, Poland, and elsewhere in Eastern Europe - and the 10,000 Kindertransport children rescued on the eve of war". I've already given you a suggestion as to why they didn't put the condition on the mother (too crass), and I'll make a further suggestion that because Britain's influx of foreign Jews during the war consisted of impoverished refugees, restricting the 1945 policy to would-be Collegers would have been good enough to select against the new pool of foreign Jews (the only way their kids could have got into Eton is via scholarship; refugees couldn't afford the fees). Whether either suggestion is near the mark is immaterial; they do, however, serve their purpose.

"David, I am sorry..." No one likes a suck up.

For a serious, non-irritating compromise, in the article we could state that the admissions policy applied only to Collegers (though, for the reason suggested above, this could potentially mislead the reader), and enter the necessary caveats: according to Ayer, X was the case; again according to Ayer, Elliott admitted that X was the case. What do you reckon?

Well, a few small pieces of Ayer and Etonian trivia, if nothing else, have been gained from this unusually extended irritation. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 07:38, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Also should have mentioned that Macmillan wrote to Elliot objecting to what he regard as the antsemitic tone of the statute. Wasn't just Ayer who saw the policy as basically antsemitic. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 08:19, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I shall ignore your stupid personal insults. My mention of "only 15 years" was not in any way to defend any such policy, but merely to point out how different that is from the impression you initially gave, with your "long history" introduction and no mention of 1945, that this policy had been there for centuries and might still be in force. Without looking any further, this impression is obviously disproven by the fact that Ayer himself was at Eton, which is why I pointed that out. Of course I am aware that he was there long before 1945. I have never doubted that there was antisemitic feeling at Eton, as was generally the case among some or all of the English upper classes, and I said so at the outset, and that is reflected in the revised opening that I have put on the paragraph, "In the past, Eton has been guilty of antisemitism, like English society generally". This sets the matter properly in context. The bald assertion in the Tablet article -- "Eton (....) required that its students' fathers be British by birth, so as to keep out the Jews" -- on which you based your initial intervention, proves to be without justification, as I said all along, and as you now seem to be admitting. And yes, I do think you should amend the article to make it clear that any anti-Jewish policy applied only to King's Scholars. It's not that that makes it any better (I never said any of this was good), just that it is misleading not to include that qualification. As for the idea that Eton is precious to me, anyone who knows my personal views about the English class system and private education will find that extremely hilarious. You should not make such silly assumptions. I already said that I hold no brief for Eton. I am simply concerned that the article be accurate. My personal opinions (which happen to be leftwing and pro-Jewish) have nothing to do with it. It is a requirement for editing Wikipedia that one leaves one's own point of view at the door. -- Alarics (talk) 08:31, 23 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) 08:35, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

SFL 2
Hello, I saw thay you previously had commented on Articles for deletion/SFL 1 (2nd nomination). I wanted to draw your attention to the Articles for Discussion occuring currently. You may find it at Articles for deletion/SFL 2. Please feel free to comment. Hasteur (talk) 15:12, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your amazingly fast response
Hello David,

Once again you have come to my rescue with amazing speed.

Thank you very much. Kind regards, Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 19:31, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
thank u

Bakultyagi (talk) 02:43, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 

Tulln an der Donau
Any special reasons why you've reverted my last edit to this article although I gave a clear source for that? Master Katarn (talk) 15:11, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

why the revert to WP:RFC/BOARD
David, Why are you reverting the WP:RFC/BOARD. I have been painstakingly responding to over 80 RfCs and deleting from here when done. The Edit Comments explains the actions taken. Your didn't include an explanation of your revert in the Edit Comment when you undid my changes.

Coastside (talk) 15:21, 18 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Totally unintentional. I guess it's this not infrequent problem of the page moving just as I was clicking to rollback something else.  I've reverted my change. Thanks for pointing it out. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:28, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing it. Coastside (talk) 15:34, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Windermere
I agree that your alternative interpretation could have been what was intended, and will change it back, with a request for clarification. --- Ehrenkater (talk) 12:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of article to which you have contributed
A few days ago I was informed that the article Metrication of British transport was being considered for deletion. As you have made at least one contribution to this article or to its Talk page, you might like to contribute to the debate at Articles for deletion/Metrication of British transport. I have sent this note to everybody whose name was thrown up by the "Contributions" facility of the article and of its Talk Page (apart from those who have already contributed). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinvl (talk • contribs) 18:02, 7 July 2012‎ (UTC)

Thank you for your reverts of 15 edits done by an IP.
The user (92.26.130.145) who done fifteen edits to Shanghai Maglev Train, has been reverted because it contained unconstructive edits. Now the user could also be engaged in an edit war with another editor. The three-revert rule states that making more than three reverts in 24 hours will result in a block by an administrator. Thank you for your reverts; why not try to use these following abbreviations: rv - stands for revert rvv - stands for reverting vandalism. 2.216.191.10 (talk) 14:42, 17 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) 16:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Articles on Bob Janousek and Penny Chuter
Hello, Peter Wilkinson here (Grace Wilkinson's son, Bridget's brother). Looking at Wikipedia during Britain's Olympic rowing triumphs, I noticed some gaps in coverage of British rowing history and have tried to plug a couple of the gaps by expanding the article on Bohumil Janoušek to cover his subsequent British career (and the name he has been known by during it) and by creating an article on Penny Chuter. In both cases, I think I have done enough to keep the information (and articles) in existence until someone else can improve them, but I know that, while I have done the best I could without far more work, both articles are still almost certainly missing important details and are not as well sourced as they might be. I would be grateful if you (or other Wikipedians with more rowing knowledge than I have) could look them over and, when time allows, improve them. PWilkinson (talk) 15:46, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Getting Wikimedians to the Olympic Games
Hi. I am part of an effort to get Wikimedians access to the 2016 Summer Olympics as accredited reporters and photographers. Part of this effort includes covering the 2012 Summer Paralympics. Two Wikimedians have credentials to attend these games as reporters through Wikimedia Australia. As English Wikipedia does not allow original reporting, this is largely through Wikinews with a project page found at Wikinews:Paralympic Games. If you are interested in helping to get Wikimedians to the next Summer Olympics,I'd encourage you to assist with Wikinews efforts, and also to work on all language 2012 Summer Paralympic Wikipedia articles before, during and after the Games to demonstrate a track record of success. Thank you. --LauraHale (talk) 04:52, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

didn't spot it
The other Torpedo change was plain as a pikestaff, and I missed it. Mea culpa. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:46, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page. In this issue: Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->
 * Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
 * Research: The most recent DR data
 * Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
 * Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
 * DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
 * Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
 * Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 18:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Military history coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 08:53, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

thank your for response
I talked about the Chinese versions of these articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.117.157.164 (talk) 17:55, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * In which case, as I said at the Help Desk, the question needs to be asked in Chinese Wikipedia. We here in the English Wikipedia can't answer questions about edits there. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:59, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I can't, I can contact nobody in Chinese on zh.wikipedia.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.117.157.164 (talk) 18:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

These articles do no more reflect the facts (or almost distorted). I worry about it. Other articles on some French companies, he deleted the "markets and products", the CEO names, as they are advertising. I don't understand this person! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.117.157.164 (talk) 19:30, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


 * It's no good talking to me if your problem is on Chinese Wikipedia. - David Biddulph (talk) 19:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, thank you any way. I don't know why Chinese Wikipedia let him do this? I wrote to several of them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.117.157.164 (talk) 20:28, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Croatian rowing
Yes, but all four crewman were ethnical Croats, from Split, Croatia, from Split's "Gusar" rowing club, at the time part of the rowing union of Croatia within Yugoslavia. Furthermore, why is then 1988 olympics counted in Slovenian achievements?--140.180.252.239 (talk) 17:53, 3 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I've put a note in Slovenian Rowing Federation to clarify that the 1988 medal was for YUG, not for SLO. The section starts by saying: "Slovenian rowers have many international successes ...", so it could be argued that it is referring to Slovenian rowers, not to rowers racing for Slovenia.  Personally I wouldn't include wins under the name of the previous federation, or I would include them under a separate section. You may want to do something similar with yours, but if in your table of Croatian Olympic wins you additionally include wins which were not under the name of Croatia they are likely to be deleted by another editor. You may, of course, wish to seek advice at Talk:Croatian_Rowing_Federation, but I don't know how widely that page is watched; I had your page on my watchlist merely because I had reverted some vandalism on the page a number of years ago. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:07, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
My finger slipped and I inadvertently reverted at ANI! JoeSperrazza (talk) 12:21, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, I've done it myself before now, so I recognised the symptoms. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd take it personally if it didn't happen to me far too often! GiantSnowman 12:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer it if rollback had the facility to preview & confirm, like a normal edit, but I guess that folk who use it more than I do (and don't ever hit the button accidentally) wouldn't want the extra click. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:43, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The point of rollback is that it is just 1 click - otherwise why not use the 'Undo' button as normal? GiantSnowman 13:13, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Partly because the default edit summary from rollback is slightly more informative, telling the reader whose version I've gone back to. And if it's more than one edit at a time that is being rolled back, undo won't give a default edit summary at all. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:35, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Your help desk response
This response has a date but no signature. And it's not as simple as typing "~", as I found out. The date is there now rather than "", which is what I assume you typed.— Vchimpanzee  ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 18:37, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing it out. If my memory serves me right, 3 tildes gives name, 5 gives date, and 4 gives both.  Sorted now. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:46, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Spam
I don't think the IPs about to stop. I have ties to an Admin who's handled School IPs and am passing the case on to him. Meva / CHCSPrefect - (Give cake?)  11:27, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


 * The IP been blocked for a month (after I reported at WP:AIV), but if someone can contact the school and educate them it would be a good thing. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:30, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: Adding references is easy...really!
The reftool bar is now a default within the editing window, see the No installation required section of RefToolbar 2.0. Perhaps you somehow have it disabled in your 'My Preferences'? Shearonink (talk) 01:59, 20 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that pointer. I had the old RefToolbar 1.0 version, but the link you gave me showed me which preference to change. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:17, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Thankyou
For helping me tidy up The Girls' Day Out Show and teaching the rules - It's all starting to make sense now - Do you think it needs some more work? If so, any suggestions? Rosiehannah (talk) 12:48, 21 November 2012 (UTC)


 * It's getting there slowly. Two areas where there is scope for improvement are:


 * References you've given as bare urls. Try looking again at WP:Referencing for beginners, Citing sources, & Citation templates, for starters.


 * You've got repeated links to the same wiki article, so you ought to read OVERLINK.


 * But certainly making progress, and don't get disheartened that there is still plenty more to learn; enjoy the challenge! - David Biddulph (talk) 13:01, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Sandbox problem
Hi David. I've just left this message on the Village Pump page and am posting it here to ensure you see it: That's fantastic, David. Thanks for your very prompt and clear explanation and help in returning the Sandbox back to virgin territory. I'll copy and paste your explanation for future reference. I edit a lot on Wikipedia, but I still don't understand its various mechanisms and am never sure how to look anything up when seeking guidance. I appreciate what you've done for me. Kim Traynor (talk) 23:41, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notification, but it wasn't my submission! - David Biddulph (talk) 21:58, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

It's 2:1 now, so there must be a rational explanation
Hello David. You are now the second person to undo my edit to Geoffrey Biggs. After the first one, I assumed, naively perhaps, that I was right and they were wrong, so I changed it back again. However, now you've done it too, I wondered if you could help me to understand why, by explaining your reasoning please. First though, let me reiterate why I made the edit. As I understood it, and as seems to be supported by Royal Navy (disambiguation), there are many royal navies. So I thought, rather than having to click through to a link to find out which one was being referred to, it would help the reader if the text was explicit. Dainful (talk) 22:53, 11 December 2012 (UTC)


 * There is one Royal Navy, which is why the Wikipedia link for those words goes to Royal Navy. The first paragraph of that article explains Due to this historical prominence, it is common – even among non-Britons – to refer to it as "The Royal Navy" without qualification.  There are royal navies of other countries, which each have the country's name as part of the title; these are listed at  Royal Navy (disambiguation). - David Biddulph (talk) 08:41, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply. It wasn't against Wikipedia rules, as such, then, it is just a judgement call on your part. You don't think we need to cater for those in the world who aren't aware of that navy's historical prominence and don't immediately realise that, although as Royal Navy (disambiguation) explains "Royal Navy can also refer to" one of over 25 other royal navies, in this other article in Wikipedia, it only means the British Royal Navy. Dainful (talk) 22:41, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Edits to Wikipedia:Requested articles/Sports
Matt Sydal is now Evan Bourne and the others have canged there name 2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.79.25.1 (talk) 13:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)


 * If that is the case, I suggest that you put a note alongside each old name to link to the article for the new name. It would also be worth creating redirects from the old names.  Having thus explained why new articles are no longer needed, you could then in a later edit remove the entries, but you shouldn't remove them without explanation. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mandolin Society
Dear David:

The above page was redirecting through my sandbox, and I was trying to get the sandbox back so that I could start working on another page. A Tea House editor helped me sort that out, so if you need the old page for some internal purpose, it's no longer a problem for me &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 15:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC).


 * The reason that the redirect from the AFC page should remain is that a number of places, including your Teahouse question as well as the AFC index, refer to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mandolin Society, and if a user gets there they ought to be able to find where the article has gone. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:56, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

about Cartography
Hi. I'm an academic cartographer and think that the content does not reflect today's cartography well. I recommend deleting historical map since there is a relevant section if it is needed. If you can look at the International Cartographic Association (ICA) pages (www.icaci.org), it will be more meaningful why changes are needed. Classic cartography does not only deal with map-making but also map use. Today map-making has been replaced with building a geodatabase, from which maps can be derived and map use is main part of spatial analysis. For these reasons, I recommend using the definition of cartography adopted by ICA (http://icaci.org/mission/). So, some parts in the definition is similiar to second sentence. So, I recommend deleting this sentence to prevent repetition. Research areas or challenges of modern cartography that I add largely corresponds to ICA research agenda and the studies of ICA Commissions. I have also deleted the link to a music album titled "cartographer" which I think it is not related to the scientific content. I hope this explanation is enough about changes. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.185.7.90 (talk) 22:37, 27 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The reason for the mention of the music album is that Cartographer redirects to Cartography, so a reader arriving there needs to know that if he arrives there when he was looking for the album he needs to go to Cartographer (album). Even if you are an expert in the subject, you still need to abide by Wikipedia's conventions.  As for your other proposed changes, at the very least you need to explain with an edit summary the reason for a change, and support any new material with references to reliable sources to ensure verifiability.  Do not rely on your own knowledge, as that counts as WP:original research.  As in some cases your edits have been tried previously and reverted you should not repeat the edit, but instead you should suggest the changes at Talk:Cartography and explain the reasons there and wait for a consensus to be established there. - David Biddulph (talk) 22:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Congrats... You gave an awesome answer in the Teahouse!
Hi! Thanks for helping a frustrated editor coming from Articles for Creation to realize that they were not being perpetually declined. You probably saved him/her a whole lot more frustration, and you did so in an accessible and clear way. Thanks for doing that! Ocaasit &#124; c 22:24, 9 February 2013 (UTC) 

Please review...
this. Everybody makes mistakes. Please try to learn from this one. Best regards, David in DC (talk) 19:58, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

So if you are from Harrow, and you like rowing...
Does that mean you particularly like "harrowing"? bd2412 T 22:22, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Royal Navy
Hello, I could use your input at the Royal Navy talk page. Some editors are trying to remove any mention of the Royal Navy being a blue-water navy or a global force. Thanks and I hope you get this in time!Osama is Obama (talk) 17:04, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Very nice welcome.
Rollock (talk) 15:08, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Signature
Thank you for pointing out the problem with my signature and sorry for the confusion caused. I've now unchecked a box on my preferences that was rendering me unlinked. All fixed now as you can see. Libby norman (talk) 09:04, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Ushau97 talk 17:19, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: White noise's noteability
noteability is hard to get for the article since i am confined to only my school computer for editing. meaning i can not just simply go on twitter or any other social media other then milkstone studios in the google search engine, i am trying my best to keep this article up as possible since this is kind of a good game but keeping with noteability is not easy if your just one user doing the whole article for the remainder of school. i hope i am not coming out harsh i get scared easily when favorite game of mines is put on a deathwatch with other users suspecting me to meet the deadline i can't do this alone T^T --Indienews (talk) 17:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * If you're not sure that you've yet found enough reliable sources to demonstrate the notability of a subject, it is safest not to rush to publish the article. If your time is limited, it would be better for you to develop the draft article as a sub-page in your user space, and then publish it when it is ready. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:00, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

fine, but you can teach me how to understand noteability with my article it sounds hard but its easy the problem is i can not wrap my head around it. Who made it, when it was made, how was it made, is it popular im lucky to write down a few paragraphs let alone convice the world...what am i doing wrong here and also i will be taking a break from wikipedia since it's good friday in the USA so i might not be able to controle the article when im gone.--Indienews (talk) 18:16, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * You presumably haven't read the links which I provided regarding notability and reliable sources. When you have done so, you'll understand the situation better. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:24, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Kew Railway Bridge
Hi David You've suggested an alternative title – Strand on the Green Bridge – but do you have a citation please for it being called by this name? Headhitter (talk) 12:49, 3 April 2013 (UTC)


 * http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?x=519398&y=177765&z=110&sv=Strand-on-the-Green&st=6&tl=Map+of+Strand+On+The+Green,+London,+W_4&searchp=ids.srf&mapp=map.srf
 * http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/44575066
 * http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&d=WCT18860906.2.20
 * http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephenpoole/8351278086/
 * and various others at https://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLG,GGLG:2009-07,GGLG:en&q=%22Strand+on+the+Green+bridge
 * -David Biddulph (talk) 13:18, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of article Kan Pesum Vaarthaigal
I've replied on my talk  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  12:31, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Steve stephens
i received an email from Steve Stephens recently, asking me to change his entry in Wikipedia. Here is his email:

On Apr 3, 2013, at 4:23 PM, Stephens Steve <1semperfidelis@comcast.net> wrote:

Sandy, taking your kind advice, I am resubmitting my bio to you for submission to Wikipedia. I have severely edited the previous bio, so that hopefully we will not be accused of plagiarism. This one is certainly not word for word from the one Chuck submitted to Arkansas Encyclopedia. Here goes…..

Stephen Owen Stephens (Steve) is a television and communication pioneer in Arkansas, who originally became well known as the host of "Steve's Show," a hugely popular television program in the late 50's and early 60's. He has remained a communication specialist as of this posting.

Born in 1930, to Allie and Owen Stephens in Newport, Arkansas, Steve later attended Castle Heights Military Academy, and graduated from Newport High School. Following graduation, he attended the University of Arkansas until the Koran Conflict erupted in 1950, when in his quest for adventure, he enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps. Attaining the rank of Sergeant, he received three battle stars in Korea. After the Korean Armistice was signed in l953, he was honorably discharged and returned to Newport.

While in the Marines, he was occasionally asked if he had ever been a broadcaster, as he seemed to have a natural "radio voice." After returning to Newport, he began as a part-time announcer at radio station KNBY, and soon became known as the "Voice of the White River Valley."

His entry into radio coincided with the beginnings of rock and roll, and he soon became a popular proponent of this new type of music. His style began to capture the attention of Little Rock television station KTHV, the Arkansas affiliate of the CBS Television Network, who offered him an entry position as a station announcer.

Shortly after joining the station he began hosting a television dance party in March, l957 which became an instant success. As bus loads of teenagers began arriving from all over the state the show was expanded to six days a week.

Steve helped launch the career's of Johnny Cash, Conway Twitty, Charlie Rich, Brenda Lee, Sonny Burgess, Fabian and many others who appeared on "Steve's Show" during its 8 year run. As a result of his continuing popularity during that time, he was awarded a recording contract, recording, "Pizza Pete," "Honey Bee," "How It Used To Be," and "Weird Session, and was voted, "Arkansas Top Television Personality."

From l957 until l965 he served as senior weatherman for KTHV television at both 6pm and 10:00 pm, and was also the first to use Radar in his weather cast. He recorded another first when he became one of the first TV weatherman in the nation to use radar to detect Santa Claus flying into the state.

Steve went on the produce other TV programs for KTHV, including "Eye On Arkansas," which showcased such celebrities as Liberace, Ronald Reagan (before he was Governor of California and later President), Roy Rogers, the cast of the popular TV programs, "The Beverly Hillbillies," and "Ponderosa," Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., and many other notables.

In 1965 Steve left television at the invitation of U.S. Senator John McClellan to join him on his staff in Washington, D.C. as Special Assistant in charge of Media Relations. In l968 he returned to Arkansas to form his own advertising, public relations and travel agency.

In 1986 he was approached by financier Jack Stephens, chairman of the investment banking firm of Stephens Inc, to join him as his assistant and director of corporate communications. He remained with Stephens Inc. until his retirement in l998. Following retirement, he has continued to be active as a "voice talent" for numerous local and national radio and television commercials, in addition to being the creator and announcer for the KUAR/AETN program. "Biography Arkansas" since 2005.

Steve also served as a National Trustee for the March of Dimes Foundation for over a decade, and was named an Honorary Life Trustee of the organization in 1998. During that time, he was awarded the "Jonas Salk Lifetime Achievement" award by the Salk Institute for his fund raising efforts on behalf of the March of Dimes.

In recognition of his pioneering achievements in broadcasting, he was inducted into the "Arkansas Entertainers Hall of Fame," and later his name was added to the "Arkansas Walk of Fame" in Hot Springs. On April 22, 2010 (the anniversary of his birthday), he was recognized by the Eighth General Assembly of the Arkansas House of Representatives with a Lifetime Achievement Citation, "for maintaining a high degree of professionalism and integrity during his 50 years in the business and broadcasting community of Arkansas." In 2011 he was inducted into his hometown (Newport, AR) High School Hall of Fame. _________________________________________________________________________ Sandy, certainly don't bother with this until you have time and feel like doing it. Regardless, I appreciate your efforts. Steve

submitted by Sandra Hubbard 72.204.7.142 (talk) 14:46, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Changes to Steve Stephens
please review the submission and include if the changes qualify. If not, please advise us how to do that. Thank you, S Hubbard — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.204.7.142 (talk) 14:55, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * It's not for me to decide whether the changes qualify or not. If you're the same editor involved in earlier discussions, you've seen links to the advice regarding copyright violation and close paraphrasing. Other editors will make a judgement accordingly, as will the holders of any copyright. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:47, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I will add that the subject of an article is usually not the right person to write about themselves, as they are rarely able to do so dispassionately with a neutral point of view. That is why Wikipedia has its guidance on conflict of interest. Asking someone else to submit the material on their behalf doesn't really resolve those issues. Steve has also included no references to published reliable source to support the statements he sent to you. I will therefore step back from what I said in my reply above, and tell you that what he proposed would not be acceptable, as it stands, for Wikipedia, regardless of whether or not it would be a copyright violation. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:58, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance!
Thank you for the information and insight David! I will make sure to look at those pages! Miguemely (talk) 00:50, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

One question, I just redid the page and made sure it's working and has references to what I am doing. Is it fine how it is or am I missing something? Miguemely (talk) 01:03, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Request for uninvolved 3rd party to comment.
Hello. I am requesting your opinions at Talk:Thomas Savage (died 1611) as a third party to a discussion which I feel is nearing an impasse. I feel confident that if you chose to participate, your comments ideas and suggestions will be neutral and non-biased in favor or against either of the currently involved participants. If you do not wish to participate, I understand and respect your wishes. Thank you. Technical 13 (talk) 19:42, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Oswestry School
Keen not to ignite another 'Editing War', do you feel that the following is a fair representation of current events?:

"In March 2013, the Headmaster announced that he had commissioned an 'inspection' to consider the future of Bellan House as a Prep School. One of the options currently being considered is to move the existing prep school up to the Senior School site and turn the existing Bellan House building into a sixth form centre."

Alphaceo (talk) 12:40, 9 April 2013 (UTC)


 * May be better to say nothing until there are published reliable sources to back it up, or until decisions are made, but that looks a lot closer to what the HM's letter apparently said than what was in the previous updates. Perhaps the best is to put something on the article's talk page to point readers in the direction of the current situation and to explain the outcome of the previous edit war, but to leave the article alone for now. I hope that you will apologise to those whom you have misled and to those whom you have wrongly accused of vandalism. You were lucky not to have been blocked for edit-warring. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:55, 9 April 2013 (UTC)


 * But I see that you have asked the same question on your user talk page, so hopefully other interested parties will respond there. My only interest in the first place was to stop the stupid edit war. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:58, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks David, and agreement reached with DanielCooling OSICT and I think all sorted now Alphaceo (talk) 13:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for undoing the bizarre 'Jonathan' edits, I too had been undoing them but didn't want to fall foul of the 3 strike thingamebob rule! An ex-member of staff who left very suddenly was called Jonathan so I suspect that's where they think it comes from. I know it didn't start well (my involvement, that is) but ANY attempt at deviating from the 'party line' seems to set the spin/hate/damage limitation machine into overdrive hence, I suspect, the 'Jonathan' nonsense. Alphaceo (talk) 12:32, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Sesamevoila (talk) 12:34, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
WorldTraveller101Did I mess up? 22:36, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Notifications box replacement prototypes released
Hey David Biddulph; Kaldari has finished scripting a set of potential replacements available to test and give feedback on. Please go to this thread for more detail on how to enable them. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:58, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Allrounder
Was just reviewing the edits there as I thought they might be vandalism, but they seem like good edits so I reinstated them. I am assuming you were there for the same reason I was. If you disagree feel free to re-revert. AIR corn (talk) 11:59, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Feedback
Where do you see the problem? Ashbeckjonathan 18:49, 28 May 2013 (UTC)


 * In your message here, as a good example. No links. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:59, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * In case you missed it, the relevant part of WP:SIG is at Signatures. - David Biddulph (talk) 19:31, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Retirement
Just to let you know, because I am really having a rough time on Wikipedia, I am considered for retirement starting today until I feel like coming back whenever I am ready. Ashbeckjonathan 21:24, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hopefully when you come back you'll sort out your signature problem. If in doubt, set the relevant part of your preferences back to their default settings. - David Biddulph (talk) 21:34, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Page problems - International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes
Hello David,

Considering I am fairly new to the system, I have benefitted greatly from your comments, particularly about the copyright laws on Wikipedia. I have scanned a lot of pages and found that some articles tend to regurgitate a lot of content from other online resources, so I thought this was an integral part of wikipedia's programme. Given that I am unfamiliar with bacteriology or prokaryotes, I decided to use a lot of the material from their own site. I understand that there may be a conflict of interest here, but I assure you that I am not part of this committee and am not representing them in any way.

In response to your qualms about independent references, what if the committee's website is the best authority on the subject? The content on the site is not exactly promotional and merely offers a overview of the committee and the responsibilities they have. The site gives the best summary and definition relating to the committee so why can't it be included in the references?

Just wanted to run this past you so that I can improve as a wikieditor and create the most reliable content for future articles.

Thankyou for your comments, I am always eager to get involved in any talk discussions.

Binko

Binko100 (talk) 10:10, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Trashed infobox is VE bug
Hi David. I saw this edit of yours and realized I had been involved in something similar here. It looks like Visual Editor has been causing this damage - it is discussed here and there's a link to a bug (which is itself linked to another bug and so on). Unless it is already fixed I suspect we may be seeing a few more of these. The editor concerned has probably only tried to make some small change to the box but as you saw it has had a spectacular effect ... I guess the best advice we can give, unless/until it's fixed, is to avoid VE for infoboxes. Hope this helps, best wishes DBaK (talk) 08:13, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

IP
I think User talk:92.21.209.26 is having trouble with the VisualEditor, which copes poorly with template. I'll remove the scary warnings and leave a message. Jamesx12345 (talk) 19:04, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

IAAF World Championships in Athletics/ Great Britain
No rules to specify the full official names of countries in that table! Otherwise you must write: United States of America, Russian Federation, People Republic of China, France Republic etc. What about it? IkariSindzi (talk) 09:48, 1 August 2013 (UTC)


 * "Great Britain and N.I." is what has been the accepted entry in that table for some time; I see no reason to change it now without discussion and agreement. David Biddulph (talk) 11:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

The Radicalization Watch Project
I am one of the researchers in the Radicalization Watch Project and I would like to edit the page of this project in order to update it. Could you please remove the protection so that I can update it. Thanks for assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmo07518 (talk • contribs) 08:12, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


 * There isn't such a page. Radicalization Watch Project was deleted in 2010. If it did exist, and was protected, that would have been because too much damage had been done previously by non-auto-confirmed editors, and a case would have to be made to the administrators to remove the protection. See Protection policy. I am not an administrator.  - David Biddulph (talk) 09:25, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
I am sorry if i did something wrong. Please put it back the way it was — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chanthujohnson (talk • contribs) 15:10, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Typo?
Hi, David. In your answer at Help desk you said that an editor does need the other editor's permission to edit the article. Did you mean to say "does NOT need"? &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 17:59, 19 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Absolutely right, Anne. Corrected now.  Thanks for pointing it out. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:07, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks.
Hey Dave. Just wanted to drop a note saying that I appreciate your vigilance over the Teahouse lately as well as the quality and straight-forwardness of your responses. That, and whenever I see a new question, you usually beat me to it! I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 15:53, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
--Ashbeckjonathan 00:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

No, I haven't, and your signature is still wrong. - David Biddulph (talk) 00:53, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Then there is nothing I can do to fix it; that was the way it was when I first joined Wikipedia. There you have it; I will not respond again. Ashbeckjonathan 00:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I got it working; sorry my behavior. Ashbeckjonathan (talk) 01:02, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's working now. Well done! - David Biddulph (talk) 01:05, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * At least you guessed correctly; because you are so smart let me get you a barnstar! Ashbeckjonathan (talk) 01:19, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

You'll Never Walk Alone
Shirley Jones is notable for singing this song in the 1956 hit film Carousel as well as on the hit soundtrack.  Caden  cool  20:47, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you explain to me why you reverted my edit??  Caden  cool  21:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm still waiting for an explanation from you.  Caden  cool  02:52, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Your makes it much clearer, so I'm happy with that. The argument from Contributions/Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars looked convincing at first glance with the previous wording. - David Biddulph (talk) 03:17, 27 August 2013 (UTC)