User talk:David Underdown/Archive 1

Welcome
Hello, , and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. 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: &#126;&#126;&#126;. Four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) 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! Kukini 15:27, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

The Definite Article
Thank you. I get little out of conversations with such as those whose almost sole contribution is picking flies out of articles to which others have made substantive contributions. I can scarcely be bothered to argue the toss; but the policy, if such it is, is nonsense. Any Frenchman or woman would tell you so. I don't care either about good article status, only about good, grammatical, articles. You may have the leisure to explain to me what the rationale is. The difference between a definite and indefinite article in a heading may be significant. We are to lose that, are we? Roger Arguile 13:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC) PS We could do with losing Garzo's rudeness.

HI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am hoping that you will join the few of us at the disney wikia.  We dont have alot of people there, so who ever we can get would be welcome. Want to know how small that thing is? I just now created a Jafar page. JUST NOW. and I became a member about a week ago. So umm....yeah, come help? thanks. My user name is the same as it is here. =]--AngelicDemon92 00:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

World War I
I moved "The 'War Guilt' of Germany" subsection dealing with the WWI armistice treaty and the war debt Germany had to pay after WWI from the "Causes" of WWI section to the "Aftermath" section. You flagged my move of this content as a deletion and a vandalism and moved the post-treaty aftermath content back to one of the causes of WWI. Dumbass. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.130.15.14 (talk • contribs)


 * See my response on talk:World War I Forgetting to sign things myself now.  David Underdown

Money broker
No probs on the fix, you followed all the steps correctly and it very nearly worked. Wikipedia is quite specific about capitalisation which is something to bear in mind especially outside of the main space where the articles live. I hope you continue to enjoy contributing all over the wiki. MLA 09:51, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The May 2006 Local Elections & the Labour Party
Hi David!

Yep, sounds like a good idea to wait till after the elections..never know..they might do well! ;op Hayday 15:25, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

My Userpage
Thanks for the vandal reversion on my userpage. It was someone who didn't like an AfD recommendation that I made a while back. MLA 16:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Vann etc
I was interested to read yr article on Stanley Vann. With your P'brgh connections you might like to see the article I created yesterday on Thomas Armstrong: a highly overdue entry I think! Perhaps we can meet in the Prom queue in the summer? Look for a bright yellow-green "Rhythm of Life" T shirt in the day queue. Hikitsurisan 16:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes I saw that, and was rather ashamed that I hadn't really heard of him before. Most people near the front of the Arena season queue would know if I'm about or not, so I'm sure we'll bump into each other at some point.  David Underdown 08:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Matins and Evensong
Hello David, I do hope that you will be able to find the time to continue work on revising Morning Prayer and Evensong. I am in the process of reviewing existing articles and considering new ones for an Anglicanism wikiproject I want to propose, and any efforts you can concentrate on these articles would do much to help things along. I am working on the proposed project page at User talk:Fishhead64/Anglicanism, if you would like to check it out. Cheers! Fishhead64 06:38, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Things are a little hectic just now due to moving house, but I very much hope to get back to have a concerted revision of those articles. If you get the project going I'll try and get my sister and/or mother going on it.  They're much more knowledgable on the theological/historical side of Anglicanism than I am.  David Underdown 09:15, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion
Hello! I noticed that you have been a contributor to articles on Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. You may be interested in checking out a new WikiProject - WikiProject Anglicanism. Please consider signing up and participating in this collaborative effort to improve and expand Anglican-related articles! Cheers! Fishhead64 22:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Hockey
Hi David, Would you be interested in helping work on a Field Hockey Portal? Just had a thought looking around the other sports!? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Portal/Proposals --Nunners 15:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


 * In principle yes, although as I mentioned time is at something of a premium at the moment. As well as moving house, I'm also getting married at the end of September, and you know all about that.  David Underdown 15:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi David, I replied to your comment on my talk page... Thanks for fixing that link as well, I ahem "borrowed" it from that user and obviously forgot to change the link :S Staphylococcus 16:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Charlotte Wilson (VSO)
''Thanks for creating this article, I knew Charlotte when we both sang in the choir at Imperial. David Underdown 09:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)''

OK, no problem. I didn't actually know her myself but I was a VSO volunteer in Rwanda from 2003-2005 and Charlotte's legacy and memory live on here. Cheers &mdash; SteveRwanda 10:46, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Radio Three
Why did you remove the trivia portion of BBC Radio Three? Was it somehow incorrect? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.209.2.132 (talk • contribs)


 * There seems to be a reasonably strong opinion taht trivia doesn't generally have a place in Wikipedia articles - would yo usee something like that in a print encyclopaedia. If it was to go somewhere, it would probably be more appropriate in the Yes, Minister article, rather than Radio 3.  Did the information actually help anyone to understand what Radio 3 is about?  David Underdown 07:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
For reverting the long comment in brackets on Apostolic Succession. I agree it was rather frivolous of me and didn't help the discussion --BozMo talk 19:10, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

RS
Hello... thanks for the comment. A history, yeah... he kinda sought me out. I have no intention of editting on his page... but it seems quite obvious that it is an article that he wrote about himself (as an anon and as sockpuppets) and has used sockpuppets to protect it... I get the distinct feeling that people have kept away from speedy deleting it for vanity because they do not want to again feel his wrath. I don't know how to feel about it, kinda helpless really. DMighton 21:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Wow. I doubt he passes WP:MUSIC. Compositions that "commissioned" by churches and schools, that Google only picks up at wiki (and mirrors) and his own site. One national BBC blurb...  Check this out : []. ccwaters 23:04, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I just received this from another member of the WP, I think he has a point. DMighton 23:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I haven't checked for a while, but I understood that he could muster commissions from the RLPO and Evelyn Glennie, which would probably just tip him into notability. Possibly the page could be edited somewhat, and some the incoming links reviewed.  I found the article first of all after following the link from Last Post, and now I've reviewed the contributions from the IP that added the link, 86.137.66.200 all 4 of them are saying (essentially), Robert Steadman uses/refers to this in his work blah, so it would appear that some (self-?)promotion was going on.  This IP appears to be in the same range as some of those used to edit the actual Steadman article as well.  However this IP is in the range assigned to BT consumer broadband, so that doesn't really prove anything.  I'm reluctant to give the impression of being engaged in a vendetta, so I might return to this in the future, but I'm going to let the dust settle for a bit.  David Underdown 08:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Probably not a bad idea. Personally, I'm just marvelling over the shear scale of this guy's vanity.  I don't even know what to think about it.  I don't think it is right, but I think that the way he acts allows for little to be done without retribution from him. DMighton 16:08, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

An open letter to Mr Underdown (if that's a real name)
Dear Mr Underdown,

It seems to me rather silly that you have been editing a subject you know nothing about. Firstly, you've deleted my accurate comments:

1) Michale James is indeed an editor (www.grapevine-press.co.uk) of an underground magazine (or at least no one has seen it for years).

2) Go to Waterstone's. You will see many books written by Peter Goddard. His contributions to literature are as valid as David Farr's.

3) Jae Lee's appointement has yet to be officially announced.

4) The rumours about Ken Clarke are true (or at least it's true that there are rumours).

You also removed Jack Butler from alumni. I can garauntee that this slithery, unpleasant character is indeed that.

You did fail to spot the real mistakes.

1) Duncan Eaglesham is not Head of School.

2) FJ McIvor is not a member of Opus Dei.

I give you 48 hours to ammend the page as necessary and if you comply I will not demand a public apology.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 139.222.67.72 (talk • contribs) 07:58, July 31 2006 (UTC)


 * It is a key tenet of Wikipedia that information should be verifiable. You gave no references for any of your changes which is why I simply reverted them as being unencyclopaedic and posible vandalism.  If you can make referenced changes, then go ahead and do it.  In addition to references you need to make sure that people you add are notable.  David Underdown 09:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * That's all very well, but where are the references for all the other comments. You are quite simply discriminating against my (true) information. There's nothing wrong with information apatheid, as long as it's the wrong information that has to stand on the bus. As for notobility, it says there is no official policy, so how can you complain? Anyway references are over-rated. How do you know that the reference is correct. Just because I have a reference from Adolph doesn't mean that Jews are evil etc. ad absurdum.


 * The whole article should indeed be better referenced. I would be inclined to take out "Head of School" altogether as it changes each year (I assume), and does not seems to be shown even on the school website.  In general many articles on schools are in poor shape as pupils of the school (or rival schools) tend to add nonsense of one sort or another.  I've tended to take the approach of reverting obvious vandalism, or unsupported changes from the point after which I've come across the article (for whatever reason).  You've added Ian Simpson back to the almuni, I have no quibble about that per se, but the way you've done means the article the link point to is still pointing at the similarly  named architect.  What you really should do is add something like Ian Simpson to get it to point to a new (blank) article, completely unconnected with someone else.    David Underdown 15:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Choir
Yes, something really had to be done with that. I'm glad I came to your userpage as I've now heard of the fascinating practice of change ringing! Best wishes, MarkBuckles 09:23, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Well if you want to know more, this is a list of all towers in the US and these two churches in Boston both have change-ringing, http://www.theadvent.org/ and http://www.oldnorth.com/ and I'm sure they'd be glad to see a potential new recruit (or even just someone who wants to see how it's done). David Underdown 09:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

MLTC
I've reverted the content, it struck me as petulant to do that over the name. I'm trying to find somehting both open source and official that highlights the proper name of the Cadre, but it looks as if all the PR blurb sticks with the popular name. Will continue hacking.ALR 13:25, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Hi, I think of Audenshaw School as my article, so I would like to thank you for your tireless reverting of vandalism.--Bjw e bb (talk) 21:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem, it ended up on my watchlist when I was doing some RC patrolling, and I'v left it there since like all school articles it seems to attract more than its fair share of vandalism. David Underdown 08:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

korean war changes
just wanted to let you know that my changing of "sk" to "sk government" is correct in that sk was NOT by any stretch of the imagination of single, homogenous political entity. extensive resistance to that governemnt by many koreans took place. so the receipent of the help given by the UN forces really is best described as "sk government" in this context. next, when nk appears immediately afterwards, it is as "nk forces", not just the country of nk. if you prefer to keep you change, fine with me since it is a rather minor point. but if my points here make you think differently, maybe you could restore my edit. thanks. Hongkyongnae 23:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I take your point to an extent, but you left other instances in the article untouched, and some of the grammar around your changes would also have needed changing to reflec the adjustment, so the simplest thing was just to change it back, and it seemed preferable to me to have a consistent style throughout the article. This should really be discussed on the article talk page not here so more people have a chance to get involved in the discussion.  David Underdown 08:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Major assistance
Thanks for catching my slip-up with the reference to "B-flat major" over on the Gregorian chant page. After a crazy day of vandalism, it's easy to miss the small stuff! Peirigill 17:07, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Antonescu
Testimony about the Romanian withdraw from 1940 and how elements of the jewish population behaved then can be found in the book "Antonescu" by JC Dragan, which is already cited at the References paragraph. Oh, and thanks for fixing my grammaticaly incorrect sentences.

Anglican primates
Hmmm...so I did. But I can't recall what the sentence was supposed to be. Oh well...it will come back. Thanks.Masalai 01:28, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Black Sticks
Black Sticks is for both men and women national field hockey team. However, i want to seperate women to one page, so use Black Sticks for Women OR Women's Black Sticks. I want your opinion. Thanks --Aleen f 1  03:04, 7 October 2006 (UTC)


 * This issues had been left for month long, i need quick resolve, i found in NZ Official website, clearly they put "Black Sticks Men" and "Black Sticks Women". So, shall you nod to move it, i will move it. Thanks for reply. --Aleen f 1  03:48, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Done, have a check. :-) --Aleen f 1  10:59, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

English Reformation
Thank you for that. I was amazed at the number. It's in Haigh. Roger Arguile 11:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Stave/Staff
That's cool. So how is "stave" properly pronounced? Long or short A? SFT | Talk 16:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Women's Field Hockey
Hi, So if Women's Field Hockey and Men's Field Hockey are the same thing we do not need Women's basketball. Felix Portier 9:00 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[[Image:Hockeyroos vs Chile.jpg]]
Hi, Did you deleate this image Image:Hockeyroos vs Chile.jpg? Felix Portier 22 November 2006 9:06 (UTC)

3RR
Reverting clear vandalism is covered by a excemption to the rule. I don't see why abiding by copyright law shouldn't be excempt either. Copyright is something Wikipedia should stick by and if you think you need to revert for that, it's fine. Make sure you doublecheck when you do it. - Mgm|(talk) 08:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Kvernberget is looking like a hand-mill
You have changed this page back to an earlier version, destroying a text that was good. This text was newly translated and shortened from the Norwegian Wiki text. I dont know by whome, but it was correct. I wrote the Norwegian text. Please dont change things like this.krg 81.191.48.111 23:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Your input is requested
Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 17:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Anglicanism COTM
The Anglicanism Collaboration of the Month has been reactivated! Please consider going to the page to either vote for one of the nominated articles, or nominate one yourself. Thanks! Fishhead64 02:47, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Lack of edit-conflict warning
Thanks for your greeting. Your edit summary showed clearly what had happened. Happy 2007. Lima 14:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Trombone
Hi! The vandalism on the trombone article was already sorted. I hope you weren't lumping my removal of the translations (because I don't believe they belong in the lead and Wikipedia is not an English-foreign dictionary) in your description?! :-) Best wishes,  RobertG &#9836; talk 16:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I did a diff over a broad range of edits from this afternoon as it looked like Dar-Ape had a done a manual edit to remove a final bit of vandalism (rather than undo/rollback), and I wanted to be sure nothing else had been missed. I noticed that the list of names had gone, and another para had lost a few words, so I reverted, having overlooked your (rather cryptic) edit summary.  On the other hand, the foreign language names do serve some purpose as they (in particular the german) are used in piece titles and in scores so arguably it is useful information (despite WP not being a English-foreign dictionary as you say).  It's not really in the lead either - more by way of an extension to the infobox, it would have been nice to see it discussed on the talkpage, rather than a unilateral removal.  David Underdown 18:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

My userpage
Thanks for the revert. Can't these kids in school just listen to their teachers for a sec, rather than troll Wikipedia? Think of how greatly their grades would improve with the extra time spent on their work! Too much to ask, I suppose...Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 16:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * No worries, I think you may have done the same for me before anyway. David Underdown 16:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Evensong/Evening Prayer
David, perhaps we should have a discussion about how we can best improve the article Evening Prayer (Anglican) since we're both interested in the topic. Right now, it needs improvement, but I haven't figured out how best to tackle it. Heck, I'm surprised that Wikipedia didn't have an article for the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul (yesterday) until I wrote it last night. For some reason WikiProject Anglicanism is rather dead. But a lot of Anglican topics are in sore need of a fix up. Want to join me in brainstorming a bit? I've got a few pictures of Evensong services at Saint Thomas Church in New York City, where I'm a parishoner, that I will probably add to the article.&mdash;ExplorerCDT 10:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll do what I can, my main interest is int he musical side of things. To be honest I'm not sure how pictures would particularly improve the article Morning Prayer could also do with quite a lot of work.  I made a start on some revisions a while back in my user space User:David Underdown/Morning Prayer, but rather ran out of steam.  David Underdown 10:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I know what you mean about running out of steam. Pictures of a choral evensong service (just one or two) might just brighten the place up. I'm surprised, especially in the U.S. how many are people are cluelessly astounded when I say "choir of men and boys" or mention "boy sopranos". The musical side is what interests me most of all, too. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 10:21, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * P.S. If you get the chance, take a look at http://www.SaintThomasChurch.org/Stream.html for audio of services from Saint Thomas Church in NYC. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 10:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I've been meaning to have a listen to that, but I'm not supposed to too much at work, and I'm still on dial-up (yes really) at home, so I haven't got round to it yet. I suppose the "cathedral style" choir is more embedded in the culture in the UK (although vastly less commmon than it was in practice), with a large number of people being familiar with the King's Cambridge broadcast of Nine Lessons and Carols.

Your reverts to Carrier article blanking
I noticed serial blanking issue last night and awakened to find same articles hit again by similar IP address that you had reverted. I think it is same person and although it may be unintentional, it is continuing and warnings are not working. here is summary of edits from both IP addresses:

Summary of blanked text for Admin/Editor reference

144.138.25.145

 * 21:41, 4 February 2007 (hist) (diff) USS Nimitz (CVN-68)
 * 21:37, 4 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Aircraft carrier
 * 21:33, 4 February 2007 (hist) (diff) HMS Illustrious (R06)
 * 21:30, 4 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Invincible class aircraft carrier (top)
 * 21:27, 4 February 2007 (hist) (diff) HMS Ocean (L12) (top)
 * 21:20, 4 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Aircraft carrier
 * 21:17, 4 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Aircraft carrier
 * 21:14, 4 February 2007 (hist) (diff) HMS Ocean (L12)

For Admin/editor use:

144.138.25.220

 * 05:41, 5 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Royal Navy CVF programme
 * 04:24, 5 February 2007 (hist) (diff) HMS Ocean (L12)
 * 04:20, 5 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Invincible class aircraft carrier
 * 04:18, 5 February 2007 (hist) (diff) HMS Illustrious (R06)

HJ 13:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The problem is that a Whois (see the links at the bottom of each talkpage) report shows that they are both IP adresses belonging to Telstra so (given that he's already hit the articles from 2 different IPs) next time the guy comes online it could be from yet another different IP address (or equally someone else could be asigned one which he has previously used). Since it is several hours since the last vandalism, admins will be reluctant to block (particularly in view of the likelihood the block won't actually hit its target).  If vandalism continues it will probably be more effective to request semi-protection of the affected articles at WP:RPP which will prevent any IP or newly registered account from editing those articles for some period of time.  David Underdown 13:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Concur...hadn't thought of protecting the articles...great idea. HJ 14:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Here's today's attacks by same person....

This is third day of seeing either vandalism or clumsy editing on carrier related articles from now 3 different similar IP addresses. The latest being 144.139.59.173. Only one or two edits seem to be genuine, the rest remove the same images over and over. I have tried to follow this activity and summarize the activity with warnings on the successive tak pages, but have gotten no response from whoever is doing it.


 * 6:19, 6 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Invincible class aircraft carrier
 * 06:18, 6 February 2007 (hist) (diff) HMS Illustrious (R06)
 * 06:16, 6 February 2007 (hist) (diff) HMS Ocean (L12)

Rwendland thinks the vandal "is not keen on images of UK carriers near larger US carriers" and keeps deleting them daily. Regardless, without a reason given or discussion, it is crossing the line of vandalism. HJ 14:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Dates
I am sorry, I don't understand. The advice given to us is that date links are only useful if they enable someone to find something which relates to the article. I had put together the day, month and year as it might have been useful to discover what else happened on the same day. I may have misunderstood the guidance but I was trying to follow it. Do look it up and see if I am wrong. I don't have strong views; I was simply being compliant with the guidance as I read it. Roger Arguile 10:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

42 Articles
Hello there. Don't you think the 42 articles need a separate Wikipedia article?

Here's the only reference I have, not on hand, but maybe you have an online one?


 * Documents of the English Reformation ed. Gerald Bray (Cambridge, UK, 1994: James Clarke & Co., Ltd.; ISBN:0-2276-7930-X), pp. 284-311. Luis F. Gonzalez 18:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Breaking the redirect is easy, but before doing that I'd rather have the something for the Fourty-Two/Forty Two/Fourty Two/Forty-Two/42 articles article ready to go. Either way, have a good day. Luis F. Gonzalez 16:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

The City of Peterborough
Hello. I am a new user and have been making edits to the Peterborough article over the past week. User:80.3.253.138 has reverted my edits to Demographics on three occasions without explanation or entering into a dialogue although I have left messages on his talk page. As an experienced user I would appreciate it if you could let me know what you think. Thanks. 163.167.129.124 10:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC) (This address is not my own).


 * Frankly there have been so many edits over the past few days I've been finding it very hard to keep track of who's done what. It would be helpful if everyone could make greater use of the "show preview" button, rather than making a string of tiny edits, saving each one individually (it reduces the load on the server apart from anything else).  As you may have noticed I've had a few issues with User:80.3.253.138 myself on a previous occasion - he seems to have stopped that particular behaviour since the information was better cited, so that approach may also work here.  Finally, have you considered registering?  It's nicer talking to a name (which can be a pseudonym) than a number, and it actually gives you more privacy since your IP address is hidden from (virtually) everybody (which can give away a lot about where you're editing from etc), and you can give as much or as little information about yourself as you like, and of course you always get "credit" for you edits no matter where you log in from.  David Underdown 10:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Western Europ
Thanks for keeping an eye on the Cathedral article. Some people just don't seem to read what they are editting. --Amandajm 11:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Islam inside Hungarians
Hi, this article Islam inside Hungarians has nothing to do with Islam in Hungary but Hungarian muslims itself. plz removed the tag cause it's under construction. thanks West Bank Boy


 * I find it hard to see how such an article can be written in a form which will meet Wikipedia's policies. All I have done is bring the article to wider attention, if I'm wrong the article will be kept, and others will probably help you in the writing.  having looked through a numebr of your contributions, I'm not sure you really understand how Wikipedia works though.  David Underdown 12:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll get source from the hungarian islamic website to support this, i've join wiki 3 or 4 weeks ago so yeh still not experienced. West Bank Boy

Curse of Turan
here's the reference where i got from the hungarian islamic website.

''Through many centuries the Hungarian Muslims became a part of the Hungarian nation. When the independent religion commune had ended, they assimilated to the Hungarians in the point of population and in the point of religion into the Christians. The Islam religion life had finally ended during the reign of I Nagy Lajos. He damaged the last dzsámi in 1350, which was in the Nyírség. At the appearance of reformation ex Muslims who became Christian started to support the new. It was a long way from I Saint Stephen's letter to his sun Imre, which mentioned the settlement of the "Guests" until the appearance of law about the total assimilation.

In their language and dress they were the same then Hungarians, they were only different in their religion.'' from the hungarian islamic website. here thanks WBB.


 * Add it to the article then. David Underdown 09:12, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Webesite ref: if you say so!Roger Arguile 17:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

"Butting in"
Popping by with a helpful solution is never butting in. Thanks for the heads up. Cheers! -- Sig Pig  |SEND - OVER 10:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

ion antonescu image
Sorry for that....I think I fixed it now. Best regards, Eurocopter Tigre 15:08, 23 March 2007

English Reformation
I see you have been keeping an eye on my edits. Thanks you for checking up. I think I have finished for the moment - it may however be a bit long. Any suggestions? Roger Arguile 18:57, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think ISBNs are a good idea. Many books don't have them and it is yet another burden on editors. Most of the books I quote only ever get to one edition anyway. But thanks for the thought. Roger Arguile 16:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Ridley Hall
Thankyou for reversing the previous edit. Maybe one day I will be written about as being notable alumni, it'll not be for me to judge though! Gingerclan

Rate of Pay
The rates of pay I used on some of UK Military ranks came from the British Army’s official site choosing to revert articles because the content seems unlikely to you makes you seem insolent and quick to act with out checking facts. http://www.army.mod.uk/100regtrav/ranks_and_pay.htm --Climax Void 12:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thats ok, i should of i should of been more thoughra, ill double check next time thanks --Climax Void 16:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

2007 Iranian Hostage Situation
Thanks for fixing my spelling there, Etafly told me it was spelt wrong. Maurauth 11:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

RN Rates
David, sorry for not getting to this sooner, was away seeing family over the bank holiday. Generally a Leading Hand in the warfare branch, of any specialisation, would be addressed as a Leadsing Seaman, with the actual specialisation in brackets after the rate. Turney is a Seamanship specialist, as opposed to an Above Water Warfare or Electronic Warfare specialist. Seamanship specs are deck apes, dealing with upper deck husbandry, boat driving etc.

I'll catch up with the various articles but the whole rank/ rate structure series in WP needs some work.

ALR 18:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Ely Cathedral
Sir, I am writing this to ask permission of you to put Revd. Canon David Sills back on the list of canons to Ely Cathedral. I live in Ely, and am a regular visitor to the Cathedral. Canon Sills, Canon Hargrave and Canon Pritchard are very much integral to the life of the Cathedral - ok, maybe don't put every priest, vicar and the rest of the crew down, but certainly Canon Sills should be on that list, in my opinion. Your comments on this are welcome, and thank you for your time. Thor Malmjursson 13:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Bishop Michael & Illness
I have taken the step instead of putting it under Bishop of East Anglia, which doesn't look right to add the information to, of putting all the information about Bishop Michael and his illness, into an article listed under his name Michael Charles Evans, which links from Bishop of East Anglia. Please take a look at the new article and see if you think anything needs fixing. Thanks - Thor Malmjursson 13:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks fine, I've left a minimal description both under the Diocese and the Bishop article. Since it's a relatively new diocese, all the bishops are reasonably significant in the development of that diocese.  David Underdown 13:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

St. Peter's School, York
You recently added that ALL the Gunpowder plot conspirators were educated at this school. I cannot find any evidence for this (indeed I have found contrary evidence that says one was educated at Nottingham High School, another in Suffolk, etc.). If you have ebidence please revert but if this was simply vandalism on your part please refrain. 86.136.161.170 12:03, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I assume that you are Willbickfordsmith not logged in? Because the change to the number was included in other edits that appeared to include adding yourself to the article in violation of Wikipedia's policies on conflicts of interest I had no way of judging whether the rest of the edits made at the same time were better or worse, so I simply reverted to the version of the article prior.  I note that the assertion that all the Gunpowder plot conspiritors attended the school was originally added to the article on 2006-06-26 (not by me), although earlier revisions of the article were less definite.  Please be a little more careful before bandying about allegations of vandalism to established users - you will see that there are no other warnings on this talk-page.  Had you mentioned your evidence in your original edits, I would not have reverted it.  David Underdown 08:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * It was clearly unsourced, unreferenced and vandalism - sorry you don;t like that. Maybe this is your first warning, maybe it isn't, just learn from the experience and be a little more careful in future before editing in that manner. Thanks. 86.136.160.215 09:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * As first presented your change was also unsourced, unreferenced etc. I did not introduce that information to the article - I simply reverted to an older version which had gone unchallenged for over 6 months and was prior to some edits by the same suer who changed that information which clearly did not meet Wikipedia policy.  That is not vandalism.  Please look at the policies on assuming good faith.  David Underdown 09:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I will AGF when appropriate, As your edit history shows you often insert minor vandalism and get away with it because nobody else cares about the totally unnotable topics that seem to interest you. Just stop your vandalism and try to become a productive editor. Any further abuse and I will have to RFC you and your behaviour. 86.136.160.215 15:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm always happy to receive constructive criticism of my editing - could you provide some diffs to show these instances? David Underdown 16:06, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No, I'll save them all up for the RFC thanks. 86.136.160.215 19:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Fine, play it that way if you wish. I'm confident my conduct here will stand up to scrutiny.  You will of course need to find a second user who agrees with your concerns, and should bear in mind that the conduct of all parties involved in an RFC will be examined.  David Underdown 20:18, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Rob or Robert
Thanks for your message and for your kind words. Sorry for not getting back to you sooner. I've been busy. Regarding Rob(ert), I left a message on Jimbo's page. I don't really think it needs to go to the Foundation unless something else happens. I'm sure there are a lot of people who write letters to papers about how terrible Wikipedia is, and we can certainly survive that. Rob was (is) no friend of mine, but I wouldn't like to cause him any embarrassment in the real world, for all that. Cheers. Musical Linguist 18:16, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Mary (mother of Jesus)
Since I limit my watchlist, I have not included this article. If you think another intervention by me is really needed, let me know. Lima 14:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Peterborough
What is {{doi}|10.1093/ref:odnb/54713}}? These refs. look untidy and are inconsistent with others. 163.167.129.124 12:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Well done ;-) 163.167.129.124 15:38, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Lord's Prayer
I willingly accept your correction, without any need for me to check what you say. Clearly, I drew a wrong conclusion from the text as given at the beginning of services. Lima 08:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi
Nice attempt at humour at the end of the page. It's just a pity nobody knows who David Underdown is, resulting in your comment been unfunny. Also, why do you answer questions in such a rude, cocky manner with snide remarks such as "Did the information actually help anyone to understand what Radio 3 is about?"

It would also appear that you are never wrong, as shown by your arguement with Willbickfordsmith. Although you think you are superior to all other users, please bear in mind that there is a slight chance that you are in the wrong sometimes.

The fact that you are so quick to respond to criticism also tells me something. You are quite sad and do nothing but sit at your PC all day, waiting for people to make minor edits which you disagree with.

All the best, love Declan

XXX

(D. BULL 13:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC))

Funny how you pop up just after Declanthebullbull has edited my userpage. David Underdown 13:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's very funny indeed. Almost as hilarious as the comment you made about not been related to David Underworld, whatever the fuck his name is. (D. BULL 14:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC))

English Reformation
The article is not mine, though I feel somewhat possessive about it. So thank you for taking the trouble to make a few clean ups. (Who Declan is I really wonder!) Roger Arguile 17:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

William Arbuthnot
Mr. Underdown,
 * I've done some slight editing to William Arbuthnot (cavalry officer) and have confirmed much of his miltary career through his entry in the 1894 edition of The Annual Register by Edmund Burke (see ). Please inform me if I've made any errors and thank you for your time. MadMax 06:55, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, I've found a possible reference for George Alexander Arbuthnot (see ), although I'm unsure if the George Arbuthnot mentioned is George Alexander Arbuthnot as it does not state the specific command held by this George Arbuthnot other than "extra Aide-de-Camp". MadMax 07:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * David, please could you have a look at the entries I added to Articles for deletion/William Arbuthnot (cavalry officer) as I admit to being slightly baffled by how one can be a Colonel and Lieutenant Colonel etc. Regards Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 20:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Thorney Abbey
Why is this para. "irrelevant"?


 * Also, tracing its roots back to around AD 500 as a Saxon settlement, the existence of Thorney Abbey made Thorney an important ecclesiastical centre for a long period of time, and the village remains the most northerly point of the Diocese of Ely.

Thorney is a civil parish in the City of Peterborough and I don't think it comes under the arrangement in place south of the river.

Also, the claim that the "upgrade" was due to Katherine of Aragon is included in verifiable, printed sources.

163.167.129.124 12:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Perhaps I wrong about irrelevant then - I had forgotten that Thorney was part of the unitary authority (and that's not clear from the wording of the addition), so I didn't quite understand what the point was of adding it. In any case it made the parenthesis rather long and convoluted and would probably be better treated separately.


 * As to the influence or otehr of Katherine's burial place, sure it's believed to be true, but as I understand at no soruce definitvely states a direct link, so it is better to word it as I ahve done (and even that should probably be cited). If you do have a source to the contrary, the by all means add it, with the relevant cite.  David Underdown 12:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. Can you please reinstate the Thorney sentence though as you see fit. Cheers, 163.167.129.124 12:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I disagree David. The information was better as I had it in the first place. I don't wish to cause offence because I know you mean well, but it is quite irritating when everything I write is immediately reverted or revised quite substantially. I spent time finding and adding the information about Thorney Abbey, which I believe is relevant as Thorney is part of the city (and was previous to the inception of the unitary authority). I'll leave it on this occasion, but please bear this in mind in future. Cheers, 163.167.129.124 09:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * But it's not part of the diocese, which is what that article is about. David Underdown 09:42, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

James Pike edit
Your comment was: "(Remove duplicated statement re ordination of a womn as deacon (what is meant by first order deacon?))"

I think that the "first-order deacon" is what we now call a "transitional deacon". I'll double check on that, but should we use the term that was in use at the time or the current term to avoid confusion?

thanks --RFlynn1000 13:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

W Arbuthnot
Thanks David- I did see your comment- we have just been having some more confusion over Brigadier/Briagadier-General at Articles for deletion/Alexander George Arbuthnot (British army officer)- apparently Brigadier was only an appointment conferred on Colonels and not a substantive rank until just after World War II- do you know when it became a substantive rank? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 23:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Cathedral architecture
Hi David! I left a message on the talk page of the person who added it, identified only by number. --Amandajm 16:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Within a article of that nature, I would avoid naming two examples from the same country in a section that is making a general statement.
 * I have included, as stated a little further down, monastic and other churches that are within the architectural tradition of a cathedral. Oxford is, being ancient, monastic, and once twice the size it is now. Oxford was never simply a parish church.
 * You ahve a point about not having too many cathedrals from one country being used as an example. however, was Oxford ever actually bigger, theonly tuff I can find on their website says it actually used to be smaller!  David Underdown 09:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

English Reformation. I for one value your work Mr Underdown. However you seem to sprinkle commas rather liberally, and class simple good natured humour as "sarcastic". Nevertheless thank you for your help and advice. Frederick Jones

Garzo
It will be a sad day when one cannot defend others. No indeed, Mr. Jones, is not an good editor, technically speaking. But Garzo is not very polite, substantially speaking. I have commented on the definite article in the style page. I notice that you do not say why you support the policy. '1662 Prayer Book' sounds silly,as does 'Prayer books of edward VI' which is what literally we are expected to include. Thought police (the) need challenging.Roger Arguile 13:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

The Good article
I ought not to tell you this for you may take advantage of the awful confession: in English Reformation (sic) there are two headings with the definite article in them. The idea that The Elizabethan Settlement (sic) should be truncated so as to be compared with Elizabethan Music or Elizabethen sewerage sytems fails to notice that it has always had an article because it was not just any old settlement but a particular one. Now, you have the advantage over me. Those wicked assessors allowed the article to acquire GA status without noticing that it was so dreadfully flawed that orientalists would feel obliged to break off their important studies to attend to such a literary gaffe, if they knew. Of course, if you now fail to correct it, we may both be discovered and subjected to harrasment by the correct. Roger Arguile 14:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC) PS I am trading on your evidenced good humour to indulge in some unaccustomed irony.

I have just read MOS (headings) discussion page. I am not sure how the guideline still survives since it really does seem to me that there is a case for distinguishing. One example was the use of the term 'Allies': which Allies? 'The Allies' as used in WW2. My belief is that there are too many style police and not enough serious contributors. So thank you for your comment about footnotes. Roger Arguile 14:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Edit Summary
Sorry, I am aware of this and I will make a better effort to get in the habit of doing the edit summary. Cheers. SECisek 09:05, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Chair of St. Augustine
As a newbie, I screwed up the title of this article: "THE Chair of St. Augustine" is there any way to fix it at this point or do I just redirect? Thanks in advance for the advice.

P.S. I agree about editor Jones. - Send me info on how to cite better. I cite everything but I know I am not doing it right. Thank you.SECisek 19:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * OH NO, HE'S BACK! Be ready to do some serious editing!!! BTW, I cite like a pro now, Thanks. -- SECisek 15:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Orton Mere
I have now asked the other editor to revert his page move from Orton Mere to Orton Mere railway station. Also, 7 1/2 should be written as seven and a half, as I originally had it, in line with all other numbers under 10 throughout the article. 163.167.129.124 11:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Orton Mere
with the page move from Orton Mere to Orton Mere railway station the opportunity now exists for yourself and others to add as much information about the place at Orton Mere.
 * -=# Amos E Wolfe talk #=- 14:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The point is it is not just an NVR station, as anyone who has spent any time in the city would know. How many railway stations do you know that have "several moorings for boats navigating the River Nene" etc. The station is only one part of Orton Mere. I have again asked the other editor to revert the move as per my original request, as there has obviously been no discussion/ consensus reached for it. 163.167.129.124 08:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Robert King (conductor)
I noticed this is on your to-do list - can you confirm that this will be the final title? I've amended my SJC choir article to link to this. Stefan 20:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry and thanks
Sorry for my fool, wrong edit on RobertG's user page. I am so tired that I think that the user page is the talk page! Thanks for helping me edit back to the talk page. I also express my gratitude to your edit and correction on La Transfiguration de Notre-Seigneur Jesus-Christ. (Addaick 14:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC))

Saint-sulpice
Hi,

I noticed via User:Makemi that you attempted the correction re: Daniel Roth. I too have done some digging and found that your revert of "sneaky vandalism" did undo some fact in that Sophie-Veronique Cauchefer-Choplin is co-titular/assistant to Roth at Saint-Sulpice so I've included that too.

Best wishes,

–MDCollins (talk) 14:39, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


 * FYI you caused great concern, consternation, alarm in the Organ world by reporting incorrectly that Daniel Roth had died. He is very much alive and kicking thank you. Please get your facts correct before updating something so it can not be easily challenged.  I contacted the Roths thanks you to your mis-information and was told that Daniel is not only in good health but is alive and kicking. He is currently on concert tour in France.  I am sorry but your report as to Daniels passing is greatly exaggerated.  The correct information that you should have told was that his assistant had passed. Let us hope that Daniel lives to be more than 110. Vive les Roths. lvb


 * He was fixing it, not vandalizing it. Please learn how to read differences in reversions before snarking at people. Please also be sure to leave messages on users' talk pages, not their userpages. The page's title should begin User talk:, not User:. Thanks, Mak (talk)  03:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

42 Articles
Of course! I don't know what I was thinking - I set up the redirect myself! -- SECisek 12:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Doesn't matter, it so happens that we've been round that particular circle before, which is why I spotted it fairly quickly. David Underdown 13:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

La Transfiguration de Notre-Seigneur Jesus-Christ
I have thinked of this problem for a long time. You have edited the "The Transfiguration of Our Lord Jesus Christ" in the top paragraph, which links to the article about Jesus' transfiguration. I think that this link shoud be added in the "Background" section or editing a new section talking about it instead of appearing on the top paragraph. What's your view?(Addaick 09:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC))
 * Well normally we link on first mention, but that wouldn't exclude also giving a brief overview elsewhere in the article. David Underdown 09:22, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

David Hill's DOB
I have added a ref to the DOB. Hope that can help you. In the reference in question they do not mention anything else than his birthday & age. Cheers, 132.204.208.191 11:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Lord's Prayer
Yes, to you that would be convenient, since you're Anglican. God knows Anglicans were the first to translate the prayer... Unbiased people would see the original words to prayer for what they are. But go right ahead since it makes you feel better about yourself. Have a nice day. --Garzj019 15:42, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

BCP
We seem to have arrived at an edit war. Unfortunately quite gross errors have crept in as a result of all of this. An instance is the claim that the 1552 book was the result of a tumult. This is quite wrong. Cranmer's purpose was implicit in 1549 as McCulloch makes clear. The introduction did not require the alterations that the previous editors have made. It is frankly, getting worse. Roger Arguile 14:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I fear that I simply do not understand all this huge amount of information in an introduction. Moreover, there are grave errors. The word 'Mass' appears in the 1549 version (by way of concession) but not subsequently. Having been away I am not sure who has done what but it frankly did not deserve dealing with by those who have not, I am afraid, read the whole article. Roger Arguile 14:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

My apologies for putting my message on the wrong page. I think that WUW replaced a small degree of obscurity with an unhelpful list and too much detail. It also had two history headings. I confess that I found it difficult to amend what has itself its own obscurities. I shall have another look. Roger Arguile 14:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I notice, trying to follow my own advice, that what you have slightly amended and what I produced as a revsion of WUW's work, is a repetition. I don't think it is necessary. However, what is necessary is a little introduction on theology which I shall add. (I remain unconvinced.) Roger Arguile 14:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I am happy with what you have done and have added only a little. what wuwc will make of it, one hesitates to ask.

I have done more, removing, I am afraid your changes. If we are really to use simple terms in the intro, we must do it fully. My theological assertions can be found extended, I think - I shall check - later on. Roger Arguile 15:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I am hapy with that what wuwc will make of it, one hesitates to ask. Roger Arguile 15:33, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Peterborough
Peterborough is a current (somewhat neglected) featured article candidate. If you feel you can lend your support please do so. Cheers, Chrisieboy 19:53, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I really don't think it's the case that as a past contributor to the article you should do no more than comment. Cheers anyway, Chrisieboy 13:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Scrolling template
Fair enough; I've never noticed any particular problems with the scrolling template, but reflist|2 will do instead. DWaterson 10:59, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

You're in the news
This revert has earned you a mention in the news. Friday's edition of Crikey contains an article by Helen Razer entitled Putting the poo bum dicky wee wee into Wikipedia, the opening paragraph of which is: "Kevin Andrews smells strongly of Roquefort cheese and hate. Or, at least, he did until some upright soul thought to reverse my amendments to the Minister's Wikipedia page." Hesperian 11:53, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

St Ed
Hey, I've now fully unprotected the article so I'd like to encourage you to make the changes you've been discussing on the talk page. Please let me know as soon as the hit-and-run brigade show up again. All the best The Rambling Man 09:04, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks! Terrance Lindall 15:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)