User talk:Dodger67/Archive 1

Welcome!
welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users - please check it out! If you need help, visit Questions or place   on this page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. -Fnlayson 15:24, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

removal of external links
I was being bold. If you think that any of the links that were removed should not have been removed, I am more than willing to discuss it on the talk page. I do not believe that any edit has to be prejustified on the talk page (unless the article is very controversial or sprotected or something like that). In any case, if you require a justification, it is the policy in WP:LINKS and Wikipedia is not a repository of links. - htonl 11:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem! Enjoy editing Wikipedia. - htonl (talk) 21:38, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Amateur radio article edit - callsigns
Just wanted to say....thank you!! (Your change did make things a LOT better there!) Edit Centric (talk) 10:39, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

January 2008
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. -- Pepve (talk) 17:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the innapropriate response. I am coming to the Koek article from the Afrikaans perspective. I don't know Dutch well at all. In Afrikaans "koek" is essentially the same as the English "cake". "Cake" is a better redirect than "cookie". I can illustrate my point like this: If you said in Afrikaans "Daar is koek op die tafel" (There is cake on the table) and in fact there are only cookies - Afrikaans speakers would reply that there is no cake, only cookies "koekies". Cookies are regarded as something separate from cake. Afrikaans uses "koek" for things like "Verjaarsdagkoek" (Birthday Cake), "Vrugtekoek" (Fruitcake), "Sjokoladekoek" (Chocolate Cake) and so on.


 * That's alright. My reaction was a bit on the harsh side, sorry for that. Thanks for explaining the word koek in Afrikaans, I assumed it would be more similar to Dutch. (I'm usually able to understand quite some Afrikaans words.) Koek in dutch generally means cookie, although it might refer to very basic cakes (like boterkoek). If I said: "Er is koek op de tafel," people would be expecting cookies. Examples are on the Dutch wikipedia article. Maybe we should make Koek a disambiguation page, like:
 * Koek is a Dutch and an Afrikaans word, it may mean: Cake (common Afrikaans translation)Cookie (common Dutch translation)
 * (Although I'm not too sure about the bits in parentheses, being as Wikipedia is not a dictionary.) What do you think? -- Pepve (talk) 00:47, 16 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Pepve. There are many such differences between Afrikaans and Nederlands. Maybe there can be an article about them as a whole - if it is within Wikipedia policy to have "word list" articles. Some such differences can even be socially embarrasing! Afrikaans has "preserved" a lot of vocabulary from 17th and 18th century South Hollandic dialect - usually with modified spelling and pronounciation.


 * I wonder if there really is much point to having a "Koek" article at all in the English wikipedia? Just as a matter of curiosity, do you know what "koek" is in Vlaams? Roger (talk) 13:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, there is a Differences between Spanish and Portuguese article, so it should be viable for Afrikaans and Dutch. Their articles already have sections on it. I like Koek as a redirect, it won't anyone this way. Koek in Vlaams generally means the same as in Dutch, although it might have a different connotation. Dutch and Vlaams even share a dictionary, words almost always have the same meaning. And note that Vlamingen on average are better at Dutch than Nederlanders. They always beat is in an annual spelling contest... :-) -- Pepve (talk) 01:11, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Edits to Amateur Radio
In your edit summary, you asked "pls do not mutilate the example." I assure you that this is not the intent here. The intent is to present the information in a concise, encyclopedic manner. Instead of citing a US example as you suggested, I went ahead and incorporated the text into your example, as again not every country has the same license specifics.

In the future, please try to assume good faith when completing an edit summary, and above all, HAVE FUN!! Edit Centric (talk) 02:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

AWB Middelburg visit
Hello, I think I saw this advertised on the AWB events page http://www.awb.co.za/gebeureblad_e.htm                                                   Middelburg (aanwysings sal aangebring word)

3 April 2008 – 7nm

Spreekers: Mnr. Eugene Terre Blanche

Prokureur Andrè Visagie

But I wasn't sure whether to link/source this site, because of it's offensive nature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Teatreez (talk • contribs) 18:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the link. Unfortunately it does not conclusively answer the question. It seems that the AWB is unaware that there are two towns in SA called Middleburg, one in Mpumalanga and one in the Eastern Cape. I changed the info in the article to Mpumalanga, based on the total absence of "talk on the street" in Middleburg EC. Also Mpumalanga is a "traditional" support area for the AWB whereas they have never had a really significant presence in the EC in the past. Middleburg Mpumalanga also fits in the general area of the other venues of ET's "tour" while Middleburg EC is at least a whole day's drive away from any of the other places. Either way, the definitive answer will be in tomorrow's news.Roger (talk) 09:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks for you're help, Mpumalanga does seems more likely.Teatreez (talk) 14:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

thanks for your vote
I have refactored your vote in my little straw poll on Village pump (miscellaneous). May I have your permission, please, to go 1 step farther and change your vote from "neither" to "disambiguate"? 69.140.152.55 (talk) 01:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes you are welcome to do that. But your poll is in fact unecessary because the normal "standard" practice here on WP is to always disambiguate such terms. There really is nothing to discuss about it. Roger (talk) 12:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

SA culture
nice edits on that topic :) Equine-man (talk) 08:27, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I do what I can to clean it up - I hope I did ok in terms of NPOV Roger (talk) 08:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Fclass
Hi. User:Fclass was blocked indefinitely last week and last night the IP was blocked for a year. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 17:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

55 vs 44 gallon drum
Hello, I've reopened the can of worms that is the 55 vs 44 gallon drum argument which you were involved in a while ago. Since you were involved before the argument fizzled out without a conclusion, I thought you might like to include your input again. Thanks, Phasmatisnox (talk) 16:24, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

RE: Cullinan
The official term used is "owned by Her Majesty as sovereign and kept in trust for her successors". However using this term on every page is too long and tedious and thus E II is used. This isn't really a problem though as the Elizabeth II of UK article clearly states as much. Best, --Cameron* 18:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Karoo - Removal of external link
I would like to dispute the removal of an external link on the Karoo page. The link text itself is not written in a promotional way and valid information about the Karoo is given. Regards Sasch (talk) 11:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

A400M
I removed the following from the A400M High performance turboprop engines will allow operation in a civil air traffic control environment. mainly because it does not make sense, as you have added it back in any chance of explaining what engines has to do with operating in a civil air traffic environment as the sentence is written. Thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 10:59, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Put it down to finger trouble - seems like I ended up reverting the revert of the revert that I actually wanted to revert! Confusion Rules! LOL! Roger (talk) 11:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * No problems - had me confused. MilborneOne (talk) 18:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, with my reversion I was making no precise judgments on similarities/differences between the A400M and the C-17, other than that they're both cargo airlifters, and the fact that the IP address that removed it originally left no explanation, AND was registered to Boeing (i.e., had the potential to be a subtle vandal edit by an employee at a competing firm). Best, umrguy  42  18:58, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Well Cessna Caravan is also a "cargolifter" and so is the Antonov 124. That fact alone is not sufficient to be called "comparable". Other factors such as size, role, etc. need to be taken into consideration. The A400 is intended to be a replacement/suplement for C130 and similar in-theater tactical transports while the C17 is doing the same for C141 heavyweight intercontinental strategic transports.

Afrikaans
Hi there. With regards to your recent change to the Afrikaan article (in which you undid an undo that I did) I can see why it was changed originally because the white settlers were not going into an unpopulated area. So, calling them "Dutch" may be incorrect but I think it's even more incorrect to infer that they moved into unpopulated land. I'm going to change it to white settlers, or Afrikaners. Feel free to change if you have a better suggestion. Cheers! Rbakker99 (talk) 08:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Template:African American ethnicity
Hello. You expressed an interest in the pictures in the photo montage in Template:African American ethnicity that appears in the article African American.

I'd like to settle on some new pictures in the montage, and I'd appreciate your opinion. Please join the discussion at Template talk:African American ethnicity.

Thank you. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 03:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Cuito
Hi. Good work on the Cuito article lately, it looks like it's nearly a full-time job to keep some of the propaganda out. That last change you reverted was particularly amusing, what with the G6 claim amongst the other outrageous numbers. Honestly, if some of the pro-Cuban stuff that's come out since the war was true, the SAAF would have lost twice as many aircraft as it had in its entire inventory! Yet the claims still persist. So keep up the good work. &mdash; Impi (talk) 20:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid there's not much writing outside of guys like Steenkamp and Heitman that goes into proper detail on Orders of Battle and whatnot. Most other authors on this subject are just ideologues, more interested in grinding their own particular axe than in the real facts of the battle. This new editor is no different, judging by the sources he relies on and the way he starts to obfuscate when the obvious flaws in his claims are pointed out. It is immensely frustrating and a serious waste of everyone's time. The biggest culprit is that urrib2000 site, which pretty much every pro-Cuban wannabe relies on despite it being an obvious packet of lies and misinformation. But I suppose the 9/11 conspiracy theories are proof enough that reason and rationality aren't in strong supply these days. &mdash; Impi (talk) 14:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

RE: New article Thunder City
Great, I will go over the article and look for any infoboxes, categories, stub icons etc. that should go with it. Any other style issues, or policy issues you need help with, regarding this article? - Marcusmax ( speak ) 21:15, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I put in what I can at the time, but the article should probably be expanded before a relevant infobox can be found. Maybe add a detailed history section, or info about past incidents etc. - Marcusmax ( speak ) 21:39, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for creating it. I had no idea they existed. (I wish I lived in Cape Town!) Any help I can be, let me know. (BTW, I watchlisted it for vandal patrol.)  TREKphiler   hit me ♠  23:43, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Help?
Looking at this, I'm wondering if you can translate Mokopa & Ingwe. Thanx. TREKphiler  hit me ♠  12:07, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Worth a shot to ask. Thanx anyhow. And I learned something about the mamba I didn't know, besides. ;) TREKphiler   hit me ♠  13:13, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Kgalema Motlanthe
I see you reverted my edit to the article Kgalema Motlanthe. I also see you are interested in topics relating to South Africa. However, my edit to Kgalema Motlanthe was perfectly justified. The 'reference' to how he pronounces his own name is termed a note. The article references would be the books, urls and publications used several times in the referencing of the article. See todays featured article, Group (mathematics). Take note of how the references and notes sections are separated. Other articles also use a similar format. The references section may be known as the Notes section, especially in a case such as with the article on Kgalema Motlanthe. The "reference" or inline citation is essentially a foot-note, and should be treated as such. Elucidate ( light up ) 09:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Non-Country specific information
Totally agree with you Dodger (re: Wheelchair and removal of UK information (edit 250189625) however the point is its already country specific. Its massivley biased towards the US (e.g. EPW is a US only term, Building access section discusses US policy, and public transport gives an example from the US). I was attempting to give a more global view. I think it would have been better to edit than simply remove my edits. I'm afraid you will have to remove the Building access section, and the public access section if this is your reasoning for the deletion. Willwade (talk) 14:37, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Karoo
Thanks for fixing the line breaks in the Hardy poem I added to the entry karoo. I wasn't sure how to do this myself (I should have looked it up). --PloniAlmoni (talk) 15:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Afrikaans as analytic language
You recently undid a change I made to the Afrikaans grammar page. To clarify, I do not at all disagree with the statements made in the article. You deem it self evident from the article that Afrikaans is one of the most analytic of the Indo-European languages, but respectfully, in my opinion, whether it is self evident or not is irrelevant. I feel that statements like one of the most and compared to should be qualified with references, otherwise the content might seem to be original research, because it cannot be corroborated from a reliable source. I would like to discuss the matter further on the talk page, because I think adding the fact tag again could lead to someone finding a reliable reference to add to the article. payxystaxna (talk) 14:14, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Beverage can
Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. --Kozuch (talk) 16:28, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Disruptive reversion
The edit you reverted on MoS was harmless, and arguably had some value, even tho i would not have made or encouraged it. Your pointless reversion was a disruptive edit, gives the appearance of stemming from PoV, and is likely to trigger counter-reversion. If you should revert a second time, i will block you for edit warring in accordance with the provision of 3RR that says 3 is not always permissible. --Jerzy•t 21:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)  Hello,. There is a response from me, below the message you left in the "MOS" section of my talk page. You can [ remove this User:Jerzy/tbnh-generated notice] at any time by removing the markup that begins and ends " < !-- START Jerzy/tbnh -->" and " < !-- Jerzy/tbnh END -->". --Thanks, Jerzy•t 09:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Jonty Rhodes
Hi. I've reverted back to my version, can we please discuss this on Talk:Jonty Rhodes? Thanks. Zunaid 10:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

– xeno  ( talk ) 15:13, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Suggested move: Battle of Cassinga to Cassinga massacre
Hi. Since you've been active on the discussion page for the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale recently, I thought you might be interested in the discussion around the requested move of Battle of Cassinga to a new title of Cassinga massacre. The discussion has only attracted three editors so far (including myself), and I think it would be beneficial to have the input there of some of the more regular contributors to Border War articles. &mdash; Impi (talk) 10:31, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Your changes to "Transvaal"
You recently made changes to the article "Transvaal". I reverted them -- We do have an article title "South African Republic." I will add a disambiguation-link to make this clear. Thanks for your input, you made a good point! (Reply here, you're on my watchlist now)Seb az86556 (talk) 03:42, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Question About Castro Article
Since you have expressed interest in the Fidel_Castro article in the past, I wonder if you would look at Talk:Fidel_Castro, as I truly cannot understand the reasoning of User:Redthoreau. Thanks, Cerberus (talk) 20:14, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Are you a sock puppet of BilCat?
You appear to be a sock puppet of BilCat? It is a fact that Saxony is not on the island of England. Skeptical Dude (talk) 20:50, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

President of South Africa
Hi, I saw your change to the numbering of the post-apartheid presidents. You're right that the numbering was potentially confusing; however I've never seen a source that conflates the numbering of the three different types of presidents of South Africa, i.e. ceremonial State Presidents, executive State Presidents, and post-apartheid Presidents. I've tried to clarify this in the info boxes, in the process partly undoing the change you made, which is why I'm letting you know here. I changed the Mandela page to say that he was "1st post-apartheid" president, and the others similarly. Regards, Zaian (talk) 18:37, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Explanation of "CW"
Hi. I saw and agree with your edits of my edit (yawn) of the Morse reference in the Amateur Radio entry. Your wording is much more straight forward. What I was trying to get to with the "now" wording was the fact that, when Morse was first used in Ham Radio, it was used with spark gap transmitters, which were decidedly not CW. However, I think that probably puts too fine of a point on things. A purist could argue with your edit - but that ain't me, and I think it ended up at a good place. 73 WA5PSA Briefer (talk) 21:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Municipalities and place names
You said: "The actual town name is more useful. A municipality is an organ of government that wields authority over a defined area whereas a town is a specific place" in an edit summary at South African Airways

First and foremost people usually refer to places in "Houston, Texas" even though Houston is a geographically large area. New York City is a geographically large area, yet New York City needs to be mentioned in articles dealing about things about NYC. In many instances it is more important to refer to the municipality than to the neighborhood/suburb/"town".

For instance it is more important to say Continental Airlines is headquartered in Houston than in Downtown Houston, even though Houston is a very large municipality, while Downtown is a specific area. Other companies in Houston are based in other business districts or neighborhoods, but usually they are first and foremost based in Houston. However I have no problem with mentioning Kempton Park in the South African Airways article, so I kept that. BTW, the map is required as a reference to prove that the airport is located in the municipality (and in the Kempton Park area too).

From my understanding in South Africa municipalities typically govern several distinct communities ("towns") - But the communities have no legal jurisdiction. They essentially are neighborhoods and communities of the larger municipality. American cities, British cities, etc. also have many different communities within their borders. Kingwood is a distinct community, but it is clearly within the city limits of Houston, so places in Kingwood are first and foremost in "Houston, Texas" WhisperToMe (talk) 00:38, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

point well taken...
So... could you go through the article and make any changes you see fit (if there are any)? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 18:57, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

RE: MeerKAT photos
Hi Rodger,

In respone to your question at Talk:MeerKAT. The best way to post the photos would be to upload them to Commons at, just click on It is entirely my own work if they are your own photos and then fill in the form. --NJR_ZA (talk) 14:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Flickr photo license
Nice photos you have there on Flickr. I'd love to upload those, but first you will need to change the license on them to something other than all rights reserved. The Attribution-ShareAlike Creative Commons licence will be good. Flickr gives you an option to edit the license under Additional Information on the photos.


 * Additional Information
 * All rights reserved (edit)

If you can change the license on Image0021, Image0019, Image0018, Image0017,Image0010, Image0009 and Image0008 and let me know when it is done, then I can use Flickr2Commons to upload the photos with attribution to you. --NJR_ZA (talk) 19:41, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

MeerKAT images on commons
OK, I have uploaded some of you Flickr photos, you will find them at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:MeerKAT. I have also added a commonscat link from the wikipedia article to commons an have added one of the photos to the infobox on the wikipedia article. --NJR_ZA (talk) 20:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Schwa
Why don't you like my edits to schwa? I have explained them in my last edit summary. WP:Hatnotes should not link to articles other than their desired target and the symbol is specifically mentioned, so why not link to it? I don't want to get into an edit war and I'm happy to discuss, but on what grounds do you disagree with my edits. Cheers, — sligocki (talk) 22:24, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Ares I-X
Hi Dodger67,

I reverted one of your edits on Ares I-X here. The stage of the rocket is actually named "Upper Stage Simulator". This has confused a few others since it does look like this is actually just a description of "a" simulator of a rocket's upper stage, which it is, but this simulated upper stage also happens to be officially name "Upper Stage Simulator". Not the most creative naming convention out there... In any event, I just wanted to explain the revert, as you were doing the right thing. Hiberniantears (talk) 17:03, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Paul Ngobeni
Thank you for reverting that half-baked stuff a couple of days ago. I will be putting in a number of edits over the next few days which will document Mr Ngobeni's woes quite comprehensively. Every single fact will be backed by (mostly) a government body reference, so I am sure you will have no problems with it. It is actually quite amazing how thoroughly one's life is documented in the USA, and how easily available that documentation is. I even have a copy of his divorce decree, which goes into the personal details, such as the medication that his ex-wife takes, and so on.

By the way, referring to your adding Paul Ngobeni to "South African Lawyers", I don't think that is strictly correct. He is certainly not licensed to practise law in ZA. I am not even sure whether his academic qualifications are recognised. He is also no longer licensed to practise in the USA, so he is not a lawyer anywhere.

Groetnis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pietopper (talk • contribs) 21:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Kimberley, Northern Cape - schools
Thanks for your concern about "pointless POV subdivision" with regard to Perseverance and Gore Browne schools in Kimberley. I have however suggested a slightly different way of subdividing because it reflects an important historical situation which resulted in the closing of these schools. Some people are under the impression that Perseverance still exists which is not the case. Hope you approve the new subdivision. All the best. Blarcrean (talk) 21:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Signing warnings
Hi. Thanks for the vandal patrolling. It is really helpful to admins like myself when following up on WP:AIV reports if when folks leave u3, u4, and u4im messages like you did on user talk: 99.72.39.220 that there be a signature with a timestamp ( ~ ) after the warning so we can easily see when the last warning was left. This is especially important on IP editors. Otherwise we have to match the warning to the history and compare that to the last edit, with is about twice as complex. That being said, thanks for the warnings being issued. Most folks like you tend to use Twinkle to add such warnings. It almost automates the issuing of warnings and such, and it ensures that you sign. Check it out. Please keep up the great work. Toddst1 (talk) 13:08, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Working the numbers
Alot of bio articles of Presidents & Prime Ministers use the numbering in the content & infoboxes. Exampls are the US Presidents, Vice Presidents, Canadian Prime Ministers. GoodDay (talk) 21:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Its complicated in the case of South Africa. In the media and elswhere one is often left with the impression that the country has only existed since 1994. In reality SA has had Presidents since 1961 - first they were ceremonial only then they became executive and then came the post apartheid era. We had a discussion about the numbering of presidents issue on the wikiproject some time ago and came up with the current system where the phrase "#th post apartheid president" was decided. Please don't change the consensus position without first discussing the issue - prefereably at the Wikiproject South Africa page. Roger (talk) 22:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * But I've placed State President with those 1961-1994 fellows, in the contents. I believe a post apartheid note would help clarifiy things for Mandela & his successors. GoodDay (talk) 22:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thats is how it was before you started fiddling with it today. Please take a look at Talk:President_of_South_Africa. I mean no offence but you are obviously not South African. I think we South Africans have a clearer understanding of our own history and systems of government - we don't need "outsiders" messing with our consensus. Roger (talk) 22:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The President of South Africa article content needs to have the State Presidents excluded. However, I'll respect this consensus & revert to your previous revert. GoodDay (talk) 22:33, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Paper size
Please contribute a better wording for my edit on Paper size, or are you making some other point here? patsw (talk) 01:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Fanfold is not a Paper Size. What is so hard to understand about that? Fanfold paper is available in a variety of sizes - (Letter, A4, A3, etc.as well as many custom sizes for invoices and other business documents - often in carbonless duplicate/triplicate form). It differs from other paper in that the pages are connected to each other in a continous folded "string of sheets" separated by perforations, other ways paper is "presented" (here I need a better word) is as "separate cut sheets" as used in laser printers, copiers etc, "bound in books", "glued at one edge but removable" as in notepads etc. But the point remains that any of those "presentations" of paper are available in a variety of sizes. Roger (talk) 09:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Denel group restructuring
Hi Rodger, thanks for the heads up, I'll try help out where I can to get our coverage of Denel back to scratch. Impi (talk) 18:11, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism from 66.228.80.2
I just wanted to inform you, that User 66.228.80.2 has made yet more unconstructive edits to wikipedia here and here. I'm not sure what the normal procedure is in this case but given this IP's history, wouldn't it make sense to just block it permanently?--U5K0 (talk) 18:41, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Paralympics Task Force
Started a Paralympics task force: WikiProject Olympics/Paralympics. Please feel free to edit and or join. Bib (talk) 10:46, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Ping
I have sent you an e-mail. --Tenmei (talk) 17:53, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Didn't get it. What is it about? Roger (talk) 07:28, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Great Britain at the 1992 Winter Paralympics
I've replied to your comment on the talk page. Sorry if my words there seem a bit harsh, I'm sure you had a genuine concern over the naming of the article, but there is a need to be firm to stop yet another debate on the topic from users who may have read your comment. Basement12 (T.C) 13:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

hk 416
Did you read the discussion about 416 before readding turkish army section ??Which i explained why? And why you didn't post anything before readding?

i deleted the section because source was old (aprox. 2 years)

Please answer because TR army " will not " use 416.project is cancelled.

one last note ,i agree that my english isnt that good (Well i am turkish) and youre older than me but if you want to discuss, then please do that at 416 discussion.

With my regards, ILGAROD 212.253.235.95 (talk) 15:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Selected bibliography at Code-switching
Thank you for your edits to Code-switching. Your comments are welcome at Talk:Code-switching. Best, Cnilep (talk) 18:22, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Reply
You're very welcome. I'm glad you've created such a project. Bib (talk) 15:17, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Bot to tag with WikiProject banner
The bot you suggested at Bot requests, already exists. See my reply at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disability. Bib (talk) 09:11, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion with the project tagging
Hey Dodger67, as I mentioned at the bot request, I'm sorry if I confused you, and I'll be happy to do a simple project tagging of just Category:Disability (not it's subcategories, that would be too many unrelated page). I can take care of all the confusing settings for you. Feel free to reply here or on any of the other pages we've talked on (I'll be watching all of them). Good luck with your WikiProject! - EdoDodo  talk 15:20, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thats a great idea - tagging just the 1st level pages to begin with. Thanks! I'm an experienced content editor, a novice at discussing policy and MoS issues, but a complete newbie at the technicalities. Roger (talk) 15:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Great, just these pages should give your project some first pages to start off with, and then you can always ask me if you would like me to tag more categories. I'll get to work right away, if it's not done by this evening I'll finish off tomorrow. - EdoDodo  talk 15:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * ((tick}} Should be done with Category:Disability, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you would like me to tag more categories. - EdoDodo  talk 17:00, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Popular pages
I've added WikiProject Disability in the request que for Popular pages statistics. If the request is accepted before July 1, the statistics will be available for the WikiProject on August 1. (Example on Popular pages statistics: Paralympics/Popular pages.) Up to 1500 popular pages can be displayed, and I've currently requested 1000 displayed. If you want to edit the request you can visit the request que and enter the code ****** to edit. Please delete the code from this user talk when you've noted it down elsewhere. Bib (talk) 08:59, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Brahmos
You recently added a few tags to the export section of the BrahMos article under the impression it was lacking sources. I have re-worded the section (as it was the exact copy of the article referenced) and I added another reference from a reliable source. If you could take a look at the section in question and let me know what you think, that would be great. Thanks, Vedant (talk) 18:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reading the edit. Unfortunately a lot of these articles have copyvios where entire paragraphs are copied. Not only is this illegal, it sometimes can hurt the flow of an article. If you come across any more issues, please let me know. Thanks, Vedant (talk) 06:40, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Ship Names
Hi Dodger. I think is is standard practice to write ship names in italics while the prefix is in upper-case normal text. Refer Naming conventions (ships). If you agree - please undo your edit on the South African Navy page. Rgds. Farawayman (talk) 11:23, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Joseph Merrick
Hello, as a member of WikiProject Disability, I was wondering if you would do me the favour of having a quick look at Joseph Merrick, an article I'm currently working on. Merrick (aka the Elephant Man) was famous for his physical deformities and was exhibited as a "freak" in Victorian England. Another editor suggested that I ask the advice of the members of the disability project with regard to whether or not the language used in the article is appropriate. For example, I'm trying to avoid labelling Merrick as a freak, but have still mentioned freak shows. In your opinion is this appropriate? I'd appreciate any input if you have the time. Don't worry if not. The project talkpage didn't look that active, so I thought I'd ask you directly, and I'm also asking User:Bib. Thanks, -- Beloved Freak  23:49, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I've read it and I think its a really good article. Well done! Roger (talk) 10:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much! No problem with any of the language used?-- Beloved Freak  10:48, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Nothing struck me as inappropriate. But then I am in principle opposed to using PC language on linguistic grounds and I also intensely dislike the intellectual dishonesty inherent in political correctness used for its own sake. You'll get no brownie points for calling me "differently abled" but I will give you a dirty look if you say I'm "wheelchair bound". But that's just me - others may of course disagree. Roger (talk) 11:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Ha, thanks. I think it's hard to strike that balance sometimes especially when some terms are ultra-PC in some countries but actually considered quite offensive in others. I can't imagine hearing someone use the term "mentally retarded" in the UK without being offensive, but it's apparently quite acceptable in the US. Anyway, I just wanted to cover all bases. It was pointed out to me that people may be more likely to read certain articles if they have a personal connection ie. that someone with deformities similar to Merrick's might be even more drawn to the article, so I didn't want to inadvertently call someone (by association) a freak in my zeal for telling good story! Again, thanks for your input.-- Beloved Freak  11:52, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm going to post a (suitably redacted version) of this discussion to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disability so that others may also participate - just because the projects talk page is not as busy as others is no reason to avoid it - the project is still very new so traffic will hopefully increase - and the best way to increase it is to use it! Please continue the conversation there. Roger (talk) 12:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks that makes sense. I didn't realise the project was so new. I've added myself as there are some related articles I'd like to work on at some point.-- Beloved Freak  12:14, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Brain Drain
Hi, I see you undid my edits to the Brain Drain page, under United States. I am a rural researcher and there are no verifiable sources to substantiate the "This has negatively impacted rural communities in the U.S." claim. I am wondering why you did so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.38.102 (talk) 05:35, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The part that I found odd was the reference to high school graduates when the entire rest of the article is about university graduates in knowlege professions. I live in a rural village in South Africa, we have entire communities where nobody has and qualification higher than a high school certificate. Your edit implied that US rural communities don't even have HS graduates - I find that very hard to believe. Roger (talk) 06:48, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't know what part of my edits implied that "US rural communities don't even have HS graduates." There is a statement there now: "This has negatively impacted rural communities in the U.S." This is just NOT true. Rural communities have nearly ALL lost their HS graduates, some of these towns are still gaining population and some are losing. This is an unverified claim and just not substantiated by research. However, that comment you did not remove. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.38.102 (talk) 23:16, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

There are many research articles and books here in the US that use the term to only mean high school graduates. That is what I mean when I edited to include "The use of the brain drain term in the United States tends to be a narrow definition encompassing just high school graduates, rather than those people with high skills and/or education." The book 'Hollowing out the Middle' by Patrick Carr also uses this narrow definition. I totally agree with you, and the worldwide definition of college graduates, which makes it so frustrating when here in the US the rural researchers are always talking about high school. I don't know how they can call it a brain drain when the young high school children have some of the lowest education and skills in the country. I only wanted to clarify the use of this term in the United States and its misuse. Thanks for responding. I hope you will re-allow my edits to remain to put this in to context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.38.102 (talk) 20:14, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

United States Sports Academy awards
Hello... sorry it has taken a while to pass this along. In a nutshell, the "award" information has been removed because it is nothing but spam, promotional material added by single-purpose editors over the past few years. I've even tracked down an AfD from 2007 that led to the deletion of over a dozen articles about the "awards". At the time, the nominator asserted that (with regard to the school's other practice of awarding honourary degrees) "there was no evidence that the 'recipients' were aware of or accepted the 'honorary degrees'". The current round were added over the past few weeks; when challenged, the SPA simply added a "reference" URL that is owned by the school. Hope this helps; I've posted it at Jacklee's talk page as well. Cheers. --Ckatz chat spy  02:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Towns in the Great Karoo
Greetings. I've taken a look at your work on SA stuff and its impressive. You deleted mention of a few towns in the Great Karoo. I think listing some towns found within the Great Karoo is appropriate to this article. Would you agree? Which towns warrant mention is another question. I went for some of the bigger ones, that's all. I suggest restoring the deleted section under a heading that says, "Towns and settlements". Perhaps the word "Notable towns" was the problem for you. ?? Incidentally, some of the towns of the Little Karoo are listed in the article. That doesn't seem to be a problem and indeed succinctly adds very useful detail to that section, IMO. Currently, no Great Karoo towns are directly mentioned at all. One is left to infer Laingsburg is there from captions to the lovely photos. What say you, shall we come up with a joint list of Great Karoo towns? BlandBaroque (talk) 04:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd tend towards listing them all but the real problem is to define the boundaries of the Karoo(s). As my background is agricultural - I grew up on a farm near Victoria West, Northern Cape - I tend to prefer a ecological/botanical definition - per Acocks' veld types Roger (talk) 10:52, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh gosh. Then I'm out of my depth.  I was going to look at the boundaries of the map given in the article, overlay that on an atlas and name the towns within that area.  I agree that the Karoo is primarily an ecological / botanical concept and so your way is strictly the most accurate.  I'll leave it for later, then, when I have a botanical map, although I was looking forward to arguing what constitutes an actual town as opposed to a mere village like Victoria West ;) BlandBaroque (talk) 21:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

please re-delete
Hi, I recently saw that Wanya1 attempted to outed me on the Talk:Abahlali baseMjondolo page. This is why I have deleted that section as per wikipeda outing guidelines. Can you please revert to my edit deleting that section. Thanks. ps - I hope that this explains why my delete was not in bad faith. This is the second time Wanya1 has attempted to out me.Frombelow (talk) 12:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The way I understand WP:OUTING it is revealing private information avbout an editor such as real name, phone number, etc. Discussing your self-declared bias is not outing. Roger (talk) 12:50, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * he did attempt to reveal personal information through the attempted outing. I have lodged a formal complaint but in the mean time according to those rules I have the right to remove that information from the page.Frombelow (talk) 13:56, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Since you wont remove it, I will have to? As per WP:OUTING: "Any edit that [attempts to] "outs" someone must be reverted promptly, followed by a request for Oversight to delete that edit from Wikipedia permanently." Frombelow (talk) 21:00, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe I am stupid but I doubt it, so can you explain what about Wanya1's post constitutes outing, please be specific. Roger (talk) 19:04, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If I can contact you privately, I will explain in more detail. I cannot (and have been advised by wiki guidelines not to explain on a public page.Frombelow (talk) 20:07, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * An administrator has explained the situation to me. I hope the matter is now resolved. Roger (talk) 10:31, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Same administrator has explained why they want deletion of retired editor's name from the Abahlali talkpage. Makes sense. Kindly see though my talk page for clarification and reply Wanya1 (talk) 04:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Louis Oosthuizen
Hello, Dodger! Did you have to remove the "English" pronunciation guide for Louis' name from the Wikipedia article? The IPA symbols by themselves are not helpful to most of us. (I hear it's against policy, but stupid rules are meant to be broken). I think we should have IPA and a pronunciation guide that's easy to use. And just for the record, I hear it as LOO-ee OOIST-eye-zən (from the External Link audio). What do you think? Kenatipo (talk) 16:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't remove it, Xyzzyva moved it to a footnote, with an explanation that it should stay there until we can get it sorted out properly.
 * See this diff

BTW what you hear is a lot more accurate than the rubbish currently in the footnote. I think we should keep the discussion centralised on the article's talk page, rather than scattering it all over various user talk pages. Roger (talk) 16:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Dodger, I was talking about this edit which removed the "re-spelling".
 * Thank you, Roger. I'll put something on the L O discussion page.  --Kenatipo (talk) 19:19, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Movement for Justice
Hi Dodger67,

I am writing to you from Movement for Justice in El Barrio with an earnest request: please respect our wish to permanently remove the link to our grant profile, which we have now removed two times. We would rather keep that information private for security purposes. Thank you for contributing to this page in other ways, and for attaching any other public articles written on our work and history.

Thank you for your understanding.

Movement for Justice in El Barrio

MiekeDee (talk) 01:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I have refered your request to an administrator. Roger (talk) 07:39, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The information you want removed is not private. It exists on a publically accessible website. The article still needs an introduction. Roger (talk) 14:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello again, Dodger67,

I will repeat that, although you may have found a link that is publicly accessible, we at Movement for Justice in El Barrio would request that you will respect our wish not to publicize it. It includes very specific information about our the of our funds that we would prefer to keep as private as we can. I encourage you to problem solve another way to introduce our organization and its history. Again, we thank you for choosing to take on the task of contributing to a wikipedia page about the movement we have built and continue to build for over six years. Please be an ally by respecting our organizational needs and wishes.

Mieke Movement for Justice in El Barrio —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.88.88.63 (talk) 19:11, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

ADA importance
Hi. I think it was I who set importance at Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 to Low. Reason being that any article which concentrates on one country only shouldn't have importance=High. FYI. --Hordaland (talk) 09:16, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you may be right, it is just about one country but it is a very important law which is talked about even outside the US. Maybe its a candidate for a Mid importance rating? But I think we should discuss this at the Project, not on my talk page. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disability/Assessment Roger (talk) 09:45, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Apostrophes
re:this — Eats, Shoots & Leaves is a must read if you're picky about punctutation. Socrates2008 ( Talk ) 10:03, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I wonder why the bot that fixed "1990's>1990s" missed also fixing "1980's". I've heard of the phrase "Eats, shoots and leaves" but I wasn't aware there is a book - on my shopping list now, thanks! Roger (talk) 11:06, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Winter solstice
You recently reverted my edit on Manual of Style that changed "Winter solstice" to "Winter Solstice". According to MOS:CAPS, "Winter Solstice" is meant to be capitalised as it is the name of an event. Winter solstice and Summer solstice both use the capital "S" for solstice consistently, despite not using it in the title. I think it needs to be standardised. Do we use a capital "S" or not? McLerristarr (Mclay1) (talk) 01:48, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Via
I'll agree to to disagree. Semantics eh! :) Brendandh (talk) 20:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Plausible G10s
Hi, I've started a thread at Wikipedia_talk:Biographies_of_living_persons  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  12:34, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Code switching in AAVE
Your comments are invited at Talk:Code-switching. Thank you, Cnilep (talk) 17:19, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Airline headquarters
See: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Airlines Next time, please directly contact me. WhisperToMe (talk) 12:25, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I will revert most of that edit to Airlink:
 * Let's review this edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Airlink&diff=375931303&oldid=375921329
 * 1. "Modderfontein" links to Battle of Elands River - That is an article about a historical event, not primarily about a place - While the development is on the "Modderfontein" site, based on the Battle of Elands River article I can't tell if the "Modderfontein" in Gauteng has anything to do with the battle
 * 2. The "metropolitan municipal authority" as you refer to it must be in those South African airline infoboxes in all instances. By "town" or "city" I mean a municipality, an organization with a functioning municipal government. WP:Airlines decided that the town/city should be in the infobox.
 * Ekurlheni is the municipality ("town/city"). "Modderfontein" is not a municipal government. Even if South Africans don't think of saying "I live in Ekurlheni," (there are communities like that where people do not think about the municipality first) we are obligated to say "this is in Ekurlheni" unambiguously in the infobox and in the lead, because the municipality is of utmost importance no matter what land or country it is in, and the municipality is more important than the neighborhood (or "suburb" or the South African "town"). Wikipedia requires standardization and precision.
 * 3. The removal of the entire "Head office" section, with the citation, was not acceptable.
 * Firstly, referencing is absolutely crucial in all Wikipedia articles, and it is far better to over-cite than under-cite.
 * Secondly, every company needs to elaborate on its specific head office facility if additional information about it exists. The head office is the most important facility of a company. Unless the head office is a notable building itself (say, MetLife Building) the detailed info about the head office belongs in the company article and must stay there. If it is a notable building then the bulk of the info can be in a separate article.
 * You can argue that "head office" still doesn't justify a section all to itself, so I can rename it "corporate governance" or "corporate affairs" and add other corporate info to the section, without removing any of the detail.
 * 4. Placement of municipalities in airline infoboxes is obligatory. The "excessive detail" prohibited by WP:Airlines includes non-notable buildings and specific addresses, not municipalities. All of the posters said that the "city/town" should be named. "Ekurlheni" is the municipality so it is the "city/town." Places like "Modderfontein" and "Kempton Park" are to be treated as neighborhoods and parts of the "city/town" as they are not municipal entities.
 * 5. The change from Greenstone Office Park to Greenstone Hill Office Park was good, so that was left in. I must have accidentally omitted "Hill" when typing in the building name...

WhisperToMe (talk) 12:33, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Coanda's claim to first jet engine
If you have a lot of spare time, read the arguments at Talk:Coanda-1910 regarding that aircraft engine. The basic facts of it are in severe dispute, so there is no reason why we should put it in the aircraft engine article. As I wrote in Talk:1910 in aviation, we have three avenues open to us when there is a major dispute about facts: "the first choice is to find which facts are correct and present them; a path which requires one side of the dispute to be utterly unreliable. Charles Harvard Gibbs-Smith is reliable, and many people think that Henri Coanda is reliable (though I disagree), so this path is not open to us. The second choice is to present both sets of facts as disputed, with attribution to proponents of each version. This "1910 in aviation" article is not the place to debate the Coanda-1910 aircraft, or to debate the possible faulty memory of Henri Coanda. The third choice is to present only facts which are not disputed, such as Coanda being a very intelligent and dedicated aeronautical engineer and inventor, the man who discovered the Coanda effect. This is the path I wish to take here."

For the aircraft engine article, it seems to me that only undisputed claims should be listed, unless space is dedicated to the presentation of both sides of a dispute. Binksternet (talk) 16:47, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Food allergies
About your question at Inclusion (education): See  for one example of a food allergy significantly affecting a school. (The parents originally demanded that no person in the entire school be permitted to possess any product containing peanuts or tree nuts, including coconut-flavored sunscreen.)

The point of this paragraph is that most physical disabilities aren't educationally significant, and consequently the student with the disability shouldn't be placed in a separate educational program. If touching a peanut might make you very sick, you have a "real" invisible disability, but it's not one that affects academic performance. Kids with this category of disability are the ones most likely to be fully included. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:21, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Watchlist
Hi Dodger67,

I expanded on the response to your helpdesk question.

Cheers, Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 13:48, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Undoing my edit of 'Provinces of South Africa'
Thanks for undoing my edit of the table on this page. I overlooked the fact that some of the cities in the 'Largest Cities' column were already linked in the 'Capital' column. Shovelyjoe (talk) 11:07, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Overlinking is a an often overlooked problem, I find it all over this place. Roger (talk) 11:10, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Template:Disability and Disability abuse
I think you are missing the point. In most cases, each of the individual abuses covered in abuse have a short summary and a link to the relevant article for that specific abuse. But in some cases a separate article for that abuse type hasnt yet been written - such as Disability abuse. The information written on Disability abuse in abuse is just a start and is expected in time to be expanded and eventually have its own article. By having Disability abuse in Template:Disability increases the chances that it will get noticed and developed quicker. As it stands, Disability abuse is a fledgling article.--Penbat (talk) 15:38, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That is not the purpose of the template. Articles linked on the template must at least already exist and be more than just a one-liner. The template is for high importance articles covering "main themes" - as discussed on the WikiProject, we're not letting any old junk take up space on the template. Roger (talk) 18:19, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I dont think that most people would consider Disability abuse to be "any old junk". In fact many people would find your view offensive. It has 22,600 Google hits. --Penbat (talk) 18:29, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It is a single sentence within an article that is not about disability as such - it isn't even a stub article yet. I'm sorry if calling a single sentence embedded in another article "junk" offends you. First create the article - then link it. If your intention is to attract contributions from editors a better option would be to post a note about it on the WikiProject Talk page. Please abide by the consensus of the Wikiproject about the use of the Template (which is an important tool created by the WikiProject to manage its articles and activities). Roger (talk) 18:43, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Your edit to AC power plugs and sockets
Are you certain that the South African 16 A plug is the same as the Brazilian 20 A plug? The original IEC 60906-1 called for 16 A, with pin diameters of 4.5 mm while the Brazilian plugs uses 4.0 mm pins at 10 A and 4.8 mm pins at 20 A. The reference link you provided doesn't mention pin diameters at all. Carolina wren (talk) 23:45, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It's the version that is compatible with the 2 pin Europlug. The reference was already there - I didn't provide it. Roger (talk) 08:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Problem is, all three versions are compatible with the Europlug. The Brazilian pair are designed so that a 10 A plug will fit in a 20 A socket, but not vice versa. Don't know how the tolerances work with the IEC 16 A and the other Brazilian plugs.  If they are demanding enough, the general idea of you can't place a high amperage plug in a low amperage socket would still apply. Carolina wren (talk) 16:31, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Further research required. Roger (talk) 17:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

News item for tomorrow?
Armless pianist wins China's Got Talent. Perhaps other news sources have more information about him. Mirokado (talk) 17:48, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If we can find an article about it with tomorrows date on it, it would be worth considering. BTW last season's winner of South Africa's Got Talent is a deaf dancer. He was absolutely brilliant and didn't play the "crip card" at all - he legitimately beat everyone else. His performance was an awesome "medley" dance. He transitioned perfectly smoothly between styles - from hip-hop to ballet without missing a beat. Roger (talk) 19:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Done - see today's headline. Roger (talk) 09:42, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


 * You found a good article for it. Well done. — Mirokado (talk) 11:33, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

the diagram in brain drain
I drew it by myself according to the written explaination to the process of brain drain. Not everything should have a citation. something could be originally-created. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.170.90.3 (talk) 06:48, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but that is incorrect. On WP originally created material is in fact specifically prohibited. See WP:OR Roger (talk) 06:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * So sorry for that! But if in WP, all the stuff have citation and are not originally-created, why do scholars say that wikipedia is not reliable? And why are we not allowed to quote sentences from WP when we wirte essays? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.170.90.6 (talk) 10:11, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Frequency control of He-Ne laser
You wrote: Can a HeNe laser's wavelength be intentionally modulated for transmitting a simple FM audio frequency signal? I'm looking at gas lasers because it cannot be done with diode lasers, or am I barking up the wrong tree? Roger (talk) 19:59, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I have considerable experience with frequency modulation of He-Ne lasers. The frequency of any one mode can be varied over the 1500 MHz gain envelope of the lasing medium by changing the cavity wavelength over a total range of about 1.5GHz/473 THz = 3e-6 of its full length (thus about a micron for a 30cm long cavity). ALL of the lasing modes will be affected equally when you do that. I have done that with a laser having a partially external cavity (with a brewster window on the tube) using a piezo actuator (from a piezo beeper) on which one mirror was mounted. I have also done that on a typical sealed tube using an electromagnetic actuator pushing on the back mirror, though this requires a considerable force (perhaps a hundred grams of force for 1500MHz shift) depending on the stiffness of the tube which is held down on the other side. This cannot necessarily be done as fast as you'd like for audio and will be affected by the mechanical resonance of the glass tube. I could go on but I don't know what more you need to know, or more importantly how you intend to detect the audio FM modulated signal. If you want I can send you my personal email address if you want to discuss this further.

Hope that helps! Interferometrist (talk) 16:19, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Check again
I think you misread the diff over at WP:V. Blueboar copied and pasted the selfpub criteria into the questionable sources section directly above it. I see no need for that kind of redundancy. Gigs (talk) 19:09, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If you look back 1000 edits ago you'll see the same list was headed "selfpub and questionable" thus applicable to both types of sources. Roger (talk) 19:17, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The redundancy was added in only a few days ago. Did you look at it in context?  It looks really silly to have the same information on the screen twice. Note that it already has an anchor to the other section. Gigs (talk) 19:22, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point! I'm having a bit of a D'oh! moment here. Any source "about itself" is by definition self published regardless of how questionable or RS it is. Roger (talk)

MOS:HASH
Per your reversion of my edit: can you please explain your point of view at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. I don't really see how my edit defeated the purpose of the example. Thanks, Adabow (talk · contribs) 07:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The way I read it the example is pointing out that the abreviation "No." should be used instead of the symbol "#" because the hash symbol does not mean "number" in all varieties of English. It is drawing a distiction between two different ways of abreviating the word "number", to change one of them to the full word defeats the point that the hash symbol is problematic in this usage. Roger (talk) 08:08, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Not really. If we ask people to spell the word out correctly, they can still see that using a hash is incorrect. The reason for changing this is that 'number' is used far more often than 'No.' on WP, and keeps the prose flowing nicely. Adabow (talk · contribs) 08:22, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You seem to be missing the point that this guideline is about the preference of one abreviation over another abreviation. Full word versus abreviation is a different matter entirely. There are situations such as infoxes or tables where the full word just doesn't fit neatly and an abreviation must be used. Roger (talk) 08:48, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * But the example (Her album reached No. 1 in the UK album charts.) is one of prose. Besides, both options ('number' and 'No.') are listed before the examples. The other point is that WP:ORDINAL states that numbers less than ten should be written out in full. Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:05, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Sandbox
Disability/Sandbox has been moved to User:Dodger67/Sandbox. Cindamuse (talk) 15:27, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * May I be so WP:BOLD as to recommend a little less haste on the tigger finger and a little more WP:AGF. Your zealotry has caused me a lot of extra trouble in my attempt to set up the sandbox as explained at Help_desk. Thanks Roger (talk) 15:47, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * No harm; no foul. In reality, the process of reviewing recent changes and new pages, calls for moving improperly placed articles to the editor's userpage. Assuming good faith, (like I know you are), I'm sure you realize that this action is one to assist the erstwhile editor rather than hinder. If you need further assistance setting up a sandbox in a different place, please don't hesitate to ask. And if you need assistance in the article on disability from the perspective of a State Commissioner on Disability with professional background speaking before the U.S. Congress and Senate Judiciary on the issue, please don't hesitate to ask in that regard either. Best, Cindamuse (talk) 16:02, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the tone of my initial response. You caught me just as I figured out I had put it in the wrong place. Yes please your involvement in the article and others in WP:WikiProject Disability would be most welcome! Please join us. Roger (talk) 16:13, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll take a look at the WikiProject. I need something to keep me off the streets. ;) Have a great day/evening. Regards, Cindamuse (talk) 16:32, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Airlink Zambia
Hi Dodger, I'm responding to your claim to accuse the creator of this article of bad faith by alleging that it is a hoax without evidence is unacceptable. Well, I do not think you are right here. I tried to find some evidence from reliable sources that this airline exists at all. I didn't succeed, so I basically had no other possibility than to question the truthfulness of the content. If the editor would have acted out of good faith he/she would have added any references for the claim that the airline exists. Anf for your other one If you remove almost all the text we have no details for searching I can only remind you that all deleted text is still visible at the page history. Therefore, I restored my edit, the only difference is that now you claimed to have seen the airline (which actually doesn't count as a source) there is no more hoax template. Per aspera ad Astra (talk) 20:33, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Peer review
Glad my comments on Peer review/Social model of disability/archive1 were helpful. In general anyone can make an assessment up to B level, but for WP:GA the article has to pass WP:GAN, and even for WP:FA, which has to pass WP:FAC. I do not generally assess articles, but the best this could be without going through GAN or FAC is B class. If you can't find anyone to do it, asking at the relavent WikiProject Talk Page usually works. Hope that helps, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:09, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance
I thought its time to say thanks to all the editors who have assisted me in the articles I have been working on; so I took a look at toolserver.org and it shows that you have done 5,602 edits. I think you not only deserve, but are entitled to the below award in accordance with the award criteria. I know that one is supposed to award this medal to yourself, but we never do, so I am doing it on behalf of you! Thanks for all your help. Farawayman (talk) 14:21, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Recognition
People should not think we have formed a Mutual Appreciation Society: however, you clearly deserve one of these too! Mirokado (talk) 21:01, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Roger (talk) 21:06, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Saartje
First, some background. My grandaughters name is Sarah. Being of Flemish heritage we nicknamed her saarje and pronounced it saar-cheh. When I came across this article this evening, I logically assumed that a mistake had been made...somewhere. I was even aware that the Africaans pronunciation may be different. So I investigated and I found (http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=20540269). I have no problem with your correction. I would suggest, however, that you assume good faith toward other editors before choosing a less than friendly edit summary. Buster7 (talk) 07:46, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Gloss the poem on the language ref desk?
Sgt. MacKenzie Lament

Lay me doon in the caul caul groon

Lay me down in the cold cold ground

Whaur afore monie mair huv gaun

Where before many more have gone

When they come a wull staun ma groon

When they come I will stand my ground

Staun ma groon al nae be afraid

Stand my ground, I'll not be afraid

Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear

Thoughts of home take away my fear

Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

Sweat and blood hide my veil of tears

Ains a year say a prayer faur me

Once a year say a prayer for me

Close yir een an remember me

Close your eyes and remember me

Nair mair shall a see the sun

Nevermore shall I see the sun

For a fell tae a Germans gun

For I fell to a German's gun

Do you think it would improve the discussion if a gloss was added?--Shirt58 (talk) 10:41, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:50, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
for this. I agree. Perhaps the WikiProject would like to provide a link to it on their project page, and any other relevant advice pages like WP:ACCESS that its members might be interested in. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:42, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Saab Gripen
Where in the talk page is there any conclusion that the name Gripen is not translated 'the griffin' but rather just 'griffin'? As far as I can see, it is rather the other way around. Also, any Swedish-English dictionary would prove the same. John  Anderson  (talk) 10:24, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

re Umkhonto (missile)
A hatnote is meant to get the reader to the article they really want to be at. Anybody who types "umkhonto" would arrive at the disambiguation page, so would have to select the missile article as the one they want to read. I can think of no circumstances where a reader would type "Umkhonto (missile)" into the search field and actually want to be at the article for the reggae album or armed group. Can you? - BanyanTree 02:25, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you very much. B i b (talk) 21:53, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy 10th Anniversary of Wikipedia!
 Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia! Hey Bzuk  (contribs) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. Bzuk (talk) 16:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Special education rollback
The reason the page was rolled back, and that I have done such again, is the post was by the confirmed WP:SOCK of a banned user. Such users are completely unwelcome and aren't allowed to make any edits at all. As such, their contributions should, nay must, be removed lest they think they're getting away with it. OK, I'm a little harsher than some on these things, but I've had dealings with some of the most notorious sockmasters around these parts, so I tend towards a "throw-'em-all-out" attitude.

Actually, the entire POV pushing nonsense with User:Xcueta was the same sockmaster. I'd like to just remove those sections from the talk page outright, but since you contributed in good faith, I wanted to give you the choice. oknazevad (talk) 20:06, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Radio
Specifically Talk:Radio. Hoping you might contribute opinions regarding changes requested by a user. Thanks. - LuckyLouie (talk) 20:30, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

CopyViol
You've added copyViol text to the article by reverting several edits by 2 people trying to remove the violations. Maybe you're unaware of the policy; please read it here WP:COPYVIO WP:PARAPHRASE. This is the second time I've written these policies for you; first time was here in the text box when I removed it. This is being referred to the noticeboard: Ebanony (talk) 13:18, 16 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I have responded on the noticeboard. Roger (talk) 15:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The solution is simple: we cannot use direct text unless it's inside quotation marks "", is limited & is attributed. The other way is to put it in your own words & attribute it. Either is fine. Sometimes (like perhaps in this case) people use their own words and include certain difficult phrases in quotes. If you do that, I will withdraw the claim straightaway. I'm more than willing to believe you simply misunderstood the policy. WP:PARAPHRASE is a pretty good guide. See also WP:COPYPASTE. Here's just an example:


 * "The number of disabled veterans has jumped by 25 percent since 2001 — to 2.9 million — and the cause really is no mystery." This can become "Increased US military involvement has resulted in a significant increase of disabled military personnel since 2001. According to Fox News, this is a '25 percent' rise, with more than '2.9 million' total veterans now disabled."


 * In this case, you might not have to quote "2.9 million" or "25 percent", but I'd do it. Just an example.Ebanony (talk) 12:57, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Looks good to me! I'll use your proposed text. Glad we could resolve this problem. Roger (talk) 13:06, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * You don't have to use that version; it's just an example. Please let me know when you posted it. I withdrew the claim as soon as I saw your posting.Ebanony (talk) 13:56, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Your version is fine - I've used it just as you wrote it. Roger (talk) 14:03, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

CRIPA page
Thanks for the quick response! And thanks for moving the blank sections to the sandbox. I am in class and was helping another student and showed her how to do something and the sections were gone! So I added them again and then checked the history page and saw what you had done. In response to your question, all of the research I have done so far (which is not much I must admit) states that those 5 sections (the new ones currently on the page) are what the law looks at. I know that there are physical disabilities that some people have, but I think that they only focused on incarcerated individuals.

I do not know why, then, nursing homes are included, but they are, maybe just grouping individuals in government-run institutions that may have their rights oppressed. I will look into this more! If you have any good links or ideas, please keep sending them to me, I am really new to this and want to do this article justice!!

Stephen G. Jones Jones3sg (talk) 20:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The answer may lie in the legal definition of "nursing home". The distinction between "incarcerated" and "institutionalized" is probably also significant - "incarcerated" being a subset of "institutionalized". I'm not American so my access to and understanding of US law and policy is marginal at best. I'm also about to go to bed, I'll probably get back here in about 12 hours. G'night! Roger (talk) 20:50, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you. I just need to get myself in a routine...can't just wait on class.  Thank you for your suggestion, and I will look into the distinction between them.  Jones3sg (talk) 19:16, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

SNEB
Hi again, Roger. Please don't take offense but I've reverted you here. Although I understand that you meant well and the thing is I'm only quoting facts and figures from British sources, not French. Surely, you should know that us editors of English Wikipedia relies mostly on English language sources for citations and references, not other languages if we can help it, right? That said, you're not wrong too to have explained that in the edit summary. However, the reason I'm quoting the EE Lightning as a notable example (per WP:Notability) was that it stands out being the only British product used by the Saudis and was the only EE Lightning operator to field the SNEB/Matra JL-100. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 18:36, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Surely that would make it less rather than more "notable" (not using the strict WP sense of the word) . Mentioning it so prominently while barely mentioning the hundreds of other aircraft (many different types) that use(d) this rocket runs into undue weight problems.


 * Problem is, I've provided a very reliable source (established since the early 1900's) to back the story up and unless you can find a Mirage fighter jet that can mount the JL-100 on the over-wing pylon like the EE Lightning does, I think we're pretty much settled on the issue. Thoughts? -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 19:02, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * OK I hope I see what you are getting at - the notable thing about Lightning's use of this weapon is the unusual (unique?) way it is mounted.
 * However - there's always a "however" LOL - the Lighning carries many different types of weapons and fuel tanks on top of it's wings so it's not specific to the JL-100. It is a notable fact about the Lightning, not about the JL-100 or the SNEB rocket as such. Nitpicking like this is really not my style but I think this information would be a better fit on the Lightning's article where it is specifically relevant and notable, rather than as an WP:UNDUE "factoid" in this article - which is primarily about the rockets fired from JL-100 (and other) launcher pods. Perhaps we should move this discussion to the article talk page so that other editors can also contribute their thoughts and opinions and so reach a consensus. Well it's getting late here and I have an early start in the morning so I'm saying "g'night". Roger (talk) 19:28, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Nigella Lawson
Don't revert other user's edits if you don't know why your was reverted. First ask them about your reversion on their talk page, because there may be chances that you're just fighting for wrong. undefinedBill william compton Talk  14:07, 3 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I was attempting to revert the deletion by an IP of details about her studying at Oxford. It seems my revertion clashed with someone else's. Roger (talk) 14:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

European Wheelchair Basketball Championship
Thank you very much. I'm working on a woman's section now. I saw your request/comment on a project for disability sport, great idea, cause that could absolutely be a useful addition. B i b (talk) 19:00, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey
So I know that I am always on here apologizing for not being on it that much, but I just wanted to write you and let you know that my school just had Spring Break and I was away from my computer most of the time. I just wanted to let you know that I am going to be starting back up with the page and wanted you to keep an eye on it when you can. Thanks!! Jones3sg (talk) 05:59, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

List of manual labour tasks
I've declined your speedy because it doesn't fit. This is the sort of list that 'business consultants' come up with when they are demonstrating how to remove money from a business by legal and fashionable means. I've come up against crap like this on a few courses in various areas (not all in business). It doesn't fit the nonsense tag because it is comprehensible. There's possibly other ways of getting it. Even AfD if prod doesn't work. Peridon (talk) 13:18, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps Speedy's criteria for what is and isn't nonsense needs to be expanded a bit. It's material such as this that gives WP such a bad reputation in the "real world". Roger (talk) 13:35, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I think there's room for expansion of the speedy categories. Once I've got settled in properly I'll try to get some recommendations together. Peridon (talk) 13:46, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Now at Articles for deletion/List of manual labour tasks. Peridon (talk) 17:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

AAC
I think you're way out of line dismissing AAC, and dismissing my defence of it, the way that you did. It was really very offensive. I have joined the project (since you implied that this is essential) and made an argument about the status of AAC. -- Evertype·✆ 13:44, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Out_From_Under%3A_Disability%2C_History_and_Things_to_Remember
I have reverted your recent edits to the above article. You "hid" them behind seemingly innocuous edit summaries but in fact reinstated the article as it was prior to my (valid and useful) edits of a few minutes earlier. Please can you explain (a) why you mis-used the summaries and (b) why you reverted the content. Among other things, the reversion caused plagiarism to reappear. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 17:50, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * A thought: were you somehow using an old version of the page? - Sitush (talk) 17:52, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I have no idea. Edit conflicts can be very confusing. The page has been on my watchlist for a long time - it popped up a while ago so I took a look at the changes. Saw that a whole lot more needs to be done. Particularly the references are all misformatted. I'll stop editing now, let you get on with your edits then I'll come back to it in a few hours to see what you've done and if anything still needs to be done. Are you familiar with the correct citation methods? Roger (talk) 18:04, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Weird. I'd finished editing 14 minutes before you started. Not to worry - looks like something has gone wrong with caching etc at your end. Take a look now and, of course, feel free to make any changes that you think fit - there is room for improvement. I think you'll find that I understand the various citation methods  - Sitush (talk) 18:08, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Nicely done! I just have one question; is it really necessary to completely remove the descriptions of the exhibition items? I thought that was pretty much the "core" of the article. Roger (talk) 18:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The removal was necessary because it was a copyvio. However, something about them does need to go in. I don't have the time or (if I am honest, inclination) as I am trying to complete a massive revamp of Paravar. If you have both of those attributes, then go for it! And, BTW, I'm not too sure that all of the items in the See Also section are necessary but I'll leave that to you or others. since I know that you are watching it & know what you are doing, I'll probably take it off my list soon. - Sitush (talk) 18:27, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Frivolity?
I too don't make frivolous edits (except on talk pages - and then usually to some point...), but I've had a third of my edits deleted. Mainly because I work in XfD and CSD, I suppose.... Peridon (talk) 16:34, 11 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh please! people are making far too much of this, just let it go already! Roger (talk) 16:41, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey doger look at this because I got the troll aha.
thefreedictionary look up black and at the bottom of the page: noun 5 Black - a person with dark skin who comes from Africa (or whose ancestors came from Africa) AnthonyTheGamer (talk) 23:27, 2 August 2011 (UTC) AnthonyTheGamer

Sound files in Schwa and Mid-central vowel
Hello! I ask you because you are a native speaker of English, a veteran editor of Wikipedia and a person who takes an interest in phonetics.

Could you listen to the sound files in the info boxes of these two articles, please? The sound files are exactly the same. The article claims that the word Schwa has two meaning: one is the neutral vowel and the other is the mid-central vowel. Since mid-central vowel has its own article, it seems that Schwa should be about the first meaning. Therefore, these articles should have different sounds in their info boxes. What do you think about it?

The second issue is here: IPA vowels chart with audio.

It seems that the button ɜ really represents the sound /ə/, while the button ə really represents the sound /ɜ/.

If you click the button ɜ, it sounds like the English "a" in the word "alike" (neutral vowel). Of course, the latter is short and unstressed.

If you click the button ə, it sounds like the English "ir" in the word "bird" (open-mid central unrounded vowel).

However, dictionaries show us that "alike" is pronounced as /əˈlaɪk/ and "bird" is pronounced as /bɜːrd/ (General American) or /bɜːd/ (British RP).

Since I do not know English well, I can be mistaken. I also do not feel at home with Wikipedia. Can you dissuade me or solve these problems or write to the person who can solve them? Ufim (talk) 18:55, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I have an interest in phonetics but I am far from an expert. The best place to raise this matter is on the article's talk page. Roger (talk) 19:13, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you.Ufim (talk) 03:57, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry
Regarding this - I've checkusered both accounts, and they're obvious sockpuppets of a particular banned user, which is why I removed the contributions. Part of my role on the project is to find her accounts, track them, and use the underlying technical information to discover patterns which we can use prevent further disruption. Standard practice with her is to simply revert the contributions or blank them as required. We also try not to 'tag' her accounts - again, to deny recognition. I know this might seem counter-intuitive, but she's a long term disruptive user with hundreds of single-use, throwaway sockpuppet accounts. The Cavalry (Message me) 17:44, 23 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Maybe the edit summary should read something like "poster is a confirmed/known/identified sockpuppet" rather than "obvious" because it is in fact not obvious. Roger (talk) 06:29, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I should have been more clear, and I will be in future. Basically, the special education article is a hotspot for this person, and nearly all the 'new accounts' involved are sockpuppets of them. In future, I'll be more clear. The Cavalry (Message me) 15:25, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Use of "symbiotic partnership" in Pathlight School
Thanks for pointing out that the term may be confusing to readers. A full understanding of the partnership would require some background knowledge of special education and autism, but I have edited the lead and other sections, in an attempt to offer a brief explanation. Please read the article again, give me your feedback and feel free to copyedit the article. Hope you enjoy reading and improving it! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 14:16, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Hein Grosskopf
Hein's father was also a professor at Stellenbosch University. We all know Hein did not attend classes.. just need to confirm whether or not he enrolled.. Gregorydavid (talk) 13:18, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I was actually a student there when "MK Hein" became notorious. His father took a lot of heat from the authorities over his son's "delinquency". See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Stellenbosch_University#Hein_Grosskopf Roger (talk) 13:28, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Archive bot use
I replied to your question at WP:HD. Regards. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 20:45, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I see you are having "fun with archives". You could have a look at the archival templates on my talk page if you wish, they have worked nicely and you can tweak the parameters of course. I copy and modify that code myself when setting up new archiving on article talk pages. The main thing to remember is to change the name of the first archive page, otherwise the bot ignores the request. --Mirokado (talk) 20:44, 18 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I've copied your setup - with a few changes of course - so now I'm waiting to see if the bot will do it. Roger (talk) 07:02, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * It works! Yay!!! Roger (talk) 14:35, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Springbok Nude Girls Page
Hi Dodger67, I am the drummer for sng and would like to update the wikipedia page. Unfortunately my previous attempts failed. I am hoping you could assist me. Please find me on facebook: Francious Kruger. Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suoicnarf (talk • contribs) 12:18, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Francious. It's not really ethical to discuss Wikipedia editing outside of Wikipedia - the principle is that a full record of all edits and discussions about edits must be available to any reader of the article. I'd suggest that the best place to discuss the topic is on the article's talk page - Talk:Springbok Nude Girls.
 * Meanwhile you should read the following guidlines and policy documents: WP:NPOV, WP:RS, WP:COI. I see you have run into WP:COPYVIO problems a few times - the short explanation is that you are not allowed to simply copy/paste material from a copyright source to Wikipedia - even if you own the copyright! Another major problem with your previous edits is that your additions are written in a promotional tone - WP:ADVERT - this is absolutely not allowed, all writing must be written neutrally. Roger (talk) 12:20, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Undated Talks manually archived
Below this line are undated (early) posts to my talk page. The bot can't automatically archive undated posts so I've done it manually. Roger (talk) 16:56, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

About 2kW limits
> When did it change?

Hard to say. Former Yugoslavia cesed to exist in 1991. Today, maximum power limits differ from country to country, but nowhere exceeds 1500 W:

Croatia - 1000 W (source: Official Gazzette of the Republic of Croatia, http://www.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeno/2003/3165.htm )

Serbia - 1500 W (source: http://www.yu1srs.org.yu/dl/srs_doc/Pravilnik%20o%20radioamaterima.pdf )

Slovenia - 1500 W (source: Post and Electronic Communications Agency of the Republic of Slovenia, http://www.apek.si/datoteke/File/ZEKom/pogoji_za_uporabo_amaterski_radi.postaj.pdf )

Montenegro - 1500 W (source: Agency for telecommunications and postal service, http://www.agentel.cg.yu/regulativa/radioamateri.pdf )

Macedonia and Bosnia & Herzegovina - sorry, unable to find internet source atm.

Cheers, Alek

Ibid
Hi Dodger I was asked to remove those I (SmackBot) had placed. Unfortunatly it seems someone else, one of the askees, has decided to do it himself. Hence the confusion. Rich Farmbrough, 16:04 24 January 2009 (UTC).

Towns of the Northern Cape
Hi Dodger

Sorry about the issue with the towns of the Northern Cape. There are so many towns which weren't on the list, I thought we should maybe only list these with articles. Because there is a List of cities and towns in the Northern Cape, where we could place the names of all the towns in the Northern Cape.

I see you are also from the Northern Cape. Iam from Kenhardt, and you?

Id like to hear more from you!

Regards, Lourie

Stellenbosch to bid for Wikimania 2012!
Hi Dodger67!

The nascent South African Wikimedia chapter has decided to bid to host Wikimania in Stellenbosch, South Africa in 2012. This would be the first Wikimania in South Africa, and would be a great advertisement for our country. Please take a look at meta:Wikimania_2012/Bids/Stellenbosch. If you can add to the discussion, please do. If you feel that you are able to do anything to help, please join the Wikimedia South Africa mailing list and let us know. Even simple messages of support are valued!

Best regards,

David Richfield

USS New York christening
Dodge The naming ceremony was held in 2002 onboard the Intrepid, The christening is a breaking of a bottle of champagne across the bow, the first wetting of a vessel. It's not religious. Thks Scott www.ussnewyork.com

Dodger Here is the official booklet http://www.flickr.com/photos/ussnewyork/2306752246/

Gordon Ramsay
In the future please review sources and conventions before you go off and change BLPs. Your change to three Michelin stars for Chef Ramsay is damaging to the BLP as it has been established through previous references (including a new one I added after I reverted your change) that chef-owners of multiple restaurants are allowed to combine the count of stars at individual restaurants. Please take consideration before you decide to unilaterally change a BLP. Hasteur (talk) 13:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * OK Roger (talk) 13:36, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Black Mamba
Hey, sorry about not discussing it first, but the truth is there aren't any other serious editors but I on that article. I changed the name to it's scientific name, which is what a lot of other snake articles are like (ie. Bitis arietans, Bitis gabonica, Crotalus tigris, and many, many more). It is much more appropriate for an encyclopedia and it is a lot more scientific. You still get to the same page when you type in "black mamba" in the search bar. I don't see why other snake articles can be listed by their scientific name, but not this one. There really is nobody to discuss anything with because I am the only editor of the page. Nobody else really edits it and I have put a TON of work into that article - literally hours and hours of work over an extended period of time. May I please change it back? It's in the benefit of the article. Bastian (talk) 19:49, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Look at the article history - there are plenty other editors, the article has existed YEARS before you even registered on WP. But actually that is of no significance at all, just because you happen  to be  the most active recent editor  does not mean anything - see  WP:OWN. Oh and have you actually read  WP:NAME yet? Many species articles are at their scientific names particularly if the don't have very well known English names or even don't have an English name at all. However this too is irrelevant - what happens in one article is not a valid reason to do the same on a different article. Roger (talk) 20:09, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Also, the black mamba is very commonly referred to as the "black death" in Africa (this name is even relatively common in Europe and North America, aswell), I agree an expert calling it "death incarnate" does not mean it is a common name, but in Africa there are similar such names that people commonly refer to the black mamba by. Names that would translate into "black demon" (this is a common one, especially in Swaziland, Botswana, and in Mozambique), etc. Bastian (talk) 19:54, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Those names are not English, thus irrelevant. I get the impression that you are not very familiar with many of the policies and rules that govern Wikipedia. Roger (talk) 20:09, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay forget the "common names" issue - that's not a problem at all, we will stick with what we have. The name "black mamba" is just a common name for the species Dendroaspis polylepis. I am going to change it back to Dendroaspis polylepis and you can still type in "Black mamba" in the search bar and it will take you to the exact same page. There is no difference. The only difference will be that having it's scientific name as the title of the article is much more appropriate for an encyclopedia, it will be more scientific, and people who don't know will learn the scientific name of the black mamba. I think it is perfectly appropriate, many other snake articles follow the same format, and I don't think the black mamba should be an exception. No matter how "common" black mamba is in the English language. In the end, it's not like we are changing the snakes name - we are just using the scientific name as the title of the article. You seem only interested in changing things, but not discussing anything. You are a fellow Wikipedia editor, just like me. You aren't in any position of authority over me - I want you to get that straight. Second, toxicology and snakes is something I have studied deeply and at length. My knowledge on the subject is far more expansive than yours, which is probably very basic compared to me. I don't see anything in your user page that would indicate you are well versed in the topic of herpetology, toxicology, or even general science and that is why I hold this position (not that I am being arrogant, but only realistic). From what I see in your user page, you are likely much more knowledgeable about the history of South Africa, military technology, and the languages than I am. I don't disrupt your editing on the subjects which you have been schooled in, I would've appreciated it if you had left the mamba article to me to finish. I have put hours and hours of work and research for the article and several others others. Bastian (talk) 20:29, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * You really don't know the rules and policies of WP. If you unilaterally move the article again you could be blocked for disruptive editing. If you really feel strongly about moving the page you are required to follow the procedure prescribed at WP:REQMOVE. Other pages you really need to read are WP:OWN, WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. I am now going offline for about 10 hours so please regard this discussion as "on hold" while I get some sleep.  Roger (talk) 20:42, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Wait, wait a minute - I work hard on an article and you come along changing things around and you are talking to me about "disruptive editing"? You are right in that I am not very familiar with the rules and policies of Wikipedia (I do know some of the rules and policies, but not all), but all I know is that other snake articles use the scientific name rather than their common name (ie. puff adder, Gabon viper, Tiger rattlesnake, krait, Death adder, sea snakes, saw-scaled viper, Russell's viper, lancehead, and countless others). If you click on every link I put before you, you'll go to the article but the title will be the scientific name. These are all very common English words for very well known and common snakes, much like the black mamba. Why is it that it is okay for these articles to have the scientific name as the title head of the article, but I can't do it for the black mamba because of this and that rule and "policy". Don't these rules and policies apply to those articles aswell? You're giving me all these links to "rules" - I'm being civil, I am not claiming to "own" the article, and yes I intend to do whatever it takes to change the name to Dendroaspis polylepis and with all the countless of other snake articles following the same format, I think I will get to change the name. Of course that's unless somebody (not going to be me) goes and changes ALL of the snake articles from their scientific name to their common name. There are about 30-40, if not more such snake articles. The list I put above is just the tip of the iceberg. Bastian (talk) 21:11, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * In anycase, I did a request to move and I think most people are going to support the move to Dendroaspis polylepis. It looks like I'm getting support. Bastian (talk) 22:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

SA Jewish history
Roger, it has become evident that you have systematically tried to censor the article about South African history. Regarding your recent edit, having removed historical material (all of which is referenced internally through wikipedia article links), it would be most appreciated if you could find a few quick minutes to discuss your edits on the discussion page. Oh, by the way, a Jewish person who converts to Anglicanism may be referred to as "doped", rather than baptised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.147.235.216 (talk) 19:01, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I have just posted a reply at the article talk page. I have not "censored" anything, I have simply removed material that does not comply with the rules and policies. I'm afraid you still have much to learn about Wikipedia if you believe that wikilinks are acceptable substitutes for proper references. Please see WP:RS. (BTW please add a heading to a new topic, don't simply append it to a previous unrelated topic.) Roger (talk) 19:15, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification (for Dodger67)
Hi, this message is to let you know about disambiguation links you've recently created. A link to a disambiguation page is almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Émile Armand Gibon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * was linked to Sebastopol

Any suggestions for improving this automated tool are welcome. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * ✅ Roger (talk) 20:20, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks on Sophiatown
Thanks for your comments on Sophiatown. It still neeed a lot of work though. Thanks!. ShiningWolf (talk) 08:49, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Ek het jou nota gelees oor die jakalsies. Ek sal graag wil leer oor wat hierdie tipe goed is, so asb. as jy edit sal dit goed wees as ek die redes kan volg deur miskien die summary box. ShiningWolf (talk) 10:53, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Sophiatown Importance
Hi Dodger, I saw you undid the importance on Sophiatown. I also wondered about this. I agree with you suburbs should not be high importance. I think what tipped the scale for me to move it to high importance was the historical and cultural impact. Sophiatown features in the Apartheid Infobox, which I think should only reference to the more important aspects of Apratheid. Sophiatown is also more important (again an opinion) that District Six which has a more important rating. How do one go about resolving this? I know too little about Wikipedia on how this should work. ShiningWolf (talk) 08:54, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Discussion started at Talk:Sophiatown. Roger (talk) 09:16, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I think the debate is good and I am learning from it. A couple of other questions: 1) How does this importance issue get resolved, i.e. who or what process makes the final call? 2) Previously you mentioned that their are a few "jakkalsies" to be sorted out on Sophiatown before its rating can be considered a B. I know the references are messy and I will fix that during the next couple of weeks. That other stuff I am unaware of and need outside help. Who will edit this to make sure these things get caught? Do I ask for an editor or just wait for it to get fixed? ShiningWolf (talk) 16:27, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * 1. Participants in the discussion simply come to an agreement at some point.
 * 2. I've been fixing a few of the minor issues - take a look at the article history. I did a few fixes to stuff like punctuation and grammar, and I added a bunch of relevant links - so far mostly in the geography section. Stuff like that really helps to improve the overall quality of an article. Please do have a go at cleaning it up further. How about the two of us give it a concentrated go over the next day or two then we invite someone uninvolved to evaluate it for a new quality rating. (I'll be travelling on either Saturday or Sunday and then I'll be officially on holiday so I might not be here very often until about the second week in January.)
 * BTW I see quite a few projects don't use importance ratings at all as they feel it causes more unhappiness than it is worth. The argument goes that closely involved editors tend to feel "their" article is more important than most other people would rate it.
 * If you find yourself beginning to care too much about an article, it's a sign that you should take a break from even looking at it for a few weeks - it's happened to me a few times over the years that I've been here. Though I must say you're very brave to have taken on writing a new article so early in your "WP career". I was active here for more than a year (just fixing typos, formats, commenting on talk pages, etc) before I had the guts to start a new article. My first one was Thunder City. Roger (talk) 16:49, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Roger, you are a very kind man. I am going on holiday tomorrow but will make every effort to clean it up tomorrow and Saturday. I just hate references. You are right about getting too involved. I actually told myself I will work on two articles otherwise one gets a bit obsessive. I agree about getting a third person involved to review it. Anyway enjoy your holiday and let me get cracking on the references. ShiningWolf (talk) 16:55, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Your recent activity at Airlink
Regarding the warring you're engaged into with User:Ameshoff, and just to be neutral with you both, I have to place the following warning for you too. Your recent editing history shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly.--Jetstreamer (talk) 16:51, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, though I stopped at two reverts as I am fully aware of 3RR. I've moved on to expanding other parts of the article. Thanks for your assistance. Roger (talk) 17:04, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

In regards to your last edit of the George SA Airlink accident the following: As Airlink and their lawyers, you based your information on an Interim report #2 filed by the AIID of SACAA. This report has never been finalised although it was due in September 2011. I see the interim report has been withdrawn from the webpage stating it’s under review. In my opinion this report (of which I have a copy) is flawed and for the following factual reason. The report never apportions blame to the PIC on the fateful flight although he was above targets on speed and the glide scope and thus made a deep landing. The deep landing directly impacted on the pilot’s ability to decelerate the plane sufficiently to make a safe exit at the end of the runway. The report totally steers away from the fact that the pilot made a deep landing and pushes the idea of aquaplaning. Tests runs on the surface after the accident showed the following and I quote “On 9 December 2009, two days after the accident, the service of the same service provider was obtained to perform another friction test on the runway. The tests were conducted at 65 kph and at the same runway intervals as the previous test of 6 November 2009. The friction test results reflect an average value of 0.77, which met the design objective level of 0.74. The tests results display an improvement in the runway friction levels if compared to the test of 6 November 2009.” No problems in the test results so why push the aquaplaning and not the deep landing? The figures in the report shows clearly the plane was doomed because of the deep landing. I quote “The calculated factored landing (wet runway) required to stop the aircraft was 1895 m (6216 feet).” The plane’s touchdown was at 639m from the threshold of the runway. Do the calculations, there was simply not enough runway left for a safe landing in wet conditions!

SA Airlink has of all the domestic airlines serving South African airports the worst safety record. This was the point I was trying to get across. A point you don’t want people studying the SA Airlink page to be made aware of. This is totally discombobulating to me. Why not put the facts out there? User:Ameshoff (talk) 23 January 2012 at 11:05 UTC —Preceding undated comment added 11:05, 23 January 2012 (UTC).


 * I'm afraid you are mistaken about the source of the information I added. If you take a look at the citation appended to my edit you will see that I used this article from the Business Day newspaper as my source. As you seem to have access to better sources, please feel free to edit in accordance with your source(s). On a personal note, there is no reason for you to feel "discombobulated" at all, this is very much the normal way that WP articles are improved. Roger (talk) 12:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

GAR
Howdy Dodger, it's been a while! I just wanted to let you know that an article to which you've been a significant contributor, Black mamba, is having its GA status reassessed. Any comments or fixes would be much appreciated. Danger High voltage! 09:41, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know. I'm not sure if you are aware that the major contributor who did most of the work some time back (prefer not to name him to avoid NPA) and tended towards rather agressive "Ownership" has been indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry. So this time around it will hopefully go smoothly without crashing into inflated egos. Roger (talk) 09:46, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

TUI
I agree that the referencing is appalling, but it's not a speedy for spam. Too neutrally worded. Needs work, but should stay IMO (humble I ain't...). Peridon (talk) 21:39, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

When template
Glad to see you moved on, thanks. If I understand this page correctly the answer to this when template is "January 2012". Von Restorff (talk) 15:06, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

From Nick5001
I'm not sure if I am sending a message right but what do you need — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick5001 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I have absolutely no idea what you are referring to, please explain in more detail. Roger (talk) 20:32, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Church of St Teilo, Llantilio Crossenny
Thanks for fixing my error in the name, and other sorts. Could I ask for your help in one other matter? I first created the article from an entry I put into the article Listed buildings in Wales, where I placed it in the Grade I listed buildings in Monmouthshire section. Unfortunately, this is where I first spelt Crossenny wrongly and it is still spelt wrongly. When I try to change it to the correct spelling, it redlinks the article name, saying that it does not exist - which of course it does, subsequent to your sorting the problem. I've no idea how to fix this. Sorry for the essay and for the additional work. KJP1 (talk) 18:02, 12 February 2012 (UTC)


 * It took me two tries but I found the error. The list entry had two typos - LLantilio instead of Llantilio. It's no bother - fixing WP articles beats watching a "Law and Order" rerun! Roger (talk) 18:14, 12 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Really sorry - my typing's as poor as my understanding of Wikipedia formats. Much appreciate the effort.  Now you can go back to "Law and Order."  Thanks again.  KJP1 (talk) 18:18, 12 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry again, it seemed rather irrelevant to the article, but I can see that it has a relevance to the history of the article. KJP1 (talk) 18:35, 12 February 2012 (UTC)


 * You worry too much! LOL! There's no damage done that can't be easily fixed. Roger (talk) 18:52, 12 February 2012 (UTC)


 * In the interests of not worrying too much, I won't apologise for the @ then. Have a good day.  KJP1 (talk) 20:39, 12 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Bedtime for Bonzo (almost 11pm here). I have an early start tomorrow. Goodnight. Roger (talk) 20:46, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Dan Roodt
I have replied to you on the article's talk page. user: Ysgravin —Preceding undated comment added 15:05, 18 February 2012 (UTC).

Hi there. I commented on the Dan Roodt article's talk page. Please see my suggestion there. I believe the best way to save the article on Dan Roodt is to revert it to a version before the addition of so much unverified material. Johannes Jaar (talk) 08:29, 21 February 2012 (UTC)