User talk:Edhac-Edham

Welcome!
Hello, Edhac-Edham, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Kennet and Avon Canal. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! &mdash; Rod talk 12:34, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

July 2017
Hello, I'm ZH8000. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles are written objectively and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Your only contributions look like spam or promotion of not verifiable and pretendingly "official" documents, which totally lack any sources! ZH8000 (talk) 09:30, 28 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello ZH8000! I am sorry, that we have completely different views. My contributions should not be promotional and there was no commercial hidden agenda. I see no sign, that we used Wikipedia as a soapbox. Where is a non-objective comment from me? In the source you see the name of our club. If you want to see the origin old security papiers, you can contact this club. Therefore I see no lack of sources!
 * Is there a chance, that you can change your mind, or that you can give us useful hints, about how we should improve our contributions (especially a correct example for such security papers)? In the past months we got several positive responses from other administrators for our contributions. Therefore we are astonished, that your negative view about our work. Edhac-Edham (talk) 12:56, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Who is "we"? Jytdog (talk) 17:23, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * "we" means members of the club EDHAC, an association of people interested in scripophily (https://www.edhac-ev.de/)Edhac-Edham (talk) 17:21, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying. Are multiple using this account? Jytdog (talk) 08:12, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * No, there is only one "SPOC" (single point of contact) for Wikipedia / Wikimedia in our club.Edhac-Edham (talk) 21:31, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for explaining. I understand German Wikipedia is OK with "corporate accounts" but English Wikipedia is not, so people will react negatively if you say "we are doing X".  To save yourself trouble you should say "I".  :) Jytdog (talk) 05:45, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Der Aktiensammler
Why are you adding spam links to an auction house newsletter, sources to some magazine. when the source of these images is these people? Jytdog (talk) 17:22, 11 November 2017 (UTC) (amended quetion and header Jytdog (talk) 08:19, 13 November 2017 (UTC))


 * Sorry, but your conclusions are wrong. Edhac-Edham (talk) 18:54, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying!  Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting - when you reply to someone, you put a colon in front of your comment, which the Wikipedia software will render into an indent when you save your edit; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons in front of your comment, which the WP software converts into two indents, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this  in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread.  I hope that all makes sense. (And as you, at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages when you save your edit.)
 * With threading and signing, we are able to know who said what. Will reply on the substance in a second...Jytdog (talk) 13:43, 12 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Would you please answer the question I asked or explain more how it is incorrect? Please also reply to the question in the section above. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 13:40, 12 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the confusion about similar names - aktiensammler.de is the URL of a web shop. We are referring to the late magazine "Der Aktiensammler", which was completely independant from aktiensammler.de and the owner of aktiensammler.de. You can find some additional information about "Der Aktiensammler" on the following URL of the German National Library: https://portal.dnb.de/opac.htm;jsessionid=191C6EDB855D3FF7F3B77C235A899ECB.prod-worker1?query=idn%3D96489419X&cqlMode=true&method=simpleSearch Edhac-Edham (talk) 17:14, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Also on www.nonvaleurs.de/pdf/biblio_deutsch_edhac.pdf you can find a few information about the magazine in the "German Bibliography of Scripophily".
 * In our references we have put information about a magazin with an ISSN number, but not to an URL of a web shop! Edhac-Edham (talk) 17:14, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for explaining! I see my mistake, and I have changed the header above and my question above. I am sorry.
 * But I am still confused. The edit that caught my attention was this one, at Hoffmann-La Roche.  The picture of the stock certificate there, is this: File:F._Hoffmann-LaRoche_%26_Co_AG_1932.jpg.  That page says the source for the image is the collection of EDHAC.  So... how does the magazine fit in?  Did you all scan it from  that magazine, or did you also publish the scan in that magazine?   It is not clear what the citation is supposed to signify. Jytdog (talk) 08:19, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * One administrator had the complains, that our contributions are "not verifiable and pretendingly "official" documents, which totally lack any sources". Although I did not share his opinion, I have searched for an inprovement. Therefore we had the idea with the references. The real source of the image is documented in the information of the image. In the reference you see a source, where you can find additional information about this type of security paper. Edhac-Edham (talk) 21:29, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying and explaining why you are adding sources. It is still unclear what exactly is in the issue of "Der Aktiensammler" that you cited.  Is that where the scan is from, is where the scan is also published, or does it describe what stock certificates from Roche looked like at the time? Sorry I am not getting it. Jytdog (talk) 05:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * In Aktiensammler 01/12 you can find a short story about Hoffmann-La Roche, including a table with the different security papers of the company and photos of three different security papers of the company. With the help of this reference everybody should be able to verify our (my) contribution to this article.Edhac-Edham (talk) 21:23, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I see. I think a useful ref would be something like the following:  (ref)From the collection of the Ersten Deutschen Historic-Actien-Clubs e.V (EDHAC e.V.). To verify that this is authentic, please see the magazine, Der Aktiensammler 01/12, pp. 14,, which describes Roche stock certificates and has sample images.(/ref)   That explains the actual source of the image and explains why Der Aktiensammler is cited....  I would understand that citation immediately. Jytdog (talk) 02:41, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Security paper
In English this would normally be called a share certificate. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 15:57, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello Martin, I am a little bit confused about your remark. To what do you refer? I have found the article about "Security paper", but this is not related to share certificates. Regards, Edhac-Edham (talk) 19:41, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * My fault I'm sorry. I should have linked to Stockton and Darlington Railway where you attached a scan of a share certificate. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 20:02, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello Martin, I have updated the text according to your advice. Edhac-Edham (talk) 05:25, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Date format
Hi there. Thank you very much for all the share certificate images you've added, like here. I hope it will help you to know that the correct format for the date in British English would be 16 June 1857, without the dot, rather than 16. June 1857 as you've had. If you could avoid adding the dot then other editors can enjoy the share images without needing to tidy up afterwards! Vielen Dank, schön Tag, 82.34.153.236 (talk) 21:53, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:48, 28 November 2023 (UTC)