User talk:Grutness/archive43

This file is an archive - please do not add new discussion here - add it to my Talk page

Category:Indigenous peoples of North America biography stubs
Grutness, do you think it might be time for a split? If so, I think it would be best and most consistent to split along tribal lines, rather than imposed national boundaries between Canada and the US, as so many First Nations overlap. Or we could split along First Nations/Native American; Inuit/Eskimo and Metis. But therein lies the rub: for the first two cases, Canada and the US use different terms. Let me know if you have any thoughts on this... Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:15, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Replied at SoM's page. Grutness...wha? 

oops...
thanks for that :P sonia ♫  03:47, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Mark's antipodes
Your Grutness,

I wonder what you think of User:Nankai/List_of_land_antipodes_of_New_Zealand?

Mark Price of Otago Daily Times wrote a book on the topic and has asked me to put the major data of his voyage on a Wikipedia page. I'm just concerned about the "primary reasearch" rule and the fact that it's lifted wholesale from a book (even though it's with the author's permission). Can you take me through the wikiethics of this?

PeterNankai (talk) 20:16, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

antipodes
nice one JamesNankai (talk) 22:09, 9 December 2010 (UTC) Oops: not you, Schwede66Nankai (talk) 22:11, 9 December 2010 (UTC) Thanks. hey maybe I'll just be boldNankai (talk) 23:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

weasel outbreak
in Zealandia (personification): thought you'd be interested because it's slightly vexillogocal and because I put your Palmerstom pic in the gallery there.Peter Nankai (talk) 20:49, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, Peter. Weirdly, there's another connection, as the original model for the woman on the Coat of Arms was very probably my ex's grandmother. James Grutness...wha?  21:50, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
 * So was Zealandia related to Silas Spragg of the Otago Daily Times?
 * Fascinating. As long as you're here, wd you mind peeking at Tōhoku Jūkan Line; I can't spot the missing ref tag anywhereNankai (talk) 06:13, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

ooops: got it. The importance of the missing " > " was "greater than" I realised.Nankai (talk) 06:18, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Cleanup-weighted
Template:Cleanup-weighted has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji (talk) 23:57, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ash Creek, Mechanicsville, Virginia


The article Ash Creek, Mechanicsville, Virginia has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable subdivision

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RL0919 (talk) 06:24, 25 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I have never heard of Ash Creek, Mechanicsville, Virginia (in fact, I've never heard of Mechanicsville, Virginia), so I suspect you must have the wrong person. Looking at the article, I agree that it seems non-notable, though populated places are not normally prodded - they usually go through a full AfD process. Grutness...wha? 
 * Looks like you did a page move that caused Twinkle to mis-identify you as the page creator. One of the downsides of using automated tools. Sorry about that. RL0919 (talk) 15:36, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
 * S'alright. Looking at the history I see that you're right, and that my move was incorrect - I'd assumed that VA was the Australian state of Victoria! Grutness...wha?  21:08, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: NZFC
Fully support your decision re: naming of NZFC article. Makes sense in terms of Wikipedia's style guidelines. I don't know if NZFC remains as the official un-sponsored name for the tournament (it was to be renamed any before ASB came on board) but with no official word in the public domain and as the most recent clean name, I think it's the best choice for the duration of ASB's sponsorship. Keep up the good work! Gialloneri (talk) 15:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:NZ-Banks P.png
Thank you for uploading File:NZ-Banks P.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:20, 4 January 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:20, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:NZ-Banks P.png
Thank you for uploading File:NZ-Banks P.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * This is getting faintly ridiculous. I made the copyright status clear and provided info about the map's source - what else do you need? Grutness...wha?  22:36, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

File:NZ-Banks P.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NZ-Banks P.png, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Israel-archaeology-stub
Thanks for creating the Israel-archaeology-stub template. I hope you don't mind I replaced the photo, I thought the the template could do with something better than some undistinguished room from Masada. Poliocretes (talk) 10:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mucking In


The article Mucking In has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * A search for references ("Mucking In" Jim Mora) found a single published (gBooks) source, which is primary (written by Jim Mora) fails WP:N

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jeepday (talk) 00:45, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * A one-minute search for references using Google found a considerable number - what search system did you use? Grutness...wha?  04:34, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Indef full protect on South Island nationalism
Hi Grutness. I was recently checking indef fully protected pages here and came across South Island nationalism. I noticed that you fully protected the article back in October to stop an edit-war. Looks like things have died down a bit on the page, although there's still interested editors chiming in on the talk page. I wanted to get your thoughts on perhaps unprotecting the page per the third pillar and perhaps following up with blocks to users who continue to work without consensus.

I'm bringing this here rather than at WP:RFPP because it seems you have more background in this than my 5-10 minutes of research. Additionally, because of your declared minor conflict, I'm going to ask Zscout370 to comment here. Hope that's not out of line. If you do wish to unprotect the page, feel free to take action as I am not an admin. Hope all is well! -- Gnowor TC 23:26, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Gnowor - basically, as you may have read on the talk page, I asked several other Admins to look at the page, with the comment that if they saw the problem as being one where the protection could be removed, then they were completely free to do so with no comeback from me. I was uneasy about adding the protection in the first place due to my frequent editing of the page, but it did seem at the time that one editor was engaging in what we could call reductio ad stubbium. I'm still perfectly happy to have other admins remove the protection if things are fine there (I haven't actually visited that page for some time, leaving it to others do decide one way or the other - ZScout370's certainly in a more objective position to judge than I am). As far as hoping all is well, thanks - things are pretty much returned to normal for me, though I'm not nearly as active on WP as I once was. :) Grutness...wha?  08:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Got it. I'm going to ask an admin at WP:RFPP to take a look, as Zscout has deferred to you, and you're deferring to others.  I hope this is okay.  Feel free to add your opinion regarding the protection status at that forum as your background on the article could be helpful.  Thanks! -- Gnowor TC 16:44, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * *sigh* And no sooner has the article been unprotected than the nonsense has begun again. This time it's accompanied by a false edit summary (claiming to combine two sections while in fact deleting one entirely). I'm not experienced enough to know what to do from here after reverting it (BRD is about the limit of my understanding) so any suggestions would be welcome. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * After yet more nonsense I believe at least one sock puppet is involved. See this by a brand new editor. Daveosaurus (talk) 08:50, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * We might have to semi that article. I have been watching it for a while,and I just think it is going to be the subject of edit waring a a long while yet... Brian | (Talk) 09:09, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Semi-ing's not going to help, since the main problem editor is not an anon. Grutness...wha?  09:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Semi plus an SPI on the problem editor(s)? -- Gnowor TC 16:10, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to track down a list of all the accounts with unconstructive edits (vandal, or consensus defying). I'll post that list here initially.  I'd love your thoughts on those users, Grut, before I post it over at SPI.  Thanks so much! -- Gnowor TC 16:15, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed alternate solution for vandalism
Here's a summary of all of the non-constructive edits since the unprotect: (Updated 17:01, January 15, 2011 (UTC))


 * (incorrect edit summary for pure removal of content)
 * (same removal. On talk page, editor claims content is duplicated, but it is not.)
 * Looking at user's contributions, user appears to be a single-purpose account. Possible sock for this purpose?  Going to look back to prior to the October protect for potential sockmaster.
 * (positive edit by this IP, indicating semi might not be appropriate)
 * (Assuming good faith, IP editor adds links to primary not secondary sources, possibly as they're unaware of policy. Links removed in next diff)
 * (redirect vandalism)
 * Sock of Teroamahai that's dissatisfied with outcome?
 * (redirect vandalism)
 * Sock of Teroamahai that's dissatisfied with outcome?
 * Sock of Teroamahai that's dissatisfied with outcome?

Based on this, I think that a semi may even be inappropriate. Looks like it's just a single editor (Teroamahai) that needs to be removed from the debate here. Full protect might be warranted to stop Teroamahai pending results of an WP:SPI, but given that an IP did make a positive contribution, I must object to protecting this page. I'll add to the above list as I look further back in the history. -- Gnowor TC 16:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No sooner than I find myself in the middle of a dispute on which I have far too little knowledge, I realize that I have other real world duties I must attend to. I'll leave you (Grutness) and Zscout to handle this.  I very highly recommend this be taken to WP:RFC, as indef. full protection is not an ideal solution for any page on Wikipedia.  Perhaps there, you'll find a better solution.  Sorry if I've caused a headache for anyone else as a result of this.  My actions were purely motivated by the desire to bring this into conformity with the third pillar. -- Gnowor TC 17:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The New Munster Cross info added by the anon is not typical of Teroamahai, but is typical of another problem editor to the article, who has repeatedly added this information about a nn group to the article, always with primary sources (there appear to be no secondary sources about this group). The New Munster Cross information almost certainly should not be in the article. It is because there is more than one problem editor that I haven't taken this to RFC in the past - there are two, with seemingly completely diffferent agendas. The Kevohkevin edit may be Teroamahai, but I'm not convinced wone way or the other - I'm fairly sure that Teroamaahai has used socks in the past on this article, though. Grutness...wha?  18:14, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Solution here should involve some form of blocks for the problematic editors. Was assuming the New Muenster Cross edits were in good faith, and asked for them to be brought back in.  I was assuming they could be sourced, but I'll take your word that group has no secondary coverage.  Potential for mediation or arbitration between problem editors?  I agree that the middle ground is probably best, or have an NPOV article with (sourced) sections regarding the alternative notable viewpoints.  Whatever the article winds up being, should be brought about consensus, which I saw you trying to get to on the talk page.  If editors continue to defy consensus, the editors should be blocked rather than a protect on the article.  I think that last point is where we disagree.
 * I'm of the view the blocks and protects are supposed to be used on those things which can't be fixed. An article on which there can be a fix shouldn't be protected.  An editor that refuses to edit in conformity with consensus can't be fixed and should be blocked.  Thanks for your continued efforts on this. -- Gnowor TC 18:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree that ideally blocks should go in place on the editors. problem is that the New Munster-supporting editor generally edits as an anon, and one of those "revolving IP" systems - at the very least they can only really be stopped by a semi-prot. Teroamahai, I'm pretty sure, has been blocked temporarily in the past - some sort of ban from editing articles connected with New Zealand regionalism nwpould be the best solution, which would need an RFC... but then again there's also the problem of the possible socks he's used. Whatever happens, it seems a multi-stage blocking/protection process is required. Grutness...wha?  01:08, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I know that pending changes protection theoretically isn't being added to new pages, but it seems like that'd be the perfect fix for this page (specifically PC2 protection). Think there's any chance that we could appeal for it's implementation in this case? -- Gnowor TC 07:22, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Mmmmmm. That might do it, yes... if we can get it implemented. Grutness...wha?  10:20, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

According to this it looks like it's still being added to pages. Perhaps apply pending changes and see what happens? -- Gnowor TC 20:11, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Given the lack of response here, I took this to WP:RFPP and requested that PC2 be applied. An admin there declined, but I did request that they offer and opinion as to whether it's permissible to add PC2 to pages.  If they confirm it is permissible, I would greatly appreciate your support in applying PC2.  Thanks so much! -- Gnowor TC 17:23, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry - combination of Real World (tm) and not noticing this note. Have commented on the PC2 request now. Grutness...wha?  22:38, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries at all. There's this thing called law school that's been interrupting my own ability to contribute.  Thank you for your continued attention and consideration on this.  Have a great day! -- Gnowor TC 05:43, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

New Zealand
Hi Grutness. I have been doing some work on the NZ article with the aim of getting it featured at some point. I noticed the Caversham article on the main page a while ago so any advice or help would be appreciated. There are quite a few people watching the article so don't feel obliged if the real world is keeping you busy. Either way I have left some comments on the talk page. Cheers AIR corn (talk) 23:27, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice. I spammed a few other users that seem to be interested in NZ (Gadfium, Avenue, Kahuroa and Simon) with positive replies so far. AIR corn (talk) 00:23, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

File:JamesDignan.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:JamesDignan.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:21, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Why did you replace the free image with the earlier copyrighted one? Grutness...wha?  21:30, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Which one was copyrighted - the painting that was moved to Commons? That was the top version in the history and the one displaying on your userpage (it was renamed when it was moved to Commons). Kelly  hi! 21:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The painting is fine - the photograph now displaying at File:JamesDignan.jpg is copyrighted. Grutness...wha?  21:47, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool, all should be well then. The painting is now at File:Grutness user self-portrait.jpg on Commons and displayed on your userpage, the photo is not used anywhere. You can either let File:JamesDignan.jpg be deleted through the FFD process or tag it yourself with db-self. Kelly  hi! 21:54, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Or just delete it myself. I've not had much dealing with image files though, and since the process has started at FFD, it might be best to just let it continue there. Grutness...wha?  22:01, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors
I saw you have been really active lately and I clicked on over to your user page and was pretty impressed. Would you be interested in helping with the WP:Online_Ambassadors program? It's really a great opportunity to help university students become Wikipedia contributers. I hope you apply to become an ambassador, Sadads (talk) 00:08, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry to stick my nose into here, but I noticed that the Online Ambassadors are supposed to help students who have been given editing assignments on Wikipedia. I was wondering about the other side of the equation - how do you match your students with the ambassador programme? Guettarda (talk) 00:23, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sadads, and thanks for the comments - unfortunately the Real World is taking up more of my time than it used to, so not at the moment... but I'll keep it in mind for a future date. FWIW I do my but on this score, though - I've tutored students at a polytechnic class about Wikipedia! :) Grutness...wha?  05:54, 26 January 2011 (UTC) (PS -Hi Guettarda - how're things in Trinidad?)

Drobeta and stubs
Hi! I saw you removed the stubs from the Drobeta (ancient city) redirect. I am not sure if you noticed, but it has a R with possibilities. If you look at the template description, it clearly suggests stubs in case of this special redirects so people can see it and get involved in expanding it. Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks --Codrin.B (talk) 01:13, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Minha Opiniao: Lukapa is not capitaly of Lunda-Norte, the capitaly is Dundo. Xá-Muteba, is not Sham-Muteba. Cambulo, is not Caumbo.

thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.78.18.134 (talk) 11:46, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Huh? Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha? 

The/the Beatles
Yes folks, it's here again. Please look at this link and leave your vote. I thank you.--andreasegde (talk) 08:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Princes Street, Dunedin Good Article
I am reviewing Princes Street, Dunedin as a good article. You can view the discussion at Talk:Princes Street, Dunedin/GA1.

RCSprinter123 (talk) 17:36, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of New Leinster Province for deletion
The article New Leinster Province is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/New Leinster Province until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 16:21, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Article Move
Hi Grutness, Got your message about moving Peter Montgomery's page. When you say he is most often referred to as "Pete", he's actually most commonly referred to as PJ, far less people refer to him as Pete. Accordingly, I'd like to move the page to PJ_Montgomery, if we can't move it to Peter. Thanks! Veruca salt12 (talk) 00:41, 5 February 2011 (UTC)Veruca_Salt12
 * That would make some sense. I'd forgotten all about that proposal-it was months ago! Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  00:44, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

re WP:STREET
Just came across this. Very nice work, thank you. Herostratus (talk) 02:56, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Glad it's appreciated! Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  23:09, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I concur with Herostratus. It's a good piece of work. Well done.  Schwede 66  09:13, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * :) thanks! Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  20:44, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Been Gone Too Long
Hi there! I'm trying to come back after a rather long break. Law school and the bar exam took away my wiki time. I'm trying to get my bearings again and feeling rather confused about things that've changed since I've been gone. I've been looking at which is placing all its stubs in  to try to make it stop doing that and overpopulating that category. I don't see any text in the template making it behave that way, and I don't see any categories in the stubbed articles either. Thoughts?

Also, I just saw that you were ill. I know it's almost two years later now, but I'm very sorry to hear wiki was affecting you that way. I hope that all is well now and that you'll enjoy good health for many years to come. Aelfthrytha (talk) 14:07, 6 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Welcome back! Hopefully the study all went well and IANAL no longer applies to you ;) My health's okay, but 2009-10 was a pretty terrible time one way and another. I'm pretty much back to normal now, but I keep my WP work low-key and as stress-free as possible these days.


 * As far as CAnatolia-geo-stub is concerned, I can't actually see the problem you mentioned - it looks fine to me, and the Central Anatolia permcat doesn't seem to be overloaded. All the stubs have been turned into the asbox type now, which pretty much standardises them... it might be that they're now using hidden categories, but I don't think so. If the problem looks like persisting, run it by Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting - someone who knows more about coding than I do might be able to work out what's going on. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  20:52, 6 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Nope, IANAL still. New York state moves as fast as peanut butter oozing downhill.  We took the bar in July, got pass results in November, were interviewed for fitness to practice in February, and no swearing in until March.  Goodness gracious. Aelfthrytha (talk) 12:36, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * IAAL! Aelfthrytha (talk) 04:42, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

stubs for categorization of hotels
Hi. You're the guy for stub-sorting, right? Could you look at: I'm trying to figure out what all has happened here; about a hundred stub templates have been edited by Dawynn and hundreds of articles have had their stubs swapped. The net effect is to no longer categorize them by by company, but rather as structures, which seem completely off to me. Cheers, Jack Merridew 19:45, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * User talk:Dawynn and
 * Stub types for deletion/Log/2011/February/8

United Tribes of New Zealand
Any reason why you didn't just revert the POV pushing edits? Since I've replied to you on the talk page, I'm reluctant to revert again without some feedback from you (or others).- gadfium 06:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I simply don't know enough about the subject to know whether it should be reverted or counterbalanced with opposing info. I've reverted now though. I see from the page history that the same anon has done other dubious edits in the past, so I've semi-protected the page for a month. Hopefully that'll stop things. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  22:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Princes Street, Dunedin Good Article
Sorry. I am a little busy at the moment I will try to get to it as soon as i can - nearly there though.

RCSprinter123 (talk) 12:01, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Opportunity to comment on Batavia
There is a discussion starting up at Talk:Batavia (disambiguation), that may be of interest to you. The subject is technically a page move discussion, but the purpose of the discussion is to decide where Batavia should redirect. Until earlier today, Batavia redirected to History of Jakarta, but during this discussion, it is redirecting to Batavia (disambiguation). Your comments and suggestions are welcome.

Thanks for your help. HuskyHuskie (talk) 22:39, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

You are receiving this because you are one of the principal editors of one of the articles that is linked to Batavia (disambiguation). This notice is being posted to all of the top three editors of each of these articles (in terms of total edits), with the following exceptions: This is an attempt to be a neutrally-phrased posting in keeping with the principles of WP:CANVASS. If you find anything in the wording or the manner posted to be a violation of that guideline, please notify me at my talk page.
 * editors who are blocked
 * anonymous IP editors
 * editors who, despite ranking in the top three of edits to an article, have only a single edit to said article

Misunderstanding
I apologize if I came around as being a bit harsh the other day. Sometimes pressure at work gets to you. I feel as if I have misundertood the difference between stub and portal. Therefore, I am sorry if I jumped the gun when I saw your deletions. Furthermore, when we begin in wikipedia, not too many of us know that we have to suggest templates before making them. So now I know, and I have learnt through the experience. I hope that I have not offended you, since it was not my intention. The words mate and ''dear chap', were meant in a joking manner. Sincerely! Joe--142.169.118.147 (talk) 03:44, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I also apologise if I have offended you in any way - it was never my intention to do so. Might I suggest that if you want to encourage editing on subjects relating to a topic such as New Spain it might be an idea to try to form a specific WikiProject for it, inviting other editors who have done work on the subject to join (looking at the page histories of articles relating to the subject should help you find some, and you can also leave invitations on the talk pages of articles connected with the topic and any related WikiProjects, e.g., WikiProject Mexico, WikiProject Texas). If you did that, then you could also create an talk page assessment template for any articles connected to the subject, which would probably be far more useful to you than a stub template. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  05:07, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Princes Street
Hey, Grutness. I see that the article is under review by Rcsprinter. Since they've started that review, it's come up that Rcsprinter may not be entirely familiar with our "good" and "featured" criteria, based on their GA and FA nominations and previous GA reviews. Anyway, if you'd like me to take over the review I'll certainly have it done by this evening (in regard to your time zone). If not, I'd still advise you to seek another reviewer; that would probably be best because it would free Rcsprinter of their commitment to the article and it will expedite the review. Regards,  Swarm   X 14:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC) Thanks for that - I think I've addressed a couple of the points. As for the photos, yes, I should upload them directly to commons, but for some reason my internet link seems to object to me uploading things there (I'm on a slow dial-up link, and for some reason uploading to commons is far slower than uploading to WP. I've never really understood it, but that's the reason why I generally just upload to WP). Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  08:51, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Right, I have no intention of discrediting Rcsprinter's review, but they kind of left it hanging. I'll just jump in and see if we can get the review finished up.  Swarm   X 02:19, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, the review is done. Not much to deal with but I did raise some points. Anyway, I noticed the images you uploaded were on Wikipedia. You should really upload free images to Commons, if you didn't know that already. Just passing through to share this bit of information. Regards,  Swarm   X 02:53, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, alright. That makes sense. Article's been listed, BTW. Regards,  Swarm   X 20:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

My stubs
Sir! Any chance of placing Kingdom of France stubs and New Spain stubs off the deletion list. I have now added 28 articles to Kingdom of France and 10 to New Spain. I will continue to do so every day now! However, if they were badly formated, is it possible to format them correctly as you had suggested. KingdomofFrance-stub and NewSpain-stub and retaining the articles I had listed in each of them. I can understand the necessity for this process when you look at all the stubs created for football, linebackers, hotels, etc. So many and in a way useless. I can assure you that this will not be the case here because it covers a large scope of subjects. Your cooperation on my behalf will be and is greatly apprecitated. I also thank you for the suggestions given to me, I will definitely put them into practice.--Chnou (talk) 21:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I must admit I'm still not entirely happy with the stub types, but it seems that they do have a use - I'll rename the templates, though, so the nominations can be effectively closed. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  22:28, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! I wish you a good day!  You must have wonderful weather there!  Here it is -15 with more than 300 cms of snow! The gesture is much appreciated!--Chnou (talk) 22:36, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Brrr! Still, spring can't be far away now... It's warm, but windy here today (about 25 C). Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  22:46, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I am putting the words together so you do not have the trouble of doing it! Thank you!--Chnou (talk) 22:48, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Only the KoF ones left to do... Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  22:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: Croatia geography stub categories
Yes in fact we talked about it :) See WSS/P. As I explained earlier, I just couldn't see the point in leaving the tree so unbalanced, so to speak. Those three small ones are a small price to pay for consistency IMHO. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 23:47, 16 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you :) --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 10:05, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Scots Law
My understanding of this is that it is indeed officially known as "Scots law".


 * "The subcategories seem to be a mix & match of the two demonyms ( but, for instance). Is there a reason for this or does it need to be made uniform with one name of the other?"

I really don't know. I hear a mix of the two used colloquially, but I doubt this is much guide to what they are known as officially. Scots law is currently a hodge podge, partly because of what Westminster has done to it, so it wouldn't surprise me if there was a mix.

For example, "depute" is the proper old Scots title for "deputy" and appears in numerous titles, but we have a "deputy first minister"!!! --MacRusgail (talk) 19:14, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

It's probably worth investigating this. I know a lawyer and will ask his opinion.--MacRusgail (talk) 12:14, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

The Reed Dictionary of Māori Place Names
Hi Grutness. I notice you added a reference with the above book to Raratoka Island (thanks for the expansion by the way). I was hoping you might be able to look something up for me. I have a source that says the name "Tawhiti comes from Tahiti", but I am not sure what Tawhiti it is referring to. I have linked to the Poor Knights Island (i.e. Tawhiti Raha), but there is also a Tawhiti in Taranaki (which seems to just consist of a school and Museum now). I was hoping the book may confirm (or deny) this. I have a similar query about Rukumoana, I created a stub linking to the Marae near Morrinsville although the origin of the name is not made clear and is probably not as dodgy as the Tawhiti link. This all relates to the New Zealand place names article. Cheers AIR corn (talk) 05:18, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Aircorn - the book I have is the Reed dictionary of NZ placenames, not specifically Maori ones, and there are a few inaccuracies in it which I've noticed (or at least alternative meanings/origins to ones that I've seen mentioned elsewhere), but here's what it says about Tawhiti:
 * Tawhiti (Bay of Plenty) Literally "trap" or "snare". It was here that Pawa, the Bay of Plenty chief, set a trap to catch Rongokokako, the giant of Kahuranaki. It is a hill overlooking a small secluded bay named Waimahuru. An old proverb says "Ara te korero e piki ra i Tawhiti-a-Pawa, tokoto noa Waimahuru" ("While tidings go over Tawhiti-a-Pawa, Waimahuru remains solitary"). Tawhiti is either a name or enters into a name in many parts of New Zealand, usually denoting the homeland. Tawhiti is [the name of a place] 3km from Hawera, and another 18km from Alexandra.
 * Presumably the Tahiti connection is the places where the homeland is denoted, given the presumed origin of the Maori migrations. Hope that helps! Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  09:08, 27 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. Not a definitive answer, but at least it doesn't contradict the other source. I will delink the Poor Knights however as I can't justify that beyond wishful thinking and original research at this stage. I left a message at the Maori taskforce so hopefully someone might be able to help from there. Otherwise I will keep trawling the web and see if I stumble on anything. Cheers AIR corn (talk) 10:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Sydenham Heritage Church
Hi Grutness! Good to see you are editing, so apparently not too badly affected by the Quake. Is it OR to use Flickr photos as a source, as this church is apparently no more(demolished)? Post quake link shows before and after. Apparently badly damaged and demolished sometime on/or before the 24th February. Text saying this this was on the page but unreferenced and hence reverted.

Commons has some pics and info, here but I suppose we need a print/online reliable source? Which I am unable to find at the moment! - 220.101 User talk:220.101.28.25\ 14:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi 220.101 - most of the problems with photos are usually as a result of copyright rather than OR - and you'd have problems with that with any flickr photos you used. Unfortunately because of the fact that flickr is often used incorrectly in that way on WP (and also because it basically counts as a blog) flickr references are automatically reverted by bot. At the moment I don't think there'd be any problems if an unreferenced sentence saying that the building had been demolished was placed in the article - it's the sort of thing which can be referenced at a later date and (though there doesn't seem to be a reliable source that can be used as a reference online yet) there doesn't seem to be any doubt that there's evidence that the church has gone, and reliable references are likely to become available soon enough (the historic places trust register will give the full details at some point, for instance). Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  22:01, 27 February 2011 (UTC) PS - thanks for the concern - I'm 350km south of Chch, so not affected directly. I felt the quake, and several of my friends are in the quake zone (all well AFAIK, though one has lost her house).

Grutness (aka my wiki Superman!)
Grutness (aka my wiki Superman!) - Wow! Your kindness touch me. Thank you so much for helping me cross-link a redirect w/(disambiguation) 12/04/2010  ~Diane

My passion.. Inclusive design Backstory: I'd been searching the net for best practices (section 508 - photo captioning etc). Didn't even know the artist...notice the cross-link needed to be updated. Easy fix right? Hours later...I sent out my first ever distress call for help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dianeheudier (talk • contribs) 05:16, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Diane -not sure exactly what I did that you appreciated so much :) All I did was fix a stub template link... glad it was appreciated though! Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  12:08, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Administrative decision needed on stub sorting
If you have time, could you please help reach a decision on the hotel deletion discussions from Feb 8? There was some opposition to my original proposal, but no one commented on the revised proposals. I'm willing to help on whatever changes the community agrees on, but just need to have a final decision. Dawynn (talk) 13:59, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Probably better if it's someone who was uninvolved in the original discussion, like Waacstat or Pegship. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  22:00, 28 February 2011 (UTC)