User talk:HopsonRoad/Archive 5

Catamaran
Thank you for the correction! Madras-Katamaran this is the one. it is called "Kattamaram" in malayalam (and Tamil as well, I guess) which is a native way of fishing vessel. I can see about the early Tamilnadu usage about these things from the catamaran page as well. Do let me know if this image will add some additional information or do we need a separate page for this one? --Manuspanicker (talk) 16:57, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the interesting link to Madras-Katamaran, Manuspanicker. The German article says that the craft is not a catamaran, despite the name, but is a type of Floss, German for "raft". So, the German article is off-base about the picture, too, since a raft consists of multiple floats—usually logs—bound together, as can bee seen at the German article on the topic, Floß. The image clearly depicts a dugout canoe. The article describes the derivation of Katamaran as coming from the Tamil word for a craft, consisting of logs bound together. Thanks for the interesting excursion! Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 17:14, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * :) The picture is 3 long slightly bent logs bound together to float in sea, which is used for fishing in my native. and it is called "Kattamaram", you can see the ml link there (കട്ടമരം, you may not understand this lang, that's why the de link!). Thanks for the reply. they talk about the same thing. I felt the dug-out is more the kayak type, which is very diff than this. this one is very primitive and the the name is also from the same lines. any way nice to have a conversation! tc. --Manuspanicker (talk) 17:38, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * So it is, Manuspanicker. Even so, the effect is to create a single hull, not two. It appears to be a dugout canoe made of multiple logs, bound together, that have a "cockpit" for the occupant. Is the "cockpit" caulked so that water doesn't rise up through the joints between logs, I wonder. The Mayalam article suggests that bentonite is used. It's neither a raft nor a catamaran, but a kattamaram! I note that the German article has an "n" at the end of the word, Katamaran. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 15:31, 20 February 2016 (UTC)


 * As to whether the topic merits an article, I would hope that it would draw on one or more references from which the material was summarized. The references that I see in the German and Malayam articles look like they would mention the type of craft only in passing, not necessarily as something of note. It should be called, Kattamaram, if written. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 17:05, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks
Hello HR. I know I sent a ping but I wanted to add a written thanks for this. If it keeps getting changed would you consider adding that as a full fledged reference? If you do like the idea I think you should do the honors as you did the research. Cheers. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 04:35, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, MarnetteD, I put the reference on the term, "Chair," since it was a terminology issue. A reference for his tenure belongs in the text. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 17:53, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks good HR. Thanks for taking the time to look into this and for adding the ref. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 17:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Disruptive editor
I've asked for help, regarding the activities of User:New Speech Killer, before, who has a different view of the meaning of "plurality" than is generally accepted in the English-speaking world, which he (I presume) imposes on articles with that term in the title, as is seen at Plurality (voting): Revision history, where he also shows up as IP users 131.104.138.183 and 216.16.241.140. He also refuses to use Talk pages at the pertinent articles to achieve consensus; instead, he leaves abusive edit comments and postings in the Talk pages of various editors. See, for example, here and here. He is very resistant to courtesy and observing the protocols of WP. Also his English is difficult to follow. He has received respectful guidance from a number of editors at his talk page, which only tends to upset him. Please assist in this matter. Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 14:35, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I do believe that New Speech Killer is editing against consensus, at least the rough consensus that's emerged from what discussions I've seen spread about the article and user talk pages. I have left the user an edit warring warning.  Comments like Consensus is not a good think, the good thinks is objectivity and honesty. I believe you know that the best consensus is between mafia like members. from your second example above concern me, since reaching consensus is what Wikipedia is all about.  If this activity continues, you may be better off adjusting your template to an  template, or taking it to WP:ANI. Cheers, Nick&#8288;—&#8288;Contact/Contribs 18:02, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi HopsonRoad - help?
Hi HopsonRoad! You were so kind in welcoming me to editing Wikipedia a few years ago! So I just wanted to let you know, I'm actually now reading up to truly understand the editing process. Previously, I've just been fixing minor grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. errors.

If you could look at the "Burt Baskin" (of Baskin-Robbins ice cream fame) talk page and see what I've written and let me know what you think, I'd be very appreciative! Of course, if you don't have time, I understand. I was listening to the "Food Revolution Summit" last week with John Robbins, who is Baskin's nephew, which is why I looked up his page, and it seems there are some issues on the article. Thanks, and thanks again for your welcome when I joined Wikipedia! Best. -Betsey (named after a character in David Copperfield). BetseyTrotwood (talk) 03:46, 11 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi again HR - Thank You for your answer on the Burt Baskin talk page! I will proceed and try to "be bold"! (I had just seen that page "be bold" yesterday after I asked the question, so thanks for reinforcing that!) You're a peach, HR! -BT (my real initials :) ) BetseyTrotwood (talk) 20:17, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Need help for spaces...
Hi! Thanks for welcoming me on Wikipedia. I don't understand how to make clean spaces in pages because I need to make pictures correspond to text, i struggle a lot... Do you have some advices?

Thanks! Ecolouve (talk) 19:13, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Piloting (navigation), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Divers. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:31, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Help,visual editor
hello, how can I activate visual editing?i hate this text editor.At Last ... (talk) 19:16, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bolt rope, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mast and Boom. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tack (sailing), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sailing vessel. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Nantucket in the Revolutionary War
Please look in on Nantucket in the Revolutionary War. The editor appears to be a student, working on a history project, who doesn't understand how Wikipedia works. The article doesn't yet demonstrate attributes of notability, in my opinion. I've tried to explain this in the Talk page, but have received no reply from the editor. User:HopsonRoad 13:52, 17 November 2016 (UTC)


 * And what do you want others to do about that? My advice would be to leave a note at the new user's talk page pointing them towards the article's talk page (they may not be familiar with that system); I'll do so. Other than that, I'd say the regular editing processes should be used. If you feel there isn't enough coverage of Nantucket's Revolutionary War history to establish notability, then unfortunately AFD would be the place to go. Personally I would expect that at least some such coverage exists; in fact, the "references" section gives two books explicitly dealing with this period of Nantucket history. Huon (talk) 20:35, 17 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Huon, You did exactly what I feel is appropriate at this stage. Thank you. I wasn't looking for AFD, merely to help guide the editor towards making the case for notability in the lead and consequently, the article. If the article appears to not be shaping up, properly, can a different user request that it become a draft, as you offered at User talk:Conrad.troast? Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 21:21, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Snow/GA2
HopsonRoad, I just fixed the top section of your individual reassessment page; it was not displaying properly, so I used the standard coding for that section.

Please don't forget to notify the WikiProjects related to this article, as is specified in the WP:GAR instructions; it is a good way to find people who can help address the issues you've raised, since the original editors may not still be around (especially in the case of an article that became a GA so long ago). Many thanks, and I'm glad you were willing to take on this reassessment. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:54, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Possessive nouns
Hi,

I'm writing to ask why exactly you undid this edit I made to the Jeffrey Jones article over a month ago. [] I was always taught to add an "s" after an apostrophe even when someone's first or last name ends with an "s". Although I understand that omitting an "s" after the apostrophe for names like Jones is acceptable nowadays according to the Chicago manual of style, I was told that adding "another possessive S after a word ending in S" is preferred' according to that same manual. I've been away from Wikipedia for a while so it's possible that I may be missing something here but I would really appreciate it if you could elaborate more as to why you reverted this edit. Thank you. Shaneymike (talk) 21:52, 7 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Apostrophes

"Use the apostrophe to show possession. To show possession with a singular noun, add an apostrophe plus the letter s.

Examples: a woman's hat the boss's wife Mrs. Chang's house""

"But most people would pronounce an added s in "Jones's," so we'd write it as we say it: Mr. Jones's golf clubs."

Just to show you where I'm coming from.Shaneymike (talk) 22:07, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for checking in, Shaneymike. In the link that you provided it stated, "One method, common in newspapers and magazines, is to add an apostrophe + s ('s) to common nouns ending in s, but only a stand-alone apostrophe to proper nouns ending in s.


 * Examples:
 * the class's hours
 * Mr. Jones' golf clubs
 * the canvas's size
 * Texas' weather


 * Care must be taken to place the apostrophe outside the word in question. For instance, if talking about a pen belonging to Mr. Hastings, many people would wrongly write Mr. Hasting's pen (his name is not Mr. Hasting).


 * Correct: Mr. Hastings' pen


 * It also says that your approach is acceptable. However, I was applying the standard used in journalism, as described, above. If you like Jones's better, I won't quibble! User:HopsonRoad 22:34, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Move closures
Hi HopsonRoad, while I think that it's great that you want to improve the cold-weather warfare article, and are clearly putting a lot of time and effort in to editing it it might be a good idea to review Requested moves/Closing instructions, as the nominator of the move there was a clear conflict of interest and you closed the discussion after it has only been up for three days as opposed to the full seven day listing as required. Furthermore as you are not an admin per the policy WP:RMNAC you should have identified yourself (it may also be worthwhile looking at the essay WP:NAC). While I did of course support the move in the RM, and see no reason to make an issue out of it for petty bureaucratic reasons (WP:IGNORE is a policy too of course) it may be a good idea to not make a habit of making moves in this manner and instead be a little more cautious in the future. Ebonelm (talk) 02:55, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your gentle message, Ebonelm. My feeling was that, since there was no opposition to the new, alternate target move and if I had, perchance, chosen that alternate target name in the first place, there would have been no intervening administrative action. In other cases, when I made a name change, there were no bells going off, just the need to explain the move. It was only when the originally proposed target name was already a redirect, that bells rang. Since there was sufficient opportunity to comment and no apparent controversy about the new, alternate target name, I proceeded. I will certainly take your advice to heart, in the future. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 04:08, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Vermont gubernatorial elections
Howdy. Is Vermont the only state that requires 50%+ result for election? GoodDay (talk) 22:06, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking in, GoodDay. Of the states where governors have won with a plurality, it appears that Vermont and Mississippi require legislative action. User:HopsonRoad 22:14, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Check out how it was done at the 1999 Mississippi gubernatorial election article. PS - Gotta luv those 5 states that hold their gov elections in odd-numbered years. Going against the grain :) GoodDay (talk) 22:29, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * And an example of where the 1% Reform party vote doesn't earn a place in the infobox, GoodDay! User:HopsonRoad 02:45, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep. GoodDay (talk) 02:47, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

It appears the pro-inclusion editors aren't overly interested in working things out at the Dispute board, nor continuing discussion at article's talkpage. It appears that a Rfc will be required. GoodDay (talk) 20:58, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

COI and self-promotion
I note that Daan Roosegaarde and Studio Roosegaarde were initiated and developed by apparent employees, connected with the subjects. Look at the history pages and look at User:Lidibrouwer and User:Noralouisehoekstra, for instance. Edits by User:Fireflyinthesky11 appear to be devoted to that same subject, as well. I'm informing you, since this is above my "pay grade". Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 18:43, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I would imagine COI/Paid editing issues should probably go to WP:COIN or WP:ANI but you should take a look at WP:Outing before doing so... Chrissymad  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  19:53, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I have turned the article on the Studio, which was basically a duplicate, into a redirect to the article on Daan Roosegaarde. On that article I've removed some spam and some copyright violations, but more cleanup may be necessary. Huon (talk) 21:06, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Huon, I have welcomed and advised the following editors of Conflict of interest, inviting them to decide whether to self-declare at:


 * User talk:Fireflyinthesky11‎
 * User talk:Noralouisehoekstra‎
 * User talk:Lidibrouwer‎
 * User talk:Elainejocesxu‎
 * User talk:Tina Dekkers‎
 * User talk:Daan Roosegaarde‎
 * User talk:BruceJanssen‎
 * I hope that I did the right thing. If not, please advise me and I'll correct any error. User:HopsonRoad 21:16, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Also I hope that didn't come off as me jumping on you for potential outing - I almost got in trouble for doing so myself, so figured I'd give you a heads up! :)  Chrissymad  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  21:34, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.

About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Catamaran Edit of Feb 24, 2017 Gone - Question?
Hello Hopson Road,

Garett99 here, I made a second edit on Feb 24, which you confirmed back was OK, but today when I went to Catamaran, the edit was no longer there. I looked in the history of edits and i saw the dit go listed but in the next two edits I did not see it being removed. Can't figure it out. Am I missing something? I appreciate your time in explaining this as this is all a little new to me. Garett99 (talk) 17:46, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi HopsonRoad
Making slow progress, but getting there WikiDorset (talk) 16:33, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * "So far, so good", said the man as he fell past the 22nd floor! Thanks for all your help, WikiDorset. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 20:12, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Reference
Thanks, I didn't know that should be done. Will do next time! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smog#Canada DocTox (talk) 22:44, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia, DocTox! You can find useful templates for references at WP:CIT or on the dropdown menu, using the "Cite" button if you're editing in WP:VisualEditor.


 * Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 02:40, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Course
Dear HopsonRoad,

Thanks for your addition (/revertion) to the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Course_(navigation). I realise in some sectors course is regarded to always be over ground. Though, as I cited in my reference, there is such a thing as course through water, which is widely used in the maritime industry. As there are no major articles on marine navigation, I felt like this should be a part of the article on course. Also, courses can use other reference points. There are magnetic courses, true courses, gyro compass courses,... In the Dutch version of the article someone has elaborated this further. I might add/translate this to the English page sometime but currently lack time as there are so many more interesting articles I could add.

This is the reason I submitted my change and why I reverted yours. I may not be an experienced Wikipedia editor, I do possess extensive knowledge on marine navigation.

In the future, please educate yourself more before you revert any additions, as this saves everyone a lot of work and keeps things interesting! If you are interested further in the subject on marine courses, I'm sure you'll find a library somewhere with maritime documentations.

Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wouter van der Wal (talk • contribs) 21:29, 19 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your note, Wouter van der Wal. I too am very familiar with the subject. We should be having this discussion at the article's talk page. Please see Talk:Course (navigation). Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 21:49, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Central Counterparty Clearing
HR, would you please take out your editorial magic pens and review the above article which I have largely rewritten. ThanksWikiDorset (talk) 20:11, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

wing (anatomy), locomotory organ
Thanks for the posative reaction to that edit, maybe take a look at some thoughts here: Talk:Locomotory organ. Is there a way for wikipedia to connect these concepts around that term. I already tried to make a wiktionary def locomotary organ, but someone deleted it. Are there any other options? MfortyoneA (talk) 11:43, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Incomplete AfD nom
I cleaned up the Lorca Cohen AfD. For reference WP:AFDHOW part II and part III. - Bri (talk) 14:22, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Sailing ship
Hello I notice you took out an entry I put in the List section here (which is fair enough) but it raises the question I have posted here: Just to let you know. Regards, Moonraker12 (talk) 16:25, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Help requested
In writing a biography about a person, who married and changed names during the course of events. Should one use whichever name that applied at the time of a given set of events or the name that the person ultimately had and is the subject of the article? Could you point me to the guidance on this? Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 02:27, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The guidance you are looking for is in the Manual of Style. The guidance on changed names says: If a person is named in an article in which they are not the subject, they should be referred to by the name they were using at the time of the mention rather than a name they may have used before or after the mention. However, see MOS:IDENTITY.  MOS:Identity also says: When there is a discrepancy between the term most commonly used by reliable sources for a person or group and the term that person or group uses for themselves, use the term that is most commonly used by reliable sources; if it isn't clear which is most used, use the term that the person or group uses.  Hope this helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 03:23, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the Thanks
Having recently received from another user a revert-with-rude-comment (that I plan on demonstrating wrong, with a polite but icily clear rebuttal, but then shortly realize it is not really worth the effort), it is nice to get a thanks, and for a *tag* no less!! My pet wiki-peeve is unusual vocabulary that is not at least briefly defined for the general reader. In any case, thanks for the thanks! Peacedance (talk) 15:17, 14 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Hey HopsonRoad! Since you already have a header on your Talk page for it, I, too, would like to thank you for the "thank you".  After I removed some poorly sourced content, you reverted me but added much better sourcing, and you noted that it would have been more constructive if I had done so.  You were correct, of course, but I left a snippity edit summary in response.  Then I remembered that I've given that very same advice to other editors many times myself.   Feeling a bit like a heel now.  Anyway, thanks again.  Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 17:05, 10 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I very much appreciate this post, Xenophrenic. While my original advice with my edit may have been true, perhaps I could have offered it in a less off-putting manner. It's easy to take offense here in WP, even when none was intended. When I saw your revert, I thought,  "Hmmm, I might have gone with a simple 'moving and expanding of text' edit comment". Since your result was an improvement, I thought it best to model appreciation, rather than annoyance with what looked at first like a revert on a one-revert/day page! It's rare to find someone so introspective and willing to re-think the impact of an action on others as you have been. Thanks, again! Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 19:13, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Minor edit
Hello HopsonRoad,

You might want to familiarize yourself with the wikipedia policy on calling something a minor edit. I see a lot of recent edits on Sailing that are not minor by this definition. Nothing I disagree with, but they're not "minor" in the wikipedia sense. Thanks for helping to improve the article. Mr. Swordfish (talk) 19:09, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. I did as you suggested and saw that I tweaked a few copy-edited wordings after introducing a major change. I marked the tweaks as m, but not the major edit that they were part of. My feeling was that they took place minutes after the major change and were minor. However, they may deceive a person checking their watch list that only a minor change has occurred recently. I'll change my practice in the future. I'm glad that you're looking in. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 19:37, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Sunday July 16: New England Wiknic @ Cambridge, MA
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Orphaned non-free image File:Peter Goldmark Jr.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Peter Goldmark Jr.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Possible false positive template:unconstructive on anonymous IP user
Hi there, you may have accidentally marked someone reverting vandalism as an unconstructive anonymous contributor.

User talk page: here

Edit it likely refers to: here

The way I understand, someone else vandalized [snow] 1, not this user. Nietvoordekat (talk) 13:18, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello from QuimbyMt.
Check out my work at my sandbox. QuimbyMt (talk) 14:35, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Help me!
I would like to be guided to a place to see the code that creates an infobox, especially like the one that is seen at: Template:Infobox military conflict. I see lots of guidance on how to fill them in or to document them, but can't see how to code one from scratch.

User:HopsonRoad 22:38, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * At the top of the template page there is a "View source" link. You can use that link to see the code. Template code often is very intricate and built by making use of other templates (here particularly Template:Infobox) which in turn may make use of yet other templates. Coding an infobox from scratch is thus anything but easy. See Help:Templates for a behind-the-scenes introduction to template code. Huon (talk) 23:32, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Please improve File:Yacht-mainsheet-jibsheet-vang-downhaul-jib halyard.jpg if you want to keep that image
Like you said: arrows and more careful number placement would help to some extend.

I think that File:Schoten.png is just better for Sheet (sailing) and other pages D1gggg (talk) 15:34, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply, D1gggg. Since this is a discussion about Running rigging, let's have that discussion at Talk:Running rigging. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 16:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Josep Esquer
Hi HopsonRoad! Thank you very much for your welcome. I wish my English level was high enough to edit in English Wikipedia. By the way, I (almost) edit only in Catalan. Do you know the Patí de vela (catamaran)? Older than the Shearwater. No rudders, no centerboards, … Very, very simple, yet technical. If I can help just ask for. Josep Esquer (talk) 13:38, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Josep Esquer, Nice to make your acquaintance! Thanks for pointing me to Patí de vela! I'm a Hobie Cat driver, myself. I passed through Barcelona in late October—a beautiful city! Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 15:38, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * A friend of mine, at my request, will translate Patí de vela to the English. Once done, I will revise. I have some experience (many years in fact) sailing in a Patí ("The Stradivarius of the sail").Josep Esquer (talk) 15:51, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Vermont
I was hoping to avoid that very wikipedia-ish debate about how to describe Vermont's size - but since you asked nicely, I've added my opinion. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:46, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Deck gun
I wrote a more detailed article ru:Артиллерийско-пулемётное вооружение подводных лодок on English sources. Do you want to translate it into an article in English Wikipedia? --Vyacheslav84 (talk) 05:13, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Dear Vyacheslav84, I'm impressed with the thoroughness of your work. It's rare that non-English articles are so well sourced. I'm also honored that you would ask me to translate. Unfortunately, my command of Russian is very rudimentary. As an alternative, if you want to develop the article in a sandbox and let me know where it is, I'll put it on my watchlist and assist in its development, especially with grammar and style. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 13:58, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Vyacheslav84/GN - Here is a draft as a result of automatic translation into English. --Vyacheslav84 (talk) 07:45, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, Vyacheslav84. Perhaps, you could shape it up closer to being formatted and referenced like a WP article. I'm happy to help the final phase of the product. Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of time to put it into shape in the beginning phase. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 11:44, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
 * 15:08, 7 December 2017 Yunshui (talk | contribs) changed block settings for Vyacheslav84 (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of indefinite (account creation blocked) (Disruptive editing extended to indef per user request) - so there will be no more articles, good-bye. --109.123.151.166 (talk) 04:16, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

SMX-25
Can I restore a separate article? --Vyacheslav84 (talk) 12:15, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Vyacheslav84. I recall there being insufficient sources to support the notability of that concept. That's why it appears in Semi-submersible naval vessel. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 17:17, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, available sources are not enough?--Vyacheslav84 (talk) 05:40, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * At the time, I recall that they did not meet the guidelines for notability with significant coverage. The project received some interest in conference papers, but didn't last as a continuingly notable idea.. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 13:38, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Season's Greetings
Happy Holidays text.png Hello HopsonRoad: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, -- ψλ  ● ✉ ✓ 17:03, 21 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Farewell
I asked to return an Indefinite blocks. --Vyacheslav84 (talk) 12:12, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year, HopsonRoad!


Happy New Year! HopsonRoad, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

-- ψλ  ● ✉ ✓ 23:11, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Image "phylogenetic tree" on article Earth
Hi

You recently removed the image on phylogenetic tree from Article Earth. Since image is relevant to the text, for example ''The incorporation of smaller cells within larger ones resulted in the development of complex cells called eukaryotes. True multicellular organisms formed as cells within colonies became increasingly specialized.'' Secondly, the section is on evolution of life on earth and it need not be focused on timeline only. I would suggest you should restore the image. Thanks--ubedjunejo (talk) 17:49, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi ubedjunejo, thanks for your note. What I suggest is, that you post the image at Talk:Earth and ask for input of others. Perhaps you will achieve a consensus to restore it. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 20:32, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello, thanks for your reply. Well, that seems to be a good idea. But don't you think this same procedure should have been followed while making such a significant change (i.e removing an image) to a top class featured article? ;) Regards --ubedjunejo (talk) 14:18, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your puzzlement, ubedjunejo. But, no, there were two images covering the same concept and one said "speculative" in the caption, which suggests that it did not merit being in an encyclopedic entry, as explained by my edit comment. As to editing a featured article, the advice on the Talk page reads (my emphasis), "Earth is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so." Even featured articles acquire contributions after their FA designation that are inconsistent with the MOS; one can't tell whether a given entry occurred before or after that designation. Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 14:55, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * In my view the images did not cover the same concept, as one merely shows the timeline, as you have mentioned in your edit summary. The other one shows the process. The image on timeline doesn't explain for example how Eukaryotes are related to Bacteria or Archea or how this evolution came about. This is essential part of any discussion on evolution, and the second image served the purpose. If you find the speculative thing troubling, I would suggest insertion of a better image instead. Best regards --ubedjunejo (talk) 15:19, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for sharing your thoughts here, ubedjunejo. I suggest that this discussion should be at Talk:Earth. However, for what it's worth—the Earth section where the "Life timeline" image/table occurs is a summary of the Abiogenesis and Evolutionary history of life articles, both of which use the same "Life timeline" image/table as at Earth to summarize the origin of life and evolution. It's in those articles where more detail should occur, as with the image that you suggest. The Earth article is for a more general audience than the two more detailed and technical articles, where a reader might understand and appreciate your proposed image better, per WP:AUDIENCE. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 15:39, 16 January 2018 (UTC)