User talk:Ksbrown/2007

Archived talk from 2007 for User:Ksbrown

=January 2007=

re: My carelessness
Thank you for attempting to sort out my stupidity. It was actually another part of the page where I had not put in a ":" on a piped link. Sorry about that. Ksbrown talk 10:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * My pleasure, no worries &mdash; I've done that a thousand times. Glad to hear that it's figured out now. Snoutwood 20:27, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

=February 2007=

Stubs
Thanks for your help. I've started the changes you suggested to the stubs I have created. Thanks again. Bobfos 13:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome
After giving the tag to many members I finally get one myself, thanks. BuickCenturyDriver 22:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Stubs
Thanks for the tip on stubs! I always wondered where they came from. I'll use it a lot! HuskyHuskie 15:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Bot-tagging disambigs
It's presumably possible to do something along those line, but it would be a lot more complex than what I'm doing at present, and unlikely to be completely reliable. After all, if they were "well-formed" disambiguation pages they'd have a category-populating template, and my 'bot wouldn't be tagging them as either uncat or stub. I have, however, fixed the ones with "disambiguation" in their article titles, which seems straightforward enough (which is what my first correspondent was suggesting). And very often they should get something more specific than disambig, so a human edit would be required anyway. Alai 18:28, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Vocab-stub
Hi Ksbrown. I've reverted your change to the stub type list - vocab stubs are sometimes transwikied, but quite often they can be expanded into full articles covering more than a wiktionary entry ever could, so it's not automatic that they'll be moved there. Grutness...wha?  23:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I've found the problem, i think... someone added the "move to wiktionary" template to the vocab stub category without substing it... which left the "Move candidates" category as a parent. I've removed it from that category and left a note on the talk page of the bot's owner. Hopefully that will stop the automatic transwiki'ing. Grutness...wha?  23:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

=March 2007=

Disambiguation template
Thanks for the catch on the DDWG disambiguation page, and for letting me know so politely! All the best, Minutefong 10:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Same here. Kborer 20:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Your vote to keep
I'm a little confused with your assertions regarding your vote to keep the England specific infobox for places.

Many discussions and requests for comments and consensus have taken place.

Are these the only grounds with which you are voting to keep the England infobox? Because this reason appears to be redundant. You don't mention anything about the technical benefits or disbenefits this new infobox brings. Jhamez84 22:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


 * There are now only about ten England infoboxes transculded on Wikipedia. Five of which have been reinstated by a user who has already been temporarily blocked for edit warring and breach of WP:3RR because he feels it infringes upon his article space (very much against WP:OWN I might add).


 * It is convention to only delete an infobox (assuming its not a silly one) once it is orphaned, hence why after consensus was agreed to create and use the UK version, posted to the home nation infobox talk pages, discussed and debated various options, trialed some to get initial feedback, posted to the major UK Wikiprojects and took on board several suggestions, that several editors (I was quite late actually) rolled out the UK version and we have now nominated the English one as redundant.


 * I actually wrote the bulk of WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements - it's been dormant for quite some time, and just needs an update (thanks I hadn't noticed this). I did post to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography if you notice.


 * We are required to be bold in updating pages, and I think this is an important milestone in improving article space.


 * I just want to raise awareness that things have been (and still can be) negotiated with the UK infobox, and many parts of the various editting communities were contacted. Are you sure you do not want to reconsider? Jhamez84 00:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, there are 18 transcluded England infoboxes - 7 of which are involved in edit warring, at the time of this time stamp! Jhamez84 01:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * OK. I just find it perplexing that you have voted to keep the England infobox on the grounds the new one has no consensus, though you have no objections to the new one and like it. Voting to delete this one would enable a consensus to be formed and we can get on with improving Wiki. Anyway, you've made it clear you are not interested in the issue further, so I must respect your decision. Though if you change your mind?.... Kindest regards however, Jhamez84 11:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

=April 2007=

Hello!
Hey there Ksbrown--I didn't get a chance to thank you for welcoming me to the Wikipedia community on my userpage, and to give you a hello as well. To be completely honest, I originally though that it was a welcome bot like many websites have, but it's great to know that the Wikipedia community is very welcoming, and your post is a testament to that. So I hope you're doing well and I look forward to continuing to help out in Wikipedia. -Digiwrld1 03:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Sodium_hydride.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Sodium_hydride.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there 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. Thank you. BigDT 20:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)