User talk:Martinvl/2010

Litre
Why not "much less common"? I challenge you to find a use of the dry quart that is less than fifty years old. There's no question that the US system is complicated and foolish, but there's no reason to leave the impression that it is more complicated than it is. We do use the ounce (volume) and the ounce (weight), which is confusing to the consumer, but there's only one pint, quart, and gallon in common use.

And, BTW, "less common" had been there through around 600 edits -- three and a half years -- since the "Rough conversions" section was added. I just added "much". . . . . Jim. . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 17:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


 * If it is much less common, is it neccessary to include it in the article - we have an exact conversion anyway? Although I agree with yoy that the US system is foolish, but my understanding is that the dry quart and pint are very much part of their way of life than in the UK. I actually think that the reference to the dry quart should be removed compeltely, but given my pro-metric views, I restrained myself in order to maintain a neutral point of view. Martinvl (talk) 19:26, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I thought about that. From the point of view of a USA reader, the dry quart is absolutely irrelevant. Why not remove it and see if anyone squawks?. . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs)  19:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

RaRa?
I left you a note. Groeten, Drmies (talk) 05:31, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposal re Metric System (not "metrication"...)
MayFlowerNorth (talk) 20:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC) I see your points re deleting my additions. That said, i DO think that such a section would add considerably to the article, to help people grasp what the various prefixes actually mean, since it is an abstract concept which is difficult to handle for many people, and the current section really does nothing to help explain things at all (neither does the unnecessary article on "metric prefixes", i should add). Accordingly, if i made it much more "encyclopedic" in nature, would you leave it be?

-Ross Mayhew.


 * Hi User:MayFlowerNorth
 * One of my concerns is the degree of overlap between the two articles International System of Units and Metric system. As I see it, the former should concnetrate on the metric system (or rather SI) as it is today with a small amount of historic background, while the latter should concentrate on the evolution of the metric system.  As such I would see no problem with a section showing how Mouton introduced prefixes and maybe discussing (rather than cataloging) prefixes as they developed between 1793 and 1960 (introduction of SI).  Also, the two articles should cross-reference each other to guide readers between them. WHat are your feelings on the matter? Martinvl (talk) 07:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Moratorium?
Declaring it over? Justin talk 21:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * What are you talking about? Martinvl (talk) 21:56, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Like adding a metriculated table was not intentional? Justin talk 21:59, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I added some additional information that I believed was relevant. The addiitons were strictly inaccordance with the Wikpedia pillar WP:VERIFY. If you think it irrelevant, please say so on the article talk page.  Martinvl (talk) 05:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Charles Rawden Maclean
Thanks for starting this article - I have been fascinated by his story since I first saw his grave in my local cemetery and have gradually been collecting a lot of info about him, with a view to starting an article shortly. I have recently ordered a copy of Stephen Gray's book to fill in more of the detail - I'll read it on my forthcoming holiday.

With this in mind, I have been adding links to various pertinent articles - ironically, the only relevant article where he is not mentioned is that for Durban. Perhaps that can be rectified in due course. Cheers. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 09:08, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

p.s. I also intend to create an article about the John Ross which was named after him. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 09:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Daemonic Kangaroo. Thank you for your message. My main interest in him was his connections with Durban. I stumbled across his name when I was updating the article Tugela River. (I used to live in in the town of Colenso which was on the banks of the river). In the next few days I intend to write the South African part and I am quite happy to leave you to write the rest. Martinvl (talk) 10:26, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for what you have done so far - I am a bit perplexed by the confusion over the date of birth as both the Friends of Old Southampton Cemetery and the Fraserburgh Heritage Centre are adamant about the 1815 date. I will probably email them and ask for their comments - is their any chance that you could email me copies of the pages in the books cited by you so I can pass these on to them? I have a recent photo of the grave, which I will upload to WP Commons and add to the article, and that for the cemetery.

By the way - do you live in Durban? My wife and I are planning to re-visit South Africa next year (we went to Pretoria, Port Elizabeth and Cape Town, via the Garden Coast, 4 years ago). What's the best time to come from a weather point of view? Cheers. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 15:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Daemonic Kangaroo. Thank you for your note. I will get together the sources that I have and send what photocopies I can lay my hands on.  BTW, I live in Fleet (other end of Hampshire), but I was at univeristy in Durban. Martinvl (talk) 15:39, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I have now received the biography written by Stephen Gray in 1992, in which he asserts that the coreect date of birth is 17 August 1815, which he has checked against the Fraserburgh parish records. He is rather dismissive of the works of both Ritter (which he describes as "fiction") and Bulpin. Rather than edit the article piecemeal, I would prefer to read the whole book and then summarise its contents. As I will be away for most of July, it will be several weeks before I can come back on this. Cheers. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 10:43, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Daemonic Kangaroo. Are you happy to transfer this conversation to the Charles Rawden Maclean page (removing the personal bits)?


 * As regards visiting South Africa, the coastal areas are best during the South African summer (Oct to Apr), while the game parks (espl Kruger National Park are best during the South African winter (Apr to Oct). The northern part of the Kruger Park is closed during the South African summer.  If you do plan to visit Kruger, book from the UK - you will get preferential treatment as you are bringing foreign currency into the country. Martinvl (talk) 12:43, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes of course, much of this should be on the article's talk pag. I'll leave you to decide what to include./not include. And thanks for the info on SA. I plan to retire next May/June, so October looks favourite. We did visit Kruger four years ago in July - it rained every day! But I'm looking forward to it already! Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 12:59, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Charles Rawden Maclean
NW ( Talk ) 06:02, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Tugela River
Hi Martinvl, Please accept my apologies - I hadn't noticed that I'd already 'corrected' article in question - if I had i'd probably have twigged that it had been reverted. I hope I didn't cause any offence. I'll of course be more careful in future. Regards, TicketMan - Talk - contribs 12:28, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

WP:OR
I removed your "statement" as it appears to be WP:OR, nothing to do with WP:FALKLANDSUNITS which I simply mentioned in passing as you appear to have edited deliberately in contradiction of it and WP:MOSNUM. Please stop with the drama and personal attacks. Justin talk 20:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC) Added to the OR noticeboard, you are of course welcome to contribute. Justin talk 20:54, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Falklands Dates
I reverted your addition to the heading as the "Argentine" colonial effort was between 1828 and 1831, then for about a month in late 1832. Modern Argentina claims the period 1820-1833 but there are a number of problems with those claims. I suggest it is simply better to avoid the controversy that will ensue. Justin talk 07:41, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, point taken Martinvl (talk) 07:56, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Do you think you could wait awhile, I'm kind of busy right now? Why does it have to be now? Justin talk 10:11, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Edit warring, great, I try to collaborate and you wish to make everthing a battle. What exactly is your problem?  Justin talk 11:24, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Justin, we are all busy - how long do you want me to wait and why? Martinvl (talk) 11:29, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm at work and the changes popped up on my watchlist, I just wanted time till this evening so I could answer your question and explain the different elements of the history. 6 hrs or so, that is all. Justin talk 11:33, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Falkland Islands
I think you may have meant the edit previous to mine? Active Banana (talk) 20:08, 6 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Apologies for any inconvenience - we both hit the vandalism within five minutes which is a good thing. Anyway it is sorted now. Martinvl (talk) 20:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Has there been a RFC on the Falkland Island units debate? If so can you send me a link. Mtpaley (talk) 23:29, 4 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Mtpaley
 * The most recent RFC is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject South America/Falkland Islands work group/Units.
 * Martinvl (talk) 23:51, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

AMU reversion
Sorry, referring maybe I am being a bit tired/dense, where does it say that the preferred usage for large or small values is Dalton? It says it is "often used" sure, but the text is suggesting it is somehow preferred? (diff in question) User A1 (talk) 21:54, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The use of prefixes is referred for all SI units. (I am a part-time physics teacher so I come across this problem regularly).
 * Sorry, I think we are not quite on the same topic -- I am suggesting that the citation does not indicate that dalton is preferred over the AMU unit "u", which is the implication in the sentence. For example. what prevents someone from writing "ku" rather than "kDalton"User A1 (talk) 10:34, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You are right, the BIPM reference does not prefer one above the other. However it appears that the ISO reference (which was added by another editor) does.  As this is the case, I think it best that this discussion be continued on the article's talk page. Martinvl (talk) 11:11, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I have continued this over at Talk:Atomic mass unit User A1 (talk) 14:43, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

How is WP:RJL US-biased?
I would appreciate it to me if you could explain why you see WP:RJL as US-biased. You have offered little proof to back up your assertion. --Rschen7754 08:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I have made a proposal to include the UK in RJL at WT:RJL. --Rschen7754 00:14, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Rschen7754. I saw your proposal. By and large it looks OK, but I think it best that somebody else form the UK groups has some input.  If nobody else does, then it might well just end up being ignored.
 * I think that the real reason that the UK editors do not appear to be cooperating is that the promotes of the RJL have taken the US model as being the start point of discussions, rather than putting the US model and the UK model alongside each other and taking the common points as the start point. I get the feeling that earlier discussion have annoyed UK editors to the extent that they are just boycotting RJL discussions.
 * May I put one item into perspective. I have read a number of John Grisham books and I get the feeling that every US country has its court house and that the judges and politicians at county level have considerable power. The UK is much more centrally administered. I don't know the name of the chairman of our District Council (which serves a population of 80,000), not of our County Council (which serves a population of just under 1,000,000).  You will probably find that this is true of most Brits (apart from Londoners where the mayor does have some power).  This reflects our lack of interest in county boundaries.  It also explains why we get hot under the collar whe we are told by outsiders what is important in our own country. Martinvl (talk) 17:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Are there any other active UK users currently? In response to your other points, WP:RJL (then WP:ELG) has been in force worldwide since around 2007, before the current UK model was developed. --Rschen7754 19:37, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * There are a few, but as I have said, they have probably had enough of the RJL debate and are ignoring it. Martinvl (talk) 20:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Well... it will probably be implemented then, if nobody from the UK objects. (Not that it's a huge change anyway, it just sets Wikipedia MOS guidelines and your own project consensus regarding miles and km into the guideline). --Rschen7754 20:26, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Martin, you're right to a degree about every county here having a courthouse and power-wielding judges. Anyway, do you have any objection to adding cities to junction lists? Last time around, I asked about it the logic was since some junctions were out in the middle of nowhere, and obviously wouldn't have a location, that no junctions should have a location. I, for one, would like to know where M1 and M25 intersect, not just that they meet at J6a on the M1. –Fredddie™ 21:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I see the need for localities in junction lists as being important - the UK concept of a "city" is different to the American concept - historically a "city" in the United Kingdom had a bishop. The UK roads group ensures that the only localities quoted on the junction lists are those that appear on the roads themselves which is why we have different lists for each direction.
 * BTW, I think that the M1 and M25 intersect in either the Watford or the Hertsmere district (I have not checked which). Does Hertsmere mean anything to you? Probably not. That is why we don't use district names on our junction lists. Martinvl (talk) 06:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No, Hertsmere doesn't mean anything to me, but I think you're missing the message here. When I'm looking at a junction list, I want to know where the junction is, not where the roads at the junction will take me. –Fredddie™ 22:39, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Freddie, you are missing the point. Large pasrts of England are divided up into counties.  Hertfordshire is one such county. Counties are in turn divided up into Districts. Hertsmere is one such district. If you want things put into perspective, please visit ISO 3166-2:US (an area with which I believe you are familiar).  Now visit ISO 3166-2:GB.  See if you understand it! (BTW, Martinvl (talk) 14:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Before we confuse each other more than we already have, do we agree or disagree that ISO 3166-2:GB level localities should be in the junction lists? I think they should. –Fredddie™ 21:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Doesn't seem that much more complicated than British Columbia. --Rschen7754 21:52, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I live in the United Kingdom. Maybe it is just possible that I know more about my own country that do people who have never set foot here. I shall not be making any more comments regarding this topic on my home page.Martinvl (talk) 05:59, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Martinvl/Primary destinations
Hi, why has this page been created? Are you aware that it has been created in the main userspace? I did userfy it for you to User:Martinvl/Primary destinations because the page name contains your user name, which is why I marked the page for speedy deletion, however I notice you have since changed it back. Is this supposed to be in main space? --  role player 13:31, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Air Rhodesia Flight 825
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Socrates2008 ( Talk ) 08:32, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Socatres2008. Thank you for your note.  There was a dispute for which I apologised.  The apology was accepted.  Since the issue was resolved before the article was flagged, I think that the flag was unneccessary and should therefore be removed. Martinvl (talk) 08:42, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Disappointed that an experienced editor would do this in the first place, but fair enough. The ANI case is closed now too. Socrates2008 ( Talk ) 20:30, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Metric Calendar - opposition
The French Republican Calendar met a lot of opposition, and was eventually discarded. Tabletop (talk) 08:44, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I am fully aware of that. I am also aware of a site that gives it a good description and which converts betweeen the Gregorian Calendar and the French Revolutionary Calendar.  I did a Y2K verification of that site.  Having said that, woudl you please add references and not leave others to do so?  Martinvl (talk) 11:23, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Banking edit on Economy of the Falkland Islands
I reverted a recent edit but only because it made no sense. I think you have some words missing. Do you want to fix it, I think you'll see what I mean when you re-read it. Justin talk 20:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Justin, I have rewritten the section. Martinvl (talk) 21:55, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Justin talk 22:17, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Did you Know
Hi, I've nominated an article you started, Thomas Fairfax (Gilling), for the "Did you know" section of the main page. See Template_talk:Did_you_know. Do you have any thoughts about the article and another article about this person's father, which I started and which is also part of the nomination? -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH  (talk)  22:12, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi User:La comadreja. Thank you for your message.  I started the article in rather a hurry in order to correct the error that the common ancestor of Prince William and Kate Middleton was General Sir Thomas Fairfax (who lived a century later).  I will add my references today.  However, I have no other knowledge of him.  Regards Martinvl (talk) 06:35, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I found one pretty decent source online, which you would see if you get to the articles, and I don't know where the others would be. What references do you have in mind? -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH  (talk)  06:45, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Update
Anyway: The DYK reviewer said the articles needed other sources if they're going to appear on the main page. They probably need to be added soon if the nomination is going to pass. I don't know what they would be. -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH  (talk)  06:07, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Space puzzle
I've seen this kind of edit before, but for the life of me, I can't figure out what purpose it serves. Can you explain? HuskyHuskie (talk) 03:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi User talk:HuskyHuskie.
 * This is a "no-breaking space" - it ensures that Wikipeida does not put a "new line" between the "200" and the "km". Martinvl (talk) 08:29, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow! That's so cool to know that.  Thanks. HuskyHuskie (talk) 19:29, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

UK & Aussie republicans
Howdy. I meant place the Australian PM's comments in with the UK Bishop's comments. GoodDay (talk) 15:48, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Wedding of Prince William of Wales and Kate Middleton
Howdy. Would you please restore the Broadbent comments to that article, as you didn't have a consensus to delete it? GoodDay (talk) 06:40, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Lets see what other editors think. As far as I am concerned Broadbent is a nobody who used offensive language. Martinvl (talk) 08:50, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Offensive language, so what? Wikipedia isn't suppose to be censured. GoodDay (talk) 14:31, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

If disagreement continues over the intro, we could just mention he's the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. GoodDay (talk) 16:10, 4 December 2010 (UTC)


 * We should use what other authoritative sources say.
 * I have seen many report of "second in line to the throne" and "second in line to the British throne" while one report that has been syndicated to many countries around the world says "William, second in line to the throne of 16 realms, including Canada, Australia and New Zealand, is ..." Martinvl (talk) 16:19, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, plus it's alot better then 'second in line to Elizabeth II'. GoodDay (talk) 16:32, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Re the "th" issue, your edit and edit summary are at loggerheads. Ericoides (talk) 14:41, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

support
I removed on eof your comments, the sections are clearly for supports not comments, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 19:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I put it back, its a big mess, people supporting one and two and opposing, sill really. Off2riorob (talk) 19:30, 17 December 2010 (UTC)