User talk:Pigsonthewing/Archive 18

hCalendar standard
Reading more about it, I think I like the idea of hCalendar. However I think the template is the wrong way to do it. We already have a non built in standard on the site that handles dates, the ISO method ( 2008-12-14 ). I think you should file a bugzilla entry and make this standard apply to each use of the ISO linking. That way you can apply the change to hundreds of thousands of articles effortlessly without facing any resistance. :) -- Cat chi? 21:54, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That's not viable, because some dates are start-dates, others are end-dates; and some are neither. Other than yours, there is no resistance to this widely- and successfully- implemented method. Unfortunately, all you seem likely to achieve is to drag Hijacked ship‎ into the date-formatting war. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:59, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Which can be implemented easily into the feature. For example something like S2008-12-14...
 * I created the template from scratch. Why the heck should I be the one dragging into a WAR? Don't you have that backwards?
 * Unless you can find a way to meet the style and functionality issue I have a valid reason to provide resistance. That is the thing I have been saying all along. If you can fix the templates in question, I'd be happy to use them.
 * -- Cat chi? 22:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Again, please read WP:OWN. Which templates do you imagine are broken? And no, I have nothing backwards; but I am concerned with what can be done now, not in some hypothetical future. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:41, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Standards
You know, I am a person all in for them. But I was working on the template while you made your edit meaning I wasn't done yet. Now I have an edit conflict in front of me. Luckily in this case the change I was intending to do was quite minor. I appreciate and like your enthusiasm but please slow down just a little bit in the future. ;) -- Cat chi? 22:34, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:OWN. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:36, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Please have a little common sense and adjust your attitude. I will not hesitate one second to overwrite all your work the next time you edit conflict with me unless you adjust that attitude at once. You do NOT own this entire site and must return the kind of courtesy you are receiving. -- Cat chi? 22:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It is you who needs to adjust your attitude: cease making threats and, when you're read WP:OWN, read WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. And please don't post on this page again until you have done so and unless you are prepared to abide by them. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:48, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

FYI
I regretfully inform you that I had brought this issue to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#User:Pigsonthewing. I was hoping it wouldn't escalate to this. -- Cat chi? 23:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Where, I see, the folly of your ways has been pointed out to you. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 00:24, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Palmares template font size
Hi! You recently changed the font size of Template:Palmares start from 90% to 100%. I don't support this change, but I respect it. I am not actively changing the font size back, but I stated my opinion on Template talk:Palmares start. If more persons share my thoughts and the MoS does not prohibit it, the result might be that the font size is changed back. If your change was the best, of course it will be kept. Thanks! --EdgeNavidad (talk) 08:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Noted, thank you. And thank you for your courtesy in notifying me. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 00:25, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Floyd edits
Hi Andy,

Not sure what the proccess is to include my recent edit to the Pink Floyd page. I think my version is more correct.

Please advise, thanks.

Seasidesun —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seasidesun (talk • contribs) 00:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You can raise the matter on the Pink Floyd article's talk page. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 00:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Metric and Imperial measurements
I looked at the convert template, and I've used it in the past, but I didn't see a syntax for meters to feet-and-inches. I'll look again. --Milkbreath (talk) 13:42, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Infoboxes
Hello, I totally agree with you on the subject of info boxes. I am for them as well. Can we try to strengthen the argument for info boxes. It seems that there are plenty of folks here who are for them. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Composers/Infobox debates Happy Holidays!!Milliot (talk) 18:57, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Of course there are - you and I are among more than a dozen editors who have been told that "there is no consensus" for them, plus others who add them, only for them to be removed three months later, after numerous intermediate edits by editors who were clearly untroubled by their presence. WP:OWN should apply; I can't see why it doesn't.


 * Helpfully, there's a list of such pages, with infoboxes, which you might like to keep an eye on, as they seem to be at risk of removal. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 01:59, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Update The list has been removed; draw your own conclusions. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 09:52, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Gail Carter Lott
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Gail Carter Lott, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * No evidence of non-trivial coverage in multiple, reliable sources that would satisfy WP:N or allow a full, neutral biography to be written about this individual.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Cheers, CP 17:53, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi. Can you explain to me by what guideline you removed the PROD? Your summary was "RSPB council = notability", but that means nothing to me. According to the Wikipedia article for the RSPB, the organization has "1,500 employees" clearly all of which are not notable and there's nothing in the article about the council that would help indicate to me why a council member should be automatically presumed notable. I've done some searching and I can find no evidence that she meets the primary notability criterion, which requires non-trivial coverage in multiple, reliable, third-party sources. Cheers, CP 18:07, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * "You may remove this message if you [...] object to its deletion for any reason." (my emphasis). RSPB Council members are not RSPB employees. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:17, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * That's true; however, if you don't want the article sent to WP:AfD after you've removed the PROD, then you should provide a reason that dissuades them from doing so. Furthermore, I am completely aware that RSPB Council members are not RSPB employees. My point was that there's nothing in the RSPB article to indicate why such a council member should be considered automatically notable, which is why I came here to ask for an explanation instead of just immediately nominating for deletion. Cheers, CP 18:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Gail Carter Lott
An article that you have been involved in editing, Gail Carter Lott, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Gail Carter Lott. Thank you. Cheers, CP 04:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

M25 tunnels
Hi Andy,  I've responded with a little info on the M25 tunnels on the motorway's talk page. I don't have anything to use as varification for any of it though, hence not including it in the main article... C2r (talk) 21:39, 26 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you; at least that's satisfied my curiosity. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:41, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

TYVM
Thank you for the advice re: WP:OWNage. The more I think about it, the less reasonable it seems for a non-admin to close out debate peremptorily. arimareiji (talk) 22:59, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Helping people
Thank you for helping people at the helpdesk. Just a correction: Please don't send people with general editing conflicts to ANI; the best place for such problems generally WP:DR. See also my comment at WP:HD. &mdash; Sebastian 23:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for expressing your opinion, which I don't share - not least since you describe a debate about the verifiability of IMDb as "an ethnic conflict". Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 23:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The classification of the conflict is beside the point. The point is that it is not an issue that requires admin interaction. ANI is not a general complaints board. If you disagree, I politely ask you to bring it up at WT:ANI and seek agreement there to change the ANI header. &mdash; Sebastian 01:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not clear why you think this: ""This page is for reporting and discussing incidents on the English Wikipedia that require the intervention of administrators. Any user of Wikipedia may post here.", which supports my stance, requires changing, so no, I won't. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * How does a request for direction require the intervention of administrators? &mdash; Sebastian 01:10, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Interesting
You might find this interesting. They left a note on my talk page then proceeded to undo a good portion of your edits. I've no idea who it is though. —Locke Cole • t • c 03:50, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I have a stalker. I reported the last set of such abuse to WP:ANI, but no action was taken. Previous IP addresses used by that vandal have been given final warnings. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Now blocked. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 12:00, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

OS-->Long/Lat
Hi Andy, Noticed that you're adding coordinates to things like the Kingsmead Viaduct article - how are you going about the conversion from OSGB-->Long/Lat...? Is there an automatic way of doing it? I'm thinking at some point I need to try and make all the junction list coords consistent, which I've been putting off for over a year now....! C2r (talk) 00:06, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * There are tools which will do it, with varying degrees of success and precision, but I simply looked up the OS ref on http://www.streetmap.co.uk/, then used their "convert coordinates" option, then double checked to make sure the position was accurate, on Google Maps. If you're using Firefox, the Streetmap extension makes the first step easy. For more help with coordinates, including tools, and a place to discuss problems, see WP:GEO. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 01:13, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Infobox Person
Sorry to bother you, but I thought you might be a knowledgeable person about the above template. I did post my question on the template talk, but I made a bit of a mess of it, so I'll improve up on it here.

If term is supposed to refer to the term of holding the title, why are there so many parameters between them? Wouldn't it be more logical to have the term immediately after the title? Or is there a way of more specifically attaching the two together?

Thanks. Jarry1250 (talk) 10:24, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * It's no bother; I'll answer there. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:34, 1 January 2009 (UTC)