User talk:Suicidalhamster/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Wikiproject trains
Okay, to join you have to add your name to though you don't have to be a member to edit pages, obviously.

The best thing you can do is watch the wikiproject trains site for any announcements click here

and similary add things you're interested in to your watchlist.

I can tell you about images as well if you like.

What is your interest area? &mdash; Dunc|&#9786; 11:13, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Hey!
Do you by any chance go to St. Mary Redcliffe and Temple school, since you seem to mainly contribute to that article, and articles surrounding and in the local area? For the reference I go there :P Ian13ID:540053 22:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah I did a coupla years ago.Suicidalhamster 13:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Tarn Hows
I'm not really sure that Tarn Hows counts as one of the principal lakes of the lake district - it is pretty small in comparison to most of the others in the list. If there was a 'principal tarns of the lake district' list then I would put it on that.

Yes I did think that when I put it on, however it is the only article for a a tarn in the alke district (that I can find). The name of the tamplate could be changed to something like: 'Lakes and principle tarns of the Lake District'. Suicidalhamster 18:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Tarn Hows is definitely not one of the principal lakes, but it's a reasonable point that few, if any, other tarns are listed in Wikipedia. Perhaps for the time being we leave it in the template? When more tarns are listed, as inevitably they will be, we could set up a separate template. Arcturus 20:52, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

SSSIs
Good work on the Avon and South Yorkshire lists. I've added some comments to the Avon talk page. SP-KP 18:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Avon referencing format
Looks pretty good - it was User:Renata3 who had the most to say on this in the FL discussion - can I suggest you seek a view from her - if she's happy, I'm happy! SP-KP 18:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Avon SSSI footnotes
One other thing you might like to consider - splitting references from footnotes - see List of dragonfly species recorded in Britain for an example of where this has been done. SP-KP 18:23, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Copying Avon changes to Somerset
I've watched & imitated the good work you've done on List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Avon & wondered if, when you make changes to the headings & notes eg OS map ref note, you could also do it to List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Somerset. &mdash; Rod talk 06:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Cleveland
I think we just need the acreages done now and the Cleveland list is ready to go to FLC. Would you be able to add those in? Or if it's easy to do, I'm happy to do it myself, if you can explain how I can work them out. SP-KP 22:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Cleveland is up at FLC now, so all ready for the acreages to be added. Cheers SP-KP 08:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Templates for Lakeland Fells
I think the Templates are a great idea. I've not got a problem whatsoever. The small format is probably the best. I think they will work across the board. Regards Mick Knapton 13:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

List layout
After all your good work on the lists of SSSIs, could I be cheeky and ask you to take a look at the list of Locks on the Kennet and Avon Canal which I've been doing some work on. I'm not sure about all the column headings & widths & Notes etc (although I know about all the red links0. I'd appreciate your comments. &mdash; Rod talk 21:04, 16 September 2006 (UTC).

Multiple 'Wether Hill's
Hello. As well as the Wether Hill I know about in the Lakes, there's one in the Ochil Hills. This also appears in a list of SSSIs (unless that's a third one). Can you help a poor old duffer with a spot of disambiguation?Bobble Hat 11:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually there were at least 4, but I think I've got it sorted. While I'm here, any chance of knocking up a far easterns template like the centrals one? Ta. Bobble Hat 08:44, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

GA review of Hurricane Nate (2005)
I just made the corrections requested. CrazyC83 04:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Eastern Fells
Hello, saw the Helvellyn Range Template. I reckon we'd be better with a 'wainwrights eastern fells' template for consistency. What do you think? Bobble Hat 09:19, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Infobox SSSI (with or without map)
Hi, I spotted you'd been creating Template:Infobox SSSI Map. I've been doing some articles about SSSIs which are also caves, lakes etc it has been pointed out to me that there is Template:Geobox Protected Area and that we should be migrating SSSI infoboxes to this template - any thoughts? I've put up a discussion about this on Template talk:Infobox SSSI Map&mdash; Rod talk 18:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for feedback
Hey, man, thanks for the feedback on the Peter Canavan article. I have been waiting for ages (since mid-December) for some useful human input into the article.

I shall get to work on it at some stage in the next few days. I'll let you know when improvements have been made, so you know your donation of time ahs not been in vain

Cheers again,--Macca7174 00:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Mingulay
Thanks for looking at this - I'll address the issues you raise asap. Ben MacDui (Talk) 08:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, that was embarrassing. I am pleased to say that providing a credible lead simply required the missing '/' to be put into the reference I added along with  a few other tweaks I did shortly after nominating the article. Hopefully it's a little closer to the mark now. Ben MacDui (Talk) 18:10, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks. Ben MacDui (Talk) 22:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

List of premature obituaries
Thanks for your comments on List of premature obituaries:
 * WP:FLC is the place to nominate this list, and once the citation needed tags are turned into references it stands a good chance of becoming a Featured List.

However, I think I'm unlikely to be able to find citations for those entries marked as such - actually I marked them precisely because I have recently tried & failed to find satisfactory references for them by Googling. However, I expect most of the entries so marked are nonetheless true (e.g. in some cases I created the original entry myself based on info I found somewhere or other on the Internet that has since disappeared). So, since it would be good to nominate this as a featured list, should I just remove the citation tags and leave those entries unverified, or should I move all the unverified entries to the talk page? (Which might be excessively harsh.) Ben Finn 23:49, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I will nominate it for featured list status as it is and see what reviewers say about the citation issue. Ben Finn 23:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Whitton Bridge Pasture
Whitton Bridge Pasture is looking good.

I'm not sure that the sentance "SSSIs are also important as they often form the basis for other designations such as National Nature Reserves, Ramsar Sites, Special Protection Areas, and Special Areas of Conservation although in the case of Whitton Bridge Pasture there is no further designation." in the Reason for Notification section, adds anything to this article.

Under management "Natural England is responsible for the management of Whitton Bridge Pasture, along with all other SSSIs" - they do not own all the SSSI land and I believe although they can place restrictions I'm not sure they "manage" in this sense - perhaps this needs clarifying?

Apart from the spraying mentioned are there any other "potentially threatening activities on neighbouring land"?

It might be nice to have a picture of the actual site - I've looked on geograph & can't see one - are you local to the site?

Just one other thought - I've been looking at Template:Geobox Protected Area as an alternative to Template:Infobox SSSI Map - any thoughts?&mdash; Rod talk 09:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Mendip Hills
I've recently been doing some editing on Mendip Hills & have put it up for peer review prior to going for FA status. I'd be grateful if you'd take a look & put any comments at Peer review/Mendip Hills/archive1.&mdash; Rod talk 10:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Template:Geobox Protected Area
Hi, I'm glad you find the template useful. As of your points:


 * free fields - One of the features of the geoboxes that it checks whether field values exists as a wikipage and if it is so, it wikilinks them. However, I see it's not so good idea for the free fields so I've removed this feature for them. As of the free1 field not displayed, taht's was a bug in the template. Any other isuues with free fields?


 * hectare conversion - Rather than being out, you just get rounded figure, the template rounds the calculations for 0 decimal digits by default, you can change that by inserting.


 * location maps - Well, the template supports even the automated location dot placement, though the internals are somewhat different and more flexible than for the old template. However, this feature is not yet complete, there are a few issues I have to work out:
 * 1) a locator calibration must exist for a given map (I write articles about the Czech Republic and Slovakia so I only bothered to calibrate those two maps), I'll callibrate the UK map as soon as possible
 * 2) from the same reason, the locator dot placement will fail when used on something on the Western or Southern hemisphere (even partly), it should be easy to fix that
 * 3) the system would also not work on a map in a conical projection (which the UK fortunately isn't), from this reason the relative locator_x, locator_y system was introduced so that the locator dot could be used on real any map (before I added the automated dot placement based on coordinates I used a higly sofisticated way to get the coordinates: using a ruler on a paper map ;-)

I'll let you know when I solve the location system. There are now more templates in the Geobox series and bugs are popping out everywhere so it might take some time before I attend to all of them. But I always will. If there's any other problem, feel free to post it here. – Caroig 22:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Automated locator map
Hi, as I promised the template should be able to place the locator dot automatically as of now, based on the coordinates only (I've also simplified the field names, it can now be without the location_ prefix but the old system works too). The only think you need to add is a field named map_locator and fill it in with a calibartion template (whose name for this map is Template:Geobox location UK, the top & left fields are the coordinates of the top-left (NW) corner of the map, bottom & right are of bottom-right (SE) corner), but you only need to put UK in (the template ads the Geobox location prefix automaticly), it could be even more automated and get the calibration just from the map name but this way it acts as a on/off switch too.

FYI: I saw the pages with the old Template:Infobox SSSI Map used coordinates with decimal numbers (not minutes, seconds), you can do the same here too. Simply put the values into the lat_d and long_d and voila. You can even use the full decimal system, i.e. use negative figure for the Western hemisphere (otherwise you should fill the appropriate lat_NS and long_EW fields, just do not combine these two systems).

I hope it works. If not please feel free to throw stones at me ;-), well putting a few lines on my user page might be more helpful. I've tested that out on Briarcroft_Pasture. I left the original values in, by erasing the new map_locator field you can test the locator dot accuracy. I don't have the original UK map so I simply copied the calibartion from the old template, though it might not be that precise. If you can get the original map, you can correct the calibartion at Template:Geobox location UK. Even if you don't have the map and just see that all dots are a bit dislocated, you can try to correct the calibration by trying out various slightly adjusted figures. – Caroig 10:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Free fields
I've removed the auto-wiki-link feature from the free_type too. Actually, I don't realize why I put it there the first place (it's generally not applied on any _type field, so why was it here?).

If you feel there should/shouldn't be something (field, some other automation) in the template post it here too, please. The idea is they should be as much universal as possible. Caroig 23:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

map_first
Fixed. I always manage to introduce a new bug with every edit. – Caroig 00:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

List of counties in Kentucky
Thank you for your comments regarding the featured list candidate List of counties in Kentucky. The concerns you mentioned have been addressed by Tompw. I would appreciate your support of this nomination if you find the rest of the list in order. Thank you. Acdixon 14:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Whitton Bridge Pasture
The article Whitton Bridge Pasture you nominated as a good article has passed, see Talk:Whitton Bridge Pasture for eventual comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations. └ Jared ┘┌ talk ┐&ensp; 22:28, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Mendip Hills FAC
Thanks for your comments on the Peer Review of Mendip Hills. I have now put it up as a Featured Article Candidate & comments, support or opposition is being recorded at Featured article candidates/Mendip Hills.&mdash; Rod talk 10:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

GAC backlog elimination drive
This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all members, and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :GAReview underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. --Nehrams2020 00:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Quneitra
Thanks for taking the time to review the article. Much appreciated. — An as  talk? 17:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you and opportunity for peer review
Thank you for your review and edits to the LSWR M7 Class article, you were right about amalgamation of the livery sections, and have begun the process of doing this to the other articles I have done.

At the same time, I wish to extend an invitation for you to add your own Peer Review to the article SR West Country Class' peer review comments page here: Peer review/SR West Country Class/archive1. You are under no obligation to do so, but I thought you may wish to contribute as a fellow railway buff! Once again, thank you! --Bulleid Pacific 11:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Spinosaurus
Hello, and a belated thank-you for your comments and suggested fixes at Spinosaurus! J. Spencer 23:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

July 2007 GAC backlog elimination drive
A new elimination drive of the backlog at Good article candidates  will take place from the month of July through August 12, 2007. There are currently about 130 articles that need to be reviewed right now. If you are interested in helping with the drive, then please visit Good article candidates backlog elimination drive and record the articles that you have reviewed. Awards will be given based on the number of reviews completed. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :GAReview underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the drive's talk page. Please help to eradicate the backlog to cut down on the waiting time for articles to be reviewed.

You have received this message either due to your membership with WikiProject: Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Good article candidates/List of reviewers. --Nehrams2020 03:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

FL Main page proposal
You either nominated a WP:FLC or closed such a nomination recently. As such, you are the type of editor whose opinion I am soliciting. We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 1 2007, voting starting December 1 2007 and main page appearances starting January 1 2008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual content will resemble the current content at the featured content page. Such output would probably start at the bottom of the main page. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. Right now debate seems to be among support for the current selective democratic/consensus based proposal, a selective dictatorial approach like that used at WP:TFA or a non-selective first in line/calendar approach like that used at WP:POTD. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:01, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Featured List of the Day Experiment
There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 17:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

New articles Bembridge Down and Bonchurch Landslips
Right now the two articles are identical -- Bonchurch Landslips appears to be a copy of Bembridge Down. I imagine it's just a cut-and-paste error, but I thought you should know (especially before someone drops a delete tag on Bonchurch Landslips). -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 18:08, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

lakeland fell templates/ navboxes (ie southern fells etc)
Someone's changed them to navboxes and tagged them all as uncategorized. Someone else has decided they are geology. Any idea what they should be? If indeed it matters. Nice work on Nethermost Pike by the way. Regards from the retired user formerly known as Bobble Hat (talk) 18:37, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:LOTD
In the last month, you have created a new WP:FL. From what I can tell, you are a veteran and have produced others in the past. Congratulations! You may be aware of WP:LOTD and have probably heard from me in prior months. We are experimenting with selecting Lists of the Day so similar to the current WP:TFA and WP:POTD features that run on the main page. I am invite those who have created new FLs in the last month to participate.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Your userpage...
Your userpage is... wow so simple but tells so much and of course your username, User:Suicidalhamster anyway-- Wikipedia is strictly buisness ( mostly), so here goes... Talk:Floppy disk It is actually a long story. look all the way at the end of this talk page with my username for details because I am wondering about it. 5 things formerly on this list have been solved so spread the word!

--RayquazaDialgaWeird2210 (talk) 22:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Cassi
I've noticed PsychoV has undone your undoing on the Cassi page. I've added original research and self-published source banners - see Cassi talk for why. Paul S (talk) 17:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

A Featured List contest
Greetings. FL directors Scorpion0422 and The Rambling Man have decided to run a contest for FL contributors. We are trying to get some interest in the process and get some FLs for the under-represented topics. If you would like to learn more about this contest, you can find such information here. If you are uninterested in it, then you could still help out by reviewing FLCs submitted by the entrants. Thanks for the time, Scorpion0422 18:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Infobox SSSI template
I am doing some work on SSSIs and have noticed that the notification year has been added inconsistently to Template:Infobox SSSI - sometimes using the 1949 act date, sometimes using the 1981 act date. I don't think its controversial, we just need to agree which date to standardise on. I saw you have made some changes to the template in the past, I just wondered if you could pop along to the talk page and add your comments. Thanks. ++ MortimerCat (talk) 18:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Left a few comments there. Thanks for letting me know :) Suicidalhamster (talk) 13:03, 14 October 2008 (UTC)