User talk:Tagishsimon/C7

Tagishsimon Talk Archives

 * 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

coord missing, yet again
I've written some notes on this topic at User:The Anome/Why should we have visible coord missing tags?. I'd be interested in your thoughts on this. -- The Anome (talk) 12:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for YouTube cat abuse incident
An editor has asked for a deletion review of YouTube cat abuse incident. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. WikiScrubber (talk) 21:01, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

User:NiceHotShower
Thanks alot for letting me know, and I saw his message that's threatning me about my account being deleted. I agree he deserved to be blocked indefinetely. Hometown Kid (talk) 11:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikiquette Alert (WQA) for incivility
Just letting you know that I have listed the following WQA regarding what I consider to be habitual incivility with other editors:


 * Sorry, Wikiscrubber, but right now I'm finding you an odious creep a little difficult to take seriously. Really. Perhaps it is not civil of me to say so, but you have lied, lied and lied again, and now you're acting like a dick. Allow me to explain.


 * I advised you to get over it. It being the deletion of that stupid article. The context was unimpeachable clear.
 * I commented: "so there was not even any novelty in this pathetic story". The story was pathetic.
 * You decided to reproach me for saying "Get over [my] pathetic story", which at best is a distortion and at worst a calculated distortion.
 * You accused me of "proceed[ing] to try to change the policy to support their view"
 * I pointed out that I had tried to get a guideline changed to by way of adding a reminder that the guideline was bound by a policy
 * You didn't withdraw your accusation, but repeated it, in another form. And then said "Sorry for offending you". Well that does not cut it. Repeating the accusation more than nullifies the purported apology.
 * I call you a liar
 * You slap some sort of etiquette warning on my talk page
 * In it, you point to another exchange where I warned a user, in no uncertain terms that accusing other wikipedians of being hypocrites is unacceptable. Guess what: it is.


 * So. Let's look at the final score:
 * Tendentious misquote: check
 * False accusation: check
 * Refusal to withdraw false accusation: check
 * Repeat of false accusation: check
 * Baseless warning: check
 * Tendentious allegation in baseless warning: check
 * Failure to understand that repeatedly making false accusations so as to bias the readership of a deletion review qualifies you as a liar, for which you are liable to be called out: check.


 * I'm glad we had this little talk. Sorry for offending you. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

New project
Hi. :) Given the work you've done on copyrights, I wanted to let you know that I am launching a new copyright cleanup project (went through the proposal process at the council). Yes, this is something of a membership drive; I wanted to get in touch with contributors with whom I've collaborated on copyright issues before. It's located at WikiProject Copyright Cleanup. Please consider joining if you'd like to help out, even occasionally.

Even if you don't feel like it's a good use of your Wikitime at this point, I'd be grateful for feedback and improvements to the project page. I'm trying to be clear and comprehensive, but I know very well that I often write much too long. :/ Thanks for any input you may be able to provide. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:29, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

The Motley Moose
Sir, I noticed your participation on the AfD article for The Motley Moose, and I wanted to thank you for your input. I have one small request; if you go to the main article, and pull up the history prior to the furious edits made last night, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Motley_Moose&oldid=277928852, and let me know if this changes your view of the article. If not, no problem; it's just that most of the arguments made on the AfD page were of that version, before it was abruptly changed. Either way, thank you again for adding your voice to the dialogue. Ks64q2 (talk) 03:16, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Camille Paglia
I'm leaving a message here in case you're not watching my user page. I appreciate your time and tips on reverting vandalism. I had actually thought of using the "original" version of the article, but only after I had made a couple of edits and I couldn't find an original and began to panic..LOL Typical noob stuff. Anyway, live and learn. All those weird edits in the citations and the similarities of the user names kinda screamed sock to me, but by then I was neck deep in tabbed pages trying to keep them straight. I will go back and watchlist the article and keep an eye on it. I'm thinking that swifter minds than mine (equipped with better buttons as well) will probably be involved soon. OK, then...nice to have editors like you out there looking out for the neophytes :) see ya 'round...thanks again  Tide  rolls  02:29, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:George Bass - Project Gutenberg eText 12992.jpg
File:George Bass - Project Gutenberg eText 12992.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:George Bass.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 19:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Pine Pattern Collar in Tatting - Project Gutenberg eText 15147.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Pine Pattern Collar in Tatting - Project Gutenberg eText 15147.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 18:43, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Chichester Cathedral about 1650 - Project Gutenberg eText 13331.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Chichester Cathedral about 1650 - Project Gutenberg eText 13331.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 14:48, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Chicomecoatl - Project Gutenberg eText 14993.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Chicomecoatl - Project Gutenberg eText 14993.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Jeté - Statue by Enzo Plazzotta - Millbank - Westminster - London - 240404.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Jeté - Statue by Enzo Plazzotta - Millbank - Westminster - London - 240404.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:12, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * File:HMS Example (P165) - at HMS Calliope - Gateshead - 14082004.jpg is now available as Commons:File:HMS Example (P165) - at HMS Calliope - Gateshead - 14082004.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:59, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies
I'm not sure it's a sexology journal per se...Critical Theory perhaps?Zigzig20s (talk) 21:45, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Possibly.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:23, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Meetup/London 20
This Sunday if you fancy coming.Theresa Knott | token threats 18:30, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Swim bladders
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Swim bladders, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Cleaning up Swim (see Talk:Swim) - no need to have a redirect for the plural and the singular.  Let's remove Swim Bladders redirect and just leave Swim Bladder redirect.

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. JCutter { talk to me }    01:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

user:chzz
Re. this edit - it puzzled me, but I now understand - so thanks.  Chzz  ►  12:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Swim bladders
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Swim bladders, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * second (plural) version of redirect - only Swim bladder needs to exist.    see also Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Swimming

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. JCutter { talk to me }    01:43, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
   JCutter { talk to me }    22:40, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Brew Tea Bar
Twinkle didn't finish the nom for you. I fixed it. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:34, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Templates for missing coordinates
See User_talk:Rich_Farmbrough for what I have done in this field. Three templates and all relevant category pages now reflect the same idea in the same way. Debresser (talk) 00:41, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I have reflected just the status quo. I am aware of an opinion to make visible tags in articles. I also noticed that the Locate me tag was previously marked as deprecated (unofficially, not using Tdeprecated ), but the status quo doesn't reflect this (which goes along well with my personal opinion). Debresser (talk) 00:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Since we're using his talk page for discussion, I added another commentary. Let's keep discussion centralised there (for the moment). Debresser (talk) 01:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Deantown
That's fine, but if it's an alternative name for Dean Village, shouldn't it state so in the article? - Dudesleeper / Talk  01:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

New shortcut: WP:GEOCODE
I've added a new hidden category, Category:Isle of Man articles missing geocoordinate data, to catch articles tagged with, and altered my bot to consider it as a valid subcategory for auto-categorization. -- The Anome (talk) 09:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yup. I've just coded 20 or so articles in it. Very handy to have them brought together; thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:58, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Locate me
I've removed most of the uses of this from talk pages - nearly all corresponding pages either already had coords or had 'coord missing'. The template + a few related ones could probably be deleted. Occuli (talk) 18:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

You have been nominated for membership of the Established Editors Association
The Established editors association will be a kind of union of who have made substantial and enduring contributions to the encyclopedia for a period of time (say, two years or more). The proposed articles of association are here - suggestions welcome.

If you wish to be elected, please notify me here. If you know of someone else who may be eligible, please nominate them here

Discussion is here.Peter Damian (talk) 17:25, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

RfC on Joseph Priestley lead image alignment
A RfC has been opened to discuss the issue of alignment of the lead image on the Joseph Priestley article. Because you have previously commented or been involved with this issue, your input is requested. Please stop by Talk:Joseph Priestley and leave any feedback you may have. Thank you. Madcoverboy (talk) 03:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

DNB Epitome
Sections of ten is a good idea. I'd like to strip out the entries for "Dukes of Bedford" and so on first, and those are going into another "Peerage" listing (there are no articles for these, they just direct to the Dukes of Bedford occurring in the DNB). I've done six volumes so far of that. I put a Status template on Epitome 01 as a guide to the working steps I'd currently envisage. Cheers. Charles Matthews (talk) 13:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: DYK
I am so sorry! I must have clicked the rollback button on accident when I was going through my watchlist. It won't happen again. Sorry!  The Le ft ori um  18:01, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Bicyclo
Yes, that works as well. To me the comas would make it obvious that it is discussing the same thing yet on a side note. Either way is acceptable to me as long as it is not "aka". Not everyone using Wikipedia is familiar with this acronym. Regards. --Astavats (talk) 10:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

RE:Cain
Thanks for the note, I have responded there. Regards, Woody (talk) 20:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing
For helping me finding the needle in a haystack.--The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 23:21, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Fitness fanatic
An article that you have been involved in editing, Fitness fanatic, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:38, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Curse of Chick Hearn
I perfectly understand why my article about the Curse of Chick Hearn was nominated for deletion, but I must honestly tell you that I'm doing all I can to prevent the srticle from getting deleted. I politely assure you that even as I speak, I am searching for valid references from past internet articles to ensure that the article in question avoids deletion. The references are intended to explain important events that happened to the Los Angeles Lakers during the duration of the Curse of Chick Hearn. Please give me a chance to look up more references if you can. I apologize for any signs of rudeness I might have unintentionally displayed in this message. Mr. Brain (talk) 00:04, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

MER Coordinates
Thanks for your help; I've had a look and understand what needs doing, but the format of coordinates in Google Maps is different to wiki so I'm not sure how to translate this accross? --Gordonastill (talk) 11:27, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Can I just mention oscoor which is brilliant for Ordnance Survey Map coordinates. Laxey Station is at . Clicking on the resulting link also gives the coordinates of 54.23259°N, -4.4064°W, plus a host of other links via GeoHack. Mjroots (talk) 14:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Geograph is good for finding OS coordinates. Mjroots (talk) 17:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Ding Day
You shouldn't add a prod template back in once it has been removed for any reason, per WP:PROD. I've sent the article to AfD. Fences &amp;  Windows  22:38, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for fixing the errant newline in my village pump comment! I noticed it only after posting but saw you'd already pounced on it when I went to fix it. --Cyber cobra (talk) 02:32, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Reports of untagged articles
I'm sorry I haven't got back to you about your reports of articles that should, but have not, been coded as coord missing. These kinds of reports often expose whole classes of articles that can be geocoded, but have not because of some quirk of the metadata, or the lack of a suitable heuristic in the matching code, or a bug in the bot, so a single report can sometimes cause hundreds or even thousands of articles to become codable. Thank you for the reports, and please go on sending them! I'll try to give more feedback in future. -- The Anome (talk) 10:55, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Turner Contemporary
Hi there. I usually try to avoid experienced users how to "do things", so please forgive me if this sounds patronising: I was wondering why you think this article ought to be removed from Wikipedia when reliable sources covering the subject in detail can be found quite easily. Regards  So Why  14:03, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry
About the whole Yahoo Ansers thing.Accdude92 (talk) (sign) 17:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about the date linking
When I first got involved in Wikipedia about a year and a half ago, I ran across something somewhere advising us to use date linking as much as possible, and explaining how to. I was unaware of the Style Guide's admonition against use of date linking until you showed it to me, so it looks like I have been misguided. Live and learn. The date linking never disfigured article in my view, and I figured if anyone looked up a date, power to them. But it's not rhe kind of thing that concerns me one way or the other on Wikipedia -- my focus is more on getting information into Wikipedia and linking it up to related articles as much as possible -- so if it bothers anyone enough for them to write me about it, then I won't do it. Frankly, judging by the Style Guide, I am hard put to see when one ever would use the date linking function, as the guide seems to preclude most uses I can think of. I learn something every day. Mdnavman (talk) 13:27, 28 August 2009 (UTC)mdnavman

Thanks
Less formally, you rock. I mean it. :) (And you even found a book cover for me! :D) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you. You more than deserve support, slight as it is. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:24, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to add that I thought that in particular was very nice of you. :) I know this must be a difficult situation for that contributor, but he is rising wonderfully to the occasion. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yup. To err is human, to clear up the mess afterwards, divine. If I could get my rugrats to understand this, how much happier I would be :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * If you've got time for more input there, would you mind taking a look at User_talk:Bleaney? I'm a little concerned that I'm not communicating clearly based on the latest batch of revisions. If you have advice for me on how to be clearer or direct input there, it would be appreciated. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:28, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Kent coords
No worries - although clearing out the 230-odd missing Kent coords is definitely a one-off for me, once I've done those remaining 19. It's a nice little project to have done, but I do have a ton of other things to do.... :-) I'm not tempted by London...... :-)))))) Cheers. 82.20.52.30 (talk) 17:39, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ach - we've just edit conflicted on the Mary White. I was deliberately leaving it til last because I was going to rewrite it rather than just coord it. I was going to suggest that it be renamed Mary White (lifeboat) to make a companion article to Culmer White - the lifeboat named Mary White is a lot more notable than the brig it was named after, the only interesting thing the ship did was sink. But I understand that it's not very obvious from the bizarre way User:Faedra writes.... I don't suppose you could move the rescue over to Mary White (lifeboat) and then I'll get on with rewriting it? TIA :PS Haven't you got some England articles to be getting on with. :-))) 82.20.52.30 (talk) 21:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That user name looks so much better in red rather than blue. :-) It definitely isn't going to happen - we're coming to the end of a Bank Holiday here, Kent was a one-off thing. But if you've done the whole of the UK pretty much by yourself then just one little town should be easy, no? :-)) It might be worth your while publicising the cats in some of the Project pages, I suspect that lots of people don't know about them - and it's always better to delegate than to have to do the work yourself. As long as they know what they're doing of course. Incidentally I've dropped a line to User:The Anome about your new page and your success in clearing the UK - I see his bot has returned the favour by tagging more pages.  On the moving thing - no, IP's can't move or create new pages, but in any case I wouldn't want to do it without a reality check from someone who's been around the block. In a similar vein, I've reported back to the Kentish Wikipedians (and Wikipedians of Kent) with a few things to do that I've come across in my travels, I don't know if any of them are your cup of tea. 82.20.52.30 (talk) 22:53, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've commented more on The Anome's page about an idea for picking up the mirrors fairly easily by bot. Bing/Multimap's nicer in some ways for that kind of stuff because you can get the article title on hover, which you can't do on Google (at least, in Firefox).  But Multimap seems to use a less complete database, and it only turns on the Wikipedia layer below 1:25000 or so, it's less good for scanning the sea. On the London thing - I understand the irritation, but I figure there's 8m people (plus lots of tourist/commuters who "know" it a bit) with 1000 articles to tag, versus say Shropshire which has 0.4m people to work on 243 articles. Looking to the long term ideal of getting every county clear, I figure that any one-off attacks are probably best aimed at large-area counties with relatively low populations where people are unlikely to go touristing; articles in London are more likely to get "casual" interest at some point in the next 2-3 years.  Bit surprised that tourists haven't helped Devon and Cumbria along in the same way that Cornwall is looking quite good, but I have a feeling that it's 200+ article counties like Shropshire and Lincolnshire that really need the Wikilove.  Particularly counties like Shropshire and Norfolk that don't have their own WikiProject to stir up some interest. Very surprised that Essex doesn't have its own project - guess some of the stereotypes might be true! But if you look at say Cumbria, Dorset, Durham and Shropshire, that's 1119 articles (London is 1115) covering only 2.5m people (and far fewer visitors than London).  Long term, that's more likely to be a stumbling block. They're the "Big 4" that are seriously in need of work. Just for fun, I've worked out articles/population, these are the ones with more than 130 articles/million population : Shropshire* (537), Cumbria*, (Isle of Wight), Dorset, County Durham* (NEE), Warwickshire, Surrey, Buckinghamshire, Lincolnshire, Wiltshire*, Devon, Cheshire, Staffordshire*, North Yorkshire* (Yorks), Bedfordshire, Norfolk*, Merseyside, Northamptonshire, Suffolk*, Lancashire*, Hampshire, Cambridgeshire *(Cambridge), Cornwall, West Yorkshire* (Yorks), South Yorkshire* (Yorks), Essex*, Greater London, Nottinghamshire(141). Asterisks are the counties that don't have "pure" county projects at the moment (although Durham, Yorks and part of Cambs are covered elsewhere, and IOW is too small to count). Shropshire/Staffs appeal to me as possible targets of a future lost weekend, you're welcome to the likes of Cumbria, Durham and Wilts though. Yorkshire bothers me a bit, 4.5m people with 841 articles. Obviously this is not the whole story - Hereford is the exception that proves the rule, a big, low-population county with no Project, but someone's obviously had a go at it. In general though, I think this is quite a good way to think about things.  Scotland is 1520 articles for 5.1m population, Wales 878 for 3m, NI 527 for 1.8m - interestingly they're all about 295 articles/million, so between Warks and Surrey. I'm cursed with a logical mind! 82.20.52.30 (talk) 01:51, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It was only 2 minutes in Excel, it took longer to write. Been thinking about this a bit more, in terms of getting that one person to attack a county. As you say, that seems to be the ideal - and a handful of articles really benefit from that local knowledge. And you only need to pull in one person (as Cornwall and Hereford prove), population/demographics/WikiProjects only tell you something about the probability of finding that one person. What if there's a second person who is desperate to come and do Kent? I'd have beeen better off doing Essex instead and let them do Kent. So although it's really satisfying to zero a county, in some ways you're better off reducing two counties by 100 than zeroing a 200-article county - and it's quicker, as you can cherrypick the easy ones. I found that 10% of the articles took about 50% of my time, whether chasing down uncertainties or getting sidetracked rewriting eg the Mary White and the nature reserves, but if you're going for a zero you just have to bite the bullet and spend the time. So perhaps the most efficient way to proceed if there was someone taking on masterminding the zeroing of all the counties, would be to concentrate in the first place on reducing all of them (ex London) down to say 200 articles/county.  That means that anyone with local knowledge won't be frustrated by having nothing to do, and you get to avoid all the difficult ones (for now).  Also if you do have one of the mad people who want to zero a county, they're more likely to start in the first place if they only see 170 articles than if they're faced with 340. But I'm probably thinking too much about this. :-)  I'm still not going to do an attack on London but as a concession here's a deal - we both do 5 Londons/day for 12 days, that landmark should at least scratch your itch!!! PS Looks like the pros are onto the mirroring thing, having lit the blue touchpaper I'm happy to retire on that front. 82.20.52.30 (talk) 11:38, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for Townley House - that one was annoying, it felt like I should be able to see it on one of the mapping sites but I just couldn't find the right one. As you say, it's nice on Multimap - TBH I'd rather given up on them as their aerial coverage of Kent is so lousy (and even their satellite coverage is pretty poor, I think they reckon that aerial coverage of select areas will make up for generally low-res sat coverage). It's fun in London having so much StreetView coverage. :-) Although I don't like having to go to a decimal place on seconds in London, having studiously avoided them in Kent it feels like overprecision even when it's not. On type and dim, thanks but I had just started getting my head round those in the last few days, and had already adapted my boilerplate appropriately. London - yes, you may have noticed I'm not very good at counting to 5 :-). Time's tight the next 2-3 days, might need to catch up on Sunday if I can. On the zeroing - I'm not assuming anything, just saying one of these rare suckers dedicated Wikipedians who are prepared to zero a county might pop up in any county, and with so many articles to do, it seems inefficient for a "generalist" coorder to thwart a "specialist" by cleaning out their county in the way that I've done to Kent. Given that the probability of someone stepping up to take on a county increases as the number of articles decreases, I'd have been better off spending the time knocking 80 off each of the Yorkshires or something. No matter, it's done now - but after London is <1000 any coording I do will be taking "big" counties down to 200 rather than zeroing.82.20.52.30 (talk) 11:17, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I do double-check most of my coords (can't swear to all of them, but I do usually remember). I found that there was something like 1% of cases in Kent where I needed decimal seconds, whereas moving to London I've had a couple already in the what, 20 I've done? For single buildings in built-up areas you really need them, whereas most of the time in Kent I was doing schools and country houses and things where it's less critical. Although there was mebbe 5% of cases where my initial dms needed tweaking - you might find that 17.6" lands you on the main building, 18" takes you off the site but 17" gets you a secondary building on the site so I'd use that. I'm mostly converting the 5-6dp of Google decimal links to dms myself, the only time I use decimal in articles are secondary schools mostly, where I'm adding or using Infobox UK school which requires decimal. I try to use 3dp, sometimes I have to go to 4. Like you I much prefer dms if I can, it just "looks" right. Anyway, onwards...82.20.52.30 (talk) 08:41, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

UK

 * :-))) again - I'd been dimly aware that your summary page had sparked a few people into action, hadn't realised we'd got ~1200 done net of Anomebot additions (so 1400 ish?) in just a few days. Shame it's not always easy to work out who's done what, which is why I've started a little "credits" section in the archive - aside from Rodhullandemu clearing out Merseyside which was a bit one, someone has nuked Wiltshire and made a good start on Dorzet and Cumbria - it's almost like someone is watching this page! As you may have noticed I've cleaned out England and taken Surrey out of the 300 club as little side projects. Meanwhile despite the bot's best efforts, London is now under 900, although that was a bit of a bonus to my main mission these last few days, which was to be nice to whoever ends up zeroing London. On the assumption that they'd using each letter as a mini-milestone, they were going to get a shock when they got to S and found nearly 3 columns-worth, more than double any other letter. So the mission was to cut S down to the same size as the next biggest letter - taking it from 180-ish to 80 left London at 910 or so, so I just pushed on under 900 on a broader front. Twice, thanks to the bot. :-( I guess the next mini-milestone would be to take S,L,C,W and H from <80 to under one column - that would only be 50-odd to do - but I'm now heading for the provinces. It'll be at a lower intensity, but first stop will be Shropshire under 200, then Staffs.
 * One thing that occurs to me after doing so many Londons, it has a particular "problem" having so many lost buildings which can be quite hard work (but interesting) to place - I obviously had a lot of churches among the S's. In some cases people just don't know where they are, but I suspect that in most cases we do and it's well documented, it's just not available online unless they happen to pop up in a planning application or something. So it would be helpful to try and get hold of someone with access to that paperwork - ideally someone at the Museum of London or a university archaeology dept, they could do the remaining ones much quicker than someone without that access, and could correct the ones that have been done - I've also found that some of the photos of sites aren't quite in the right place. Dunno where to start on that - is there an archaeology Wikiproject? 82.3.86.1 (talk) 08:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Rodhullandemu did Wiltshire, too; and various other things. You should say hello. Click through the "Removed" column at http://toolserver.org/~para/coordmissing/ to find out who's coorded things - Para's tool lists the articles with a link to their history. Yup, progress, mainly due to you & Rod, has been excellent this past week. I've chipped in a little too, but nothing by comparison. It's my poor luck to live somewhere that has no broadband access. So I'll be in the woods with chain & bow saws for the next few days. Assuming I don't chop fingers off, back on Monday.
 * As to the lost buildings ... let's see what we can do then we can look around for an archeologist. I have the Encyclopedia of London, which might cast some light on some of this antiquity. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:38, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I've done that much - more credit falls to Bobschops, who's knocked off Lincs and Northants just in the last few days and now seems to be heading for Derbys. Thanks for Para's tool - fun. I find a lot of sources just come up with descriptions like "on the corner of streets X & Y" - but not which corner. The churches that got sold as part of the Union of Benefices Act 1860 aren't so bad as you can find them on old maps, but the ones lost in the Great Fire really need archaeology. At least they're documented - some of the worst are schools closed in the 60s and 70s; too old for current online resources, but the dead tree sources are still in copyright and not online. Have fun in the woods... 82.3.86.1 (talk) 10:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

O Canada
Hi, Tagishsimon. I notice that you and Anome did some work a couple of months ago restructuring the "coord missing" subcats for Scotland and Wales. I was wondering whether someone might want to take on the task of dealing with Category:Canada articles missing geocoordinate data, which currently contains more than 8,500 entries and has no subcats at all. It would seem useful to create a subcat for each province/territory at least, and perhaps ones for Toronto and Montreal and perhaps a couple of other major cities. Is this something that a bot like Anome's could do? Deor (talk) 00:43, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Tagishsimon isn't around at the moment, but you want to be talking to The Anome in any case. From my understanding of the process, you need to create the subcats manually, and then Anomebot can knock about half the articles down into the subcats automatically.  Then in the case of the UK, Tagishsimon has been manually knocking the rest down into subcats - I'd suggest that should be the job of some Canucks rather than him, it's a tedious job! (and to be honest, I think his time would be better spent in countries such as Belize or Nigeria where en.wiki is their primary Wikipedia but there are far fewer active Wikipedians than in Canada) It'll make it easier for the bot if the subcats follow the existing organisation of Canadian categories as far as possible, so let the existing structure dictate what subcats you create rather than imposing your own ideas.  For instance if the cats are mostly of the form  then you set up, but if they're mostly  then you want  instead. The simpler the structure, the more that can be done automatically by bot, so I'd just start off with provinces plus Toronto, and then see how things look once you've filled those. At least the Canuck cities are generally in just one province, they're not like eg Belfast which sprawls across two of the main administrative divisions.82.3.241.225 (talk) 15:41, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks 82.3. I'm back a day early, on a south-bound train. Yup, I was thinking that Canada coord missing articles could do with some organisation. I've asked The Anome to make a start, though the decision is up to him/her. As 82.3 notred, even is Anome does pick up the bot part of the work, there'll be a sizable number of articles left in the Canada root which'll need to be attacked by hand. iird, the UK had about 1,400 or 1,800 out of about 11,000 in its root after Anome's best efforts.


 * I think, fwiw, the key to this sort of thing is to be able to identify the root categories against which a sort will be done, so that for The Anome, the job is nothing more than plugging some values into his tool.


 * There are probably a few other countries that could usefully be subdivided - see Category talk:Articles missing geocoordinate data by country. Meanwhile I'll consider my posting to the Niger delta, possibly by stocking up on Joseph Conrad novels and quinine. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:49, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I thanked you for your attention on my talk page, but I'll add that I'm going to be away from home for about a week, starting tomorrow, so I'll be no immediate help. Can Anome's bot recognize parts of category names, such as "… in Ontario", or does it need the full name of each specific category? Deor (talk) 22:25, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

List of numbered roads in Kawartha Lakes, Ontario
Hey, was just wondering if you had any last comments on the peer review for the list of numbered roads in Kawartha Lakes? I've made all the recommended revisions, so I'm hoping its pretty much ready for the next step. Cheers,  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  16:09, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool. I've got work for the next 8 hours so that means I should be around to respond quickly. -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  16:18, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Geographical co-ordinates in constituency articles
I am concerned that the application of geographical co-ordinates (or of coord missing tags) to articles on parliamentary constituencies may be misleading to readers. There seems to be a lot of this underway at the moment. I have opened a centralised discussion on this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Geographical_coordinates, and would welcome your input.

In the meantime, please could you consider holding off any further coord missing tag of parliamentary constituencies pending the outcome of that discussion?

Thanks! -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:01, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Magdalen Gate
Would love to help but I think it was User:Efficacy that inserted those comments, and I didn't really want to delete them just like that. Lamberhurst (talk) 12:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Heygate Estate
Hello Tagishsimon, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Heygate Estate has been removed. It was removed by MRSC with the following edit summary ' (create stub; the estate has been in the news for ~10 years as part of failed E&C regeneration) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with MRSC before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 20:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/De Hems pub
Would you consider closing this AFD? It will close anyway keep, this way, if you close it now, it will make you look like someone who can comprimise and change his opinion based on new evidence, a well respected attribute on wikipedia. I can get Colonel Warden to strike those comments if this helps. Ikip (talk) 00:37, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Great Denham
Hi there. Thanks for all your recent additions of coordinates for articles in Bedfordshire! However, you have added coordinates for Great Denham in Bedfordshire which actually connect to Great Dunham in Norfolk (I realised this when I tried to integrate the coordinates into the infobox). I've had to revert it, but if you could tell me how to find and link coordinates for places on Wikipedia, i'd love to help out! Bleaney (talk) 17:06, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi there, thanks for the heads up, when I get some time over the weekend i'm gonna play about a bit, and get the hang of adding coordinates. In the mean time... I couldn't help noticing that the coordinates you added for Great Denham were wrong again, they link to a place called Cowlinge in Suffolk. Hopefully I will get the hang of it over the weekend and do it myself, but in the meantime i've had to revert again. Thanks for the info! Bleaney (talk) 11:23, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Ref desk
I asked a fair question. Take it to the ref desk talk page. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 21:24, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Ref: 68.244.107.246
I told Tango that I'd stop the DB's. I had no idea anyone would run a CU on me so quickly. FYI, Gadget nailed that question on the mark. I thought it only fitting to give him credit. Not sure what BB's issue is, but while I was passing out ribbons, seemed fitting to pin the right one on him. Bottom line is that the professionalism at RD seems to fall lower every week. Not an excuse for the DB, but it is what it is. 68.245.14.176 (talk) 02:34, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's worth pointing out that part of the above editor's long-standing schtick has been to promise to stop - if we made certain concessions. Wikipedia does not submit to extortion. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 14:21, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Please feedback hydrofoil image request
Hi, I would like some feedback on your request. Just want to know if i've done right. --Beao 16:53, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Reference Desk
Your last change – I think this, although incoherent, was a good-faith attempt to answer the India question a little further up the page. Maybe it should be moved there. Malcolm XIV (talk) 09:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Geocoding
Aw, don't walk away from geocoding in a huff (don't even walk away in a minute and a huff). For what it's worth, I tend to agree with your assessments of what articles do and do not need coordinates more than I agree with the other guy's. Deor (talk) 19:04, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

DNB stuff
The Wikisource end is getting a bit slicker and quicker. As for here on Wikipedia: my current thinking would be (in the end) to divide up each volume page into tables of 100 (so a volume goes into half-a-dozen smaller pages). There is a need for comments, more accurate templating as you have put forward, but also the page numbers in the original (remaining ordering issues), and I'm interested in listing authors too. Much to do. We are short of quite a few listings all round. At present, as you will have guessed really, I'm checking the volume lists in patches as they come up in other things I'm doing, checking a block of 10 in passing in order to keep the ticking moving. Charles Matthews (talk) 13:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Reference Desk archiving interval
There's a discussion running on the RD talk page about decreasing the archiving and transclusion thresholds to reduce the page size, perhaps to as few as four days. I don't care one way or the other, but I'd like to make sure any consensus includes input from some long-time regulars, so I'm dropping this note on the talk pages of a few that pop to mind. (I hope no one feels this is improper canvassing.) —Steve Summit (talk) 01:19, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Can I have a short RD clarification? (Because I apparently really don't know)
I don't suppose you could coach me a bit on this? I'll admit I didn't accomplish much, but requests for subjective terms like "best" or "most" aren't really what Wikipedia deals with, yes? If there's no article on any kind of related matter I figure I have to pretend it's not there. It's not like there's a shortage of other questions answered in similar ways in asking us to rate things and the RD guidelines are pretty particular about keeping point of view, reliability, source weight, etc. out of talk. I'll just stay away unless you can point me to a direction or guidelines on how to be more... Personable and non-encyclopedia-like. ...Thanks. ♪ daTheisen(talk) 16:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Charles Dance (disambguation)
Hello. Just letting you know that this dab has been nominated for deletion, per MOS:DAB guidelines on dabs with 2 entries, I've used a hatnote instead. Thanks, Boleyn3 (talk) 20:37, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Your flammage
I believe some of your recent comments on my talk page constitute a clear violation of WP:NPA. As you appear to be quite the experienced editor, I'm sure this one warning should suffice to discourage you from such behavior from now on.

That said: I do, in fact, agree with you about the point you were making re. my signature. The specific RD conversation you refer to is, it turns out, the first time I have made so many comments so close (on the page) to each other, and seeing my signature repeated so densely in that conversation actually annoyed me, too! I had, therefore, decided to give some thought to changing my signature – and would probably be working on that right now had I not become distracted by your rather misplaced and unconstructive edits on my talk page! So, I fear, I must therefore risk further annoying you thus: Wikiscient  17:27, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Re:

"'Would you fancy pointing to exacgtly which part of my comment constitutes a personal attack. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:39, 17 November 2009 (UTC)'"
 * Not really, at the moment, no. But I'd be happy to ask an arbitrator to point that out for you if after a bit of effort you still cannot manage to discern it on your own...  Wikiscient  17:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

William Adams
I put a refimprove tag, because I thought the article should use more than one source. If there's a better tag for that, please tell me. I just thought that a single source could be improved upon.--  fetch  comms  ☛ 23:31, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I see. As for tagging, I try to edit articles in the open tasks section, to offset my tagging, but I haven't been able to do so for a few weeks (due to time and other issues).--  fetch  comms  ☛ 23:51, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not really big on editing and adding info (I don't really have much time to dig up sources), but I see your reasoning. (P.S. What's YWWV?)--  fetch  comms  ☛ 00:02, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Don't sweat it; I'll do almost anything to prevent a dispute. Making enemies is not why I came here, but disagreeing civilly is fine with me. In any case, I accept your viewpoint and I'll try adjusting some things to see if I may be able to work better. Thanks again,  fetch  comms  ☛ 00:18, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Appletons
Thanks for pointing out the problem with David Lee Child. Yes I do review the text for that sort of thing, but here I missed it. Luckily there are other eyes. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 02:43, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

London hotels
HI, thanks for finding those coordinates. Perhaps you could find the coordinates of the rest of the ones I started today? Dr. Blofeld       White cat 20:05, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Hehe. If I have time I may expand a few of them into DYKs... Dr. Blofeld       White cat 21:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Nic eone. What about Hempel Hotel? Its north of Hyde Park I think.. Dr. Blofeld       White cat 22:29, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Reference desk question
I thought I'd rather answer you here, because I don't think the original poster would be interested. Specifically I'm talking about:"I kinda see what you're driving at, but is it not possession of the content of the email, rather than the legal rubric at the bottom of it, that is relevant w.r.t. other laws such as insider trading? Is there a case where absent the rubric there is no insider trading issue, whilst with the rubric there is? --Tagishsimon (talk) 04:25, 17 December 2009 (UTC)" I think you're mostly right, but a recipient of unsolicited information isn't free to do anything with that information. I use the insider trading example because it's probably the most pertinent. Dirks v. SEC, 463 U.S. 646 (1983). What we should be talking about, and I suppose we aren't because the distinction is subtle, is that how one comes about the information is important, but also how one might use that information is too. I use insider trading as an example because it's an incredibly expansive claim, way beyond what was envisioned in the 1930s. It seems pretty clear that that approach isn't old. Shadowjams (talk) 07:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Reference Desk help
Thanks for the advice, I'll take it and keep it in mind for the future. You don't know how much of a relief that is, and I'm still a new editor, so I was more then abit worried. Thanks! ThemeParker 16:16, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

RE: Aber Clydach
Hi. I think Aber Clydach refers to an Aber Village, based on this Google map and this supporting book reference. Perhaps a move is in order? --Merovingian (T, C, L) 17:49, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Accenture India Delivery Centre
Based on User_talk:Mks86 it looks like you PRODed this on 13 August. I can not find any PROD discussion and the history of the current article shows it being created on 17 December 2009. Can you assist me to find any discussion that happened? Thanks, Ariconte (talk) 10:39, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Potential DNB issues
Hi. It's been a while; hope you've been well. :) There's a conversation at my talk page about a potential widespread issue with copyright infringement on the ODNB, and User:Charles Matthews, who found the problem, suggested you might be in position to help out. This might lead to a full scale contributor copyright investigation or might not; it's soon to say whether it will meet that threshold. Issues do, however, seem to be substantiated in at least four articles from one contributor. If you're interested and have time, your feedback would be welcome in that conversation. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:02, 14 January 2010 (UTC)


 * That all is proceeding well. Another one that has just come up is Elias of Dereham. The problem there is that the "DNB archive" text is not old DNB text at all. Charles Matthews (talk) 08:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I've responded on MRG's page, but note I agree there's a tagishsimon copyvio on Elias. My bad :(. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Tagishsimon! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Richard Pyros -

Talkback
Koman90 A+ (talk) 02:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Koman90 A+ (talk) 02:33, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Koman90 A+ (talk) 02:50, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

thanks for flippin
the File:LHPolarBear3.jpg|polar bear. It is probably easier to flip a picture than a statue, and both are no doubt (one of 23 words or phrases that really mean "in my opinion") easier that flipping a real polar bear but it would have taken me a hour or so and now you've just done it, leaving me time for lunch. In any case you have now earned the seldom coveted THUMBS UP AWARD. If you decide to not keep it, please recycle. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 18:45, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Koman90, A+ (talk) 06:35, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

coord missing runs
I'm holding off on these until the next database dump, which should be in about two weeks' time. At that point, I should be able to tag the entire backlog to date. The underlying reason for this is that the current database dump is taking a very long time, because it has to bring the entire en: Wikipedia's full dump up-to-date, something which has not occurred in a couple of years; subsequent dumps should be back on a regular schedule after this. -- The Anome (talk) 14:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Feedback requested
Hi. :) I'm working on the Craigy144 cleanup, and I need opinions on whether or not the paraphrasing at Elizabeth Seymour, Duchess of Somerset rises to the level of copyright concern (no doubt it's plagiarism, but as you know copyvio requires different and somewhat more aggressive treatment). Would you mind taking a look? I'm also asking User:Franamax and User:Charles Matthews their thoughts. Some of mine are at that article's talk page. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:33, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback here (should have said sooner; sorry!) and thanks for weighing in at ANI. I was wondering what I'd find when I went to review it this morning, and I'm glad to see it's all settled down. :) You said what I had been trying to say so much more plainly. I just could not seem to get my point across. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

St Thomas More Catholic Upper School
Hi there, despite your very welcome comment on the talk page of St Thomas More Catholic Upper School, an editor is continuing to add the info without a source. Can you help? Bleaney (talk) 22:23, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your support on this one mate. The ironic thing is, this is my old school, and i'd love for it to have a notable alumni section, if I could find any! Bleaney (talk) 13:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The Crown Court at Southwark
sits in a building labelled - not very surprisingly - "Crown Court Southwark" and not, as you would like to think "Southwark Crown Court". See my longer comments on Ali Dizaei. I wouldn't want you to miss the correction. Ironman 1104 16:02, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Sundial in the form of a mandolin - Project Gutenberg eText 15050.png missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Sundial in the form of a mandolin - Project Gutenberg eText 15050.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

An odd link
Surrey Institution - in 2007 you left a link marked as for the DNB, but which was a search of some kind - now routed to Bing. Which it wouldn't have done then. Whatever you had in mind, I'll happily create the DNB article at WS for you; needs to be reconsidered in some fashion. Charles Matthews (talk) 15:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

London hotels
Hi, any thoughts on this. An editor has proposed to delete all of those London hotel stubs started back in December.. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 16:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I know. But mass prodding of articles and unpleasantries are certianly not a way to get them expanded. He can't even be bothered to AFD them. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 13:03, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

IPA
I see that  the American campaign against  the British pronunciation  of British place names, by  British  Wikipedeia authors and British  citizens has been relaunched. I think this campaign is deceitful and goes against  an admin's remit. I might not  be so prepared to  let things rest  this time round, especially  as the editors concerned are  oblivious of the sensitivities they may  be affronting, and even though  I  am one editor  who  abhors opening  cans of worms. I may  call an RfC and will  look  forward to  your support.--Kudpung (talk) 12:09, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Copyright question at Edward John Hutchins
Hi. :) I need a UK contributor with library access to review this article against the Times obit (1876). (More info at talk.) It's clearly copied from somewhere, but the document tagged as a source may itself have duplicated much of that PD document. Do you think you'd be able to take a look at that talk page and help out? Not like I'm not already for all your help, but I'd be everso grateful. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Gay (word)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Gay (word). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Gay (word). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:RAILCRASH
I've replied at WT:RAILCRASH re your disputing the adoption of the guideline. Mjroots (talk) 08:46, 2 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note. I'm not offended as it is the issues which are being discussed, not the editor who holds the view for/against, which is how it should be. Mjroots (talk) 05:32, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Dire Straits tour
The table has been broken. Correct please--Andrey! 01:58, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Dire Straits tour2
Capacity for Tiffany is lost. Return please--Andrey! 02:00, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Dire Straits tour/Notes
I suggest you to offer their text--Andrey! 06:31, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Dire Straits tour/Notes
Please, let's discuss it. I wished to make normal notes (approximately 10-15 words and three facts). What do you think about it?--Andrey! 15:12, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Marquee Club
Give we will discuss necessity of a maps. Two maps probably there is no need, you are right. But one should be left. I will return it in a week after recoil, on March, 9--Andrey! 15:41, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

SPA template
Am I missing something? What's so dreadful about the template? :O ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  Speaker  ─╢ 21:58, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Dire Straits tour, Notes about Boat Hall
The first under the list goes Tiffanys, on I suggest to begin with Boat Hall.--Andrey! 08:06, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!
In addition to the helpful note at my talk page, I see you popping up at some CCIs! Thanks. :) It's greatly appreciated! --Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Enid Russell-Smith
I read your response to the poser at User talk:Moonriddengirl with some interest. Well done for coming up with the explanation. I also experienced a similar "what the hell is that" moment with 'my' Talk:Boogie Woogie Red. Can I suggest that since you, me, Moonriddengirl and User:Rms125a@hotmail.com have all been perplexed over this scenario, that User:7SeriesBOT (et al ?) is very politely asked to create a different messaging system on these occasions to avoid further confusion arising. Can it not simply delete the tag it created, without deleting the talk page itself ? Sorry, I have probably not worded this very well, but I hope you get my gist.

On a completely separate matter, why is it that sometimes when I post messages in user talk (sorry, discussion) pages there is an edit summary box available towards the bottom of the page, and on others, like this, there is not ? Daft, nay inconsistent.

You can probably tell that I am not the most Wiki technical chap in the cosmos. However, I would guess it is not just me that is confused by these, at least, perceived anomalies. Whilst you are about it, can you explain the Big Bang theory; the missing link between apes and humans; and more crucially why everyone's computer crashes at the most critical moment. Then, when you are campaigning to be the 'Emperor of the Universe', you will have my vote !?! Thanks,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 02:10, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Normally, one would ask the editor who runs the Bot ... I could have pointed you to the entire discussion about the bot, how it started, and stuff. Since you didn't ask: a blue-linked article or talkpage should always contain information.  User:WildBot (run by someone else) does some great disambiguation checking - updates an article talkpage, and then removes its messages once its problems are fixed.  As blank pages are not good, it tags the page to deletion under WP:CSD, and along comes 7 series to the rescue.  It's been common for years across Wikipedia - it's just now that a Bot is doing it on behalf of humans, meaning less work in CSD patrol. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 10:16, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

misc.
My inspiration for that joke was a drink that was served some years ago at a seafood place, I'm thinking it was Red Lobster, of all things. They had a drink that was basically white, and a little plastic shark hanging on the edge with its mouth open, and when you were ready you would tip the shark and raspberry sauce would spill into the drink. I kid you not. And I find your being offended by menstruation to be ... offensive. Especially when the first responder to the OP pointed to an article that had something about one woman stuffing another woman with yogurt. That you don't find offensive and/or gross? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:46, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, Tagishsimon. I came here to thank you for your support in countering the personal vitriol that's been unleashed recently by HalfShadow.  As I said on the Ref desk talk page, it does Baseball Bugs no credit to be associated, however innocently, with such seriously off behaviour.  I mean, really, suggesting that other editors die in a fire?  What manner of human being is this that contemplates such things?  It's beyond my ken, I can tell you.  And I thought that encyclopedia writers were serious-minded, bespectacled, nerdy, peace-loving types.  There you go.


 * In relation to the above from Mr Bugs, here we have the classic Karpman drama triangle: first, the perpetrator; now, the victim; next step will be the rescuer. Then around it goes again and again, just as long as the drama never stops and the focus stays on him.  --   Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   12:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I would be quite content if you all never brought my name up on the talk page again. Your characterization is offensive, as I am neither perpetrator nor victim of anything. Don't be blaming me for what you two or anyone else choose to do of your own free will. There can be no valid reason, whatsoever, to be offended by my little joke about the red yogurt. And evidently you're unaware of the "Shark Attack" drink, which used to be sold at Red Lobster and is apparently still sold at Joe's Crab Shack. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:19, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * There is no possible valid reason to be offended by my comment about yogurt - which, as you may recall, was in small print as per past discussions in the talk page. What I see about your "posse" is that periodically they look for someone to yell at. When they get tired of yelling at one user, they turn their attention to someone else. Hence I've stopped watching the talk page, hence I don't add any comments to it, and hence the latest round of whining should end sooner. And, yes, you can post "any damn thing" you want. That's your choice. Jack was arguing above that I'm seeking that kind of attention. I do not decide for you or Jack what to post on the talk page. That's your decision. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:51, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Let me get this straight, Baseball Bugs. You deny absolutely another person's right to feel offended by something you have done, but then demand exactly the same right for yourself?  Is that the way it is?
 * You say you're of the same vintage as me, and I would have thought that a person of such advanced years would have learned a few things by now. In particular, someone's lack of intention to cause harm or offence has nothing to do with whether such harm or offence actually occurs.  And if it actually occurs, the person who caused it is responsible for making some sort of amends.  It's not enough to say "I didn't mean it"; and it's certainly not enough to deny there even is any offence.  But you take it even further than that: you're actually denying that others have the RIGHT to feel anything other than what you prescribe they should feel.  You may as well accuse them of lying when they say they feel offended.  You can't do that.  You have no choice but to accept and acknowledge that offence has been created, however unintentionally on your part it may have been.  You've come nowhere close to that yet.  Because if you don't take that step in relation to other people, how on earth can you seriously expect others to acknowledge the offence you claim you suffer at their hands?  How?   How?  Unless, of course, you're a total hypocrite.  Would that explain anything?
 * You haven't read the relevant part of the Ref Desk talk page (you haven't peeked, have you?), so you won't know just exactly what the issue is that I've raised. But for your information, nowhere have I ever claimed to have been personally offended by your post.  It was crass, boorish, stupid, childish, in poor taste, you name it - but I wasn't personally offended.  However, (a) it was highly inappropriate, (b) others were offended by it, (c) it was the latest in a long string of boringly predictable attention-seeking quips, and (d) it came hot on the heels of my asking you nicely to take a break from this sort of activity.  Which added up to plenty of cause to raise your behaviour and ask for assistance in curbing it.
 * We've discussed this issue now in 3 places - your talk page; the Language ref desk, and now here. It seems you have no in-principle objection to talking about it, except that you'll do so anywhere except the most appropriate place.  What on earth your objection is to visiting the Ref Desk talk page and responding there, I cannot for the life of me imagine.  It just seems like obdurate bloody-mindedness to me.    --    Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   14:06, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Oi. Bugs came here to deal with the issue directly with the offended editor, and discuss it like adults - no need for 3rd party intervention and rhetoric - let the adults work through their issues, and involve WP:WQA or other WP:DR processes happen if needed. Bugs did the right thing by talking to the offended editor "in person" and away from prying eyes. ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 14:45, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Jack's is not a 3rd party intervention. By contrast, yours is, BWilkins, though you are none the less welcome. Neither was I offended by the joke, merely unhappy that Bugs does not understand that his jokes are very often unwelcome and misplaced, and that his attacks on IP editors entirely inappropriate. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:54, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Usability of GeoTemplate
Comments on the usability of GeoTemplate (the page listing mapping services found by clicking on coordinates in articles) are invited, at Template talk:GeoTemplate. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 17:47, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback VII
-- Red rose64 (talk) 18:38, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Battersea Coords
I updated the Battersea coords to the geographical centre of Battersea. Battersea does not just comprise north Battersea - it is centred around the Clapham Junction area - a fact that many people are confused by. I will re-update them together with the infobox.

Check the map on www.lovebattersea.org.uk for confirmation of the town's boundaries. Brycewiki (talk) 21:35, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Agree that I c-cked up the coord references, I've now changed both of them so they work.

This is the map I was referring to: It's a common issue that people think that Clapham Junction and the Northcote area are in Clapham and one that people living in Battersea (like myself) want to put right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brycewiki (talk • contribs) 21:53, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Ashford v Thornton
Thanks for your praise on Ashford v Thornton. I'm not sure you are aware that it is presently at FAC and could use some reviews. Your opinions would be greatly appreciated there.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:06, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Arthur Nicolson
Hello Tagishsimon, I have translated Arthur Nicolson, 1st Baron Carnock into fr:Arthur Nicolson, and would like the illustration to be transferred to commons. Is this possible ? Thanks in advance. --Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 18:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I tranfered it here : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Arthur_Nicolson.jpg
 * Thanks for your response. I have done a rapid translation (I will make it better). I was intersted in the article because Arthur Nicolson signed the Anglo-Russian Convention :, see . All the best. --Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 19:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Co-ords for demolished buildings
Thanks for adding the co-ords to the Star and Garter Hotel, Richmond. Would you know if there is a way to indicate that the hotel building is no longer there? It was demolished in 1919 and replaced by the current building (a very grand and stately care home) in 1924. I'm currently writing an article on the home, and will be using the same co-ords that you kindly provided, but how will that work on map displays that include links to articles? Will both articles show up in the same location? Carcharoth (talk) 06:18, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Sloth - Project Gutenberg eBook 11921.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Sloth - Project Gutenberg eBook 11921.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 09:59, 1 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:59, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Julius Caesar - Illustration from Cassell's History of England - Century Edition - published circa 1902.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Julius Caesar - Illustration from Cassell's History of England - Century Edition - published circa 1902.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)