User talk:Trident13/archive2007

Victoria Silvstedt - Censorship
Wikipedia isn't a family-orientated site; anything encyclopedic can be added. You can provide a warning, saying that a link may not be suitable for minors or those that are easily offended, but you shouldn't censor Wikipedia. Saccerzd 19:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think you understood the point of my post on the discussion page of this article. I thought it was important to post the link to substantiate the fact. But as the inclusion of the information it refered to had been the subject of a passionate edit war and debate, the basis of wikipedia seeks to agree a position between editors in such cases based on the substantiated facts. Having posted back the link, the point of my post on the discussion page was to seek agreement between both sides. Some may call this "censorship", but simply put it is the basis of debating a position between editors to agree what all can agree to - if that is called censorship, then the individual probably didn't communicate their position well enough to be heard. As this is a community based project, the debate and engagement/agreement is as important to the solidity and longevity of the project as the substantiated facts are. Best Regards, - Trident13 21:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Spanish advertising translation
Thanks for taking a look at my article on Spanish advertising translation. I must, however respectfully disagree with your feeling that it is "original research". I explain my reasons on the edit summary and also the talk page dealing with the article. Per the delete message, I have also improved the article (I hope), and I have thus removed the delete message.Jchild 12:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I note your comments, but have applied both significance and tone tags for the reasons stated on the discussion page. If the article stays, it still needs much work to have a less sales-tone/more global perspective view required of wikipedia as an encyclopedia. Rgds, - Trident13 13:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

sip-scootershop
Hello Trident13, as it seems you deleted my article about sip-scootershop. This is sad, as i spent a full day of work to write it and I feel the article is ok. I ask you to upload the article again and propose what I should change that violates any rules of wikipedia. Thanks. Ralf ..Sipsepp..


 * Thanx for your message. Looking at your edit record, this would seem like your first set of edits on Wikipedia? Simply put, this is an encyclopedia project, not an advertising opportunity or an ability to raise Google rankings which some articles can fall under. Personally on reviewing your article on SIP-Scootershop, I tagged it believing that it's tone was too commercial. I also tagged it with a notability tag - there are a set of crietria that all articles need to adhere to asses there enecyclopedia notability. I only placed the tags on the article, I didn't delete it - an administrator deleted it, deciding that what you had written was too commercial and not notable enough. Personally, I can't see that you or any other contributor/editor will at present or in the near future be able to create any format of article which will directly relate to SIP-Scootershop - whether it was written in a commercial tone or not, it would still fail notability criteria: there are other larger/more notable motorcycle shops and enterprises which don't have wikipedia articles. Your most productive approach would be to add value to, for instance, the Vespa article - more referenced details, missed notes, references, model notes, etc. I and I am sure other editors if you added value to an article would support then allowing you to put on a link - but no value, and most (and specifically on the Vespa article) it would be removed. If you have any questions, then please come back to me. Best Regards, - Trident13 09:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Category:Motorcyclists
Hi Trident. I am concerned about the usefulness of Category:Motorcyclists, which you created, especially as it becomes more and more populated. I have listed it at Categories for discussion, and was hoping that you would join the the conversation. Best regards. ×Meegs 13:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the message
Thank you for the message concerning the possible deletion of the Banbury United article. I agree that the article is worthy and that it is poorly written. I plan to re-write much of it in the next few dates. You may have noticed that JJGD who put it up for deletion, as put many articles up for deletion recently. He is a friend of mine and I believe that this may be an attempt to reduce my edit count. I will discuss this with JJGD tonight. --geniussansom 17:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey, no problem! I think the subject is worthy of an article, and you clearly have put a lot of effort into it - its more of a" work in progress" than a poorly written article. Good Luck! Rgds, - Trident13 17:16, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Real tennis
Hi, you've just done a cut'n'paste move here, please don't do that again :) Have a look WP:MOVE and WP:RM for more details. I'll fix it up just now, so don't edit the article for a bit, thanks/wangi 01:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but I wanted to move it back quickly after a new editor referenced Encarta to move it originally from the most common term - to be honest, I have never heard of Court Tennis! Can you then as you have now removed the information place a message on BlueLotas "advising him" in a friendly manner not to move articles without first a discussion on the talk page! Rgds, - Trident13 01:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem, have left a wee note on their page. Ta/wangi 01:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks - look after yourself! Rgds, - Ian 01:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Apologies
Apologies if that's the way I come across. I suffer with bipolar disorder and I sometimes get agitated when typing things etc, particularly dependent on my mood at the time - I know this isn't an excuse, but that's the reason. Sorry if I sounded snappy or whatever. Keep up the great work! Will2710 02:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey Wil, no problem! I have a friend with bipolar, so know the opportunities that brings. No need for appologies, it always good to see new editors with good standrads and I liked your work and the style. If you need some help, please just ask. With Best Regards, - Trident13 15:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Kit car notablility
Any kit car manufacturer is notable with this narrow field. given the difficulties for survival imposed by regulatory authorities. Please reconsider your tag for deletion of Factory Five Racing. I have no interest in this company other than to ensure the wide scope of referring articles such as Kit car. Best wishes, Leonard G. 01:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Firstly, thank you for your message. Having reviewed the article again, which still has an unsubstantiated claim for being the worlds largest replica AC Cobra manufacturer and then a list of the current models in production; I still don't see at present the factual evidence that the company has the required level of notability to justify an article at Wikipedia. If it stated some substantiated facts, or had a notable history, or a notable model then I would have supported your request, but at present it still doesn't make the grade on notability. Perhaps you could find some facts or points of notability that would allow a better review? Best Regards, - Trident13 10:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Perhaps you should consider tagging articles concerning various Pokemon characters and other such fictional triva if you do not think that a real-world manufacture of kit cars merits notability - or do you not wish to stir up that kind of hornet's nest? - Leonard G. 01:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm - not quite sure what you are trying to get at? If you are trying to get at me, then please read WP:Civility. If your point is you think I tagged the article incorrectly, then why did you not challenge it in the agreed procedure? Having spent two years in Japan, and knowing how much Pokemon still sells, much as though I may not be a fan it meets the notability criteria. If you think that Factory Five Racing is credit worthy and meets the notability criteria, then like other editors before I am happy to work on a suitable article - see for example Gettysburg furniture companies, which was deleted three times until something suitable was co-created. I have retrieved the previous text which is now held on a personal stub page if you want me to help you create a suitable article. Best Regards, - Trident13 01:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


 * But of course, that was a needle (communications), well within the bounds of civil discourse in my universe. Kit car manufactures are like the proverbial talking dog - it is not so much what the dog says but rather that he can talk at all. I would think that you could have deleted a few lines of puffery from the article to your satisfaction - as I stated I have no particular interest in this particular manufacture. - Leonard G. 02:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Sovereign Publications notability issues
I just updated the Sovereign Publications article in an effort to remove the notability mark that you put on yesterday. Please have a look at it and let me know if it sufficient to remove the tag. If not, please advise what needs to be done in order to remove the tag. I would greatly appreciate it. Chris 14:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * After a quick search on Google, a quick question - are they anything to do with this? Because if they are, that's the first noticeable thing that came up on Google after various address and contact detail listings, and would need to be included in the article. If they are not, and even with that included, I am still not sure they are notable enough. Rgds, - Trident13 14:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * From what I have seen of the Washington Post link, Sovereign Publications is not part of this. All I can see from them is that they publish books and journals of legitimate issues as mentioned earlier. It has nothing to do with advertisements. I found them when I was doing the International Union of Food Science and Technology article and the only reason I created them is to the fact I despise redlinks in Wikipedia. It was nothing to do with advertising at all. Chris 14:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Another edit has come up with proof that the publisher is a vanity publisher. Is that grounds for an article deletion? If it is, then I will lead the AfD effort to remove. Please advise. Chris 15:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar Award

 * Thanks Chris, means a lot! Rgds, - Trident13 21:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The Apprentice
Hi,

Wanted to say thanks for putting this page up. It's got loads of good info on the series. I thought you might like to know that the Village Vermin website which the characters use in the series has been created in real life on the web. It's being updated each week as the series progresses with previews and follow-ups to the story.

Cheers,

Ian May Producer Village Vermin website for the BBC (Party Animals)

Elisa Portelli
Hi, I am new to writng to/editing Wikipedia. In the last week I added my opinion to whether an article about a television presenter/singer should be deleted. Having done so I checked the user log of the person that created that page and discovered that they had nominated your article on Elisa Portelli for deletion. I had some concerns as the user that nominated your article has created and edited articles about a particular female presenter that works for a "rival" channel and appears to have less notability than Elisa Portelli. I don't know whether this is pertinent or not, but I thought you might like to be aware of it. Hotmann 10:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The One and Only
Hi I think you created the page "The one and Only" on 27th Feb? I had in fact created a page of this film on 24th Feb....any chance you could merge the pages? We seem to have information about the film that could be used in one longer article. I welcome your views.Luckyles 07:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Solved - I included most of the stuff from your article which added to my article, which is in wiki format (except the quote section - lots of debate about those!), and made your page a disambiguation page. You had a number of nice pieces in your article, but have a look how the page is technically constructed - may be use its format to create others articles on other films you notice we are missing here. The only missing items from your article was the categorisation, which is very important as we are an encyclopaedia. Keep up your great work, and if you need some help - please, just ask! With Best Regards, --Trident13 22:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi - Many thanks for merging the article. I am still a bit of a novice at starting new articles, so I really appreciate the work you've done. Should I go to a link for help in wikifying an article? Anyway, many thanks for your help on this - Luckyles 11:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Honestly, the best way to learn is to edit! You can find lots of useful links on the first message on your talk page on wiki rules and aids. However, they only convey technical format and take you so far - creating a good article is as much doing as it is the technical standards. So I suggest, if you want to write a new article, firstly look for a good/great article on a similar subject/in the same area, and use that as a template to create your new article around. Create a stub page for your new article, and create it first there - then you can play with it as much as you want! When you are happy, then publish to the main encyclopedia. If you want to help me improve the article on actor Edward Woodward, then have an edit of the stub page in my personal stubs area. If you have any further questions, please come back to me. Best Regards, - Trident13 20:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Phillip Schofield
I see that you removed the link to Schofield Fans. I have readded the link however using the official domain. It used to be just a fansite however recently his agent and Phillip himself have been in contact and have now linked their official domain (phillipschofield.com) to the site, therefore I think that is enough to make it worthy of still being part of wikipedia. Phillip also participates on the site and all information on the site is checked often by his agents.

Ellen —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Webkin (talk • contribs) 23:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

Lambretta links
Would you please explain to me exactly why you removed my links? I spent many years as a works rider of Rafferty Newman 'wildcat Lambretta scooters' and am considered an authority on them. Just exactly why do you feel qualified to remove the links? How qualified are you on Lambrettas? I'm very annoyed at you for doing that. Unless you can contribute something better, I think you should leave well alone. If necessary I will create a dedicated 'Wildcat' page on Wikipedia. Regards Dave Tooley


 * Can I first ask, have you read the the rules at WP:CIV? If you created a registered Wiki account, and explained who you were, perhaps I could have taken your claimed credentials into account (I can't verify who you are), and asked why you added the link - which contains an amount of commercial content, and therefore would not without explanation meet the rules for inclusion unless it's value were explained. You even added the link to the Vespa article, under the pages highlighted edit notes stating that the page is carefully watched, and if an editor wants to add an external link to please explain why on the Talk Page: and you didn't. Finally, unlike myself when removing your link, you left no edit summary in your addition of the link to some six articles - which in its own looks like SPAM activity. I am happy to discuss further, but why add the link to six articles unless you wanted to publise it for commercial gain? The article on Wildcat would need to be considered on its own, but a quick singular Google check would suggest it would fail WP:notability rules for inclusion. Rgds, - Trident13 19:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Wildcats
I have registered with Wiki, and have a username and password. But since when I first viewed your page it said anyone could edit or add content I didn't see the problem. You can see who I am, Dave Tooley. Just search for my name in any search engine of your choice and you will find me number one in the world. I was world famous in the early 70's as one of the most succesful riders of my era on the Works Wildcat Lambrettas. If that doesn't qualify as experienced enough to get an entry on Wikipedia, I don't know what is. I added the links to the very few references you have to scooters because of that very reason. YOU HAVE VERY FEW REFERENCES TO SCOOTERS. My website gets thousands of hits every day because there is so much world wide interest in it. I just thought it may be of further interest to the internet community to put a link from your site. The only possible commercial link on my site is a minor reference to Lambretta clothing. Can easily be removed if you have an issue with it. Rafferty Newman have not sold Lambrettas since 1972 (Italy stopped making them then) so there is no issue there) If you take the time to actually look through my site, http://www.davesplace.co.uk/Dave%20Tooley%27s%20Scooter%20Racing%20Links%20Page.htm you will find it holds priceless information from a lost era, and also photos from a period of racing you will find nowhere else. I hope this answers some of your questions.  But to be honest, I'm not that bothered.  I only thought your readers may be interested in following on from the subjects.  If you don't care about your readers being further enlightened, then I will not bother again, and just carry on adding to my own site.

Regards Dave Tooley —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.27.153.18 (talk) 20:32, 10 March 2007 (UTC).


 * Unfortunately, again, can I ask - have you read WP:CIV? This is a co-operative site, and your attitude and tone is unnecessary - Thank You. Some thoughts....


 * Articles on wikipedia have to meet certain criteria for inclusion. You or I may think it important, but unless the article's subject meets these criteria, then any other editor can challenge it under a defined procedure. If the challenge is successful and supported by others, then the article is removed. I did a quick search on Wildcats again, and on a Google search criteria it would fail - hence probably fail WP:notability
 * A number of experts often find it hard to add to existing articles, because Wikipedia asks only for fact. Fact is different to expertise, in that it requires reference. That takes a bit of time to get used to, to have to prove what you write: I re wrote the Yamaha R1 article substantially into wiki format, after an expert editor had added much but substantiated little with external reference. We collaborated, he's not got a nice article which he add's to in a developed style
 * External links are meant as a way of adding additional information to an article for a reader, not as a commercial or Google ranking exercise. However, as is the case for the Ducati Paso, and as explained on the talk page of the Vespa article, some editors who are (claim) to be experts have added much good information to those articles, those who are interested in that subject generally won't complain if the editor in question adds his/her commercial link. They are often enthusiasts, and have much good information on their own site. Again I reiterate I don't know who you are (ie - I can't substantiate it), but if you are who you claim you are a good edit record in an area would substantially prove your expertise here beyond reasonable doubt
 * The Vespa article has suffered from much attack. The reason for this is that a group of six+ editors collaborated to create a more substantial article some 6months ago. Two of the things we created was a "Famous Vespa" and 'Vespa in Film" sections, which seem to be the longest lists of such criteria around (NB: you will note on most of the car related articles, such information has been removed - they had a group decision to exclude such information. Different choices in different areas, depending on what different groups of editors agree is appropriate - collaboration over numerous fixed rules). As a result it has added/we revert an external link addition about twice a day - write a good article, and its quite satisfying to see it continually referred to, but attack is one of the down sides


 * Here's a thought...... in review, the Lambretta article is pretty poor at present: not much history, poor in most other areas. I wouldn't claim expertise or basic knowledge in the area (I'm a Vespa man - plus Triumph, BSA, Norton, etc all of which I currently own examples of). Why not improve the lambretta article, add a piece on racing and hence a piece on the wildcats. I don't think many would complain about that, you could use your site (and others) as a reference point, and add it as a link. If you want some assistance I am happy to help, or go over to the Wiki motorcycle project page (you can find a link on my personal FP), and find some other editors who would love to help you revamp the Lambretta article. Best Regards, - Trident13 20:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar Award

 * Thanks Chris, means a lot! Rgds, - Trident13 21:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The Apprentice
Hi,

Wanted to say thanks for putting this page up. It's got loads of good info on the series. I thought you might like to know that the Village Vermin website which the characters use in the series has been created in real life on the web. It's being updated each week as the series progresses with previews and follow-ups to the story.

Cheers,

Ian May Producer Village Vermin website for the BBC (Party Animals)

The One and Only
Hi I think you created the page "The one and Only" on 27th Feb? I had in fact created a page of this film on 24th Feb....any chance you could merge the pages? We seem to have information about the film that could be used in one longer article. I welcome your views.Luckyles 07:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Solved - I included most of the stuff from your article which added to my article, which is in wiki format (except the quote section - lots of debate about those!), and made your page a disambiguation page. You had a number of nice pieces in your article, but have a look how the page is technically constructed - may be use its format to create others articles on other films you notice we are missing here. The only missing items from your article was the categorisation, which is very important as we are an encyclopaedia. Keep up your great work, and if you need some help - please, just ask! With Best Regards, --Trident13 22:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi - Many thanks for merging the article. I am still a bit of a novice at starting new articles, so I really appreciate the work you've done. Should I go to a link for help in wikifying an article? Anyway, many thanks for your help on this - Luckyles 11:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Honestly, the best way to learn is to edit! You can find lots of useful links on the first message on your talk page on wiki rules and aids. However, they only convey technical format and take you so far - creating a good article is as much doing as it is the technical standards. So I suggest, if you want to write a new article, firstly look for a good/great article on a similar subject/in the same area, and use that as a template to create your new article around. Create a stub page for your new article, and create it first there - then you can play with it as much as you want! When you are happy, then publish to the main encyclopedia. If you want to help me improve the article on actor Edward Woodward, then have an edit of the stub page in my personal stubs area. If you have any further questions, please come back to me. Best Regards, - Trident13 20:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Phillip Schofield
I see that you removed the link to Schofield Fans. I have readded the link however using the official domain. It used to be just a fansite however recently his agent and Phillip himself have been in contact and have now linked their official domain (phillipschofield.com) to the site, therefore I think that is enough to make it worthy of still being part of wikipedia. Phillip also participates on the site and all information on the site is checked often by his agents.

Ellen —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Webkin (talk • contribs) 23:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

Lambretta links
Would you please explain to me exactly why you removed my links? I spent many years as a works rider of Rafferty Newman 'wildcat Lambretta scooters' and am considered an authority on them. Just exactly why do you feel qualified to remove the links? How qualified are you on Lambrettas? I'm very annoyed at you for doing that. Unless you can contribute something better, I think you should leave well alone. If necessary I will create a dedicated 'Wildcat' page on Wikipedia. Regards Dave Tooley


 * Can I first ask, have you read the the rules at WP:CIV? If you created a registered Wiki account, and explained who you were, perhaps I could have taken your claimed credentials into account (I can't verify who you are), and asked why you added the link - which contains an amount of commercial content, and therefore would not without explanation meet the rules for inclusion unless it's value were explained. You even added the link to the Vespa article, under the pages highlighted edit notes stating that the page is carefully watched, and if an editor wants to add an external link to please explain why on the Talk Page: and you didn't. Finally, unlike myself when removing your link, you left no edit summary in your addition of the link to some six articles - which in its own looks like SPAM activity. I am happy to discuss further, but why add the link to six articles unless you wanted to publise it for commercial gain? The article on Wildcat would need to be considered on its own, but a quick singular Google check would suggest it would fail WP:notability rules for inclusion. Rgds, - Trident13 19:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Wildcats
I have registered with Wiki, and have a username and password. But since when I first viewed your page it said anyone could edit or add content I didn't see the problem. You can see who I am, Dave Tooley. Just search for my name in any search engine of your choice and you will find me number one in the world. I was world famous in the early 70's as one of the most succesful riders of my era on the Works Wildcat Lambrettas. If that doesn't qualify as experienced enough to get an entry on Wikipedia, I don't know what is. I added the links to the very few references you have to scooters because of that very reason. YOU HAVE VERY FEW REFERENCES TO SCOOTERS. My website gets thousands of hits every day because there is so much world wide interest in it. I just thought it may be of further interest to the internet community to put a link from your site. The only possible commercial link on my site is a minor reference to Lambretta clothing. Can easily be removed if you have an issue with it. Rafferty Newman have not sold Lambrettas since 1972 (Italy stopped making them then) so there is no issue there) If you take the time to actually look through my site, http://www.davesplace.co.uk/Dave%20Tooley%27s%20Scooter%20Racing%20Links%20Page.htm you will find it holds priceless information from a lost era, and also photos from a period of racing you will find nowhere else. I hope this answers some of your questions.  But to be honest, I'm not that bothered.  I only thought your readers may be interested in following on from the subjects.  If you don't care about your readers being further enlightened, then I will not bother again, and just carry on adding to my own site.

Regards Dave Tooley —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.27.153.18 (talk) 20:32, 10 March 2007 (UTC).


 * Unfortunately, again, can I ask - have you read WP:CIV? This is a co-operative site, and your attitude and tone is unnecessary - Thank You. Some thoughts....


 * Articles on wikipedia have to meet certain criteria for inclusion. You or I may think it important, but unless the article's subject meets these criteria, then any other editor can challenge it under a defined procedure. If the challenge is successful and supported by others, then the article is removed. I did a quick search on Wildcats again, and on a Google search criteria it would fail - hence probably fail WP:notability
 * A number of experts often find it hard to add to existing articles, because Wikipedia asks only for fact. Fact is different to expertise, in that it requires reference. That takes a bit of time to get used to, to have to prove what you write: I re wrote the Yamaha R1 article substantially into wiki format, after an expert editor had added much but substantiated little with external reference. We collaborated, he's not got a nice article which he add's to in a developed style
 * External links are meant as a way of adding additional information to an article for a reader, not as a commercial or Google ranking exercise. However, as is the case for the Ducati Paso, and as explained on the talk page of the Vespa article, some editors who are (claim) to be experts have added much good information to those articles, those who are interested in that subject generally won't complain if the editor in question adds his/her commercial link. They are often enthusiasts, and have much good information on their own site. Again I reiterate I don't know who you are (ie - I can't substantiate it), but if you are who you claim you are a good edit record in an area would substantially prove your expertise here beyond reasonable doubt
 * The Vespa article has suffered from much attack. The reason for this is that a group of six+ editors collaborated to create a more substantial article some 6months ago. Two of the things we created was a "Famous Vespa" and 'Vespa in Film" sections, which seem to be the longest lists of such criteria around (NB: you will note on most of the car related articles, such information has been removed - they had a group decision to exclude such information. Different choices in different areas, depending on what different groups of editors agree is appropriate - collaboration over numerous fixed rules). As a result it has added/we revert an external link addition about twice a day - write a good article, and its quite satisfying to see it continually referred to, but attack is one of the down sides


 * Here's a thought...... in review, the Lambretta article is pretty poor at present: not much history, poor in most other areas. I wouldn't claim expertise or basic knowledge in the area (I'm a Vespa man - plus Triumph, BSA, Norton, etc all of which I currently own examples of). Why not improve the lambretta article, add a piece on racing and hence a piece on the wildcats. I don't think many would complain about that, you could use your site (and others) as a reference point, and add it as a link. If you want some assistance I am happy to help, or go over to the Wiki motorcycle project page (you can find a link on my personal FP), and find some other editors who would love to help you revamp the Lambretta article. Best Regards, - Trident13 20:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Wildcats
Ok, I'll go with that. (I've now signed on with my username, Bowumps. But it's still Dave Tooley talking) You'll have to excuse my tone in my preceding messages, but I didn't understand the concept of how Wikipedia is added to. I apologise unreservedly. Funny you should mention you have a Norton as well. I rode passenger at National level on a motorcycle sidecar in '76 utilising a works Norton Commando engine which previously belonged to Peter Williams (works rider) Les Rafferty my racing sponser(of Rafferty Newmans)was a friend of his. I was also a close friend of Barry Sheene from his early racing days of racing when we were both 16. I can assure you, my references are immpecable.

Check out:- http://www.fareham.org/motor/davet.shtml

I would like to add a piece on Lambretta racing to the Lambretta Wiki site, but do not know how to go about it. Could you please possibly give me some guidance? How do I submit it? Do you want it as an HTML page?

I have created an FAQ. page on my website which could easily be transponded into a factual document.

http://www.davesplace.co.uk/Wildcat_FAQ.htm

I'll be grateful for any assistance in this project.

Regards Dave Tooley —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bowumps (talk • contribs) 17:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

Is John Wyattville Jeffry?
Hi, do you have more information on these two? I think "John" may be a middle/second/nick name or pseudonym of Jeffry Wyattville. Please see Talk:Jeffry Wyattville and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Architecture. -- Jeandré, 2007-03-23t08:26z


 * NO - they were brothers! John was not as well known as his brother Sir Jeffry, but equally architecturally adapt as well as being a better gardiner. Rgds, - Trident13 12:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Anthony Minnuto
An article that you have been involved in editing, Anthony Minnuto, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Anthony Minnuto. Thank you. --A. B. (talk) 20:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


 * PS You originally tagged the article 3 months ago.


 * Thanks - I added Strong delete Rgds, - Trident13 21:33, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Grease: You're the One that I Want!
I've just expanded this article and noticed that you had worked on it before. I'd be grateful if you would revisit it and make any changes you think helpful. Best regards! -- Ssilvers 06:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

MoS issues with titles
Hi there. I notice you've been formatting a number of titles using both quotes and italics. The general rule, and the one suggested by the MoS, is to use italics (only) for "full-length works" (names of TV programmes, books, newspapers), and quotes (only) for "short works" (episode titles, short stories, individual articles). Hope that helps. Alai 18:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message. You say "a number of titles...", but I have looked back through your edit logs for the past two weeks and can't see any articles which I have ever editted. Perhaps some older edits/articles, or please advice - Thank You! Rgds, - Trident13 20:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn't mean to imply I'd actually fixed them, or anything like that. :) I had in mind Amanda Lamb, for example.  Alai 20:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Re James and Tom Martin
Just to say sorry you feel strongly that this article should be deleted...you have your reasons and I respect that but I would just like to point out that this article is not a self bio and was written by myself, after many hours of researching my subject and figuring out how Wikipedia works. As my first attempt at a Wikipedia entry, perhaps isn't worded in quite the right way for some taste, but if there are any useful tips you may like to give me on improving my next article it would be most appreciated. I added the article because I do feel they are worthy of an entry into Wikipedia, as I said over 40 of their songs have been used already by various rock artists and there will be more to follow at a later date.

--Purplepickledonions 08:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of subpage
I have no problem with deleting the subpage. Just wondering if you had considered that you could move the subpage to the article name, thus preserving your edit history, and then tag the subpage (automatically made into a redirect by the move) for deletion. Up to you.--Fuhghettaboutit 23:04, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your message - hope this finds you well! The way I piece an article together, I would have 100+ edits per article - I love playing with the words, and piecing together the history. Some take a while to put together, so hence my current preference for use of sub pages. Thanks for your thoughts though, and perhaps if I have some time/a simple (?) subject, I will give it a go! Best Regards, - Trident13 23:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Great just wanted to check. Deleting away.--Fuhghettaboutit 23:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * One more question. Are you familiar with the DYK process? You seem to create many articles (with references!), which is perfect for dyk articles.--Fuhghettaboutit 23:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes - and in example my originated Rollie Free article was featured! As you mentioned in the debate in your nomination for Admin status (congrat's - very well deserved), personally I'm not here for the publicity. If someone wants to put any of the articles I create or add to through the procedure then happy to support, but other wise would prefer to continue to add to the project and its aims by research/creation/addition - and supporting newbies, plus the odd bit of vandal hunting. Some I think (verging on know?) are here for what it can do for them outside Wikipedia/their careers, than adding value (be that in creation, editting or Admin, etc) to the project. The Rollie Free article in example created more debate on the Waterpump/Admin BB in nomination than it did on the article itself - the debate centred around the licensed use of the photo: some in hindsight were adding to the debate just to get more 'counts" in certain areas: Woo-pe-Do! I hence prefer using the Feedback process and resultantly gain artcle improvement; than the high publicity DYK option. Rgds, - Trident13 07:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Once again just checking. For the articles I've been creating, I think the main page is a perfect fit because so few people know anything about billiards (something I'm passionate about). Some articles i've put up there have been greatly improved quickly with so many eyes looking at them. Anyway, have a great day!--Fuhghettaboutit 12:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Andres Garcia Pena db
I gave a reason for the article. Please consider removal of the db templates. Thanks, Rhetth 23:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry - an Administrator thought my tag correct, and deleted your article. If you still think he is worthy of an article, I suggest you create a stub page and create a draft. Quite happy to help you review this and create something suitable for inclusion if he passes WP:BIO. Rgds, - Trident13 14:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

SOUNDCHECK Magazine Entry
You marked a page that I made for deletion claiming it as an advertisement. I would like to avoid this. What can I do to edit it? Spaceblue 02:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry - an Administrator thought my tag correct, and deleted your article. The developed article I saw this morning European time was more advert like than the stub when I tagged it - a list of distribution points is an advert! If you still think it is worthy of an article, I suggest you create a stub page and create a draft: include something on its background, what it editorially focuses on, contributors, etc. Quite happy to help you review this and create something suitable for inclusion if it passes WP:BIO, but eight issues to Dec06/Jan07 would suggest not. Rgds, - Trident13 14:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

California Aggie article
Trident13: I have tagged The California Aggie page with hangon - please see my discussion in the talk page. --Vince undefined 21:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi! Happy to let this go from speedy to notability (now tag'd), to give you time to build the article - so that will be about two weeks. You need to build in more information and references. A notable newspaper it may be, but a one liner entry doesn't pass WP:notability. Good Luck! Regards, - Trident13 21:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Josef_Szombathy
You applied a speedy delete tag to Josef Szombathy. A pretty usless article at present, but just as a thought did you try a quick Google before tagging it, and did you see the Ducth Wiki page on him? A poor article indeed, but a seemingly notable person who pass WP:notability. Rgds, - Trident13 11:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn't tag it as being non notable, but as an article providing little or no context. The article does not assert anything but his nationality :) -- lucasbfr talk 11:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Agreed it is a poor article, but you then have two choices - apply speed delete for various pieces of rubbish, or if they/the subject is real and does pass WP:notability apply a notability tag, allowing time for the original creator or other editors to expand the article. If a quick search shows notability, then removing the article just means it will be replaced at some point - a notability tag means it should be expanded. Its a lesson I have learnt from applying speedy tags to articles, where a bit of research and an inexperinced editor can add up to better contributions. Rgds, - Trident13 11:11, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Honestly I sometimes check further and add some sources, but when I have no time, I tag the article and leave a message on the author page. That way, if the author intends to add something, he'll either ask me for help or I'll see it. But most of the times the author is no longer there and doesn't see the message. I don't like the notability tag, because the backlog for June 2006 was cleared a week ago or so (most of the time by prodding the articles while nobody was watching...). My own view is that I prefer not having an article about a subject than a 1 sentence article with 3 tags on it. But I understand your view :) -- lucasbfr talk 11:23, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

"Landscape with an Eye"
Hello. WP:CSD doesn't apply to paintings so far as I can tell. I've merged "Landscape with an Eye" into Aimitsu (all of one sentence) and redirected it. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:40, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Jacqui Oatley
Hi, I've nominated an article you worked on, Jacqui Oatley, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the "hook" for the article at Template talk:Did you know where you can improve it if you see fit. Regards,  howcheng  {chat} 16:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Fully supported - just wish I could find a photo. Rgds, - Trident13 17:04, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Your report to AIV
Thank-you for reporting a vandal to AIV. In the future, please use the correct reporting format - simply stating their username and a description isn't very helpful, as it creates more work for admins in fixing your post before they are able to block. An example of the template that should be used can be found at the top of the WP:AIV editing window. Chrisch 08:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


 * My apologies - thought I had used the correct format, but can see now mistake I made. Perhaps formats should be explained in the Editor instructions on the page, rather than in the edit notes? Rgds, - Trident13 09:06, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Just a note to say thanks!
Hey there! I just wanted to say a big thank you for the helpful advice you left on my talk page a few months back. I took what you said on board and since then I've really enjoyed being on Wikipedia, and it inspired me to help wherever I can. So, I just wanted to say thanks again. Having people like you around makes Wikipedia a nicer place. Again, thanks!-- Will2710 |Talk! 22:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Kennedy article
LC has raised no NPOV-related issues - s/he simply is upset that "non-scholarly sources" are being used - that despite the fact that s/he has been using non-scholarly sources all along. LC is trying to keep a valid opinion out of the article - s/he can't tag the article with NPOV simply because s/he doesn't like a certain source. NPOV requires us to report all views fairly and proportionately. That is what I was doing when I restored the information. The only possible NPOV-related issue is one of undue weight, and I can't see how the addition of a few words on the subject constitutes an NPOV violation. 72.198.121.115 12:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


 * A balance dispute between editors is a valid reason for an NPOV tag - better than being blocked on a three revert rule, or being banned! I understand where you are coming from and agree that LC's citation for the sources being unrelaible and not passing WP:RS is not correct. Join in the debate and lets get this sorted. Rgds, - Trident13 12:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think you understand the use of NPOV very well. There is no neutrality dispute on the article - there is a question of what constitutes a reliable source.  The fact that LC doesn't understand what constitutes a reliable source does not mean that there is a dispute about the neutrality of the article.  As for 3rr issues - you're the one who is reverting repeatedly - LC has not replaced the tag since I explained why it wasn't a neutrality debate.  You have not raised any neutrality issues.
 * As for the medcab - I have no interest in working with them - most of their "mediators" don't understand policy and don't seem to know that they are an informal body, which does not have the power to rule on disputes. There is nothing to mediate - instead, you should try to explain to LC what a reliable source constitutes.  72.198.121.115 13:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Link
It was a dead link (as I explained in my edit summary). 72.198.121.115 13:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Article
Hey thanks for helping out. The article's almost done now, but I still have 2 questions that need answered:


 * What's the main purpose of editing Wikipedia instead of leaving it for someone else to fix? - ANSWER: I am sure its different for each, but personally a combination of: the pleasure of seeing something added to the project; the resultant learning of the world; leaving a signature/possible legacy. As you spend a bit longer here, you appreciate the personal effects on self education, and how different people see the world so much more differently.


 * Do you ever believe that Wikipedia will ever be considered credible enough to cite in a research paper? ANSWER: Yes - its already been cited in court, its only a matter of time before its cited in a heavy-weight reserch paper outside social interaction and the intrenet

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Luke J-School (talk • contribs) 15:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC).


 * Good luck with your project! Rgds, --Trident13 15:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

D. James Kennedy
Umm...how did I vandalize Kennedy's page????? Thanks. - unsigned comment by 65.246.143.130


 * In explanation, you removed a whole paragraph. If this was a genuine mistake, no worries, but procedure is to leave a warning. Rgds, --Trident13 18:46, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

about Robyn Ochs
Hi, I'd like to know what we could do to get the NPOV tags. I've just added the first three articles I came across. She really is very well know. CyntWorkStuff 19:00, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * See my comments on Talk:Robyn Ochs. Remove a few POV statements and add some references - OK? Rgds, --Trident13 21:05, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

The trains of the Holocaust
Good job on that one, are you some kind of article-writing dervish? Did you have some preexisting source you wikified to make the new version? &mdash;dgies tc 16:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Its a bank holiday, it was raining (so no gardening or motorcycles), and some subjects you just get into. I had some material from previous articles, so it wasn't too hard. Rgds, - Trident13 19:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * It has been proposed that this article be renamed to Holocaust trains. Please comment on the matter at Talk:The trains of the Holocaust.  &mdash;dgies tc 05:06, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

RAF West Freugh
Hi, I've nominated an article you worked on, RAF West Freugh, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the "hook" for the article at Template talk:Did you know where you can improve it if you see fit. Regards,  howcheng  {chat} 21:21, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Lucy Verasamy
Hi Trident, I noticed you have contributed to a number of artciles in relation to Sky News weather presenters. I was perhaps wondering if you might be willing to have a look at the Lucy Verasamy article, and perhaps provide your insight and comment in it's AfD? Thanks —Lonewolf 1183 16:58, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message and highlighting this AfD! I have made due comment STRONG KEEP/IMMEDIATE CLOSE for not following due process WP:AFD. Best Regards, --Trident13 17:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Appreciate you taking the time to have look at it and providing your input. Lonewolf 1183 17:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Try that! Looks a bit better, and nine references can't be bad! If you need any help on any other articles, in terms of assistance or improvment, please just ask. Rgds, --Trident13 18:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the random act of kindness barnstar you gave me -- it was nice to find it when I got back from a recent (internet-less) business trip to the hinterlands of Greece! MeegsC | Talk 15:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Photos
Thanks, how did you know bout my stobart pics? Can you help me upload them to commons? eg tell me what to do and how to get my previous uploads there, and what it is all about. Cheers - Llamafish 16:27, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi! To upload your photo's to WikiCommons, go over to the WikiCommons FP and create yourself an account much like you did here - ideally, use the same account name over there that you have over here. Uploading photos to WikiCommons is similar to Wikipedia, but there is a better choice of licenses. By creating an account rather than letting another editor move your files over means that you get a better choice of licenses. Personally, I like using the one that means the user has to credit you as the originator of the photo - its still a free license, but at least you get the credit (the plain license over here means - no credit). And I saw your Eddie Stobart pictures on the link to your fototopic page on your wiki FP. Look after yourself. Best Regards, --Trident13 17:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I still need help, I don't have a clue what to do! - Llamafish 17:27, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, no problems. Try this: Click Here To Create An Account at WikiCommons Make your UserName there the same as here (ie: Llamafish), enter a password and an eMail address and follow the instructions. Any problems, come back to me. Rgds, --Trident13 17:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I have, bit unsure about the pictures aspect though, and how to get my old uploads up. Thanks for helping me, you are a great wikipedian Llamafish 17:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, don't worry (yet) about your old photo's uploaded over here - we can sort that later! The nice thing about commons is twofold: better choice of licenses (you have a good eye and good enthusiasm for your subject); indexing of images meaning that your images are more likely to be used (much like Wikipedia indexes articles, WikiCommons indexes photo's - ie Cat - British Diesel Locomotives). Have a look around first, and then having found a photo in a similar category/s to one that you would like to upload, make a note and use the same settings for your upload. Like here the image will have a page reference(eg - Image:XYZ.jpg for instance) - that's now accessible over all Wiki projects not just Wikipedia. I wouldn't upload all your photo's (those on your phototopic page are your copyright), just some you are proud of and are happy for others to use. Let me know how you get on, and if you need any help, just ask! Best Regards, --Trident13 17:45, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * which is the best tag to use for a photo? Llamafish 17:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC) (one you suggested)


 * You want an Attribution license - see this photo of mine which is on WikiCommons, with the license I suggest you use - free to use, some rights reserved, must be attributed. Rgds, --Trident13 18:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi again, How to I transfer all of my existing images to commons?

Llamafish 17:20, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Kevin Costner
Hi! Just a short note to say - thanks for your input on the Kevin Costner article. I had a look at the talkpage, looking for the reasons behind the anon's adding the link with Time magazine reference to his ancestory, and the reverts by various editors including yourself. Could you give me some background so I can help you out? Thanks! Best Rgds, --Trident13 17:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, it's simply that the anon is adding that his father was German American and his mother was Irish American. But the source - Time - doesn't say that specifically - just mentions that his family had Irish, German and Cherokee ancestry as a whole. Mad Jack 23:27, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank You! Rgds, --Trident13 23:40, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * HELP - I've almost given up with this Anon! The Anon from ip address 84.140.XXX.XXX is orginating from a Deutsche Telekom owned IP address. My guess is that the address rotates as the Anon is subscriber to DT's Broadband ISP service - so it works much like AOL's rotating IP address for thei subscribers. What do you suggest? I added a load of details to the article with references, and all the Anon does is revert back to the version that states his father is German American, normally having also adjusted the German American article before that. Suggestions? Rgds, --Trident13 17:31, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks good to me, good work adding sources. I think the only thing we can do is just keep reverting. His IP changes daily. Mad Jack 18:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Take a look at this edit record from the German Wikipedia. Note the last edit of 13 Mai, by IP 84.140.106.9 - not long before, the same IP address turns up on the English Wiki Kevin Costner article editing. The IP address would be the same if the Anon kept logged in. Rgds, --Trident13 22:16, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bigcatweek.jpg
Hello, Trident13. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Bigcatweek.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Trident13/Wild. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 06:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:TheWickerMan Howiewarnsvillagers.jpg
Hello Trident13, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:TheWickerMan Howiewarnsvillagers.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Trident13/EWoodward. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

The Krays
Hey, I left a message on Talk:Kray twins regarding tha fact that you can't have categories on redirect pages; however, I just thought of an easy solution. You should make each twin's page a short stub, with all the approprate categories, guiding readers to the main article. Like:

Ronald Kray (24 October 1933 – 17 March 1995) was one of the Kray twins, the foremost organised crime leaders in London's Eastend during the 1950s and 60s. Ronald &mdash; commonly referred to as Ron or Ronnie &mdash; was bisexual, suffered from paranoid schizophrenia and had the more dominant personality of the two. I can help you out or clean them up if you wish; also, there needs to be a source referenced regarding Ron's sexuality, or somebody from my WikiProject may remove the category! LOL. TAnthony 14:48, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Military of Wales
I have removed in good faith the Royal Navy ships that you have added to the above category on 2 grounds; Your selection criterion for using this category appears to have been a Welsh connection in the name. However, I would strongly advise against this, or else we could put every ship with a Scottish or Irish or English connection in the name into such categories of convenience as "Military of..." and down to such ships as HMS Gambia in a category "Military of Gambia". It is my opinion that the Military of Wales category should be used solely for such items as Welsh regiments, forts and other uniquely Welsh items of militaria. I have canvassed some opinion here. Please do join in if you feel I have overstepped the mark. Emoscopes Talk 11:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Firstly, Military, in the strict British use of the word, pertains to "land" matters. Naval ships are not part of the military organisation.
 * 2) Secondly, none of these ships are Welsh or part of a Welsh Navy. These ships are all British ships of the Royal Navy.


 * As you started the discussion on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history, see answer there. Rgds, - Trident13 11:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Vespa Share program
I am new to this whole thing and I was reading all the warnings about external links. My wife (who suffers from Lupus) and I run a Vespa rental business in Miami and we also have a Vespa-Share program and our members are called "Greenie's." I think we are the only Vespa-Share program in the country identical to the Car-share programs that exist in NY, Chicago, and Boston. I wanted you to take a look and let me know what section (if not a section of it's own) this info should go in based on this articles large scope of info. Again I am new to this and yes this would be a way for us to drive people to our web site and yes we would benefit from it if people became members but I think our service is the only service in North America and we all have to do our share to reduce our carbo-emmissions. Let me know what you think of the link and if or when I can add it to the article? Q Fortune


 * Hi! Thanks for your message re the Vespa article. I have had a look at your website, which perhaps at present looks a little bit under developed. I looked around it, but can't find out the scale of your present operation - how many bikes do you have? I would say at present most of the main contributors would see your addition of a link as "spam" or failing WP:EXT - perhaps if it included some information about and why vespas? To start a debate on whether to/to not add a link, I have posted your piece on my talk page to the articles talk page. However, if you want a quicker and more likely positive outcome, and you like Vespa's and think you could add information to the present Wikipedia article before you add your link, then most of our best contributors are also commercial operations owners, some of whom have links at the bottom as a concession. Add some information on Vespa's, build up a consistent edit record, and go from there. If you have any questions, come back to me. Best Regards, --Trident13 13:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

PROD warning
Hello - just thought I'd let you know that I've added a PROD to Cardiff & County Club, which you've been editing recently, in case you can address the concerns I've got. Yours, Bencherlite 22:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup? Why?
I'm curious as to why you tagged this article for cleanup. I don't see anything wrong with it. If you are going to tag with the generic cleanup tag, then you should explain your reasons on the talk page, or use a more specific tag. -- Elaich   talk 18:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I suggest you read it - a whole host of mashed together comments with no refereces, that's inherently POV and has limited encyclopedic content/not written in an encyclopedic manner. Need I say any more, or care to debate it on WP:AFD? Give it a clean up! Rgds, --Trident13 19:00, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Evans v. the United Kingdom
Hi, I fixed invalid links to the ECHR that were in this article. It doesn't work if you copy and paste the URL from your brower address bar (these are only temporary links): you have to click on "notice" (above left) and then to copy the link at the bottom. In general, be careful with any link which contains "sessionid" (it probably won't work for anybody else). Apokrif 15:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Chew Stoke FAC
Hi, I've recently put Chew Stoke up as a Featured Article candidate. As you have edited this article in the past I wondered if you would like to make any comments at Featured article candidates/Chew Stoke?&mdash; Rod talk 07:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Camper and Nicholsons

 * Just to confirm: when you say "1900s" you mean 1900-09, right? Because otherwise "20th century" is more accurate. Biruitorul 21:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Transformers/Vespa
Hi! I note your edit to the Vespa article and your edit summary comments to editor Rally180 as: ''Rally180 didn't read summary before making an uninformed edit. Read before making unnecessary deletions.'' On checking your edit versus your earlier addition of Transformers to the film section, I note you did not add the additional information re the competition previously. Please can you note the Wiki precedence of Assume Good Faith, and further that we are a friendly bunch of editors who maintain the Vespa article, and such comments are not useful to maintaining the quality of the article or common purpose. Rgds, --Trident13 07:12, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, In regards to the "Transformers" movie, I did put: (Look at vespa dot com and you'll see the Transformers tie in. A Vespa Transformer would be pretty sweet.) in the summary part that's found in the history page.  I guess that was not clear enough, so I made it more clear by putting it as a reference.  I will make sure to put references (when possible) by additions that might seem out of the ordinary.  However, when there is no reason to put a link (ie. the link is overkill or not adding much), is it enough to just put it in the summary part?  Do people read the summary part on the history page to see the reason why someone put an addition in, or is that not the case?  I am sorry if the comment was taken the wrong way. - Cheers  Paperino45 23:10, 23 June 2007


 * In simple summary - I think your thoughts are right, and when in doubt its always best to leave more information than less, particularly if a reference is available. But your edit summary is where you got it wrong on this occasion, and could have created a major row/edit war. You are a good editor we would hate to lose from the article, so please watch your edit summaries! Look after yourself. Rgds, --Trident13 22:07, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

A7
Speedy for notability is only when there is no assertion of having any importance. To say that someone is a professor is an assertion of importance--especially when its a named chair, when there's editorship of journals, etc. I have declined the speedy. DGG 23:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * and i see another admin declined the speedy on Hernouni, who is a member of his national academy of sciences and the winner of a whole list of prizes. That's about as clear assertion as one can get. Anyone who asserts non trivial prizes in anything isn't a valid speedy. You're marking most of them right, though, so please keep on with it, but cautiously. If you merely doubt someone's importance, it has to be prod or AfD. DGG 00:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Lee Hughes
Where in the Sun article did it say that Lee Hughes owns a nightclub? "New club" = football club, i.e. Oldham. Please add a separate source that says "nightclub" if that indeed is the case (although I think unlikely). Thanks. --Jameboy 08:42, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Ed Bridges, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Ozgod 12:56, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Re Bernard Manning
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:87.194.116.134&redirect=no

I've got to say, that did give me a chuckle. And I do admire your handling of the situation there.

I have got to admit, changing every use of 'racist' on Bernard Manning's page to 'knob-jockey' wasn't so much an experiment, more a childish bout of vandalism. It's something I've come more prone to do, having grown frustrated with the 99% of Wikipediphiles who routinely strip out anything bordering on remotely useful or interesting (or as they generally call it, Nx, where N is 'not', and x is more or less random), which absolutely ruins this site. Maybe it'll make more people understand that Wikipedia is, mostly, bollocks, and although it's a nice idea with some good people working on it, it's basically a failure. Probably won't, though. But it'll be a giggle to me and my friends, so it's not entirely pointless.

Ah well. Back to being anonymous for me. Keep up your good work, and have a good week.

Cheers, DB

Copyright violation in Greeves (motorcycles)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Greeves (motorcycles), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Greeves (motorcycles) is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Greeves (motorcycles), please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it did not nominate Greeves (motorcycles) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 01:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:2007_Ford_Mondeo_Pre_Launch.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:2007_Ford_Mondeo_Pre_Launch.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 10:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:2007_Ford_Mondeo_Pre_Launch.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:2007_Ford_Mondeo_Pre_Launch.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 18:47, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Laura Kuenssberg
Welcome to Wikipedia. An article you recently created, Laura Kuenssberg, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new articles, so it will shortly be removed (if it hasn't been already). Please use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do and please read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. In my opiton, this person is not noteable enough, Tiddly Tom 21:35, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Woops - according to an Admin, you got that one wrong! I know as a new pages patroller myself of some 14months standing (a second thing you didn't check) its difficult to assess articles sometimes, but there was a reference. Less haste, more speed! Best Regards, - Trident13 21:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yah, But just becouse there is a reference, does this meen that the person is noteable? I did get a little worried when I came here to issue this warning ^^ And you had a very big user talk, and a barnstar just above my post :p Sorry for any inconvenence cause ;) Tiddly Tom 21:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No, but you need to read and know what the criteria are for notability BEFORE you put up a speedy tag! Not doing so will get you into lots of trouble, and hassle - some people are very "protective" of something they wrote, and can take it VERY personally: that's not much fun. A couple of references and a journalist for a nationaly recognised news network would pass WP:BIO, let alone an award form a recognised national society. You were out on at least four issues (me and the time I have been here, journalist, references, award). As I said before - less haste, more speed! If you need any help, come back and ask - happy to help! Best Regards, --Trident13 22:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your help, and I deffinaly agree with you. Will be much more carefull next time :) Tiddly Tom 22:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Graham Jones
Please see the discussion point I have raised on the Graham Jones entry.

You keep deleting the point of clarity I am making because I am Graham Jones, the author who should not be confused with Graham Jones the film director

You say my entry is spam. It isn't it is clarifying the page.

It is an issue for biography pages where people have the same names.

Smile!


WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Just spreading some random wikilove. Cheers. :) -WarthogDemon 23:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Pilleth
Hi there. Most of the article that you contributed on Pilleth appears to be a copyvio from the Friends of Pilleth website, listed as an external libnk on the article. Rather than immediately launching into the Copyvio procedures, I thought it best to bring it up with you first. Are you involved with the Friends of Pilleth, or otherwise have permission to use their Copyright material? --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 15:08, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note! I am a member of the Friends of Pilleth, but taking a look thought it could do with a revamp - an Anon editor had added much re the battle, which I removed; and I added more text and references with ref section. Let me know what you think. Rgds, - Trident13 20:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Brilliant work - thanks! I've made some minor edits just to get rid of single-sentence paragraphs (which are often stylistically frowned-upon) - I think you've made it into an exemplary short article. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 08:47, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Nadine Baggott
A tag has been placed on Nadine Baggott requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines. For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. -- DMcMPO11AAUK 02:02, 9 September 2007 (UTC) I've nominated Nadine Baggott's page for speedy deletion, as the original author I'm advising you. The page makes no assertion of importance or significance about Ms Baggott, and her only "award" seems to be a small prize in a small pond. The page also attracts a lot of vandalism, and has links for references of dubious quality or that simply don't work any more. DMcMPO11AAUK 02:02, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I nominated KEEP for clear reasons, and made some additional comments - Rgds, - Trident13 20:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The Speedy Deletion has become an AfD anyway - can you add anything to the article? I still don't think she's particularly notable, and I've added everything to the article that I can find a reliable source for (which is why her year of birth isn't in the bio info box - I can't find a reliable source for it!) For someone so "notable" there's very little verifiable information available publicly. DMcMPO11AAUK 00:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not grooming anything for deletion. I've reverted vandalism on several occasions, removed inaccuracies both in the original article text (for example birthplace is not orpington, despite the reference which was a blogosphere discussion where someone asked "did she come from orpington?") (she states she was born in Isleworth); and that seem to have been added later (e.g. the assertion that she owns cats - she states that she doesn't). I've added a bio infobox in which I've placed only that information that is verifiably accurate, and I've endeavoured to ensure that all material on the page is from verifiable sources. The only verifiable information that I've removed is that she has done a commercial tv presenters course - I don't think it's appropriate in a bio to list short vocational courses that the subject has attended. I've discussed just about all of this on the article's talk page as I've done it. And I've done it because although I believe that the article should be deleted, I also believe that if the AfD fails, the article is now better laid out and more accurate than before I started on it.

How about before you start slinging accusations that I'm grooming the article for deletion you read the article talk page where I've explained my reasons for the more significant changes I've made, and actually read my comments in the edit history!

For your perusal, here is a list of all the edits I've made to the article and the descriptions from the edit history, grouped according to the sort of changes I made. If you disagree with any specific edit, feel free to ask me to expand on my reasoning for that change!

6 edits attempting to re-structure and flesh out the section about her career

01:10, 13 September 2007 (3,441 bytes) (magazines and newspapers now as a single list, moved ref for Hello to first instance)

23:28, 11 September 2007 m (3,399 bytes) (?Journalism - fixed the list of publications to read properly)

23:18, 11 September 2007 (3,405 bytes) (?Career - added product endorsements, link to flash version of olay regenerist advert)

02:25, 11 September 2007 (2,801 bytes) (Added some headers, tidied up first para of career)

23:21, 11 September 2007 m (3,402 bytes) (sites --> companies in endorsements)

02:19, 11 September 2007 (2,730 bytes) (grammatical fix, recognition of negative response to adverts)

3 edits in connection with Speedy Deletion / AfD process

03:33, 9 September 2007 (2,056 bytes) (Correcting the summary: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadine Baggott)

03:24, 9 September 2007 (1,978 bytes) (Nominated for deletion: see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadine_Baggott)

02:46, 9 September 2007 (2,038 bytes) (nominated for speedy deletion - fails to assert importance / significance of subject)

2 edits generally tidying a few things up, identifying where citations needed

02:33, 9 September 2007 (2,026 bytes) (some tidying up, but I'm actually wondering if the page should be deleted anyway)

03:14, 9 September 2007 (1,764 bytes) (citation needed for year and place of birth)

6 edits to revert vandalism, inappropriate comments, NPOV

00:35, 10 September 2007 (2,116 bytes) (Undid revision 156686396 by 82.16.112.191 nonsensical vandalism, see talk)

01:46, 9 September 2007 (1,963 bytes) (Undid revision 156583890 by 62.136.139.208)

06:54, 4 September 2007 (1,966 bytes) (removed inappropriate personal opinion about averts subject appears in)

06:39, 1 September 2007 (1,966 bytes) (removed more minor vandalism - see talk page)

09:26, 16 August 2007 (1,966 bytes) (Undid revision 151226904 by 81.140.82.87)

18:31, 13 August 2007 (1,966 bytes) (Undid revision 150816464 by 88.106.97.141)

2 edits to create and update the Trivia category

16:13, 13 September 2007 m (3,728 bytes) (tweaked the trivia)

16:11, 13 September 2007 (3,712 bytes) (?Trivia - created section)

2 edits to create and update the infobox

01:42, 11 September 2007 (2,338 bytes) (update infobox)

01:39, 11 September 2007 (2,272 bytes) (created infobox/person with information that I think is accurate)

2 edits to remove factual errors - she was not born in orpington and does not own 2 siamese cats

12:16, 10 September 2007 (2,027 bytes) (Nadine has no cats, and was born in Isleworth, West London. See talk page for more info)

02:04, 11 September 2007 (2,303 bytes) (removed category "people from orpington" - NB is not!)

2 edits to remove or fix broken and / or poor quality references / links

03:10, 9 September 2007 (1,748 bytes) (removed broken / poor quality references)

12:50, 10 September 2007 (2,052 bytes) (?External links - updated a link)

DMcMPO11AAUK 01:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Frankly, I am confused by your edit record on the article - it appears "split" in objective, and the change of heart and comments made even on my talk page still seem to suggest a dual position. I made the comment re grooming for deletion as the evidence from the articles history is clear, and hence I stand fully by the comment. Also, re your style on Wiki - it appears far, far too wordy: may be have a review there and devlop a more sucsinct delivery. Rgds, - Trident13 09:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Kevin Costner
the trivia that i added, i thought it was an interesting thing, trivial but interesting. so i did some research about other articles with Trivia, look at Longfellow, "The Bowdoin College Longfellows, an all male a capella group, uses Longfellow as their inspiration." how's that more encyclopedic than what i added? i don't want to nag you, i just want to know how come i can't put that dude's project about Costner in the trivia.Yamanbaiia 13:56, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message - hope this finds you well! I thought what you added was quite interesting, but Wikipedia is trying to remove most of the Trivia sections at present - see WP:TRIVIA. Hence, while a piece of trivia could sit well in one article, it wouldn't in another. We have tried to improve the Costner article to make it more encyclopedic, and less a fan shrine. But, having looked at what you inserted under trivia, if well referenced it would sit well under the main part of his article as an interesting current fact. Let me know what your thoughts are, and if you want to integrate it into the article but not under a trivia heading, quite happy to help you. Best Regards, - Trident13 19:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * i have been reading WT:TRIV and everyone is just going ballistic over there, i am going to improve this article one of these days but i don't think that that small trivia can be included in Costner's current events becuse it's not something he is doing but someone else, i insist about leaving it as a trivia, at least until someone else comes and gives an opinion. three think better than two. :)Yamanbaiia 17:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Vespa
What you delete that for, everyone know me around D.C. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanfrick8 (talk • contribs) 21:52, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Apparently - not! Sorry, but no Wiki bio, no mention on the Vespa article. Rgds, - Trident13 21:58, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yea, it's crazy that someone hasn't made an article about me yet. I think you deleted me bc I have a newer vespa than you?  TRUE or FALSE?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanfrick8 (talk • contribs) 19:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Nadine Baggott
Perhaps you'd like to suggest fixes to the following issues relating to the original article?


 * The reference for her year of birth is not working, and I can't find the information on the ITV website. www.archive.org seems to be broken so I can't find it there either. My fix was to remove the reference and add a cite template.


 * The reference for her birthplace being Orpington is a blog where people are asking where she was born. This is hardly a high quality reference for biographical data (WP:BLP). She gives her place of birth as Isleworth, not Orpington. My fix was to change the place of birth to Isleworth.


 * The implication that she trained as a journalist between graduation and employment has no verifiable source. Her own statement is that she was employed as a journalist after graduating. My fix was to reword the statement as "After graduating, Baggott gained employment as a journalist".


 * The reference for her contributions to the London Evening Standard gives the message "This requested article does not exist", on entering "Nadine Baggott" in the search box for the website gives "No results found for your query from FindArticle". Searching the London Evening Standard website for "Nadine Baggott" finds nothing. My fix was to remove the reference.


 * If the list of journals that she has written for is to be split between newspapers and magazines, then there shouldn't be a "magazine" in the newspaper list - it's inconsistent. There is no reason to split the list anyway. My fix was to combine all the journals in a single list.


 * Time sensitive information in the second and third paragraph is not dated. (WP:NAMES#Out-of-date_material). My fix was to add the current year in brackets where I felt it was needed.


 * Vocational training courses aren't generally listed in WP Bio's, and there is no verifiable source that the "media training" occurred before the subject appeared on the BBC show "Vanessa". My fix was to remove all reference to her receiving media training.

DMcMPO11AAUK 17:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Ian McAllister
Hi. You've twice reverted me there. Can we come to a compromise, or do we need to involve other people? My stance is that we need a better source to say that McAllister is a practising Catholic. --John 23:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Lets try talking it through. I could understand your first edit - it needed a ref, so I replicated a higher ref down to where you had placed a citation tag. So the question - is he a catholic? He attended Thornleigh Salesian College, an (at the time - the rules changed post 1998 under the discrimination laws on sex, race and religion) exclusive Catholic only college. To attend he and his family would have had to have to been practising catholics at the time. There are other clear references that he's a practising Christian, and if he'd changed religion to (say) Baptist or other wise there would be good references. Hence for me, its pretty clear he is catholic. What are your thoughts? Rgds, - Trident13 22:28, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, that level of verifiability does not entitle the claim that he belongs to that category, especially for a living person, in my opinion. There is also the question of whether his (putative) Catholicism is noteworthy enough to be included. Let's take it to article talk and see what others think as it is clear we disagree. --John 18:20, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, I here where you are coming from, but before we take it there what in your opinion are we in dispute about: that he's religeous; that he's catholic; that his being catholic is significant enough that it should be noted in his bio? As I personally have a Scots/Irish but born in England background, I realise that some take these items far more seriously, and have seen far too many daft edits wars over such issues. Personally wishing to avoid such an opportunity now, and focus future potential debate when other editors review and note the attendence of Thornleigh Salesian College, and in the spirit of WP:CON, I would prefere to agree between you and I a suitable position or what we disagree about before we take it to the talk page. Thoughts? Rgds - Trident13 18:54, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I would think you'd be able to get your point across, and be immune to any objections, were you to simply embellish the second sentence of the article by changing "he was schooled at Thornleigh Salesian College" to "he was schooled at (the then all-Catholic) Thornleigh Salesian College". 75.88.108.52 05:11, 5 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Good suggestion from an Anon - what do you think? Rgds, - Trident13 07:53, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Ned Sherrin edit
Hi! Don't know if you knew you removed the "class" ratings in this edit, but just wanted you to be aware. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 21:09, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes - it needed re assesment in light of its comprehensive re-writting in light of his death. Rgds, - Trident13 22:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Barbara Serra
Hi - I have just read your entry on newsreader Barbara Serra - it was very informative and well written. Do you know Barbara or are you just interested in news and current affairs? Cheers - Jon Irving —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.205.59.17 (talk) 16:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Not a friend, just a news fan - Rgds - Trident13 22:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Bombay Bicycle Club
A tag has been placed on Bombay Bicycle Club, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD A1.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Ryan Lupin  (talk/contribs) 20:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Jean Charles de Menezes
Shwmae! Now that the H&S trial is all but over do you fancy working on an update to the article? It's messy and needs an overhaul. I was thinking of separating out the contentious stuff (about a dozen things) and consolidating each into its own section. Each section could have the original claim: evidence for, evidence against etc. This would also involve updating links, some of the early ones really report misinformation that was later corrected or retracted. This strikes me as the most encyclopedic way of dealing with it and it presents controversial information in the contxt of being controversial. Thoughts? -- R OGER D AVIES  TALK 08:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Frances FitzGerald
Just want to let you know that I've removed the entire section(s) about Marietta Peabody that you added to Frances FitzGerald, since they are utterly out of place (not to mention that she's already got her own article). Honestly, this was one of the more bizarre things I've come across in the thousands of articles I've seen/edited on Wikipedia. Please try to use some common sense next time you're tempted to add non-germane material to an article. Cheers! Cgingold 04:15, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Question
Hi, sorry I know ur on a wikibreak, but I wonder when u get back could u help me with a question I posted here plz? Ryan4314 07:24, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sports World logo.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Sports World logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Eric Lock entry
Sorry to disturb your studies....but I have added some extra info on Eric Lock....have a glance through it and make any edits you feel necessary.

I felt the need:

a. Because the entry seemed a bit sparse for a guy that made such an impact (albeit a brief one)

b. The entry as it stood seemed to indicate he ended his career as a Pilot Officer

c. The score indicated appeared like he shot down only 16 and a half in his career, whereas that was only his BoB score

Anyway look it over......I can be reached on adrian_angove@btinternet.com if you want to discuss

Lawson Software
I saw your note about aggressive editting (sic) and being unavailable because you're taking a break and that you won't respond to comments posted until that message is deleted. I'm hoping that perhaps you forgot to delete the message and that you will respond to this one.

I noted some pretty heavy editing of the Lawson site and would like to reinstate a good portion of the information. Here's the outline of what I'd like to see reappear:
 * Leadership. How is it considered advertising to post a company's leaders in a very factual manner? What was posted was merely a restatement of information that previously came from Forbes.
 * Industries served. Again, why is it considered advertising to state which types of specific companies (e.g. hospitals and other healthcare organizations) do business with Lawson?
 * Applications. Why is it considered advertising to talk more about specific applications that Lawson sells. Marketing-ease had been completely eliminated from the language to make it factual.
 * Services. Again, merely stating the types of services offered by Lawson seems pretty factual.
 * Customers. Again, this is all information that was taken from reliable third-party sources that simply state what the customers use and why they chose Lawson. Seems pretty factual to me.

I'd appreciate a reply and a reinstatement of information. Thanks. --KMPLS (talk) 18:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * The rules are pretty clear, and various recent edits had taken it from an valid company article to a copy of their own marketing data. The customers section was the worst version of pure advertext I have seen in a while - a straight rip-off of marketing materials with marketing text. Your edit of 16 November added 4kbytes of advertext customer lists - why, it adds no encyclopedic value? (Do we for instance list all of Microsoft or IBM or SunMS's customers?)You say there are references - but where were/are they? I assume you are tied to the company, as you don't seem to see the problems of the previous article version. Also, please follow noted Wiki procedure and add news messages at the bottom of User Talk Pages, and not aggresivly but direct editting at the top - Thank You! Rgds, - Trident13 (talk) 09:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't mean to be smart here, but if the rules are pretty clear, why are we having this discussion? But that's beside the point.

I'll admit that better references are needed for the customer information, but to argue the point, not every single Lawson customer was listed (they have more than 4,000 customers and only a handful were listed). I believe it's valid to list customers to give readers a feel for what types of companies do business with Lawson. I'm working on better references. If I get them, can the information be reinstated?

Also, regarding other references, there's a long list of references for the leadership information (all from Forbes), references for product information (from Reuters, Information Week, and HR Executive Online), so I'm not sure why all of the product info was eliminated. I'd like to see it reinstated. At some point in the past couple of months, another editor validated our references, so I'm not sure why this is coming up again. Again, I'm requesting reinstatement of the product information.

Also, sorry for messing the Wiki protocol and putting my message at the top. --KMPLS (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks for the appologies. The bottom line is Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and NOT a piece of advertising. Again, I cite back to articles on larger/more notable software companies that: don't list their customers, don't list all the executives, don't list the reason as to why customers bought the product (the later was just pure advertext dragged from marketing materials). Re the exec's bio, yes there was a reference but the wiki convention is only to list those needed for the company info box UNLESS the person warrants a seperate wiki article of their own. I assume as you are a company employee, that you know there is a wiki convention that advises you against writing on such an article due to conflict of interest? If you have a look at a similar companies article, like for instance a Microsft, and see how that is structured, that should be a good guide as to how to structure and what to include in a good article. Lawson certainly deserves an article, but the advertising text and tone was just too OTT and risked its total removal from the project. Best Seasonal Regards, - Trident13 (talk) 16:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

First of all, I am not employed by Lawson. Second of all, just because Microsfit doesn't have customers or execs listed, does that make it the de facto standard for all Wiki articles? I noted that on Microsoft's page, there is information on business culture and user culture, which I don't necessarily view as something that can be viewed as 100 percent factual.

Point taken regarding execs who would warrant a separate page of their own; however, it's a one or two sentence description of each person's background. I'm going to the mat on the information that was taken out regarding products, industries and applications. All of that was backed up by unbiased sources, and I certainly feel it is germaine for the public to have a basic understanding of Lawson's products, the industries it serves and applications offered. I would view advertext as something that is saying "this is the best HR offering ever," but the current text merely states this is what the company offers and what's included in the application.

Cheers.

--KMPLS (talk) 17:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm - you seem to be unfocused on what an encyclopedia is and what detail is necessary - have a look here WP:GA? on the wikipedia guidelines, and particularly Section 3B. Apart form the text included in the article pre my edits being advertext, it was also unecessaryily detailed. It is difficult to judge what needs/should not be included - some of the kiddy-interest and soap articles, or the topical subjects for instance - want to include everything that occurs: and for some of the topical articles at that moment thats fine and necessary. But in the Lawsons article the added text form the last three months just add more details on products and did include text on why customers choose it (hence - advertext). Putting that aside for one moment, and assuming those details change as the products develop, the external link to their own website would provide those details in an up to date manner anyway - so why include them? The text on the execs, the details on the products, and the customers (unless any of it is notable - and none of it referenced to sufficent third party sources) is all unnecessary for an encyclopedic article, and were outside Wiki guidelines - that's why I removed it. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 11:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Can you tell me exactly what is permissible regarding naming customers on a company’s Wikipedia site? In my mind, mentioning some examples of customers gives a broader view of what a company is and does. Pretty much everyone understands what kind of customers large companies like Microsoft have, but it may not be as clear for less known B2B companies like Lawson. I’d appreciate your comment on this. Thanks.

--JVSN (talk) 13 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I would like a definition of what is notable and what is not. Also, there are references to third-party sources, but perhaps they aren't formatted correctly. I'm going to work over the next several days to make it more clear which reference goes with which piece of information, especially regarding the execs, the products and customers. Also, do Wiki editors verify non-online third-party sources? Regards. --KMPLS (talk) 16:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

You seem to have plenty of time for editing but little for responding. Everything I listed about Lawson customers today had a reference. In what way is listing a selection of a company's customers advertising? It simply provides a better perspective about Lawson's target industries and the types of companies within those industries.

--JVSN (talk) 8 January 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.4.146 (talk) 18:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)