User talk:Andrew Gray/Archives/2

Capital punishment

The politician articles to which I have added the "opponents of capital punishment" tag already their voting records among the links. Treybien 3:22 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Boyle Roche

Please see and respond to my note on the talk page for the Boyle Roche article. Thanks. ubiquity 23:17, 17 June 2006 (UTC)ubiquity[reply]

Testing, testing, is this Tawkerbot on?

I gather you are testing the reactions of the Tawkerbot? Oh, I see, one of your comments says so. Still, I wonder if a top comment on your user page while doing so might be appropriate. Some of us have high blood pressure. ;-) Shenme 01:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page

Congrats! I'm sure you've seen this already, but your John Weston article (mostly yours) made it into the front page. --Brazucs 02:43, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lionel Woodville

Hello. I believe we edit conflicted as I was about to remove the prod also. It is good because I believe the article deserves inclusion in Wikipedia. I removed the first speedy when I saw it in candidates for speedy deletion. Did a little expansion with links and dates but I don't know that I personally can expand it a great deal as I am unfamiliar with the subject matter. Thank you.--Dakota ~ ° 17:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS notice

Thank you for the notice :) -- da didi 17:40, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Just wanted belatedly to thank you for your very helpful response to my DDC question on the reference desk last week. --zenohockey 19:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Slipped disc

I notified the uploader. -- Zanimum 19:28, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I was just wondering how to phrase the note, so you saved me the effort :-) Another one he uploaded was from the same source and tagged as CFU, so I've deleted it too and left a note. Shimgray | talk | 19:31, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good work, finding other problem images. -- Zanimum 19:33, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glock image removal

I was under the impression that the Glock 19 image that you removed was taken by the guy who uploaded it. Can you confirm that it was a copyvio and where it came from, if it wasn't his?

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert 17:52, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply on my talk page and the explanation. If the image was falsely claimed to be the uploaders and wasn't then that's clearly a copyvio. Sort of dissapointing that someone would do that, it makes the rest of us who really are producing original images and releasing them for WP use look bad. Georgewilliamherbert 18:09, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whale

Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Whaleto explains why I broke a link to whale.to Midgley 16:20, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. One of the references in that RFC is to the entry above on that talk page! And yes, that was a page that Whale would like people to be lead to it from. I think Google doesn't index talk pages so I guess it is not so important, but I would suggest that Whale is not really a reliable reference even to the members of NVIC etc. Midgley 17:24, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You would say that. john 20:18, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article The Tanganyika Rifles, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 12:48, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Video

Thanks for the pointer on the policy page, I've said my piece. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29 Feel free to comment! Regards, mk 21:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for voting in my RfA!

Thanks for your vote in my RfA! I appreciated the comment - the nomination didn't gain consensus but I'm glad I accepted it (and now I can tease Mindspillage about it too!) - Amgine 19:44, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Troubles

Hi, I noticed your comment on talk The troubles. If would have done any work on this or would like to please let me know, I would like to contribute/help. Fluffy999 00:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Eastley End House, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your efforts on behalf of DYK! ++Lar: t/c 13:40, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fire in Catauplt room USS Lake Champlian

Thanks for your reply, and the links that you gave. I have tried to send an e-mail to marc@navyhistory.com but my message was returned twice. Authentication required and user unknown were the reasons given. www.historycentral.com/Navy/Cv39LakeChamplain.html was the website where I got the address. Do you have any suggestions of other addresses?

Thanks Liz

What I wrote was, hmm... "[contact] the US Navy's history department; a query under the Freedom of Information Act should tell you if such a fire ever took place..."

historycentral.com is simply a site reusing US Navy material; they've nothing to do with the US Navy as such. history.navy.mil is probably the people you're after, but a paper letter might be more effective... Shimgray | talk | 23:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK!

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Harry Pursey, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your efforts! ++Lar: t/c 05:16, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HMS Valiant

Hi I am currently writing a series of articles on the battleships of the Victorian navy, with some depth to each. A stub on HMS Valiant exists, showing you as the original author. I would like to expand this into a full article, which would necessarily involve erasing essentially all of your words except for the external references. Would you have a problem with this? I will not do anything without your OK.--Anthony.bradbury 21:16, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, thanks.--Anthony.bradbury 21:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, I didn't do HMS Warrior; it was there already. As a new Wikipedian I am happy to receive any suggestions or advice that my articles appear to deserve.--Anthony.bradbury 22:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HMS Valiant (1863) is in place; I would value your comments.--Anthony.bradbury 23:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, thank you. I did know Admiral Hornby's full name, but didn't think anyone else would!--Anthony.bradbury 13:37, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have found that several other short articles on Victorian battleships were originally by you; may I also destroy and rebuild them in the same way as HMS Valiant?--Anthony.bradbury 18:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working through all the Victorian battleships, and will surely get to the Admirals, some of which were, as you say, distinctly strange. I like to ask permission before erasing an article on which an author has spent time; if my re-working it might cause offence I would go and do something else. There are plenty of ships not yet covered.--Anthony.bradbury 19:10, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advice, if you would. I know that photographs of Victorian battleships exist, because they are in my reference works; they are of course copyright. Do you know of a Wiki source that I can access that might contain pictures I can use?--Anthony.bradbury 18:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you; most helpful.--Anthony.bradbury 21:10, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you for your ongoing interest in my articles. That looks sarcastic, but it isn't meant to be. I meant it.--Anthony.bradbury 22:23, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures on Asphyxia and Shallow Water Blackout

Out of curiosity, can you please:

1. If there is one, can I please get the link to that picture and...

2. If it came from a picture, can I please get accuracy to the picture

P.S. Great Article and I apologize for forgetting the tildes Soxrock 01:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HMS Prince Albert

Thank you for your close interest, which I do in all honesty appreciate. I had in fact decided not to insert link brackets around "Queen Victoria" in my article on "HMS Prince Albert" on the basis that the link had no naval relevance. But I stand corrected.--Anthony.bradbury 22:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Etiquette

Advice again, if you would. One or two editors have added to my ship articles modern translations of units used - metres, Newtons, kilometres etc. The translations are correct, but metric figures were never used for the ships during the Victorian era. Is it rude to revert, or should I leave them in? Someone also changed the size of my white ensign, which I had no hesitation in changing back! p.s. thank you for the compliment.--Anthony.bradbury 19:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again.--Anthony.bradbury 21:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HMS Wivern

Hi: how do you upload that picture from the external link that I inserted?--Anthony.bradbury 16:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK HMS Prince Albert

On June 1, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article HMS Prince Albert (1864), which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Spangineer^[es] (háblame) 22:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use question

Hi, I have a question about using an internet image, and since I saw your name here, I figured you'd be a good person to ask. I'm working on the page Dreams from My Father, which is Senator Barack Obama's autobiography. I would like to put an image of the cover into the article. Am I allowed to upload Amazon.com's picture of the cover onto Wikipedia? Thanks for your help. --Alex S 21:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Alex S 21:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

United States featured article nomination

The article on the United States is very important and I'm sure many people would like see it become featured, so I don't believe that my advertising of its nomination is "spam," rather, it's a way to get more responses to help improve the article or to take part in its promotion.--Ryz05 _t 16:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the suggestion. I never noticed such a page existed.--Ryz05 _t 17:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dyk

On June 6, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Absent-Minded Beggar, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

ASINs

Hi, I noticed you did some work removing ASINs from Wikipedia. I think it is a good idea, and I'm interested in removing Amazon affiliate links in particular. I was wondering if your project is still active. If not, did you run afoul of any rules or policies that I should watch out for? Thanks, Wmahan . 16:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Images

Sorry 'bout that mate just that it was a too quick click of my thoughts b/c usually I only upload free use image. I'll try to be more careful --Mahoga n y 17:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sindic

Sorry, I was removing User:Harry_S. strange contributions and got into a muddle, didn't mean to rv your edit! Rex the first ^{talk | contribs} 15:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revisions, just started wikipedia today and thought some of my artwork would be of interest to anyone looking up some of the civil war personas I have painted. Was not aware my posts were out of order.

I am exploring and just really liking the concept of having users edit info and content, also love that there are folks like you keeping us all honest and keeping the site free of sales bombardents.

Thanks again, psmiley

My Userpage

Hi, on my userpage I have placed an MODIFIED Adminstrator tag saying that "I might be an Administrator". This is causing conflicts with another user who claims that my tag will "confuse" new users. I have, in no way, pretended that I am a real administrator in any way except by placing a tag that says I MIGHT be an administrator. Do you think you can help?--Jamesino 22:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks with the impersonator

Never a boring day shall go by... Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert 02:31, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

It seems I inadvertently reverted you here. My most profound apologies! Kirill Lokshin 06:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject

Shimgray: I am enormously pleased, perhaps indecently so, that two of the articles which I initiated have been selected as part of the Wikipedia history project (articles HMS Valiant and HMS Minotaur). Is there anything that I could do, should do, or that you would like me to do?--Anthony.bradbury 17:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Importance ratings

Out of curiosity, is there some particular rule of thumb you're using to flag things as Top-Importance? Some of the things there (e.g. Sicilian Expedition or War of the Austrian Succession), I wouldn't have expected to be known outside of (military) historical works. Is this just me being unaware of how widely known these things are? Kirill Lokshin 02:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok. I've gone through and moved some of them to High-Class; while they're undoubtedly important from the "most decisive battles" perspective, they don't really (at least in my view) meet the requirement of being generally notable to people outside of the actual study of military history. (In some sense, the whole reason for adopting that requirement was to avoid turning the importance rating process into a copy of the "my battle is more important than yours" game that historians have been playing for centuries without a clear outcome.) Kirill Lokshin 12:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since one of the points for doing this rating in the first place was to pre-select good candidates for inclusion in WP:1.0, we might not want to remove them even when articles are "completed" (although that might be a possibility if the 1.0 project were to abandon the ratings as a selection tool).

I do think, though, that you're correct about the ratings not being very clear. I've proposed a (fairly minor) rewriting of the criteria on the project talk page, which might eliminate (some of) the confusion; you're very welcome to comment on that proposal or to put forward any other ideas you might have. Kirill Lokshin 14:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Shimgray: I know that I've asked this sort of question before, and that I am being quite amazingly stupid, but I cannot figure out where to find images. Example. In the article on HMS Colossus (1882) the authore knew that the picture of this ship was listed as "Image:HMSColossus(1882).jpeg". You note the lack of spaces, and the use of jpeg rather than jpg. My question - how did he know it was called that? Where did he get it from, and how did he know it was there? And why can't I get my my thick head round the idea?--Anthony.bradbury 23:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great Depression in the United Kingdom

Well done. I should have thought of looking on the "Times Digital Archive" myself. I use it all the time. Jooler 13:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just read your not on the reference desk. I should have thought of Pears Cyclopaedia too! - I bloody collect them. Jooler 13:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Royal Scots regimental badge.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Royal Scots regimental badge.gif. However, the copyright tag you've used is deprecated or obsolete, and should not be used. This could be because the tag is inaccurate or misleading, or because it does not adequately specify the copyright status of the image. For a list of copyright tags that are in current use, see the "Public domain", "Free license", and "Fair use" sections of Wikipedia:Image copyright tags.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Tagging

Yes, that sometimes happens. Anyway, I think I'll run a AWB check to deprecate {{WikiProject Military history}} and {{WikiProjectBattles}} as they seem to induce some errors in AWB. Thanks for pointing that out. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 23:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sherlock Holmes titles

Yes, it'd be great if you could follow up on my questions about Sherlock Holmes titles! I appreciate your energy in doing this research!

Also, just to let you know, I cross-posted my questions to Talk:Sherlock Holmes, where User:Chris 42 has also chimed in with a comment.

—Lowellian (reply) 18:05, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the information you provided to The Sign of Four and to The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes. Thank you so much for taking the time to track down the answers to all my titling questions, and for giving the answers in such detail! —Lowellian (reply) 05:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SWB3 temp.jpg

Hi. Nice pic. On Talk:Drowning the question came up if the image is staged (I assumed so). Could you please clarify, preferably also on the image page. Many thanks! -- Chris 73 | Talk

David Asimov

Why wasn't this done with a proper AfD, so that others can add their input. This seems like kind of a backhanded way to propose something for deletion. Note that I do think it's notable enough to keep, but my arguments should be made on an AfD page. --Kickstart70-T-C 15:29, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This issue has now been brought up here, to gain some clarity on the process. --Kickstart70-T-C 15:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No contest that some of what you marked were undeniably not notable enough to be deleted...that we can agree on. However, using dated_prod to spur people into action on article which just need more cites is wrongheaded and a little unfair. Dated_prod has that 5 day time limit, and demanding that other editors see that within 5 days is just plain wrong. I'm pretty sure there are some pages that I am am the only one watching, and occasionally I'm more than 5 days between visits. In any case, we have templates like {{citeneeded}} for just such issues. I understand your frustration, but dated_prod was not the right way to accomplish this. --Kickstart70-T-C 16:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What it really comes down to then is impatience. You've got the templates (verify, citeneeded, etc.) that specifically deal with this issue, but they don't operate fast enough for you. Yes, there needs to be a better solution for this, but if there is a need for a solution, propose one. Forcing people into the "cite this or I'll delete it" path really does no good for Wikipedia, or for increasing user participation to actually get those cites in place. Should articles be added completely without cites? Ideally, no. Will they continue to be, no matter what you or I do? Absolutely. A solution that does more than these particular articles is not going to be a hammer with a 5 day warning. --Kickstart70-T-C 17:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That post is about removing specific uncited claims, NOT whole articles. I have no objection to cleaning articles of uncited claims, but this is not what you are suggesting or doing. And just because things do not work quickly enough for you is not reason to abandon processes already put in place that -do work- in a substantial number of cases.

Side point: this topic really deserves to have more input from other editors...suggest a place to move it, out of user talk pages? --Kickstart70-T-C 19:28, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We don't disagree that something needs to be done...our only disagreement is what method was used to get that started. In other words, I think you were too hasty in the choice of implementation of a solution, rather than solving the real problem; which we both agree is a problem. And my main problem with that implementation is twofold: 1) deletion because of uncited claims should be done on the claims, not the article, in cases where other criteria such as notability is readily apparent, and 2) the arbitrary 5 day timeframe on dated_prod is not enough to give other editors a chance to solve the problem. --Kickstart70-T-C 23:43, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar for your work on Rapists category

		Unsourced articles
		Your work on reviewing the Category:Rapists is greatly apreciated, and your attempts to delete the ones that lack any explanation of their notability or sources for their facts are also valued. Keep up the good work. JesseW, the juggling janitor 20:36, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Robert 'Dolly' Dunn

I've sourced the article. You could have done it yourself with Google, rather than risk deleting the article. - Richardcavell 23:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

William Stuart Brown and Robert Lowe (Australian)

I assert notability according to the criterion:

Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events

Anyway, please take them to AfD if you want them deleted. - Richardcavell 01:12, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Earls' of Dublin

I've taken my comments off the afd page to User_talk:Jtdirl as they are somewhat to the side of the issue. Alci12 15:15, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Dennis Allen

Please note I have listed this article for deletion review and welcome your input. -- Longhair 09:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're famous!

Thought I'd pop by and point you towards this Signpost article, which mentions you.

Regards,

EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME | IMPROVEME 11:47, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

merge

You proposed a merge of War of Jenkins' Ear and everyone agrees. Can you check the two articles to see if any material from one needs to be incorporated into the other? Bubba73 (talk), 18:23, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Blenheim

Thanks for nominating Battle of Blenheim for FA candidate. However, since you nominated it I have substantially rewritten most of it - IMHO it is now a much better, clearer article. It is better sourced and less Anglo-centric. Thanks again. Raymond Palmer 22:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Shimgray. Thanks to you the article received FA status today, 13 August, exactly 302 years after the famous battle took place. I noticed some of the work you did to help it through - writing stubs, copy editing and ofcourse, nominating it in the first place. Thanks Shimgray for your good work and effort. Raymond :) Raymond Palmer 15:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting

Thank you for reverting the vandalism of my user page. -- Wmahan . 20:07, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Belarus

Good call at [1]. Personally, I think the Lenin statue has no business being in that article. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 20:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Scotland

Pre-script: we are currently undergoing peer review, see: Wikipedia:Peer review/Scotland.

I am beginning to think that the Scottish Wikipedians' notice board is not the best vehicle for pushing up the quality of the Scotland article (we ought to try to get it to WP:FA, in order to get into Wikipedia:Version 0.5, or, failing that, Wikipedia:Version 1.0), and the other key Scottish articles. It is becoming increasingly obvious to me that we really ought to start up the long-mooted WikiProject Scotland.

Most of the stuff at the notice board (at least on the bottom half) is actually WikiProject material anyway, and the Talk page is really being used as a WikiProject talk already! The notice board should be just that: for bunging up brief notices and signposts. I am thinking of launching a Wikiproject and correspondingly radically clearing out, and chopping down, the noticeboard (a re-launch if you like). The Scotland Portal concept is fine (but currently mediocre/undynamic content), but in stasis: it needs a good kick up the jacksie.

For comparison, have a look at:

And, if you are at a loose end, have a look at:

Thoughts? Please express them here. --Mais oui! 12:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew, if you look at the Peer review section (linked above) you will see that the guy who changed those sub-headers on the Scotland article actually did a power of work on our Peer review request (we have still to implement them yet). He seems very, very up-to-speed on these kinds of things, and I was wondering if you may consider reverting, or at least partially reverting your last edit? Thanks. --Mais oui! 12:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew, the applicable rule in Wikipedia's Manual of Style for section headings can be found here, in subpoint #3. It's a small thing, but it will be an issue if and when the Scotland article is submitted for featured article consideration.

If you don't like "Technology," stick with "Inventions" or some similar wording. Just don't say "Scottish" in a section header. Same goes for "Scotland" in "Early Scotland," etc. If you don't like "era," use "period." Or use "Early years," "Middle Ages," and "Modern developments" or something similar. Even "Early," "Medieval," and "Modern" would work. I'd recommend not using "history," since that would result in four consecutive repetitions of the word "history" which are arguably redundant. But "Scotland" is off limits for section headers if you want the gold star.

When responding to peer reviews, I try to keep my suggestions just that — suggestions — since I assume the regular contributors know the core material better than I do and know nuances I don't. It's totally fine with me as a peer reviewer if you don't adopt any of my suggestions or if you revert any changes I make. In fact, I try to state that explicitly in the peer review comments. I just want to make sure you understand that the FA reviewers will not be so forgiving. ;-) Good luck! Peirigill 18:08, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Um. If you want to re-revert my change, please feel free, I really honestly don't care... I just saw an edit I didn't think worked stylistically on the watchlist and changed it back....(I'm a bit bemused, though, that now two people have seperately come to tell me that I really ought to rethink my stance on this, quoting chapter and verse and so forth, and no-one has edited it back...)" It was clear that you reverted the section heading changes because you thought they didn't work stylistically. I didn't revert them back for two reasons: first, it seemed brusque to simply re-revert without comment, and second, I was hoping you'd find a solution that both followed the Manual of Style and felt stylistically appropriate. I'd rather not simply re-revert if there's a better solution than the one I suggested. As for being double-teamed, sorry about that! Peirigill 20:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Bums"

Shimgray, I noticed your comment about having never seen the game of "bums" on Palace Greem in your time there. I cannot actually find anything that suggests you have been to Durham - were you a student there? If so, when? For how long? At which College?. I have been in Durham for numerous years now and never knew you existed - does this mean you dont exist? I have never seen Hild Bede gym, yet I know that exists. If your don't recognise the game of "bums" then how could you actually know whether you have seen it going on or not?

Personally, I think you should keep your work restricted to the things you know about - which I have no doubt are plentiful having seen your work and avoid making assumptions about thing you don't. "Assumptions are the mother of all fuck-ups" and by making them yourself you do nothing but parade yourself as such a fuck-up.

Take care. --Irvybabes 10:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irvybabes

Canadian Military History Taskforce

Hi Shimgray , I've seen some of your edits regarding the Canadian Military, and thought you may be interested in Canadian Military Taskforce. This projects focus is to exand and improve articals relating to the Canadian Military. Come take a look! We could use your help! Cheers, Motorfix 03:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep

Pretty much. Though, since my talkpage is protected without rationale, my comments are altered to JzG's liking, and my votes on RFAs are no longer counting, do you really think I give a shit? Tchadienne 18:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

W/e. You're no fun. Tchadienne 18:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do me a favor, get rid of the bullshit disclaimer that JzG posted and add the following "I am no longer editing under this account." Nothing more than that, and nothing less. Then I'll leave. For Good. Tchadienne 18:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maxwell Article

Hello,

I'm relatively new to Wikipedia (January of this year) and am wanting to learn as much as I can. I was doing a minor edit on the James Clerk Maxwell Article - adding the 'Deaths by stomach cancer' category. When I went to save the work I got a dialogue box saying I could not save it because the Article contained a 'spammed link', which the message identified. Once I deleted the link and went to save I found myself in an 'edit conflict' with you - we apparently had been editing at the same time. I waited and saved again, and it appears to be OK now. After all of that, my question is: what was the 'spamming alert' all about? As I said I'm still learning.

Thanks for you patience,

Michael David 23:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marilyne MacLaren listed for deletion

Fort your information: in case you hadn't noticed, an article that you created, Marilyne MacLaren, has been nominated for deletion. You may be interested in commenting here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marilyne MacLaren. Thanks, Vclaw 00:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Israel

The largest city is Jerusalem, not Tel Aviv. However, Tel Aviv's metropolitan area, Gush Dan, is more populated than Jerusalem's area. Perhaps that is what confused you.

The Israel article is heavily edited - please discuss changes on the talk page, or verify them yourself - every change there can spark controversy. okedem 14:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: An old, out-of-date matter

Hi, Shimgray. Sorry to bother you about a matter that's old and out-of-date and so on, but I learned from a 13 May IRC chat on the Wikipedia Watch website (www.wikipedia-watch.org/irc-logs/6050172.html — I'm assuming the shimgray in the chat is yourself; if not, feel free to disregard this message) that, several months back, there was some reaction to the fact that the Turkish literature article which I wrote was featured on the main page on 23 April, which is the day before the Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day. I was just wondering whether you thought this was actually so insensitive, as apparently it was claimed to be. (23 April is also a Turkish holiday, incidentally.) The article itself, if anyone had bothered to read it, is hardly insensitive, I should think; it's simply an (as much as I could make it) objective account of the history of a literature of a certain people.

Again, sorry to bother you with such a (by now) mundane and out-of-date matter; I was just made very curious (and admittedly somewhat defensive, insofar as the article is my baby—WP:OWN is a hard policy to swallow for some at times, as I'm sure you've encountered, and I'm hardly immune) by the comments I saw on that IRC talk. Cheers. —Saposcat 07:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage

Hi there; thanks for reverting my userpage. I will amend the vandalism-number to 10. Thank you also for posting the final warning on the vandal's userpage. Let's hope he pays attention to it; I will, with your permission, come back to you if he doesn't.--Anthony.bradbury 10:44, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alberto Demicheli

Many thanks for the fix. Dlyons493 Talk 15:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Login glitch

Thanks for the warning! I've changed my password.Richard75 18:45, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HMS Nelson (1881)

Hi; thank for adding this stub. I have been able to kill a red link in HMS Camperdown. I notice that you use the completion date. She was launched November 4 1876--Anthony.bradbury 23:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Durham University Images

Hi, I was just checking the other images I have uploaded and they have "Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0" on the licence, does this mean they have to be deleted as well? Thank youAlexD 22:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining that, I think I'll just have to go on a walk when I get back to Durham with my Camera! Thanks again AlexD 22:54, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for August 28th


Volume 2, Issue 35	28 August 2006	About the Signpost

A note from the editor
Interviews with Board of Trustees candidates	Wikimedia Foundation CFO resigns
Wikimania recap	Report from the Spanish Wikipedia
News and notes	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Parents Music Resource Center

I thought I'd inform you that I put the RATM image back into Parents Music Resource Center, since you were the one who originally took it out. Λυδ α cιτγ 00:40, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many Thanks

I wanted to find a better way to truly thank you for helping me out, and I stumbled on what I believed to be a perfect fit. You are a Ray of Sunshine to me, and I would like to thank you for helping me out. Have a nice day, and may your sun shine (I hope that didn't sound to schmaltzy; Oh well). --Clyde Miller 00:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion thanks

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my user page! --Ginkgo100 ^{talk · e@} 04:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Image:Robert Scoble.jpg, added Image:Robertscoble.jpg

IMHO, your uploaded image Robertscoble.jpg at 19:35, 31 August 2006 Zanimum vioalate Wikipedia:Verifiability rules are there is no way to validate your claim on licensing. This is clearly much worse that FairUse license used on original Robert Scoble.jpg. I feel that Robert able to upload images to his blog on his own and make it clear that thouse are public domain. TAG 20:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are, in fact, ways to verify this. Zanimum, could you forward the emails giving licensing permission to permissions@wikimedia.org? We'll file it and mark permission details as confirmed. Shimgray | talk | 00:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've forwarded the message. -- Zanimum 14:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Scotland

Following a successful period of consultation WikiProject Scotland has now been launched. As a supporter of the initial proposal I wonder if you may be interested in this new endeavour too? If so, please sign-up here. The WikiProject will be replacing some of the functions of the Scottish Wikipedians' notice board (which you are also invited to sign-up to!), especially those in the lower half.

While I am here, please also have a look at the new Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Scotland and give it a "Watch". It was started up by User:Visviva a few days ago, after long being mooted at the notice board, and effectively replaces all the AfD listings at the notice board. Being a transclusion of all the on-going discussions it is a much more useful tool.

Even if you do not want to spend too much time on the WikiProject, please give it a "Watch" and feel free to contribute to Talk page discussions: the more contributors the merrier.

All the best. --Mais oui! 11:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Royal Scots

I hve reassessed this article and moved it up to B class and also nominated it GA status. Would appreciate it if you could watch it for any comments from the reviewer.--Oldwildbill 21:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When do you think it would be ready. I have working with a GA reviewer and just want to let him know when he could review it.--Oldwildbill 22:01, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually that article has been assessed as an A class which is actually a higher ranking then a GA class.--Oldwildbill 22:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for September 5th.


Volume 2, Issue 36	5 September 2006	About the Signpost

Everyking desysopped	Explicit images spark debate
Report from the Italian Wikipedia	The English Wikipedia reaches 1,000 administrators
Voting begins in Board elections	Wikipedia in the news
News and notes	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:40, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS

I sent an email to Sannse regarding the OTRS, but she told me that she was inactive on the OTRS. I was interested in helping out with the OTRS program. The meta page said contact someone on the program, so here it is. What do I have to do to help out? ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 22:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shim, you own some very old unanswered tickets on info-en, e.g. 2006080410017986. Please lock them all so the red box'll remind you. -- Jeandré, 2006-09-10t05:45z

Signpost updated for September 11th.


Volume 2, Issue 37	11 September 2006	About the Signpost

Carnildo resysopped	Report from the Hungarian Wikipedia
News and notes	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Battleships

Hi there; Shimgray, you have been kind enough in the past to compliment me on the series of articles that I have been writing about Victorian ironclads. I have a small problem. I fully understand that all articles in wiki are the property of wiki, and may be edited unmercifully, etc,etc. But it distresses me when editors change the infobox which I have typed, and insert another which is less attractive and holds the data in a more untidy format. Apparently just because there appears to be an imperative to use "infobox-ship". If I race around reverting to a better infobox (mine) I will just get accused of vandalism. You are interested in ships. Advise me.--Anthony.bradbury 20:23, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

our friend at Carol Downer

i reverted his edit and put a 3RR warning on his talkpage (where i noticed he has a few 3RR warnings already...) Cindery 00:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act 1919

Hi - it looks like you've done a great job with this article; I hope to see it on DYK soon. Thanks for contacting me, but unfortunately I don't have any particular expertise in this area, and am unlikely to be able to add to your work. Warofdreams talk 02:25, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for September 18th.


Volume 2, Issue 38	18 September 2006	About the Signpost

"Citizendium" project aims to rival Wikipedia	Report from the Simple English Wikipedia
News and notes	In the news
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 21 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act 1919, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Signpost updated for September 25th.


Volume 2, Issue 39	25 September 2006	About the Signpost

Erik Möller declared winner in Board of Trustees election	Wikimania 2007 to be held in Taipei
Arbitration clerk Tony Sidaway resigns	Report from the Dutch Wikipedia
News and notes	Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Klute

Hi Andrew :) Whilst I agree that the main introduction isn't really the appropriate place to insert a wikilink to Klute (nightclub), for the life of me I can't see a better subheading. If the club is notable enough to have an article, it may as well be wikilinked across from Durham as its home town - any better suggestions? DWaterson 21:54, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

David Asimov

Hi, I nominated David Asimov for deletion.Rich 09:16, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for October 2nd.


Volume 2, Issue 40	2 October 2006	About the Signpost

New speedy deletion criteria added	News and notes
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for October 9th.


Volume 2, Issue 41	9 October 2006	About the Signpost

Interview with Board member Erik Möller	Wall Street Journal associates Wikipedia with Grupthink
Account used to create paid corporate entries shut down	Report from the Portuguese Wikipedia
News and notes	Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 17:20, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Date quibbles

Hi there.

I've just partially reverted some changes you made to Dependency of Ireland on Great Britain Act 1719; you'd changed 23/11/1719 to a conventional written date. However, this is part of the title of the cited work, not normal text, and as such should probably be left in the unusual form - could you keep an eye out for situations like this in future? Shimgray | talk | 18:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I followed the link, although I didn't see the "Cite", I was still happy to change it. But I am biased against xx/xx/xxxx dates... I'm happy to leave it as well. Rich Farmbrough, 21:22 16 October 2006 (GMT).

Signpost updated for October 16th.


Volume 2, Issue 42	16 October 2006	About the Signpost

Wikipedia partially unblocked in mainland China	$100 million copyright fund stems discussion
Floyd Landis adopts "the Wikipedia defense" as appeal strategy	News and notes: Logo votes begin, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 18:13, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ang spam

Thanks for the notice about the spam. That was not cool of whoever did that. --JamesR1701E 18:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for October 23rd.


Volume 2, Issue 43	23 October 2006	About the Signpost

Report from the Finnish Wikipedia	News and notes: Donation currencies added, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for October 30th.


Volume 2, Issue 44	30 October 2006	About the Signpost

Wales resigns chair position as reorganization underway	Hypothetical valuation of Wikipedia scrutinized
Work underway to purge plagiarized text from articles	Librarian creates video course about Wikipedia
Report from the Japanese Wikipedia	News and notes: Commemorative mosaic started, milestones
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 1 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article HMS Apollo (1799), which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 22:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 6th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 45	6 November 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration election campaigns begin	Blogger studies Wikipedia appearance in search results
Intelligence wiki receives media attention	Report from the German Wikipedia
News and notes: Foundation donation, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Carpetbagger

Shimgray, you made a commen to paulinsaudi concerning an article I wrote ( on the "operation carpetbagger" page of wikipedia He deleted it entirely as unencyclopedic. I have no quarral with that. You mentioned that there seemed to be merit in what what I wrote, and I appreciate that, because it was based upon my actions as a squadron commander of the 801st/492nd bomb squadron which you list as "the carpetbaggers.

Please revisit the site and tell me step by step where to go and what to click and what to do to remove "stub status". yours is a very difficult site for an 89 year old to navigate or understand.

Thanks for any help you can give me. Feel free to remove the "stub status" if you wish.

Robert L. Boone*

Thanks, Andrew, I'll see what I can do. Its nice to have someone to talk with.

Robert.Rlboone1917 21:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Holy Smokes, Andrew, I just went to the carpertbagger site you worked on. How in hell did you do all that? Was it a simple click or two to create all of those links ? I am impressed. That changed the rating but it is still on stub status and I sure can’t get it off. Thanks again for the help and making it into a real page.

Robert. Rlboone1917 14:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Massacre of one million civillians

its kind of incredible that you let people remove the fact that most people killed during the Suharto military coup were teachers, civillians and poor people.

And keep euphemisms like for instance on Suharto that he "by 1967, had "_maneuvered_" himself into the presidency. "

were are the massacres of one million _people_ ??? civillians!!! oh no , they were all godless "COMMUNISTS" .

this is worse than the Encyclopedia Britannica for gods sake!

it's Orwellian to the point of disgusting! 213.172.204.59 03:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is being discussed on Talk:Indonesia --Merbabu 03:14, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 13th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 46	13 November 2006	About the Signpost

Full accessibility, dramatic growth reported for Chinese Wikipedia	ArbCom elections: Information on Elections
Report identifies Wikipedia as a leader in non-US traffic	News and notes: Board passes four resolutions, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:25, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Thanks

Thanks!
Thanks for your input on my (nearly recent) Request for adminship, which regretfully achived no consensus, with votes of 68/28/2. I am grateful for the input received, both positive and in opposition, and I'd like to thank you for your participation.
Georgewilliamherbert 05:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article candidate

Hi! Given your interest in spaceflight articles, I was wondering whether I could solicit your opinions on one. Glynn Lunney is up as a featured article candidate now, but has rather a shortage of reviewers, perhaps due to the specialised nature of the topic. If you have the time to take a look at it and either support or object, I would be very grateful. MLilburne 09:23, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How not to crash

I sort of agree with your edit except that it seems inconceivable, given gravity, that the probe wouldn't have touched down in some shape or other. In any case, your wording probably has merit in being concise and "not wrong". - Samsara (talk • contribs) 17:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 20th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 47	20 November 2006	About the Signpost

One week later, Wikipedia reblocked in mainland China	Military history dominates writing contest
News and notes: Wikibooks donation, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 27th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 48	27 November 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections: Candidate profiles	Steward elections begin
Group apologizes for using Wikipedia name in online arts fundraiser	News and notes: 1.5 million articles, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 01:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Navy

Well done, that man, in reverting that unexpected move! I was busy trying to alert the troops to a discussion as I wasn't sure how to revert a move without breaking policy myself. Emoscopes ^Talk 21:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]