User talk:Charlesdrakew/Archives/2012/February

Chip123456

Thanks for keeping an eye on the edits of Chip123456. What we have here I suspect is your stereotypical child editor who won't listen to advice given by others - a good example of which is ignoring (and arguing) with advice about references and reference formatting. Given the number of warnings and the previous ANI discussion, I think a possible solution is to guide him/her towards the Adopt-a-user programme. What do you think? --Bob Re-born (talk) 11:38, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

No harm in trying certainly but in my experience those people with the maturity and interest to write good quality sourced encyclopedic content will do so anyway, and they will be helped and encouraged all the way by regular editors. Scare stories in the media about newbies being scared off by "grumpy editors" are just whinging by those denied what they think is their god given right to add personal observations, original research, links their blog etc. Transport obsessed schoolkids who think the wider world really needs to know the route numbers and frequencies of the buses on local housing estates or the length to the nearest cm. of those buses are probably not going to fit in here anyway.--Charles (talk) 14:27, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Perhaps this one is beyond redemption looking at further exchanges today. --Bob Re-born (talk) 14:34, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Coastliner 700

Hi Charles. I'd like an explanation for these edits, you don't seem to have added much to or improved the article. First, WP:NOT is for in the main articles, not the infobox, where there are special fields for that information. Second, your most recent edit seems pointless to me. You are just removing good links. The timetable can be updated as and when the link rots, and the Stagecoach South link removal could almost be considered vandalism. Please contact me and have a proper discussion before you do something like that to an article please. Rcsprinter (speak) 20:10, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think he needs to contact you, since after all, you don't own the article. However, as I'm sure Charles knows, it's recommended to discuss potentially controversial changes on the talk page of the articlen first. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I do not see anything remotely controversial about it. WikiProject Buses' quality drive page clearly states that frequencies should not be included in articles and as the infobox is part of the article there is no reason why it should be treated differently. Wikipedia should not be used for advertising and promotion and neither is it a directory so there is no reason for bus company timetables to be linked at all.--Charles (talk) 09:45, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Schpinbo

Good Day, Charles and greetings from Louisiana.

I see that you have been in an "edit war" with Schpinbo. She appears to have a long history of such behavior and is now in one over the biography of one of our alumni, Dr. Betsy Boze. In effort of full disclosure, I have met Boze through the alumni association.

While I could just revert the change (over a three year old event deemed to be non encyclopedic) or leave her a note, I suspect it would make no diffeerence and I would end up in such an edit war with her.

My question is, Schpinbo keeps getting warnings, yet nothing is done to actually sanction her. I am an amateur at this and seek your advise on how to peacefully resolve this. Any advise is welcome and appreciated.

Much appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by Byrd High (talk • contribs) 13:44, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year to you.

Regardless of any previous edit-warring the history of the Bose article shows that Schpinbo has only edited that article on two occasions, which is hardly edit warring. The talk page also shows that several competent editors have expressed concerns about the removal of the sourced material that S has restored. The age of the news does not matter if there are sources to establish notability. If you beleive this action to be wrong you need to argue your case on the article talk page. Sorry I can't help with this but if there is anything else I can help with do feel free to drop by.--Charles (talk) 20:06, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Network rail

Is there a problem with the network rail source, I thought it would be good considering it is the main owner of our networks railways. If that isn't good enough please do tell me what is. --Ta, Chip123456 (talk) 20:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Please do not write in bold text. It has a strictly limited use on Wikipedia such as for targets of redirects. Wikipedia needs reliable secondary sources independent of the organisation providing or commissioning services or facilities. As the provider of the facilities Network Rail is a primary source and wholesale reproduction of primary source material is not the purpose of an encyclopedia. See WP:Citing sources for more info.--Charles (talk) 20:30, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

So, what websites do you think will give full info on this station,? Some recommendations I assume that you would know some.--Ta, Chip123456 (talk) 20:33, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Trivial detail such as you are adding does not belong on Wikipedia. It is not what an encyclopedia is for. You could try UK Transport Wiki where there is plenty of space for that kind of thing.--Charles (talk) 23:33, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

On the article discussion page, if you read it, it says that I can add about a ticket hall and ticket machines, things like that.--Ta, Chip123456 (talk) 09:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Hindhead Tunnel

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Hindhead Tunnel". Thank you. --Mixsynth (talk) 11:57, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Anglo-Indian

Hello Charles, would you mind popping over to Talk:Anglo-Indian? The article is protected because of a content dispute and your name came up. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:45, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

ệ== Chippenham ==

How is the information containing an undue weight? ----Chip-- (talk) 19:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Is there significant coverage in reliable secondary sources to establish notability?--Charles (talk) 18:42, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

There is a point in there, in which it does say what was previously written on the article so I would say yes. --*|___Chip___|* (talk) 16:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Information re-added --Chip 17:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

West Bergholt

Good Evening Charles - I notice you have edited out of the above page a link to the St. Mary's church website. Please would you let me know what your objection is to such a link? Regards

Jon Smith — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonsmith1961 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Links allowed on Wikipedia are strictly limited as you will see from reading WP:External links.--Charles (talk) 18:21, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

About Pope

My dear, I want you to explain further extamente what their objections, because it is not permissible to simply changing content as precious as you did. I suggest that we talk about it to avoid a pointless edit war.Kaiser Guilherme II (talk) 18:46, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

I reverted you edits because it is against policy to link dates. It would be better if you make limited changes at one time so that other editors can see what you are doing.--Charles (talk) 18:49, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

As well ``link dates``? I know the rules of Wikipedia, such as the need for fairness and fonts, but do not understand this rule. And yet, there is not justification to reverse everything I did, which is essential for the page.Kaiser Guilherme II (talk) 19:20, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Very well, I think than I understand wath you wanted to talk, so I removed the links for the years in the page Pope, now there aren`t any problems with the article. thank you. Kaiser Guilherme II (talk) 22:29, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Coastliner 700 (again...)

Charles, please stop edit warring. "Reverted 1 edit by Rcsprinter123 (talk): There is already a more specific link to Stagecoach. Why the hell do we need another? Pathetic. (TW))" Which specific link is that? We have a wikilink to the Stagecoach article. We have an external link to the Coastliner website, and the route map. So, I cannot see for the life of me why we can't have an external link to the operator of the route's website (the Bognor Regis tag thing is to make it go to Stagecoach South.) Please stop reverting things that don't need it. You just get everybody angry and use up your time, my time, and server resources making pointless edits like that. So I ask you to leave it alone, and tell me why you keep removing the link. If you do so again, I may take the matter to the dispute resolution noticeboard. You also disagree with me on other articles, like the List of bus routes in Gloucestershire. Please stop. Also, please do not call people/things pathetic. Thank you, Rcsprinter (lecture) 11:52, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Why do bus spotters think they are exempt from the normal rules on advertising and promotion, notabilty, secondary sourcing and original research?--Charles (talk) 12:44, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't. I am asking you to answer my question: how is the operator's website not related? You're making a big fuss over nothing. Rcsprinter (deliver) 13:01, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

The operator's website is not needed because it is already covered by a wikipedia article. --Bob Re-born (talk) 17:07, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Worcester Buses

Hi, I can see you have changed the structure of the List of bus routes in Worcestershire, which I was editing, removing the reference and notes columns, thank you for the correction. Being new, I was following the format of what was already there and was advised to put an extra column in specifically for the references, which I did. I am still in the process of updating the content of the page but I am having trouble working out how I should reference each bus timetable or bus operator (or even if they need referencing?). Referencing 150+ timetables to 2 separate websites seems like overkill, plus these links don't tend to last very long due to the frequency of bus service changes. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) was advising me but is on a wikibreak so I'd be grateful if you could advise on the best way to reference the information contained on List of bus routes in Worcestershire once I've updated it. Thanks Worcesterbuses (talk) 13:49, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

As you are new here you could not be expected to know that these bus route lists are highly contentious. Bus routes, with a few exceptions, are not generally considered notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Most editors, other than a few bus fanatics, would rather see these lists deleted altogether. Wikipedia is not intended to be a directory or a travel guide. We have Wikitravel for that and there are other places such as UK Transport Wiki on Wikia where people can compile bus timetables if they so wish. Wikipedia is for tertiary content from reliable secondary sources not for original research compiled from primary sources such as bus company websites. My advice to you is to find something else to contribute to Wikipedia as there are plenty of legitamate jobs to be done around here. Your username may imply that you have some connection with bus providers in Worcestershire, which would be an additional problem as you would have a conflict of interest.--Charles (talk) 14:22, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Southend

Hello, just to let you know that I undid your revision of Southend on Sea article. I live in Southend on Sea. IDEA13 should be included in the wiki entry as it's a non profit network for culture in Southend which provides up to date information about what's on and reviews of art. A very useful resource. If there is anything that is not correct in the text, do let me know but please don't delete it before checking the website. Thank you, vividi0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vividi0 (talk • contribs) 09:49, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia not the yellow pages. I would have removed it again but I see another editor has already saved me the trouble.--Charles (talk) 10:09, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Teahouse updates

Hi Charles! A few updates for you about Wikipedia:Teahouse, since you're one of our awesome Teahouse hosts!:

• The host lounge is open! Please take time to review the materials in the space and start contributing to the how-to pages. Your input is valuable. Not only is it great practice to get our minds thinking like hosts, but, you can also provide easy to understand instructions and sound bites for fellow hosts!
• Join the conversation by participating on the host lounge talk pages[1][2]. We also have an IRC channel now for hosts to get to know one another, develop your skills, and eventually the channel will serve as an additional help space for new editors!

• To visit the IRC channel: #wikipedia-teahouse ^connect (Feel free to ask me for help if you're having trouble connecting!)

• Let new editors get to know you by creating your Teahouse profile. Contribute your profile on the host page at the Teahouse! This serves as a fun way for new editors to get to know the people behind the usernames. You can post a photograph of yourself or an avatar, add a quote about yourself or something you enjoy, and share projects and activities you participate on wiki (with wikilinks).

Very exciting things are taking place, and we'll be opening the Teahouse no later than Monday. Feel free to ping me on or off wiki, and I can't wait to work with you to welcome new editors with a warm cup of tea :) SarahStierch (talk) 03:24, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Sarah. I don't know about being awesome but I will wander over to see how it is going.--Charles (talk) 10:03, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

The Teahouse is Open!

Hi Charles! Great news: The Teahouse is open for business! We're ready to start inviting new users, answering questions and inspiring one another. If you haven't already taken a look at the links provided in the most recent Teahouse update, posted on your talk page, please do! Don't forget to add yourself to the Host page if you haven't already. What's next? Inviting hosts and reporting your invitation information.

• Please familiarize yourself with this brief rundown of your responsibilities as a Teahouse host.
• Use the invitation guide to invite new users and report your invites.
• Make sure you have the Q&A page on your watch page and dive in when answers get asked! Feel free to ask your own questions - either seeking help or inspiring others to share their projects, ideas and inspiration for editing.

See you at the Teahouse! SarahStierch (talk) 18:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Heya Charles! Just dropping by to let the hosts know about some new suggestions I've made based on interactions at the Teahouse thus far. Please take a look when you can! Thanks and can't wait to see you at the Teahouse! New suggestions regarding Q&A participation for hosts. -- SarahStierch (talk) 19:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Time

I have a simple yet maybe dumb question. What time zone does this site operate on? Or should I say, why is the time shown when done editing, replying, talking, etc.,not the same as the time I consider reality? Know what I mean? It says 11:30p for example, but the Wiki site reads 7:30p or whatever. Why is that? Just curious to see what the reason is. Goodnite, or is it morning in WikipediaLand? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PedroCazuela (talk • contribs) 09:03, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

excuse me jumping into answer Charles' talk messages. It operates on whatever timezone your preferences are set to - go to "My preferences" and set the timezone offset on the "date and time" tab - Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-datetime --Bob Re-born (talk) 09:08, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Bob. That is a good question and not one I had thought much about. I would like to see this question asked at the teahouse as other new editors will be interested.--Charles (talk) 09:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

p.s. The default time setting is the time at the 0 longitude meridian passing through London known as UTC.--Charles (talk) 09:31, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

help meeeeeeeeeeeee

Hi

Hello

I have a question please answer Why I can not add on semi protected pages with the knowledge that I have registered??? There are a lot of users who are ordinary, but they can added in the semi protected pages and I'm sure they're not administrators.

Please answer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sola2012 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Allow me to answer this question. Users can only edit semi protected pages when they are autoconfirmed, meaning they are four days old and usually make 10 edits. These edits can be to any page, like this one. This is not to punish new users, but to weed out any potential vandals before they get to edit semiprotected pages. Sorry for jumping into someone elses talkpage. Thanks, An Illusive Man (Contact) 22:56, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Illusive Man.--Charles (talk) 23:00, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Sola2012

Thank you very much for your support

I am honored that we are all united

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sola2012 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 28 February 2012 (UTC)