Jump to content

User talk:Danno uk/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Welcome!

Hello, Danno uk and welcome to the English Wikipedia!. I'm known here as Tohd8BohaithuGh1, and welcome to Wikipedia! We are all here very glad that you have registered. Before you start making any major edits, I suggest you check out the links listed below. They'll really help!

Important Pages

Have fun!

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! A few things to remember:

We can't say it enough, but welcome!!! --Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 11:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


Image licences

Don't forget to add these :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:55, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Kent Air Ambulance

Hi there,

jsut to let you know, you recently added the Kent Wikiproject to the page, but it was already there, in the nested wikiproject box, just click expand to see it. I've removed the second addition of it. Hope that helps. OwainDavies (about)(talk) edited at 12:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Kent Air Ambulance

Hello, speaking as an aircraft engineer on the original twin squirrel (G-SETA) of long ago, i have removed your 150mph high cruise speed info as it is not correct.

All helicopter manufacters quote a high maximum speed for press purposes, and the max speed the helicopter can reach is called VNE (Velocity Never Exceed). Which is the maximum speed the aircraft can physically acheive in flight, and this can only be reached in a dive and not straight and level cruise, so the performance figures are exaggerated!

Regards

msa1701 (talk) 08:32, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply - when you do a vne dive in a helicopter they do begin to shake a bit with the vibration!

msa1701 (talk) 05:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello, the other editor - Owaindavies (sorry cant remember his name) has also set up an article on the Sussex air ambulance and it contradicts his 150mph cruise speeds with the Kent Air Ambulance, you may want to have a peek unless he has changed that!

Regards

msa1701 (talk) 17:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC) 20:44, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Geograph images

Hi there. It is preferable that Geograph images are uploaded to Commons. They can be better organised and they are easily available to other projects. It is easy to ensure you provide all the required information by using the Wiki markup provided by the Geograph project. When you find an image to use, click the "Find out how to reuse this Image" link then scroll down to the Wikipedia section and copy the text into the basic upload form on Commons. Regards. Adambro (talk) 12:50, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback can be used to revert vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback may be removed at any time.

If you do not want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions. Happy editing! Malinaccier (talk) 21:30, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Clasico

Ok, danno, I think that a third side like you could put an end to this edit war. I will listen to you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cid Campeador (talk • contribs) 17:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD warnings

Congratulations - you got your AfD submission right! but you missed the last step, notifying the article author, with {{subst:AFDWarning|<pagename>}} or, if he's a newbie as in this case, the rather fuller {{subst:AFDWarningNew|<pagename>}}. I've done it for this guy, and will give him pointers to WP:OR and WP:COI. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:41, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that John. It was fairly inevitable that I was going to miss a step somewhere! I'll try harder next time... danno 07:25, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Please

Please do not try to delete Staff (Rumney High School). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greggs42 (talk • contribs) 15:23, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I can't actually delete it, but one of the admins will because the subject matter doesn't meet wikipedia's requirements for a standalone article. Can you not put the contents into the staff section of the school article itself? danno 15:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

AGF

Also, look closer next time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.55.206.232 (talk) 20:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Apologies, my bad. I got a little trigger happy when I saw an anonymous user blanking an article section, something that I see dozens of times every day and which is the main cause of content loss from wikipedia. My fault, but you could avoid misunderstandings like this in the future by adding notes in the edit summary. danno 20:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

dident vandalise

a think you'll find that dennis thatcher did infact marry the devil women and im sure many would agreee, so no vandalism intended :) simply speaking the truth AdamWp1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamwp1 (talk • contribs) 13:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


Proposed deletion of Goachers Brewery

The article Goachers Brewery has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of coverage required to meet WP:GNG

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Nuttah (talk) 09:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I've de-PRODded the article, added an infobox and some cats. Mjroots (talk) 16:49, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Yay, a reprieve! Thanks for your help. As someone that has PRODed and CSDed other people's articles, I was loathe to remove the tag myself to prove that I live by the standards that I expect others to abide to, whilst at the same time being gutted that one of my own was about to go. And if this was some kind of underhand attempt to bolster your bid for adminship then it has worked. I am cheaply bought ;)

Thanks again. danno 21:21, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

It's quite legitimate to remove PROD tags. You need to state why you think the article meets WP:N either by edit summary or preferably on the talk page. If the PRODder disagrees there's always WP:AfD open to them.
Why would I need to bolster my bid for Adminship? Seems to be going quite well anyway. Thanks for your support though. Mjroots (talk) 04:49, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Chicken tax

Updated DYK query On September 24, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chicken tax, which you recently nominated. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 12:22, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Poor English

is a problem in articles about neighboring Nepal as well as India. Ke garnu? -- What to do? This might not be a problem if writers kept within the bounds of standard "simple English" as promoted by Voice of America for instance. Instead we often see Wikipedia becoming a "petri dish" for experimentation with convoluted constructions that the author hasn't quite mastered.

Then there are differences between Indian and U.K. or U.S. English. Should Indian English stand even when it grates on other ears? --LADave (talk) 17:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

That's a very good point - where does “our” (as native speakers) ownership of English begin and end? From what I've heard, in 50 years or so when communicating globally we could all potentially be speaking some kind of Panglish that is based upon English but which borrows heavily from other (particularly Asian) languages, rendering it largely incomprehensible to English speakers today (see Manglish as an example). Thankfully, that's a debate for the future! As it stands, I tend to take the view that based upon wikipedia's inclusionist ethos, articles on wp should be as accessible as possible to as many readers as possible. In this context, as you suggest, that would mean that all articles regardless of subject should adhere as closely as possible to accepted simple English. I often find that when reading, for example, Indian articles, that I struggle to comprehend what is being said. I figure that if I'm having trouble then others for whom English is a second language probably have no hope. Thus by re-writing such articles into an English that is more....universally recognised(?), I hope that I'm killing two birds with one stone by firstly making the article more easily readable to someone not familiar with the local English dialect and secondly helping the local editors to improve their English. I sincerely hope that it doesn't come across as some kind of English snobbery or latent imperialism, things that I'm always keenly aware of when editing non-Western articles. danno 19:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

What you're proposing sounds good to me. In principle it seems better for the U.K. to be the ultimate arbiter. TV has flattened out our linguistic landscape but I wonder how our news announcers -- apparently linguistically lost in the fog somewhere between Ohio and Michigan -- come across in the U.K.? BBC news comes across with some accent, but not nearly as much as listening to Prince Charles, or even people from certain parts of New York City.

Anyhow the issue isn't speech but writing. I read "The Economist" fairly often and find it practically devoid of UK-isms. Do they do up a separate U.S. edition to humor us Yanks? If not, and if it still reads well in the UK, there must be hope for a global dialect of English.

I would say, edit away and see what happens. It can't hurt to make everyone more aware when they have slipped into localisms that don't play well overseas. If it's ever OK to call people on that, Wikipedia must be the right place. LADave (talk) 07:28, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Rightbeforemyeyes remix cover.jpg)

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Rightbeforemyeyes remix cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:05, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

El Clásico (again)

Hello. Please, have a look if you like at the El Clásico page in English language. The user known as Jotamar insists in reverting my deletions despite the fact the text he approves consists of subjective opinions (that should never take place in an encyclopedia such as wikipedia), and other tendentious and uncalled for statements that clearly make the article be ridiculously biased. The Spanish page dealt with this issues long ago, but Jotamar seems to prefer going into a editing war instead. Spooki (talk) 19:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. —DoRD (talk) 20:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC) Hello Danno I have provided a number of reference on wikipedia that include both website and from the books the first one was from http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict11.html it is clearly stated in this website that tigers crossing water are sometimes taken by crocodiles and wikipedia has got edits from this website in the tiger article and they just delete this claim.They should delete other articles as well if they are not accepting it.The second reference I provided was from this website http://www.tieku.org/272239/87.html it is a useful website all encounters written here are taken from reliable resources as famous tiger expert Kailash Sankhala and Valmik Thapar and also from T.v channels(Discovery channel and Animal planet)if these are not accepted than wikipedia is fake because these are authentic reports —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam786123 (talk • contribs) 18:41, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Steve Jobs LSD edit

Do we really want to encourage all the "Steve Jobs Want-to-be"s to do illegal drugs? Well cited but irresponsible considering stats about his influence on young people. The counter culture sentence (same source) should be sufficient to get the point across without the explicit encouragement. 166.183.178.85 (talk) 20:27, 14 July 2010 (UTC)Concerned Mom

I take your point, but wikipedia is founded on its neutrality. If the information is out there and verifiable then it goes in. We aren't arbiters of taste or morality. If you want to start a discussion on the issue then the best place would be the talk page of the article which I can assure you is watched by more senior and influential people in the wikipedia hierachy than I, a simple editor. danno 20:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

An editor who censored me, yes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.183.178.85 (talk) 20:46, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I didn't censor you, you tried to censor wikipedia and I declined you removing perfectly good material, following wikipedia editing consensus. If it's validly cited then it's worthy of inclusion. As I say, we're not arbiters of morality and I don't make the rules. Want to interact with someone that does? Go to the talk page of the article. danno 21:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar!  –Joshua Scott [who?] 01:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Editor Assistance/Requests

Hi,

I'd advise that you redact the statement you made, which is very close to violating WP:NPA. And, yes, sometimes we do have to put up with idiots, but we just can't call them that. :)  –Joshua Scott [who?] 06:34, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the advice! danno 22:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Danno uk, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Danno uk/Sandbox. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

  • See a log of files removed today here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:11, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Richard Boys

Materialscientist (talk) 12:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:OZ Group logo.png

Thanks for uploading File:OZ Group logo.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 21:08, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Capitalisation

Re your changes to RMC, putting Company to company. The text is referring to the specific Company, requiring a capital; not to a company in general. I suggest you reverse your changes. Bebington (talk) 16:44, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

The word company isn't a proper noun, regardless of whether it's being used to describe a specific company or not. It specifically shouldn't be capitalised. Read any newspaper article or even a company's annual report if you doubt me. If you have replicated this error in other articles that you've edited then I suggest that you fix it. danno 17:50, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

It was interesting that you say that Company "specifically shouldn't be capitalised", which is very prescriptive. I am not sure that I would rely on newspaper articles for style guidance and as for company reports, they are usually wonderful repositories of over-capitalisation - Board and Directors being examples. I have a number of style guides, and one can often select the part that suits. However, I like the Economist advice "The general rule is to dignify with capital letters organisations and institutions, but not people". I regard the title Company or Group as a proxy for a company's name which is why I capitalise it. There are two further points. First, it avoids the ambiguity which can sometimes occur between the general and the specific. Second, Company or Group is usually part of the name.

What really bothers me, however, is that on the RMC discussion page I pointed out some while ago that there was a history of the Group. No-one has wanted to use that to improve the substance of the article but people prefer instead to play around with capitals. The Economist has a pithy quotation along those lines.Bebington (talk) 08:56, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

"No-one has wanted to use that to improve the substance of the article but people prefer instead to play around with capitals" - including yourself I note ;-) . Yep, I did mean specifically although that was also a play on your use of "specific". That's what I was taught when I studied English language, it's what I've observed while reading articles and reports and it's what I go by in my job which partly involves writing reports about companies, and I can assure you that my "readership" can be very pernickety when they so choose but I've never had any complaints (about capitalisation at least...). For the record I don't capitalise "board" or "directors", if they wish their retained writers to do so out of some kind of vanity that's all very well. I'm not employed by them so I don't. I've never heard of the Economist guidance but I note that in this article (not cheating, I was genuinely curious and it was the first that I could find on their website with the word company in the text (paragraph 7 to save you wading through all the rest)), even they don't follow it.
I do take your point about people fiddling with little things rather than building the article, but I imagine that it's a simple case of people landing on the article and spotting something that can be fixed quickly. Actually going to research the history and writing it up and referencing it is something more time consuming and involved and be more likely to require someone that has a genuine interest in the subject. I myself do a lot of editing on the laptop sat watching the TV which isn't overly conducive to genuine creative writing but does lend itself quite well to vandalism fighting, fixing typos, spelling errors and the like. Wikignoming I believe it's called. danno 18:21, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Stephanie Adams Page Being Vandalised

Removing facts and adding highly personal as well as questionable comments. It's apparently the same IP address again. 108.41.21.144 (talk) 23:18, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep an eye on it. It looks like Hoary and Dayewalker are also watching it. I don't know either of them but they seem pretty sensible. That should help keep things on the level. Although the Goddessy ref doesn't name her husband and son the other ref for Dr Nicolai kind of does so I'm not sure about removing it. In fact I just did and then reinstated it after reading them both because there is an internet paper trail that seems to link it up. To put your mind at rest I'm sure that the page is well looked after given that Ms Adams has previously contacted Jimmy Wales with concerns about her article, so be assured that your contribution is valued! danno 00:21, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
3RR by 108.41.21.144

Actually, Dr. Nikolai's site does not mention a "Stephanie Adams" as his wife, and Stephanie Adams' web sites do not mention her husband or son's name on there anywhere. 108.41.21.144 (talk) 01:24, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't even see a name of his wife and child on his site anymore. 108.41.21.144 (talk) 01:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

When I looked at his site it did give his wife's name as Stephanie and their son's as Vincent. Whilst it didn't name Ms Adams directly, a picture of someone called Stephanie looking a lot like her appeared in a wedding picture with him. A further trawl of that site reveals that the two are friends and business associates. It may be verging on original research because it isn't specifically mentioned anywhere but it certainly is tacitly. danno 02:08, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
108.41.21.144 is a sock puppet for GODYSSEY which uses various sites as vanity sources for this article.

If it is then I imagine that they should be more circumspect about putting personal information on their personal and business websites and spend less time editing here. Regardless, that should in no way allow anyone else to post unverifiable stuff about any of them here. danno 02:08, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Are official documents like birth certificates, marriage licenses citable sources? How would one reference them?

I have no experience of doing such a thing. At a guess you'd have to be able to prove that you were the legal owner of the document or have permission of the legal owner to publish them online. Otherwise I wouldn't even try. Ask an admin about that. danno 02:44, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Davison Associates for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Davison Associates is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Davison Associates until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Edcolins (talk) 19:22, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

7th gen

Haha, thanks! I don't like to usually be that bold on that important of a page, but no argument against it was ever really given, and your edit summary prior to mine showed that I wasn't the only one who wanted it gone... Sergecross73 msg me 13:07, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Adding back in information

I wrote a brief description this time. Thank you for your guidance and comments. I appreciate the help. Rhinchey (talk) 21:30, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Book 'em, Danno!

Is there 5-0 in the UK? Smallbones (talk) 19:16, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Not officially but I'm working on it! You've photographed 1415 places on the historic register? Wow. danno 19:23, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi, when using Reflinks, please verify that the added information is sensible. See, for example, this edit (second one down), which now contains |author=Published Friday, Nov 5 2010, 10:06 GMT - there is a proper author on that web page, it states "By Daniel Kilkelly". Thanks. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:27, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Collaborative Intelligence

Hi Danno, Thank you for your positive words about my J Scott Turner article (my first on Wikipedia). Since then, I also did the first bio page on Eshel Ben-Jacob, which is now a Wiki Israel project. But my stub article on the Microbes Mind Forum did not fare as well (deleted yesterday within minutes of my adding the requested additional references). I'd like to see it restored as a stub to grow over time.

I joined Wikipedia specifically to grow the knowledge web around Collaborative Intelligence (main article) and related articles, e.g. the two related articles Microbes-Mind Forum & Zann Gill, which would both fit as stub articles in the Collaborative Intelligence knowledge cluster.

Background I was motivated to join Wikipedia because as an older student, completing a PhD on Collaborative Intelligence, I saw that the article was poor (dealt with the business aspects only) and I wanted to put in place a framework to which others could contribute. Both J Scott Turner and Israeli physicist Eshel Ben-Jacob are doing work relevant for Collaborative Intelligence; both advisers to the Microbes Mind Forum. My objective was to continue to add short articles relevant to Collaborative Intelligence, some of which might be stubs for awhile because I want to encourage others to contribute, rather than just posting content myself.

Do the refs I added yesterday, just before the Microbes Mind Forum article was deleted, merit restoring it? I've also written to Ron Ritzman who deleted that article. Ark2 (talk) 19:34, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Re: Thaksin

No trouble at all. That's how wiki works, isn't it? Cheers. --RJFF (talk) 18:47, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Cite, cite

Didn't know there was such a thing as Reflinks until now, but I was always under the impression that the capitalisation of Cite was encouraged. Looking at Template:Cite web I see most instances are given in lower case, so I guess that's the correct format. Not that it particularly matters either way. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 21:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Be Here Now

Hi, there's two main things that stick out about the quote. Firstly is that it isn't really saying anything unique, hence my criticism that it isn't substantive; it feels mainly decorative. The entire article is pretty about how Oasis lost the plot on the album, reiterated again and again, because that what everyone says about the album. Compare that Noel quote to the quotes before it: "'People were being edged out of the circle around Oasis. People who knew them before they were famous rather than because they were famous.' Hopkins likened the situation to a medieval court, complete with kings, courtiers and jesters. As he explained, '[o]nce you're in that situation you lose sight of reality.'" Those quotes give specific details about the situation that help paint a more specific picture, whereas the Noel quote is just some generalized quip--the other people quoted in that section are more informative about the subject at hand. As far as I can tell Noel's not talking specifically about the album's recording--he's talking about Be Here Now as a whole, and there's already enough about his thoughts on the album in the Reception section. The other thing is that that quote should really come from its original source. As it stands it's just NME repeating a quote it took from Q for some picture gallery--sourcing from a proper news story or interview would be vastly preferable. Also, you mistakenly labeled the year as 2009, when NME says the quote is from '99. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:57, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Suggestions on Folding@home? GA coming soon!

Hi there Danno uk! I see that your interested in Folding@home and thought I'd let you know that I've extensively edited the article and I believe that it's very, very close to GA nominations, something that is long overdue IMO. I'm doing a fairly informal request for comment thing, so if you could read it through and drop me a line or something with any improvement suggestions I'd appreciate it. I'm striving to make it encyclopedic, factually accurate, etc. If there's enough consensus that things are fine I will ask the lead scientist Dr. Pande for a final review and then put it up for GA nominations which I hope will transpire smoothly. I estimate that all of these events will occur within the next several weeks. So if you are interested, please let me know what you think and watch for the GA nomination! :D Your fellow folder, Jesse V. (talk) 02:49, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jesse, thanks for the invite. In all honesty, the subject matter is slightly beyond my area of expertise - I'm a happy but largely ignorant contributor to the Folding project! Having said that, I took a look at the article and I have to say that it's looking very good. I'm not overly familiar with the good/featured article protocols but from what I can see it's well structured and reffed, and considering the fairly dense subject maintains good readability. I've made a few gnomey changes but there's little that I feel equipped to add. Great work and best of luck with the good article nom. danno 19:07, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
I noticed your changes and I very much appreciate them. I understand your position, since up until last August I too was fairly ignorant as to how it all worked. I hope a Good Article on F@h can be enlightening to all, especially a surprising portion of the article's material is not directly presented on folding.stanford.edu. Your tweaks were needed so thanks! Fold on, Jesse V. (talk) 19:14, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Chelsea

I'm certainly no expert on grammar, but it seems you maybe correct. The majority of the time the club should be referred to as the plural in body of the article, you seem correct with the lead however. Feel free to restore your version. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 16:42, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Ditton

Greetings. I thought I'd start a discussion about the "Javelin" photo. I'm happy to be persuaded that the photo is irrelevant, but I haven't been so far and I don't think that simply deleting/restoring it is the best way forward. I say it's relevant to Ditton, you say not, so it is a matter of fact and degree. In the case of Ditton, the photo helps to give an idea of what transport links are available, and the accompanying text does not mislead since it is a valid option for those travelling between London and Ditton. Talking about London, its Wikipedia entry contains references to Stansted and London Southend airports, both of which are outside London but are obviously relevant to those travelling to and from London by air. The same principle applies to Ditton, although on a much smaller scale. Shaibalahmar (talk) 06:59, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Shaibalahmar, thanks for your message. To start, I'd like to extend my congratulations on the excellent job that you did in getting the article to GA, it certainly put my earlier inputs to shame and the finished product is well deserved of its new status. My issue with the photo is in regard to its specificity. Agreed, it does form part of a transport infrastructure from which Dittonians can benefit due to the village's proximity to Maidstone West. But using that rationale, the same photo could be included on the articles for every town, village or hamlet within 5 or 10 miles of a station served by the service. If the train stopped at Aylesford station and Aylesford station was in Ditton, which I don't think it is (and that's not being facetious, I'm aware that Barming and East Farleigh stations aren't exactly where their names would suggest), then the pic would be a great inclusion. Without that kind of direct link I think that its inclusion is a kind of non sequitur. A number 71 bus would be a good illustration of local transport links, but when I think of Ditton (which I know fairly well), high speed trains don't necessarily spring quickly and easily to mind! I take your point about Southend and Stansted not being overly proximal to London, but they are accepted as serving it, to the point of including in their names. Again, maybe if Maidstone West was called Maidstone West (for Ditton) then there would be a more solid argument for inclusion. The way that I see it, the inclusion of the image gives undue weight to a service that isn't really very representative of what the community really uses, and as such looks like it has been included because it's a nicer picture than that of a big green bus. danno_uk 18:52, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I take a more relaxed view about its relevance, and feel that it simply illustrates what is written in the text. However, I don't wish to prolong the debate and shall delete it. I'll try to snap a No. 71 bus on my next visit. Cheers, Shaibalahmar (talk) 19:31, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
I'll do you a deal. Post a picture of a big green bus above the picture of the train and I will pose no objection to its inclusion ; ) danno_uk 20:10, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Chris Snee

Hi,I changed Chris Snee's birth day to the 18th because that's what it says on the giants team page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Color09 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, okay. I was going by the existing ref from pro-football-reference.com. Thanks for correcting and putting in a new ref. danno_uk 20:32, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Advice

With regards to the "advice" that you offered to me on the Jimmy savile talk page - please will you keep your advice to yourself. If I need any advice, I know where to go for it, and "it" is not you. Many thanks Markdarrly (talk) 23:14, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

: ) danno_uk 22:02, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jamie Theakston, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Channel 5 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Strood Academy- Temple Chapter

Sorry this goes beyond OR. Medway could get no money for the merger unless it made these schools academies the alternative was to accept personal responsibility and liability as councillors when the first child got injured in the decaying structures at Temple and Chapter site. Councillors Insurance lapses if you vote against officer recommendation.

Undoubtably the merger was in the best interest of Strood kids but Academy status and loosing the support of the officer team was not- as can be seen in even Ofsted figures. This was extensively discussed at Labour group meeting, and debate was muted at Education Committee and if I recollect only independant Lib Dems raised warnings. The local press took the bait and published the council press statement- missing the story entirely.

Then we move on to Hoo. Different details- but in essence same story, the governors could not function if funding was cut. --ClemRutter (talk) 10:37, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Wow, I knew that the government were aggressively pushing academies, but I hadn't realised that they were arm twisting in that way. As a singleton with no kids I can't say that it's something that I've followed too closely. It's probably of little succour, but I know a project manager for KCC who works on new schools and he claims that the new buildings being built for the new academies (e.g. the New Line place in Maidstone) blow the existing school building stock into the weeds. Given that the only external clues to any development at my own alma mata appear to be an attempt to turn it into some kind of prison camp that's probably not saying a lot though. danno_uk 00:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rave, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hardcore (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Hard Boiled Sweets (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Paul Freeman
Maidstone FC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to London Scottish

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Suzi Perri

I received your message about Suzi Perri. I sure appreciate your advice. Thanks and God bless you. Ashbeckjonathan 20:55, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

PlayStation 4 lead

I undid your recent edit, and thought I'd explain why in more detail. I agree with this definition that the phrase makes what it is describing sound more interesting. To simply state that it is the successor sounds more direct and, in my opinion, more plain. Lead sections should entice visitors to want to read more, and I felt that removing the phrase was counterproductive. Also, it can imply that the product already exists, when in fact it has not been released.
I'm open to other perspectives, however, so please don't hesitate to share yours. If you'd rather discuss further on the article's talk page instead of here, that's fine too. --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:45, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Whilst I agree that lead sections should be constructed in such a way as they encourage a reader to delve further, I'm not sure how obfuscating facts in the lead on the basis that another wording is "more interesting" enhances an encyclopaedia. Whilst one could describe the Digital Compact Cassette or Digital Audio Tape as being "billed/advertised/whatever other synonym" as a successor to audio cassettes, the PS4 is factually, provably, confirmed by the manufacturer and numerous other third parties, as the next iteration of the PlayStation brand; i.e. the successor to the PS3. To introduce phrases such as "billed as", "advertised as" or "marketed as" implies that this is some kind of claim as opposed to a fact. If the absence of a physical product on shelves is the issue then "is to be" or "is the forthcoming" might be an alternative phrasing, but I'm sorry, I fail to see how "billed" adds anything apart from unnecessary woolliness. danno_uk 02:41, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Though I don't agree that the phrase "billed as" implies doubt, I think I have a better understanding now of where you're coming from. My main concern was to avoid using an introduction that implies the product already exists. I removed the phrase and restructured the statement in what I hope is an acceptable compromise. --GoneIn60 (talk) 05:35, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I think that your solution is excellent and certainly better than either of my suggestions or what went before. I suspect that our original difference is actually down to subjective Brit and U.S. phraseology which you have managed to surmount. I'd also like to say thank you for both flagging your change here and coming back and considering my views. If you carry on in this manner then you're going to both garner a fearsome amount of goodwill across the project and render many of us redundant! danno_uk 03:36, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for considering mine as well without taking offense. It is greatly appreciated. Cheers! --GoneIn60 (talk) 04:29, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello Danno, I will be celebrating my birthday on 19 March. So, I would like to give you a treat. If you decide to "eat" the cookie, please reply by placing {{subst:munch}} on my talk page. I hope this cookie has made your day better. Cheers! Arctic Kangaroo 15:10, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Danno uk. You have new messages at Arctic Kangaroo's talk page.
Message added 15:55, 19 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Arctic Kangaroo 15:55, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Area where I live

Hi, Danno uk. When you commented me about Suzi Perri, I don't have the BBC channel because I live America. Currently I can only watch sports on FOX Sports, NBC Sports, CBS Sports, ESPN on ABC, and Turner Sports, especially on TBS. Once in a while we get the Tennis Channel and the NFL Network or the CBS Sports Network or stuff like that. We used to get Versus, occasionally, until it was renamed NBC Sports Network and I used to be able to watch New York Mets games on WPIX until we got a new dish. Ashbeckjonathan 16:18, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar

Nice barnstar! I have one of those as well! Ashbeckjonathan 19:42, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry; I was mistaken. I meant the service badge! It's nice to have one! I have one too! --Ashbeckjonathan 20:37, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pointless (game show), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alexander Armstrong (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:14, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Stu Klitenic for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether if Stu Klitenic should be deleted or not. The conversation will be held at the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stu Klitenic until a consensus is held and everyone is welcome to join the conversation. However, do not remove the AfD message on the top of the page. Ashbeckjonathan 12:55, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Jeff daly

Hello Danno uk. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jeff daly, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Does not redirect to a different or incorrect namespace. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:01, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Duće, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Poljica (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Flag and coat of arms of Pennsylvania

Hi Danno uk. You just undid my change (removal of some interlanguage links) on Flag and coat of arms of Pennsylvania. The reason I removed them was that I'm solving at the moment some interlanguage conflicts on the Dutch Wikipedia (where it is the opinion that all interlanguage links in the articles should be removed since we now have Wikidata, and at the same time we try to get rid of all the wrong interlanguage links that have risen over the last years when Wikidata did not yet exist). So one of the things I did was the removal of the English interlanguage link Flag and coat of arms of Pennsylvania on the Dutch article about the Flag of Pennsylvania (w:nl:Vlag van Pennsylvania) because the English article is coupled on Wikidata to Q3702043 (together with some articles in other languages about the coat of arms of Pennsylvania), while the Dutch article is coupled to Q18983 (together with some articles in other languages about the flag of Pennsylvania). After I did this, it was in my opinion the best to also remove the interwiki links to the Dutch (and other) languages on the English wikipedia, because I believed it would be helpful to remove the interwiki conflicts on the English Wikipedia at the same time. If I'm wrong with that and if the opinion on the English wiki is that these links should not be removed, it's all fine to me, but please let me know that, so that I also don't wast time to remove them on any other English article. 83.86.171.186 (talk) 20:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

You know what, I'm not actually sure what the situation is with these links now. To be honest I saw the removal of some of the links (2 appeared to be left behind) and thought it was some kind of test edit/mischief so undid it. The wikidata page appears to only have links between the English, Spanish and Italian articles so my guess is the bot that is doing the move hasn't got to this page yet. Presumably this would mean the loss (at least temporarily) of the links to the other language articles if we remove the current links on the page? It sounds like you know more about this than me so does that sound correct or am I misunderstanding? Thanks danno_uk 20:29, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
I just tried to add another article to the wikidata page and was told that it was already linked under some d:q code so I'm clearly not getting it at all! danno_uk 20:34, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Are you proposing to link them all to the same Q number on wikidata and will that restore all of the interlanguage links? danno_uk 20:54, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
The reason the bots that have to do the move, didn't do it yet, is that these bots cannot move them. And they cannot do it for the same reason that you were told that it was already linked under some d:q. It is impossible to add a certain article to two different d:Q numbers on Wikidata. In most cases that's not really a problem, but in this case it is, because while the English wiki has only one article about both the flag and the coat of arms of Pennsylvania, other languages, like the German wiki, have two articles (one about the flag and one about the coat of arms). So there have to be two different d:Q numbers, one for the flag and one for the coat of arms, and the English article can only be coupled to one, which in this case happens to be the d:q of the coat of arms (which is not my choice by the way, it could also be coupled to the d:q of the flag instead). 83.86.171.186 (talk) 16:32, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
I've looked into quite a bit and understand better how it all fits together now. I have raised the question over on wikidata as to what they see as the best way forward. It would have been a lot more straightforward before February which was when someone decided to merge the previously separate Flag and CoA articles on EN wikipedia... danno_uk 17:06, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Welcome to the Punch, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Conspiracy and Heist (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 22:50, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Information icon Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I removed an external link you added to the page Rhodium, because it seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 21:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of licensed and localized editions of Monopoly: Europe, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Herne Bay and Callington (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:32, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Danno_uk/Archive_1&oldid=1136195898"