User talk:David Biddulph/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

WikiProject Rowing

You are invited to participate in WikiProject Rowing, a project dedicated to developing and improving articles about rowing. We are currently discussing prospects for the project. Your input would be greatly appreciated!

It would be an honour to have someone with your wealth of knowledge on the project. --The Spith 22:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm there. David Biddulph (talk) 23:00, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

ARA

While they are not responsible for organisation and development, they are the governing body see: Amateur Rowing Association and their website. --Nate1481(^t/_c) 08:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

See discussions about governing body status for other parts of the UK, on Talk:Rowing (sport)#ARA. David Biddulph (talk) 22:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

A new Oxbridge user box

David Biddulph...I am currently in the process of writing a user box for all of the colleges that are part of Oxbridge. This template is meant to replace your current college template. Please take a look at the work in progress and comment on it. My main concerns are college abbreviations and color choice. I am using scarf colors for the colleges. Thank you. - LA @ 17:29, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply given at comment page as requested. I won't be using the suggested new user box in place of the current college template. David Biddulph (talk) 18:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD Nomination of Oxbridge

Hi, I have nominated Oxbridge for deletion since it reads as WP:OR. You can find the discussion here. Coldmachine^Talk 22:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Black Buoy now Yellow in boat race?

I can see that there is something yellow in roughly the right place, and when I talk to local rowers they say that's the black buoy, but isn't that original research so not allowed in Wikipedia? What we need is a citable verification. I've tried using Google and site-specific searches via Port of London Authority, Admiralty leisure etc., but no luck so far. Did you have any particular reference in mind when you cleared the "verification required" comment? Thanks for any feedback - Pointillist (talk) 21:11, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

You've got the photo there, if you don't trust your own eyes or mine. If you wished to do so, you could undertake some spectral analysis on the colour on the photo and convince yourself that it is within scientifically acceptable tolerances of being yellow (or does that count as WP:OR?), but I suppose you could then argue the possibility of Photo manipulation. Don't you think that you're nitpicking a bit, though? Isn't it taking WP:OR to an extreme? In this case I'm more inclined to accept the bits in WP:IAR that talk about using common sense. If you feel strongly that reverting my changes would add value to the page, then please feel free to do so; I'm not going to get into an edit war over it. David Biddulph (talk) 23:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

• No, that would be daft. I'm happy to leave it as it is. I would have been even happier with a citation if you already had one up your sleeve. Anyway, thanks for coming back to me so quickly. Pointillist (talk) 06:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Gentlemen's and Ladies

Why in Skiff Championships Regatta did you change Gentlemens to Gentlemen's but did not change Ladies to Ladies' ? If you bot isn't clever enough to sort out the context, ought it to leave well alone to avoid creating such inconsistencies? David Biddulph (talk) 08:22, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi David. Thanks for the pointer, but don't you think you're being a bit on the harsh side? The bot did that substitution because 'gentlemens' is always incorrect for one reason or other, but 'ladies' is usually correct. While you could well argue that I should have noticed the inconsistency being introduced before approving the edit, you could equally well argue that the change that was made was at least a step in the right direction. Cheers, CmdrObot (talk) 18:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Torpedo

Good catch, I didn't realize the article referenced the MK 46, but the MK 48 a better comparison anyways, the Shkval is a heavy torp launched from a 533mm tube, as is the 48. The 46 is a lightweight design dropped from helos; might as well compare apples to apples. Too bad there aren't any reliable references that I could find for the speed of the Spearfish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.70.145.85 (talk) 09:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Maidenhead

Hi David - according to the website Maidenhead is at Dorney in 2008. RegardsMotmit (talk) 21:58, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

• First I knew of that. Nobody tells me anything! I'll revert one of the other changes I've done, then. David Biddulph (talk) 22:09, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Hope the punters (in punts) know - by the way some del-boy has hit on the Royal Canoe Club Regards Motmit (talk) 22:16, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Rowing at the Olympics

Hi David - I'm the one that changed the medal table, my name is Fernando I am a mexican sports journalist, I'm new in Wikipedia, anyway, you ask about where I get the information about the Medals, and I can tell you that everything is from the Official Olympic Database

You only found 17 silver medals of Britain, you said this is it:

1908 4-, 2- and Sc 1912 4+ 1920 8o and Sc 1928 8o and 2- 1936 4- 1948 8o 1964 4- 1976 8o and 2Sc 1980 8o 2000 W4Sc 2004 W4Sc and W2-

You miss one of 8+ at the 1912 olympics, and I'm sure you can find all the changes I made in the Olympic database http://www.olympic.org/uk/athletes/results/search_r_uk.asp There you can find it, there are 18 medals of Britain. Regards FerSports (FerSports) 2:31, 06 August 2008 (UTC)

Rowing

Well done with keeping up on the rowing article. I think that, now that the races are run and the results are in place and the medal table is stable - the article is now complete! Congratulations. Well, I say 'complete' but it could still do with some references and some prose. Nevertheless I think the substantive work is done. One more thing ticked off the list! Witty Lama 11:26, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Princeton

Yes Princeton isn't in Europe smarty pants!! You could have made a better sounding edit. Or you could have even have edited the article to reflect that the World Cup has been held 'mostly' in Europe. Ozdaren (talk) 15:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Kingston R C

Sorry - Confused because James C was at KGS and in Kingston Regatta and mixed them up. Do you have any other suitable names you can put in the box? Also getting the Rly bridge arches wrong was a complete abberation which has been fixed. Thanks Motmit (talk) 07:34, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 23:19, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Royal Navy

I see what you mean and I've now reworded the section. Usergreatpower (talk) 23:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Henley-on-Thames

Please stop your disruptive editing and vandalism. of Henley-on-Thames, You currently lack the understanding to be able to contribute constructively to this matter. Further, please note that neither you nor anyone else is in position to tell an editor that their contribution is unwanted. May I suggest you read the discussion on the subject, where 'notability' is conclusively proven, before allowing your ego to get the better of your integrity. 82.69.9.30 (talk) 08:08, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I had, of course, read the talk page prior to my edit, and seen your attempts to claim 'notability'. Your concept of 'conclusively proven' is fascinating. No other editor has shared your view of the situation (so you need to learn about concensus), and the Wikipedia community will not allow the article to be turned into a collection of spam links (WP:EL#ADV). David Biddulph (talk) 18:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Henley Standard

Why did you reverse the changes to the Henley Standard article? The bit about Henley Substandard is a bit cheeky, but it is true, and the rest of the edit is fair. I would have thought there is a serious question mark over whether he article really satisfies the notability criterion at all. However given it is there, an external link to their website is relevant, promotion of and the link to their stationary shop is not.Principes (talk) 15:19, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

The content which the anonymous editor removed has been there for many months (two and a half years, in the case of the link to the owners) without complaint. I'm happy to accept a consensus. David Biddulph (talk) 16:12, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey Vandal!

What is your problem with the oldest university of technology? (stears81)

Merely a question of appropriateness of where you've been putting the material. We'll allow other Wikipedians to decide who is the vandal. David Biddulph (talk) 20:54, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Decision taken, & Stears 81 blocked. David Biddulph (talk) 22:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Bad edit

Sorry about my bad edit to Racing shell, it won't happen again. Edward (talk) 21:35, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

FISA world championship boat classes

I was the one who added the M4+ to the boat classes at the world championships. I realize that the M4+ was not on the raced at the last world championsips (2008 Linz), but according to the current FISA website it is still listed as a WC event . (I'm new to wiki I hope I'm posting this in the correct area)

deener483 12:26, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

FISA haven't quite caught up, but hopefully it'll be tidied up when the rules are revised at the Extraordinary Congress in February. The background to the loss of M4+ is available on my website. David Biddulph (talk) 17:57, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Well spotted!

Cheers for sorting that one out!--Technopat (talk) 14:26, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

And again!!!!--Technopat (talk) 12:12, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: submarine

Sorry about that. I thought the IP user was changing the date to the incorrect one, not the correct one. :/ Thingg^⊕⊗ 18:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Alfred Wainwright

Thanks for reverting me. I made the mistake of thinking I knew more about Wainwright that an actually do! I have added one references you gave to the sentence so that someone else can't make the same mistake as me :) Suicidalhamster (talk) 23:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Tidal Teddington Reach

David - I would welcome your contribution to the discussion which is partly on my talk page. I had no idea KRC was now a coastal rowing club. Regards Motmit (talk) 22:03, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Lt/Lt Cdr

The officer in question was not a Lt Cdr in 1982. Including subsequent promotions in the narrative is confusing; for instance he would then be the same rank as the AAOTW. Regards. Justin talk 11:25, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

• Yes, that's why I changed the article back from Lt Cdr to Lt. I'm struggling to understand why you've again changed it from Lt to Lt Cdr? David Biddulph (talk) 12:54, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Clusterf**k on my part, apologies. Justin talk 12:56, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Easily done. We all have days like that.  :-) David Biddulph (talk) 12:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Autoblock

This section re autoblock of a range of IP addresses on the company network:

wrong Shrewksbury

Whoopsie. Tx. Good catch.--Epeefleche (talk) 15:10, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

New Years Honours

Good point - hadn't thought of that! Will look forward to the new article! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philsr3 (talk • contribs) 23:04, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5