Jump to content

User talk:Dodger67/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5→Archive 10

Re: Unessecary hero worship

On that removal on 2012 Summer Paralympics closing ceremony, the fact that he was a military captain who lost his legs serving his country is relevant. That section was a tribute to the military, and the fact that he now plans to compete at the Paralympics in Rio shows that he letting his new disability let him serve his country in a new way, going on an endeavour to compete in the Paralympics. Does that make sense? ViperSnake151  Talk  02:01, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

It's about balance. The articles covering the Paralympics only mention the military wounded of one or two countries - the western powers. The articles say nothing about the American missile that took the arm off of the Afghan athlete, the British bullet that smashed the spine of the Iraqi swimmer, the Chinese landmine that removed the Angolan runner's leg, the Russian rocket that put the Libyan athlete in a wheelchair, and so on. Glorifying the warriors has it's place but our articles should cover all the participants fairly. Keep in mind the global nature of Wikipedia - we have readers from all sides of wars and conflicts. When we do mention such things, where relevant, we must be careful to be scrupulously neutral. Roger (talk) 06:57, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Reversions

Please check in at the discussion page for Oscar Pistorius. You've made a number of reversions without any discussion. Your last to the awards section eliminated a reference that should be edited back in. Thank you. Pkeets (talk) 12:18, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

EditorReviewArchiver: Automatic processing of your editor review

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 5 September 2012 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive--> to the review page will prevent further automated actions. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:17, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of the review page - so I've popped along just now - you are one of the people I respect the most on wikipedia, which made it a little easier for me to be totally honest (leaving out the bad helps neither of us) - I plan to open up my own review at 4,000 edits so you'll have a good chance to be a brutal with me :) Fayedizard (talk) 18:00, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Hi Roger,

Just a quick heads up regarding the above talk page – every UK newspaper is likely to be scrutinising media coverage of the Closer debacle. It might not be great for WP's image (or its attractiveness to female editors, say) if comments discussing the nature of Kate's breasts are found and circulated in the news or on the web. I've left a comment underneath yours, but – and this is only a suggestion – might you consider removing it (and mine too)? Just a thought. Regards, Brammers (talk/c) 21:05, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much; I hope you didn't mind me suggesting it. Enjoy the rest of your weekend! Brammers (talk/c) 09:33, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Talk:F. G. Natesa Iyer

I have responded to your question on initials and name at the talk page. I am greatful for the interest shown in South Indian history!

Anant (talk) 08:03, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Disability convention

Looks like we hit the button at the same time. At 1935 you reverted the wikipedia page; and I uploaded the new version of the file. You may have to clear your cash to make sure it looks ok. My main change (I guess) is Greenland; I couln't find info on that (always complicated business). Do we have definate info whether Denmark's ratification included Greenland and Faroe? L.tak (talk) 17:46, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I posted the question to the Refdesk - WP:Reference desk/Humanities#UN conventions and Denmark, Greenland and the Faroe Islands, lets hope we get a good answer. Roger (talk) 19:19, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
I replied there; think indeed GL and FO should be included here... L.tak (talk) 19:39, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

OR Tambo Int'l Airport serving Pretoria

Ja, Wonderboom is an airport in Pretoria, so is Waterkloof Airforce Base! BUT if you are a paying civilian flying from Cape Town and you live in Pretoria/Centurion, you are 99% sure going to land at OR Tambo Int'l Airport my friend!

Please don't revert my entry again, you surely don't have first hand experience of these surroundings!

Have a blessed day Aliwal2012 (talk) 12:10, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

The article should probably say it actually serves the whole of Gauteng. BTW please do not presume to tell me what experience I do or do not have - you know nothing about me. Don't personalise the process of writing Wikipedia articles. Roger (talk) 12:21, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Says the one that knows all
Have I ever made any personal remark about you? Why are you attacking me after I asked you please not to personalise the process? Please read WP:AGF. Roger (talk) 13:05, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dodger67. You have new messages at Talk:Winnie (film).
Message added 17:32, 12 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please see my note about the "fall" release for Winnie. Thanks for the citation in the article; point is well taken. Bobbyandbeans (talk) 17:32, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Winnie film

I just found out that Winnie was given limited release in Canada on October 5 but unfortunately the reviews are still not good. This doesn't bode well for a U.S. or South African release, but maybe it will still get picked up. I'll keep updating the page as I get more info.Bobbyandbeans (talk) 23:56, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

It seems to be living up to expectations then - a crappy movie. I've actually met the director a few times - at film festivals and once saw him in action when he made a movie near where I live. He makes gorgeous little movies when it's his own project. When I asked him about the "not so good" movies he works on he said "I'm not Kubrick, I have to take the work I get or starve" - it happened to be shortly after Kubrick died. Roger (talk) 06:36, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
That's unfortunate for SA directors and crew because there's some real talent in the country, but then also those writers and producers who aren't so talented and when they get financial backing, other people just need to work on those projects since there is so little else. I'm privileged to chat with David James and I know he struggled for many years before District 9 and now he still needs to take what comes his way, despite how good D9 was. Maybe as more and more productions are filmed in SA, they'll get more exposure and have more opportunities. Tell him I said good luck.Bobbyandbeans (talk) 12:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
I supose you know Roodt's Oscar nominated "Yesterday" but try to get hold of "Meisie" and particularly "Faith's Corner" I think it's some of his best work. The SA film industry is in a definite growth phase but most get by with making adverts and serials for tv. Roger (talk) 13:00, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
I'll have to look them up. What's also sad is when less-than-stellar work gets circulated. I saw a preview for Leon Schuster's Mad Buddies and it looks so awful, just two men falling down and shrieking, but he's being distributed by Disney! That won't help SA's reputation! Anyway, I was thinking about our conversation about Winnie's "fall" release and I got into it with editors on Taken 2 because they didn't want to put that it was a "French" film, despite being produced and released in France by French companies, because everyone thinks it's a Hollywood movie. I tried to explain how offended people in other countries get when everyone assumes every movie is Hollywood-based, but they just didn't get it. Maybe things will keep changing, with releases like D9 and Invictus. I'll keep my fingers crossed for Darrell and the country as a whole, LOL! Nice chatting with you.Bobbyandbeans (talk) 13:59, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Public broadcasting, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages RSG and Ndebele language (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) 15:47, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Oerlikon 35mm cannon

Out of curiosity, why did you seem so convinced that my information about the use of this weapon during the Rhodesian Bush War was untrue? Your language suggests that you were certain beyond a doubt that it simply could not have been the case.

As it was, I was indeed mistaken - an Oerlikon 20mm twin cannon was the one captured from insurgents in 1978. A photograph of the Swiss weapon being manned by Rhodesian artillerymen was included in my source. (http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/1605/32591727ik7.jpg)

Thanks, --Katangais (talk) 23:56, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Military history and technology happen to be one of my interests. The only country in southern Africa that has 35mm Oerlikon guns is South Africa. The Rhodesians definitely never had any. As it is a pretty subtantial piece of equipment (weight 6.7 tons) requiring a large truck to move, as well as power generators and usually also a radar system there is no way that any of the insurgent groups could have operated one - they simply never had the logistics to do so. Even the South African Army found them very difficult to deploy in "bush" operations and afaik never took any with them on their expeditions into Angola - they used them only in semi-static positions on well developed bases (Such as Ongangwa, Rundu, Katima Mulilo, etc) to protect against possible incusions by Angolan or Cuban aircraft - which never happened.
In short its simply a too big and complex piece of equipment for the insurgents to handle. 20mm guns on the other hand are light enough to move by a standard pickup truck and don't require any external power sources. 20mm ammunition is also far lighter, cheaper and easier to source than the much larger, heavier and expensive 35 x 228 ammunition which at that time was available from only one manufacturer. To illustrate the size difference of the ammunition - one could easily carry 5 rounds of 20mm in a trouser pocket but 5 rounds of 35mm would require a backpack.
BTW the gun in that photo is misidentified - or rather the writer got the designations mixed up: The Hispano-Suiza HS.820 gun was used in a variety of applications and mounts. The HS.665 was a tripple mount (three HS.820 cannon) with drum magazines. When Oerlikon took over Hispano-Suiza's armaments division in 1970 the HS product designations all changed - the HS.820 cannon became the Oerlikon KAD and the various mounts that used it all got a GAI- prefix, for example the HS.639-B3 became the GAI-CO1. However the HS.665 tripple mount was discontinued so it never received an Oerlikon designation but it was also manufactured under licence in Yugoslavia as the M55.
The South African Army captured sufficient numbers of M55s in Angola that they were able to put them into service alongside their GAI-CO1 and GAI-BO1 guns. Given the Eastern-block orientation of the insurgent groups at the time I suspect that the most likely origin of the weapon in the photo is Yugoslavia so it's correct designation is actually M55 (it's difficult to see which particular variant it is) Yugoslavia was a significant supplier of weapons to most of the insurgencies in Southern Africa and to the "frontline states" that hosted them (Zambia, Angola, Tanzania, etc).
WOW I've written a lot! Roger (talk) 07:41, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Your request at the helpdesk

Hi Roger. I'd be happy to redact the insulting edit summary you mentioned, but I'm going offline for a half-hour or so now - gotta eat... Drop a link to the article or diff in question on my talkpage and I'll deall with it when I get back, otherwise pick a random admin from the list and point them in the right direction. If it's really severe, you can also email oversight as well. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:57, 24 October 2012‎ (UTC)

ANI

I've raised the IP's edit summaries at ANI, if you want to comment there please feel free. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:45, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

SAS template

Thanks. I will fix as I go along. I copied and pasted what someone else had done without checking the template page. Gbawden (talk) 08:59, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Aaron Robinson (composer) article

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Aaron Robinson (composer). When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Cindy(talk to me) 16:40, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Could you point out which of the sources are unreliable - the tag alone, without an explanation, is not really helpful. I came to the article in response to a post on the help page. I think we can best help the newbie article creator by giving specific information detailing the reasons fo the tagging on the article's talk page - "drive-by" tagging can be very frustrating. Roger (talk) 16:51, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Hey there! Your work is appreciated. At the same time, there's no drive-by tagging involved. In the tag that links to reliable sources guidelines, full details are provided and readily explained. In the specific article, two citations are to the composer's own work and a bookstore, another to wn.com, another to a city-data mirror site. Note that rather than using the subject's work as a citation, the proper place is to present it within a "Published works" section. As stated at the help page, it is important that if you do not understand an issue identified, ask the editor that placed the tag, rather than removing the tag. This clearly presents a confusing message to an editor that has already been receiving guidance from other less experienced (new) editors. At the same time, I would work on tempering the edit summaries. What is "unjustified" to one editor may be perfectly inline with guidelines to another. If you have questions, please feel free to contact me again. No need for a TB, since I watch other pages with current conversations for at least a week. Best regards, Cindy(talk to me) 17:15, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Got it. I see how my use of "unjustified" can be a problem - I meant it in the sense of "unexplained, no rationale provided" - poor word choice on my part, sorry. Roger (talk) 17:22, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Roger, the last thing we need at this point is further edits that fail to meet the guidelines. Please refrain from making arbitrary changes to the article until you can review the MOS and guidelines for biographies. There has been enough crap over the guidance the editor has received from inexperienced editors today than to give him even more confusion. If you want to make suggestions, please start a discussion on the talk page. Thanks. Cindy(talk to me) 07:26, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your edits ...

Hi Dodger67 ~ thank you for your helpful edits with my article. I left you a message on the "Help Desk" page continuing the conversation. For some reason, the reviewer "cindamuse" went in and completely reconstructed the article to the point where it is no longer even notable as an original subject. She stated that my subject was an "author" when the title says: (composer) ~ she states that he is known for a book ... and is "additionally known for ..." which is completely untrue. She removed a very important reference: "New Grove" book on composers that clearly states nearly all of what she now is asking for citations. Her "corrected" sentences are run-on and have nothing to do with separate statements. Could you please go in and see what can be done to restore what made this article approved as a notable subject? I'm afraid that someone will see this mess and further demand corrections. Thank you so much for looking into this ~ and please read my statement on the Help Desk talk page. I would go back in, but from reading her personal biography, she scares me. Thank you. Impromp2Music (talk) 20:22, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Cindamuse's edits are correct IMHO. I have adjusted the lead to reduce the over-emphasis on his authorship (only one recently published book). Please discuss any further concerns on the article's talk page - do not scatter discussion across multiple user talk pages and the Help desk - try to keep it all together on the article's own discussion page. You would also do yourself a favour by reading WP:OWN and perhaps stepping away from the article for a while - work on something else such as fixing typos or reverting vandalism, etc. Roger (talk) 07:53, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Requested moves

Hi. This is to let you know that I have proposed multiple page moves at Talk:Disability judo classification#Requested move 3 and have also proposed a move at Talk:Disability racquetball classification#Requested move 3. I am sending the same message to everyone who commented on the previous round of move requests for these articles. Regards, --Stfg (talk) 12:43, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

HAGGiS Adventures- suggestions

Hi there,

Many thanks for your comments on my HAGGiS article. I've searched pretty hard over the last few weeks to make more of the content verifiable but- yes- the magic "History of HAGGiS" document still glues it all together. The document itself is an Excel table with a chronological history of the company (up to 2006) written by one of the founders, but it is not published as such. I guess it would be available 'on request' from myself or the company if anyone wanted it, and I've changed the reference with this in mind- but I don't know if this makes things any better or worse! Any advice would be appreciated.

I should point out (if it is not obvious) that I work for the company, though I've taken it upon myself to create the article- as I simply believe it is worthy of an entry. I feel the 'rags to riches' aspect of the history is of most interest, so that's why I'm keen to hold on to as much of the original article information as possible. Thanks again. BoyFromNorthernBritain (talk) 21:45, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Probably the best option for that document would be to make it available for download on the company website - that would meet the "published" requirement. As an internal document it does not qualify. Roger (talk) 06:39, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Revision

Hi Dodger 67,

Sorry about the external links in the "see also" section. I'm new to the whole Wiki editing thing as of this morning. Just figuring out how to add links was quite a struggle! I'm mainly concerned about "Mr. Ollie" and his edits. You appear to be undoing his edits that state that PM&R is "outdated" "old" and "redundant." Do you have any insights into his logic? What can be done to keep this page objective? Thanks! Kpkumar1966 (talk) 17:37, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

The only thing we can do is to watch the article and undo the changes that do not make sense. There is also an unregistered editor using IP addesses that start with 175 who has been changing the article to discredit physiatry. A few weeks ago I sucessfully applied for the page to be semi-protected (which locks out unregistered editors) but that protection has expired a few days ago - if 175.???.??? comes back I will again request administrative action to protect the article. I'm not sure Mr Ollie is meaning to harm the article, it looks like he has just not been careful about how he reverted some of your misformatted edits. Welcome to Wikipedia! Roger (talk) 17:47, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Roger,

MrOllie has now sent me a message saying that I'm involved in edit warring (I think that's the term he used) so making further edits could get me blocked. He responded to my message on his talk page saying that he agreed that "outdated" and "redundant" are not accurate but he changed it to "old field of medicine"! I again challenged him on the word "old" on his talk page. I think I will report this and try to get the page protected. Thanks for your help! -Kris Kpkumar1966 (talk) 17:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Don't report MR Ollie - he's done nothing against the rules. The "old" isn't there now. Roger (talk) 18:09, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Help desk edits

Please refrain from removing my replies like you did here. I don't know whether that was intentional or not, but I do not appreciate if you edit my posts that way. Thanks. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 21:59, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about that - definitely not intentional. I messed up an edit conflict when I noticed and wanted to fix it I saw you had already done so. Roger (talk) 22:06, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
It's cool. I guess I sounded a bit harsh, sorry. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 22:10, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
File:Franziskaner Hefe-Weissbier Hell.jpg Have a beer for letting it cool down. Cheers. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 22:17, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Cheers! - sorry I'm so slow in replying - I'm busy fixing a pile of misformatted cites. Roger (talk) 22:47, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

how to add jpg

Hi,

I'm trying to help with the disability related articles the best I can but am not that experienced so bear with me if I make errors.

I started an article on a model Kelly Knox and want to try and add a pic to the infobox from a magazine, Marie Claire, thats on flickr - posted by her I think. http://www.flickr.com/photos/kellyknox/7244004184/ No idea how to go about it. Any advice would be appreciated. Many thanks. Paradisepark (talk) 18:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

That photo would never be allowed - it's under full copyright. If you can find a photo that is compatible with Wikipedia's licensing rules you can use the WP:File Upload Wizard which makes the process quite painless - provided the photo's coyright licence is acceptable. I'm not at all an expert on image copyright issues so if you get stuck rather ask the folks at the WP:Help desk. Roger (talk) 18:22, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Call for Wikipedians in Residence in Africa

Hello,

I hope you are well and thriving!! WikiAfrica has just put out a call for two Wikipedians in Residence. One in Cape Town at WikiAfrica, at the Africa Centre; and the other for WikiAfrica Cameroon in Douala, at doual’art. If you are interested, please contact either Marilyn [marilyn.doualabell@doualart.org] for the WikiAfrica Cameroon call or Isla [islahf@africacentre.net] for the WikiAfrica position in Cape Town.

If you are not interested in applying, I would be very grateful if you could spread this call far and wide among your networks to ensure that both projects get excellent candidates. Here is the link for the information page: http://www.wikiafrica.net/two-wikipedians-in-residence-for-africa/

Best regards, Islahaddow

(This message was sent using Lucia Bot at 22:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC))

1time Airline

I see you've reverted the colour changes without discussion... Whilst I do take your point about the colours not being that readable, the change did reflect their corporate colours, which I'm pleased to say I didn't choose; perhaps that's why they went bust! As a compromise, perhaps we could use 'their' red - as on their website and see [1], instead of the existing red in the article, but with a much paler yellow or even white, which I would hope is acceptable? Thank you. Carbonix (talk) 17:30, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

There's guidance and a few good tools for selecting and analysing colour combinations at WP:COLOR - use them to adjust the colours for readability. BTW My reversion "without dicussion" is in line with the WP:BRD rule. We are now discussing. :) BTW x2 There is no rule that says we must use "corporate colours" in articles. Readability is always more important than "decoration". Roger (talk) 17:42, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, especially re the colour guidance at WP:COLOR - will study hard! Carbonix (talk) 21:59, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
I've taken a good look at a few photos - the red is quite dark - towards madder - rather than a "pure" bright red. The yellow could also be a bit darker - towards orange - than pure yellow but I'm not too sure about that. Try the actual colours of the logo in the article and then put the combination through the analysis tools. Roger (talk) 22:13, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Have now reviewed things in full; the red is dark, as you say - in fact the colour I'd used (#C6111A) was directly taken from the website. I have now found the yellow as well from the official website (#FFE151). Next, the guidance link you sent at WP:COLOR says that because some Wikipedia readers are partially or fully color blind we must "ensure the contrast of the text with its background reaches at least WCAG 2.0's AA level". So, using these one of the links there, I tested these two colours, and their use together is indeed WCAG 2 AA Compliant. Interestingly, the current colours (red and white) that you reverted my change back to, are not. I have therefore amended the colours to the website-derived colours, on the grounds that they are a better match, and more compliant with guidance at Wikipedia:Accessibility#Color. Thanks for your help. Carbonix (talk) 14:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited BlazeSports America, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Decatur (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) 11:02, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

HelloGiggles

I believe the point was that there is nothing to indicate that the opinion of something called "Refinery29" is of significance or relevance to the article. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:59, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Nigella Lawson's Hometown

I don't think this is very important, but I do think it's redundant to have London listed as Nigella's hometown, since London is already listed as her place of birth and residence, just a few lines away in the info box. Most biographical articles don't even list hometowns in the info box. But, as I said, it's not a very important issue, so I won't change it again. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 11jamesfranks (talk • contribs) 10:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!


Snoozlepet (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I hope you have a merry Christmas and a wonderful New Year! Snoozlepet (talk) 18:45, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, and the same to you and yours. Roger (talk) 09:38, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Season's tidings!

To you and yours, Have a Merry ______ (fill in the blank) and Happy New Year! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:10, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, and the same to you and yours. Roger (talk) 09:39, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Seasonal Barnstar
In recognition of the good advice you have given at the help desks throughout the year, I award you this Seasonal Barnstar. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:02, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Wow, thanks! Though I hardly think I've earned it as I'm only an occasional help-desker. Roger (talk) 09:40, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
The Toolserver of Truth shows you are one of the top contributors there. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:55, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

False claims against Dr Klenner Cure about Polio

You removed my contribution without even coming to the talk page and using claims you clearly had no time to make any verification... -- 213.189.160.119 (talk) 11:14, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Distance education

Dear editor: I fully and unreservedly appreciate your general sentiment about modifying other people's comments. I see that as being moral common sense and in accordance with the usual guidelines. However, I would propose that this material is an exception to the general principle. According to WP:TPO (bold italix added):

"Editing— or even removing —others' comments is sometimes allowed."

The guideline's pertinent example of when this is said to be "uncontroversial" is (italix added):

"Off-topic posts: If a discussion goes off-topic (per the above subsection #How to use article talk pages), the general practice is to hide it by using the templates "collapse top" and "collapse bottom" or similar templates. This normally stops the off-topic discussion, while allowing people to read it by pressing the "show" link. At times, it may make sense to move off-topic posts to a more appropriate talk page. Formerly it was not uncommon to simply delete off-topic posts, but this has led to disputes from time to time, and it is generally better to hide this material as described above. It is still common, and uncontroversial, to simply delete gibberish, rants about the article subject...

My edit summary reads,

"rambling: untethered to any partic parag despite what it says"

The unsigned comment appears to me to be a rant and to be rambling gibberish. I'd like to WP:AGF but for me the "give away" is the statement:

"this paragraph has no citations"

while failing to specify ANY paragraph, and the fact that ALL the article's paragraphs DO have citations. I conclude that the unsigned comment is a spoof, and I conclude that the "rambling" in the header title is a teasing test of our collective mettle. I may of course be missing something, and if so please let me know. If on further review you see some way in which the comment is fairly judged to be "on-topic" or if you would prefer a "collapse" template (that's maybe a good compromise, and consistent with the above suggestions...?), please let me know and I'll get it done, or perhaps you would prefer WP:SOFIXIT. I look forward to your input. FeatherPluma (talk) 10:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

It appears you are correct, the post does not correspond to any existing text in the article. BTW Well done, for your very nice cleanup of the article! Roger (talk) 10:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I removed the material in question with an improved edit summary. Nice to meet you. FeatherPluma (talk) 10:50, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
You were wrong to do so. The comment was made many months ago and the material in question was in the article. The editor was correct to point out that the paragraph was poorly written and unsourced and I removed the material after the comment was left in September. ElKevbo (talk) 13:36, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Oops, I see that looking at the diff file closer. I misunderstood the comment due to its absence of grammar or formatting, taking it as self-referential. Thanks for reverting - and I see how to enhance my work flow algorithm to avoid this going forward. Also, due to the comment having a potential Gödel problem for others who misunderstand it as I did, I added a clarification comment. FeatherPluma (talk) 03:12, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Cool. If you're concerned about someone else thinking the comment is an open one that still requires action, you could also use something like {{archive top}} and {{archive bottom}} or one of the other similar templates that preserves the discussion but clearly marks it as closed/resolved. If you're not familiar with it, you can usually see several examples in action on the more active Talk and discussion pages like WP:ANI. ElKevbo (talk) 03:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

President of South Africa/State President of South Africa

I wasn't trying to vandalise the article. I think that repeating the whole list of state presidents in the president page is unnecessary, there are also comments on the talk page which agreed with removing those entries. I think that if there are two separate articles, then they should contain information about the offices as separate, with only the history sections mentioning the other post, and adding a 'see also' section. Crazydude22 (talk) 15:33, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

You really must use an WP:Edit summary because when I saw that huge deletion done with no explanation I assumed it was vandalism. Your deletion left a few misformatted "leftovers" too. There should also be a hatnote on each of the articles pointing to the other article. Roger (talk) 15:40, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Help with Bruce Mann article

Maybe I can help here. When you say in the article something like "he is the leading figure in his field" you are stating your own opinion based on the fact that he is the head of the professional organisation and various other positions and achievments. You should actually just say he was elected the head of the organisation. State only the bare facts without your own conclusions or opinion - allow the reader to form their own opinion about him. However, if for example a newpaper article, or a professional journal, reporting about his election to the position said "he is the leader in his field" then you can include the statement - with a direct citation to the news article.

Hi, Roger, I greatly appreciate your weighing in regarding my futile efforts to publish this article on "Bruce Mann (oncologist)". I fully agree with you: his posts should speak for themselves and I shouldn't make, or have to make, qualitative statements. But that's how I wrote the original version! But it was rejected, and I got back a rejection saying he wasn't sufficiently notable. I was baffled by this because I thought the eminent posts were more than enough to indicate that he's notable, but after an exchange with a Wiki editor I was reduced to saying "he's notable" at the top and then explaining how by listing his professional positions. So while I'm glad to take out the insufficiently cited value assertion in the first line, then I'd be back to the version that was rejected. I'm also frustrated because the other "Bruce Mann" (Harvard prof) who already has a Wikipedia article has 1/3rd the number of references that I've provided for this one and Bruce Mann/oncologist is clearly much more of a public figure than Harvard Mann, as Melbourne Mann is the head of the cancer and infectious medicine service at the largest women's hospital in Australia and past president of the national organisation of cancer professionals and not just a prof. Your advice on this please? Tafkira2 (talk) 22:01, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Kagiso

Hi there Dodge we are only asking to have the web site address as reference on the kagiso page, we have been working hard gathering local knowledge and have used our past experience to provide proper and correct information about this place. We are developing an information system to make it eay for people to nagivate or find what they want in kagiso.

Could you please grant us just the reference http://www.kagisotownship.co.za — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaswiJoy (talk • contribs) 07:45, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Oren Laurent for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Oren Laurent 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/Oren Laurent 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 high-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. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 23:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Khabele School

Hi! I removed the PROD since Khabele School is a secondary school institution and therefore has inherent notability. On top of that I am also getting secondary sources to improve the article (I just added one that had info on the founder). WhisperToMe (talk) 16:05, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Good - a few RSes would certainly help. I'm not sure if you've seen WP:Help desk#Major Issue - Page discrediting my place of business on your site which led to my PROD. Roger (talk) 16:33, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
No, I haven't. I'll take a look. Thanks for the notice :) WhisperToMe (talk) 17:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
I notified the original complainant that the article had been improved. There was another article I found that detailed the school's merger with another school, so I think I've got the sources down pat :) - Also I marked the IP address that made the bad edit as a university IP. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Great stuff! With your edits the article has become an example of a genuinely notable school - no "presumption" needed. Roger (talk) 19:26, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks :) WhisperToMe (talk) 19:55, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Paratriathlon

I've had a proper go at the para-triathlon classification article (under IP, I think), but still thinking how to go with the main paratriathlon one. Asked earlier today on the ITU Paratriathlon Athletes Facebook group, looking for other paratri-interested current or potential editors. Ditto on Twitter. I'm almost horrified how many Paratriathlon World Champions don't have pages here. I've found quite a few Paralympic medalists and/or IPC World Record holders without pages too. Sportygeek (talk) 13:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I've tweaked the category system by creating Category:Paratriathlon and making it the parent category for Category: Paratriathletes which I think you created as an "orphan" category as it did not have a parent category. The parent category for Category:Paratriathlon is naturally Category:Triathlon. Roger (talk) 13:45, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
I've only had an account here for 3 days - still learning. Sportygeek (talk) 13:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
You're doing very well for a newbie. Roger (talk) 13:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Australian definitions in classification articles

The reason Australian definitions are provided in some classification articles is two fold. First, there was an aim to provide several definitions because the classification definition as provided by the IPC is often confusing to the lay reader. By offering multiple definitions, people are likely to have a better chance of understanding that. (Beyond that, national classifications do matter, because you can be classified for national competitions but not internationally classified.) The second reason they are provided is trying to write definitions of the classifications is a major PITA given the highly technical nature of these descriptions. By quoting these definitions, it is easier to avoid inadvertent plagiarism or to change to accidentally change the definition of these classification. --LauraHale (talk) 13:06, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

OK but I have a real problem with them ALWAYS being Australian - as if this is Aussiepedia - the bias is simply unacceptable. The same goes for the vast majority of athletes mentioned and shown in photos as examples in each classification - except for a tiny handfull they are all Australians. Roger (talk) 14:24, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Wiki projects

Sorry for contacting you on your personal message. Thanks for your reply at Wikipedia:Help_desk#Deletion_of_Wiki_projects. The discussed wiki project was created yesterday, so there is no merge work to be done. I think we can simply delete it. TransylvaniaRomania (talk) 16:09, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

{{db-g12}}

Hi. :) I appreciate your keeping an eye out on copyright issues. We've had issues before with UCSI University. In fact, that's why I'm listed as the author of record of the page. Rather than delete it outright last time, I wrote the content from scratch myself. Which is why I know that G12 does not apply. :) WP:CSD#G12 is only for those copyright infringements where there is no clean content in history. Where there is, the article can be reverted back to the last clean version, before the influx of the copyvios, unless the copyvio can simply be removed. If that's not possible, we resort to {{copyvio}} instead--but with the backlog there these days, that's not ideal. WP:CV101 is a pretty good primer for handling these kinds of things. In any event, I do appreciate your keeping an eye out for problems. Copyright issues are huge in those kinds of articles, unfortunately. :/ --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:15, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. :) Universities do have a way of attracting that kind of thing - employees, students. I guess people feel loyal to their alma mater. :D They show up at the copyright problems board (which is how I first encountered that one) over and over again - especially univeristies in countries that don't emphasize intellectual property laws. :/ --Moonriddengirl (talk)

Re: Cracking joints

I see you have deleted the infobox on Cracking joints I had recently created. I would appreciate input on improving this infobox to apply to this and other article. Biobrit (talk) 07:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

The Casspir

Please don't vandalize this article. As I state on that article's "talk" page the use of the pre-1994 flag in this case is corect, appropriate, and is in keeping with the precedent sent in other military/weapon related articles. Hal Turner Fan (talk) 1010, 4 March 2013 (CST)

You'd be well advised to look up what WP:Vandalism really is before you repeat such unwarranted accusations to anyone less tolerant than myself. You would probably also benefit from reading WP:AGF too. The 1928 flag is ok for labelling the Origin of items developed in SA before 1994 but not for illustrating SA as a Current user. Your analogy with Germany is invalid because the Third Reich, FDR and GDR are/were three different countries. Take a look at the Soviet Union and its many successor countries for further examples. Roger (talk) 20:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

"Beyond the scope of this article"

Hi... you wrote "the article must not discuss itself, only its subject". The sentence you object to IS discussing the subject. There is no question that statements like "Popular Science magazine has reviewed this article and found it worthy" are out of place, but is one sentence mentioning that the article does not cover a particular related subject really out of bounds? Where is this written? The closest I could find was WP:SELFREF, but that refers to articles that mention Wikipedia, not themselves. Jeh (talk) 22:55, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Just btw, a Google search for

"beyond the scope of this article" site:en.wikipedia.org

finds almost 11,000 occurrences. Even if this usage is wrong, it has a lot of company. Jeh (talk) 23:11, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talk:Comparison of fighter aircraft

Lol Twinkle. I put this one to bed and closed it out. Let me know if I missed anything. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 13:29, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! But I really don't know where Twinkle posts what when it executes an AfD nomination - there may be some fallout in places I don't know about. Is it unreasonable to expect Twinkle to be intelligent enough to warn the user that they's nominating the wrong page? Roger (talk) 13:42, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
I did miss one bit, but it got taken care of here. Having never used Twinkle, I couldn't say - but it should be simple to not use certain templates in certain namespaces - you'd think, anyway. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 16:23, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
I went into such a panic I completely forgot all about the "housekeeping" Speedy templates - ironically also made easy by Twinkle. It's actually a very useful little toolbox I've been using for quite some time, today I discovered a weakness in it. Roger (talk) 16:38, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
So you did! But it's really not a huge deal. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 16:57, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Editing assistance

Hi Dodger, your being a fellow Northern Cape wikipedian and one with experience, I wonder if you could help me with an edit. I have only recently attempted inserting a picture into an article (St Cyprian's Cathedral, Kimberley). I am not sure where I went wrong, as the picture appears twice! Would be glad to have your advice/guidance! All the best. Blarcrean (talk) 10:21, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

That infobox image field requires only the file name without any formatting or embellishments. The size and caption are entered in separate fields. Infoboxes are unfortunately inconsistent in the way they handle images. BTW that image takes me back to school days - my matric dance was in the hall next to the cathedral. Roger (talk) 10:34, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Roger - also for edit suggestions. Interesting that your matric dance was in the hall alongside - which school were you at?Blarcrean (talk) 11:29, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Rodger, im sure your've seen that airports in south africa dont have dedicated websites, all airports run of the acsa site, i have put together the neccessary features that one would require from an airport site, if you visit my site (King Shaka International) you would see what i mean. please give me feedback,

Thanx V — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.203.162.33 (talk) 04:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Please see point 11 of WP:ELNO - The ACSA pages are the official sites - no matter how good or bad you think they are. Your site is not by a recognised authority so it is not allowed. You added the link to the wrong article anway - the article about the old Durban International Airport, not King Shaka International Airport. Roger (talk) 13:20, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dodger67. You have new messages at Arctic Kangaroo's talk page.
Message added 13:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Arctic Kangaroo 13:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I have reverted your deletion of my queries re SAS Umkhonto, and spelt out my reasons for doing so

Just to let you know, in case you wish to discuss the matter further (which should be done on the SAS Umkhonto Talk page), I have reverted your deletion of my queries re SAS Umkhonto, and spelt out my reasons for doing so - you can find it all here. Tlhslobus (talk) 20:11, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not going to waste my time discussing it with an editor who has been active here for several years but still doesn't know the difference between hatting and deletion. Thanks, but no thanks. Roger (talk) 21:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Oops, my mistake, sorry. It's the first time I've come across the term Hatting (I have been around for a few years, but I haven't been particularly active until recently). So thanks for the info. Please feel free to hat it again, or archive it, or whatever you deem fit. I've added in a word to this effect in the discussion there 'for the record' (basically just a copy of this current comment, plus a few extra lines). I may or may not eventually try to re-formulate my query in a manner that tries harder to conform to Talk guidelines. Again, my apologies. Tlhslobus (talk) 21:49, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello Mr Roger, 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 15:41, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

No refname for single cite

I saw your statement at the help desk that one should not use a rename if a cite is used once. I've developed a habit of always using a refname, so that if I need to use it again, it is there. Can you explain the rationale behind not using a rename? What does it hurt? Is this written somewhere? --SPhilbrick(Talk) 20:49, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

It creates extra clutter that just gets in the way of editing the text. AFAIK it's not written anywhere as a prohibition as such, but it is by definition used to repeat cites (i.e. reduce clutter) so using it on a non-repeating cite is simply pointless and counter to the whole reason for it existing at all. Roger (talk) 20:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I actually think it reduces clutter, but I need to explain that. I almost always use WP:LDR style refs. (As an aside, while editors adding to an established article should be cognizant of the style in use, so I probably would do something different if all existing ref were Harvard style, the LDR style is compatible with the standard way most editors edit.)

I think LDR requires a name.

As an example, look at an article I was working on currently: Clara Gregory Baer. The fourth edit is the first one that has not been used more than once. The ref in the text is

< ref name=NCAA/>.

If I didn't give it a name, it would have to be:

< ref>NCAA Women's Basketball, access date 24 January 2007< /ref>

Which is much longer. I accept that the total count of characters, counting both the stub in the main text, and the proper ref down in the reflist is a bit longer, but the LDR style materially reduces the clutter in the edit window, which is I think what concerns you.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 22:28, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

WP South Africa in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject South Africa for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 06:44, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Teahouse

Sorry about that. I was trying to put some sections at the top that had been posted at the bottom. I didn't notice I accidentally put a section inside another section.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 17:13, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Goodluck Jonathan

Hi Roger. Would you be able to comment any further on the Goodluck Jonathan BLP discussion? I'd like to continue working on the page, but wanted to get everything settled before I do. Dreambeaver(talk) 19:07, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Shweta Wahi

I undeleted and moved it to a sandbox. No big deal, I just didn't see the help desk thread before I deleted it. James086Talk 10:26, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Glad it's resolved. Roger (talk) 11:03, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ENERGA anti-tank rifle grenade, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Territorial Army (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) 19:32, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Korahlucky6/KORAH BABU VARGHESE

Hello Dodger67. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Korahlucky6/KORAH BABU VARGHESE, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 08:09, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

re: SANDF and recent/current events in the Central African Republic

Hi, yes I think the recent events merit a page of its own which can link to other relevant articles. The thing is I haven't been following recent events and it probably needs an author with more interest in the subject. g Gbawden (talk) 06:31, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Aaron Robinson (composer)

Roger, while I will forgo placing a warning template for removal of unaddressed maintenance tags, please spend some time familiarizing yourself with bare URLs and link rot. While the references may be properly formatted, they neglect to provide information, the inclusion of which often protects from link rot. Cindy(need help?) 21:11, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

The refs all seem to comply with the standard {{cite}} series of templates, if that does not "cure" linkrot then the problem is with the templates - which are used on literally millions of pages on WP. If it really is a problem it is far larger than just this article and should be discussed at a higher level. What additional information is required to fix the issue? As I understand it - using the Cite templates is the cure for linkrot, but if that's not so the majority of articles on WP are in serious trouble. Roger (talk) 08:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
  • No, actually, the citation templates do not cure the link rot at all. The templates merely help with formatting and provide editors with prompts to include full and accurate citations. Full citations are the cure for addressing link rot. Without full citations, it is very difficult to resolve link rot. Vital information for online sources includes the article title, author, publisher, the date of publication, and the date the source was accessed. For books, we don't need access dates, i.e., link rot doesn't occur with printed sources. That said, we need information like page numbers, author, article title, name of publication. We need to have the full citation in order to accurately verify the article's content, attributed to the specific citation. If we don't have the full citation, we lack verification. It's not a template issue, but the failure or neglect of editors to accurately use the citation templates. Here's a "how to" page that provides a bit more information on how to address and avoid link rot: WP:LINKROT. Hope this helps. Best regards, Cindy(need help?) 10:58, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Does not work.--Launchballer 21:36, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

That link is generated by the {{facebook}} template so it needs to be corrected. Roger (talk) 08:49, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
So I've fixed it; I'm currently using a school computer, so I have no idea what the link to the actual help desk. If you see this before I get home, update Template:Facebook/sandbox and put it into mainspace.--Launchballer 13:45, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Amici Dance Theatre Company, Dodger67!

Wikipedia editor FoolMeOnce2Times just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Nice article and great topic.

To reply, leave a comment on FoolMeOnce2Times's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Please do not patronise me, I'm not a newbie who needs a pat on the head and a cookie. Your over hasty minor edit could have waited, it caused a large edit conflict for me.
Wow! As an experienced editor, you probably already know that your page was moved to the new page que which is where I picked it up. Sorry for the compliment. --FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 16:28, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, it's the first time any of my new articles was edited by someone else so soon after I first created it. If I may offer you a word of advice, please let a newly created article get a little bit older before doing an edit on it. Give the original creator some time to finish their initial edits - watch the history and wait until there has been no edits for a while. Roger (talk) 16:41, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Understood. Not to "patronize" you more, but the article looked great which is why I went forward. I thought it had been completed. Sorry for any confusion and thanks for the advice. --FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 16:43, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you from a talk page stalker!

A hissy kitten for you for being so grumpy to the poor hapless editor above my post who was so unfortunate to have reviewed your new article with page curation. :(( Well I learned something worthwhile. I'll never click through and leave a cheery note to an editor when I'm reviewing. All the best on your quest for adminship and editor review. Meow...

Fylbecatulous talk 17:05, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Grumpy, moi? I plead guilty, your honour, but also plead extenuating circumstances: My day began with having to reconstruct the entire content of a notebook with a hard drive failure, that blew away my entire work-day, I achieved none of my "regular" work today. Then I get home and settle down to some relaxing Wiki-writing only to get whacked with a large edit conflict when I was least expecting it. I offer my most humble aplogies with grovels and kow-tows. Kitty and I will now destress and share a large glass of milk. Roger (talk) 17:24, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for receiving the gift of my kitten in the right humour, then. ツ I wish you well. Fylbecatulous talk 17:46, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Nando's Edits

Hi Dodger67, all changes I made yesterday were in accordance with the new nandos.com website launched this week. All restaurants in Kuwait, Lebanon, Turkey, Malawi and Nigeria have now closed. Nando's in Kenya closed years ago. Please can you revert my changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jc sed8d (talk • contribs) 23:28, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

If you'd used an WP:Edit summary like you're supposed to then you can explain your edits properly. Roger (talk) 06:24, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

Hi Dodger67, I just wanted to let you know that I have granted the reviewer userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, please contact me and I will remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions. Happy editing! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:16, 11 April 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.

Gabriele Mandel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Tekke
Mediated Quasi-Interaction (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Jesus College
Thomas C. Lewis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Danville

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:10, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi Roger, thanks for your suggestion (done) and for seconding my award. My first barnstar was a bribe so I don't think I'll copy that one across. :) Helen (talk) 11:36, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/BBVA Foundation Frontiers of Knowledge Awards

Could you please be more specific about what is unreliable in the submission? Everything is on the prize website, and I also included news of prize reception. I will really appreciate any further information. It is unimaginable that such a prestigeous prize does not have an entry in Wikipedia. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yu1266 (talk • contribs) 08:17, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

I posted a comment explaining the problem on the page - you have not used and independent sources. Please use the Help desk to discuss this, not my personal page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:32, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Islamic Azad University Khorasgan Branch (Isfahan)

Dear Dodger67, As you mentioned I added some references to the University article. I would be grateful if you check. I am still searching and trying to add more references. Please tell me your idea and guide me if you feel necessary. Thank you for your patience and kind attention. Regards, Mehrnazar Mehrnazar (talk) 08:26, 16 April 2013 (UTC)mehrnazar

I posted a comment explaining the problem on the page - you have not used any independent sources. You can use sources in other languages, not only English, I imagine there will be many sources available in Farsi. Please use the Help desk to discuss this further, not my personal page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:53, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

MOWAG Shar & MOWAG Roland

Hello, I createt the 2 Articels MOWAG Shark and MOWAG Roland. You have markt this 2 articels with the coment that they have no reliable sources. I can't understand why you have made this. On both articels i have given the references = sources

on one hand i have given the 2 Books Foss, Christopher F. Jane's Armour and Artillery 1987–88. London: Jane's Yearbooks, 1987. ISBN 0-7106-0849-7. Marcus Bauer, Nutzfahrzeuge der MOWAG Motorwagenfabrik AG, Fachpresse Goldach, Hudson & Company, 1996 ISBN 9783857380563

I personaly own one example of the Book Nutzfahrzeuge der MOWAG Motorwagenfabrik AG. A ISBN Listet Book I in my eyes a reliable source. You can copy past the title of the book by google picture serach and you will see that this books realy exist — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.1.75.33 (talk) 14:40, 10 April 2013 (UTC) Also I add the Military Museum Full.. everyone can visit this Museum see the Prototypes of this APCs and read the informations about it on the Informations written in the Museum.

Please notice also that in the German Wikipedia pages about this Vehicles exist.

Thanks 85.1.75.33 (talk) 14:32, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I know one of the books well, the problem is not that the article has no sources - it is that you have not done any actual referencing from those sources. The English Wikipedia requires WP:Inline citation to show which part of the text is based on which source. See WP:REFB for easy guidance on how to do it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:49, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I now understand. I tried to connet the parts of the text with the refernces Unfortunatly I have a problem. I put in the text the reference "links2 woh should lead to the refernces listet on below of the page . but all have the number 1 and goes to Marcus Bauer , (but one should go to Foss Christopher and one (together again with a reference to Marcus Bauer because the vehicles specifications are listet in the Book AND in the Military Museum). I am sorry i am not used to do this ref lists and english is not my native language, so I am thankfull if yoou are patience with me. 85.1.75.33 (talk) 18:32, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I think I have solved my problem, it would be nice if you have again a look at the 2 Articels MOWAG Shark and MOWAG Roland. If this is better now or what i still have to do. Thank you. (BTW i have prepared a few drafts for articels about other vehicels from MOWAG). 85.1.75.33 (talk) 18:59, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello I have a problem about the MOWAG SHARK article. I build in the references like you sayed, and put the article again on for Submission but now J.meija rejectet it by saying it looks like a advertisment (but i used only the history and tecnical datas and this vehicle never went into production) als he says it need interpendent printet refences but the article has alredy the 2 books (who are interpendent from the Company MOWAG) listet as references. I don't knew what to do its realy frustrating running in such much difficulties for writing just about one vehicle . 2A02:1205:5014:B210:8D59:2987:8812:2848 (talk) 01:58, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Cape Town International Jazz Fest

Hey, man! I saw on the WikiProject South Africa page that you wanted help with the article, so I added some information and tabulated the Cape Town Jazz Fests in chronological order (it just looks neater), so if there's anything else you might need, let me know on my talk page! Look forward to building this article up with you! :) Aleksandar Bulovic' (talk) 21:20, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for jumping in. I'm off to bed soon, I'll be away from my PC for a few days so I'm quite interested to see what you've done with it by the time I get back. I like the table for the "basic" info, then we can add text sections for History, Controversies, and so on. Do you know when it was branded the Cape Town North Sea Jazz Festival? A bit of detail on the relationship with the event in the Netherlands would be great - if you can find it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:27, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
I'll do what I can! I've done a lot of work for the Oppikoppi article and I created the RAMFest article, so I have a bit of experience finding information on local music festivals. I will try and fill up information where I can, although I am certain that in its early years, the CTIJF was poorly documented. Will do my best in any case. Aleksandar Bulovic' (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey, I've done a helluva lot of work on the CTIJF page, and dare I say it, it might be good enough to be moved into an article space. All that is required is to perhaps add some pictures to it (although I don't know how to find pictures that aren't copyrighted, so I'll leave that to you? Haha) and maybe some format/copy editing. :)
I have populated the entire table with relevant information (and citations for the info, obviously), did some research on its history as the North Sea Jazz Festival and how and why it's now the Cape Town International Jazz Festival. I've also added a few lines of trivia. Pretty much everything in the article is now verified with a large number of citations. Let me know what you think! Aleksandar Bulovic' (talk) 15:03, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Educational inequalities in South Sudan

Thank you so much for the additions and edits that you made to the Educational inequalities in South Sudan page. I wrote it by myself, and I'm relatively new to writing Wikipedia pages, so I think the changes you made are great. I appreciate your help! Feel free to continue as you see fit! ChloeCBlaskiewicz (talk) 19:37, 23 April 2013 (UTC)ChloeCBlaskiewicz

Now you know where to find me if you need any more help. I'll keep an eye on the article and jump in if something goes wrong but you seem to be managing quite well. You can also consult the folks at WP:WikiProject South Sudan, although it's not a very active project currently there are a few knowlegable editors that watch the Project's Talk page. It's bedtime for me now... Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:21, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ivor Ichikowitz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Defence (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) 11:08, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Islamic Azad University Khorasgan Branch (Isfahan)

Dear Roger, hello I made some changes to the passage eliminating promotional words and somewhere rewriting the subject. I tried the text to be informative. I Used deferent references (both English & Persian). Please check if its ok I would appreciate confirming it.Thanks for your kind attention. Regards Mehrnazar (talk) 07:22, 27 April 2013 (UTC)Mehrnazar (sorry I had forgotten to not put message in your personal page) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehrnazar (talk • contribs) 07:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for your note. If you have resubmitted the draft it will be reviewed again (the backlog is down to about 6 days now), however I won't be the reviewer this time - it's not good to have the same person reviewing every time because that may result in the reviewer's biases being reflected in the article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:28, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Multiple pages

Hey there

I have been working on the ZANEWS wiki page for some months now, trying to get it just right. I then noticed last week that wiki has published another ZANEWS page. Information on this page is also incorrect. Please assist.

Here is the page wiki published: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZANEWS

Here is the page I am working on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/ZANEWS NuggetBerrisford (talk) 07:16, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I must agree your version is definitely better. I'll ask for some advice and get back to you asap. BTW saying "wiki has published" is not really correct. From the history of the new article it's clear that it was created directly in mainspace so it did not go through any review process. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:31, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Roger for getting back to me so promptly. Look forward to hearing back from you. NuggetBerrisford (talk) 07:40, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Image to infobox

Hey Roger Another quick question. I want to upload an image to my infobox. How do I find an image of subject that is copyright free? I have made contact with the company and they said they will supply me with one. I've read up on how to do this, but I just can't get my head around it. Please help. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/ZANEWS

NuggetBerrisford (talk) 08:51, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Getting the right permissions for a donated image can be a major pain in the butt so maybe that's not the ideal way to go. You can use certain types of copyright images, such as official logos, under the fair-use conditions but the process is an, only slightly lesser, PITA. I've just struggled with the same issue in my latest article The Cost of Living (2004 film). I think let us first just get the article into mainspace, then we can figure out the image issue. Fair use images are not allowed in drafts anyway. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay great, thank you Roger for all your help. In that case I am resubmitting my page straight away. Fingers crossed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/ZANEWS NuggetBerrisford (talk) 09:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Then I'll add a review note about the problem with the other article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

APC and IFV

Hi Dodger, I saw you have been reverting my edits to MRAP, fire support and infantry mobility vehicles. An APC is different from an MRAP vehicle (as i.e. the Casspir). The main difference being that APCs transport infantry on the battlefield, while MRAPs transport infantry to the battlefield. As for the Rooikat: IFVs and APCs carry infantry, while the Rooikat does not. Therefore even though the Rooikat is an Armoured Fighting Vehicle it is neither an IFV nor an APC. noclador (talk) 14:27, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I just saw that you reversed the deletion of the AFV template; good move! I think this template needs a cleanup too; i.e. the Stryker and the Fuchs do not belong in there. Also I was thinking of creating a new template for all the various MRAP vehicles and a template for the Light Armoured Patrol Vehicles (for which there is not yet an article). noclador (talk) 14:35, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
hmm, maybe we should also create a template for Modern Fire Support vehicle? That would be a small template as only the AMX 10 RC, EE-9 Cascavel, ERC 90 Sagaie, B1 Centauro, M1128 Mobile Gun System, Rooikat and VBC-90 are modern wheeled fire support vehicles. noclador (talk) 14:43, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
The Armoured fighting vehicle article is seriously confused about what it's actual subject is! AIUI an AFV is an armoured vehicle that is armed with a main weapon heavier than a machine gun (usually turret mounted), does not carry infantry, and is smaller/lighter/less armed and armoured than a tank. The classic "armoured car" concept although most modern AFVs are much larger than Ferrets. It may be wheeled or tracked, e.g. FV107 Scimitar and Bradley Fighting Vehicle and it's role may be a mix of fire support and/or recce. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:51, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
BTW, MRAPs are just APCs or IFVs with a particular type of armour protection - V-hulls or other means of protecting against explosions below the vehicle (mines and IEDs). The Casspir (and others like it) is an MRAP APC, although it predates the MRAP terminology by 30-odd years. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:03, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Yep, the Armoured fighting vehicle article is in need of a major overhaul. I began with adding to the IFV and APC articles the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) definitions of what an APC and IFV actually is. As for AFV the CFE Point 1D calls it "heavy armament combat vehicle" and defines it as "an armoured combat vehicle with an integral or organic direct fire gun of at least 75 millimeters calibre, weighing at least 6.0 metric tonnes unladen weight, which does not fall within the definitions of an armoured personnel carrier, or an armoured infantry fighting vehicle or a battle tank."
MRAPs are APCs as they carry infantry, but at least within NATO they are considered different types of vehicles: an APC will carry infantry on the battlefield and will fight on the battlefield; while MRAP vehicles will carry infantry through hostile territory to the battlefield and then wait outside the battlefield. Most MRAPs are to high and offer too good a target to be actually employed on the battlefield. noclador (talk) 15:17, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Nevertheless MRAP is a subtype of APC - they are armoured, they carry troops. APCs in general are not used "on the battlefield" anyway - that's the defining difference between APC and IFV. BTW Your last comment would be laughed at by the South African Army - where the concept originated. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:24, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I split the template into 4 templates to put the various vehicles into more fitting groups:

A further template was needed for Armoured Jeeps as i.e. the Ocelot. So I created a template provisionally named Modern light tactical vehicles, but I did not yet add this template to any article. Basically that last template groups armoured cars and Jeeps together. If you would like to improve/edit the templates, please feel free to do so. noclador (talk) 13:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

LittleMato

Hello, I am really sorry to waste your time, but I have a serious problem with my article, it is getting really crazy, I can't get it approved for an year now :(

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Stefan_Valev

You guys always ask for references, but the problem is:

I am talking about a person in Bulgaria. FYI Bulgaria is a country that (almost) didn't have any internet before 1990. How am I supposed to find web references about things that have been happening before that? Even now nobody cares about the past, nobody is creating websites about institutions or people that are history. There are no books in Amazon.com, there are no historical or govt websites as a reference.

Does that mean we have to completely skip this part of the Bulgarian life and history and people (famous) just because Bulgaria is/was not a "modern" country? Please tell me how and what should I do to get this job done, it is getting absolutely outrageous, I am in 'paragraph 22' situation.

Best, LittleMato (talk) 15:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)LittleMatoLittleMato (talk) 15:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Has nobody ever told you in a whole year that references do not have to be online? You can use newspapers, magazines, academic journals, books. As long as it has actually been published by a reputable source, it can be used. There are articles on the English Wikipedia that reference inscriptions on gravestones that are hundreds of years old. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:34, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. Can you please clarify (sorry if my questions sound stupid, I just cannot break this vicious circle) what is the definition of a reputable source? I have official magazines and lots of books, published in Bulgaria in the 1960-1990. Are these reputable for you guys? None of these are in the web space whatsoever. I have checked this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources and it is still not clear to me :(


LittleMato (talk) 10:00, 31 May 2013

Operation Modulêr

This discussion has been moved to Talk:Operation Moduler#Spelling again. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

XJ750E-II

Hi, thank you for your more helpful response as regards my article's unsuitability. Now I have a little more confidence in it being worth the effort I'll attempt to make it more suitable with extra references etc & try to make it look a little neater & more like the other Wiki pages on motorcycles.

Thank You for your time, XJ750E-IIbloke (talk) 10:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

EDIT-: I'm not sure how many reliable sources there will actually be for this model due to it's rarity but will try to get together as much as possible.

Also, I now have an official Yamaha brochure for the XJ750E-II which confirms some of the specifications I listed. I'm sure it'll become apparent once I've fully read the WP/RS link, but if not, could you suggest the best way I could cite this as a reference (photograph relevant areas of brochure & publish online was my first thought?) Thanks again XJ750E-IIbloke (talk) 11:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I've now added some inline citations and changed the format to include an info. box, not 100% sure how well I've done all this but will appreciate any suggestions/modifications you feel necessary. XJ750E-IIbloke (talk) 13:42, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dodger67. You have new messages at Writ Keeper's talk page.
Message added 23:24, 4 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 23:24, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited West Wetlands Park (Yuma, AZ), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Army of the West (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) 13:16, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

How WP:COI would read

Your edit brought my attention to my essay How WP:COI would read if I wrote it. I haven't looked at in a while and I don't think anyone else has seen it really. I thought the edit was very on-target and if you have any other suggestions, I would be interested. I just did a bit of re-writing. For me, since WP:COI is pretty awful and not terribly useful, this is something I can link folks to that is more helpful if they need guidance. CorporateM (Talk) 14:38, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

New Heights article

This is to let you know that an article submission you declined on 19 April 2013 has been edited (removed all text that has any subjective tone) to leave just factual statements. Please advise if it conforms to the NPOV policy of Wikipedia now. Jacobnibu (talk) 03:49, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

If you think it is ready, please resubmit it - there is a "click here" instruction in the review template which will submit it for another review. Someone will then review it, but it won't be me. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:32, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Jacobnibu (talk) 07:50, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Gauteng may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:01, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dodger67/Archive_3&oldid=1138275299"