Jump to content

User talk:Ninetyone/Archive 6

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


e
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:16, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

I have 6 granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:57, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Note: This was for User:Ninetyoneschool. ninety:one 20:23, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


The Wikipedia Signpost  — 16 March 2009

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:24, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Law enforcement in New York

I checked out the page, and I love it. Its a great idea. I added alot of info on firearms, uniforms, and equipment. MOOOOOPS (talk) 06:04, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 23 March 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Vosalogo.gif)

Thanks for uploading File:Vosalogo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:20, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of File:Vosalogo.gif

A tag has been placed on File:Vosalogo.gif requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ninety:one 22:10, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I do love talking to myself... ninety:one 22:20, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

LEA infobox

Thanks for all the great work, but please copy the entire infobox, blank parameters included, so other editors can add information without having to return to the template page. Thanks! ninety:one 22:22, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok no problem, I was just afraid of cluttering up the article page.Awg1010 (talk) 22:49, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Ta. You're going to have a hard time with the UK though! The infobox is written for countries where they only have "law enforcement agencies", but for some reason we've decided to stick with calling the British ones "police forces", so autocategorisation is very hard. I'm going to turn off autocat on MOD Police because is no longer has a clue. Also, if you feel like doing any territorial police forces, please copy the bespoke skeleton I wrote here - as there are some very specific requirements for UK forces. ninety:one 00:02, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Well if the UK is going to be so messy I think I'll work on{{Infobox Police Department}} and leave this to you. By the way I think we should keep using "LEA" regardless of country, where is the debate at? I think I'll go chime in.Awg1010 (talk) 00:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I think I've tried it twice now, and it's not happening! Not too much of a deal though. Cheers. ninety:one 00:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 30 March 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Made me Smile

This had me smiling quite generously, good work :P SpitfireTally-ho! 12:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Kettling

Hi there - I take your point about 'assault' and I've changed the phrase to 'alleged assault'. The concern about the unfortunate death of Mr Tomlinson is linked to concerns about police tactics, the most controversial of which is kettling. Perhaps further sources will make that point more clear. Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 22:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there - sorry to disagree, but my understanding is that it was precisely because of the tactic of kettling that Mr Tomlinson was unable to get to where he was trying to go, though I'm sure the full facts will come out in the investigation. Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 06:10, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 13 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 20 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

List of law enforcement agencies in the United Kingdom

Hi 91,

There are currently individual lists of law enforcement agencies for every state in the United States, and most of those would be local. I would expect that local law enforcement agencies in various European countries would be as notable as those in American states. Would you disagree?

Neelix (talk) 18:04, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi 91,
The individual law enforcement agencies do not have to be notable enough to have their own articles in order for a list of them to be valid. List of 24 episodes, for example, is a featured list, but neither of the episodes it includes is sufficiently notable to have its own article.
Neelix (talk) 18:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi 91,
The lists of law enforcement agencies by American state do no differently than what you suggest is possible to do with the European countries. Would you recommend that they be deleted?
Neelix (talk) 18:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi 91,
There must be more than just Germany, the United Kingdom, and Italy. France, Russia, and Spain all have navboxes just for their law enforcement agencies already.
Neelix (talk) 22:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi 91,
If you've established that only three countries in Europe would justifiably have corresponding lists of law enforcement agencies, what do you think of the creation of a navbox which would encompass all such countries in the world? It would be great if we could delineate which countries should have these lists now and place them on a navbox so that other users know which ones are in need of creation.
Neelix (talk) 22:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi 91,
I have removed the continental navbox from List of law enforcement agencies in the United Kingdom. Thanks for agreeing to look into a worldwide replacement!
Neelix (talk) 23:12, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Territorial Support Group

Hi, I was wondering how best you think it would be to cite "The TSG often faces criticism and complaints about its policing methods". To me it doesn't really need to be cited - the articles cited beneath it prove it. Also I put in a little bit about the nature of their work meant that there were a lot of complaints made against them which was removed as "propaganda" - see talk page. Do you think it should be put back? Thanks Smartse (talk) 20:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok. I've reworded things a little and got some new references. I think the removal of {fact} should be ok. Smartse (talk) 20:58, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:34, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Office for Entrepreneurs' Relief

I had been thinking I ought to report this to BERR (or the Fraud Squad, or somebody), so I'm pleased to see that you did. What did BERR say? Did they seem interested? What do you think the motive is? The only phone number given is an 0870 (premium-rate) line, so they would collect a bit from calls, but hardly enough to justify setting up that elaborate site. Phishing to acquire details of firms who contact them? The author has a profile and a page about OER on "Younoodle". Regards, JohnCD (talk) 08:22, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

  • OK, thanks. I thought of one useful thing to do: if you search on the name, the top result is WP, but it goes to the OER disambiguation page. So I have put a link on that to the AfD debate, so that anyone who checks via Google will be warned. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:41, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

US LEA disambiguation

Hi, thanks for bringing this up. I agree with the PLACENAME, STATE Police Department naming method, however, the major contributor of the Maryland articles changed them to the PLACENAME Police Department (STATE) style (I just wanted to ensure that articles matched). I would like to utilize the former in the Maryland articles but do not wish to get into a revert war. Perhaps we can all agree and change the Maryland pages to the common format. I hope so. SGT141 (talk) 04:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I have also thrown my two cents into the mix. So sorry about the ridiculously long comments, I have a habit of being a little too technical some times. ;) But I should point out these things (such as article titles) have an enormous impact on the overall perceived quality of Wikipedia, so should be worked out extremely thoroughly, and should be continuously reviewed. I am pleased over the overall quality of the articles in the category, and over both your and SGT141's contributions. Keep up the good work! Int21h (talk) 21:32, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 11 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:09, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Uk Law Enforcement

Ninetyone your work on the UK Law Enforcement article is top notch.

There is a section there for non police bodies with significant law enforcement powers. You already mention the HSE, and therefore it is only right that agencies such as the Fire & Rescue Authorites and Local Authorities of the UK are mentioned- they have significant powers of enforcement which can lead to heavy fines and prison sentences! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.244.223.82 (talk) 15:03, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

City guard

All's well that ends well; if not for the AfD we might not have had discovered the watchmen article, which indeeds needs a merger.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 12:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Law enforcement again

Hi Ninetyone thanks for your last message - I have altered the article again as there were some inaccuracies regarding the powers of Fire Authorities (not fire & rescue services which is slightly different thing) and Local Authorities have extensive powers, which needed a brief expansion to be totally accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.244.223.82 (talk) 13:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Powers of Fire Services in the UK

Hi Ninetyone I've updated powers of the UK fire service article to include an important piece regarding Fire Safety Inspectors. i notice you undid this - can I politely and in a friendly mannera sk if you feel things aren't relevant that you start a discussion page on the article concerned. Fire Inspectors get additional powers which ought to be mentioned. regards

Continued on the article talk page. ninety:one 21:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
You're editing so many article I can't keep track! As far I can tell this comment referred to Powers of the fire service in the United Kingdom, which I have undone simply because the section structure was messed up. No content has been altered at all in this case... ninety:one 21:46, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Spurious repeat postings

As you can see on the history here (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Highways_Agency_Traffic_Officers&action=history), which you have contributed to now and again, there is a poster with the IP 195.8.190.54 who repeated posts contraversial information on this agency. Some believe that he is a disgruntelled employee who was fired from the organisation a few years ago. They repeated put the same comments on about senior management and incidents which is always removed. Is there anything that can be done about this? As you can see from the IP users talk page at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:195.8.190.54) under Jan 2009 there has been multiple warnings to this person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Highwayman101 (talk • contribs) 05:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:16, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Sacramento County Sheriff's Department move

Thanks for replying to Int21h. I guess we will run into folks that are not interested in the project and will get upset when their pet articles are changed. One thing, though. I would like to see all the articles use a standard format, so even if there is not another Sacramento SD, (California) would still appear. Both for consistency and because there may be similar locations that users from other countries may be confused about. Just because we know where Sacramento is, doesn't make it universal. There is a Sacramento in Kentucky, in Brazil, one in Mexico, and one in Uraguay. So thanks for replying, again, I just hope he doesn't change it back. Heck, I even gave up my preferred naming method because there is concensus.

Us law enforcement types seem to like uniformity. Probably a personality disorder, lol. Thanks, SGT141 (talk) 15:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

As for the "consensus", how can you call replies by three users over a period of a week (after which the discussion was marked "done") a consensus? Consensus is marked by actual edits last time I checked, not a random WikiProject by law enforcement aficionados (although, clearly, it holds alot of sway.) Although this decision by the three deciders and the subsequent edits goes a long way towards consensus, the actual decision in the WikiProject didn't define the consensus by a long shot. (Especially given the fact that there were more edits using the ", State" pattern.) But I digress. The whole point of my comment was that there is no other Sacramento County Sheriff's Department in the world, or even another Sacramento County for that matter. Watch me move Sacramento County to Sacramento County (California) and see how quickly it gets reverted. (That's rhetorical, BTW.) But as my replies exemplifies, the move is controversial, yet the page was moved without significant discussion (on the page under controversy, again, not some unknown WikiProject with three users replying.)
I'm not really upset. (You can tell by the fact that I didn't spend that night reverting the move and taking it to the next level. :) As for the "not interested in the project" comment: uh, thanks, you too? And no, I don't have a personality disorder, but the flaming is very rude and disrespectful (and disruptive to the issue at hand.) Int21h (talk) 20:10, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm really not that fussed, but if you want to move it back I'll happily debate the issue properly via the article talk page. I can only apologise for what might have looked like a less-then-perfect attitude on the part of SGT141, I am sure he didn't mean it that way... ninety:one 20:21, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
I have already moved it back once before. And already started a section on the talk page, which was apparently not seen. I direct you to Talk:Sacramento County Sheriff's Department#Page move. Int21h (talk) 20:38, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 25 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

May 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:Military ranks. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Ryan Delaney talk 00:19, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

The three revert rule applies to everyone, however long they've been here. If you are engaged in a content dispute please follow dispute resolution. Thanks, --Ryan Delaney talk 22:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Interesting essay. I think the last paragraph pretty much covers my motivation, though I would add that I'm interested in dealing with all members of a content dispute equitably. Anyway, I'm glad you don't plan to continue. --Ryan Delaney talk 22:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Power Music Article

Please remove the speedy deletion tag from Power Music. There are several reasons why Power Music is relevant which you will find available in the article. I do not understand why you put it there in the first place. >^.*.^< (talk) 01:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello

I am actively editing this I am just constructing all the sources on my computer. I will not stop writing the article until i have at least 5 sources to stablish notability but thats why we have the Under construction template no? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 23:21, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

thanks sorry to bug that was a couple of rough edits Hell in a Bucket (talk) 23:28, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 11:56, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Archive

Hi, do you have to copy and paste your discussions into the archive pages or is it automated? DotComCairney 19:28, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

New future template

Hi, I have made some changes to your template, please check'em. Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 21:58, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 22 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:08, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 29 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:John Bercow.JPG

And thank you - OTRS is recorded now. For some reason the search engine did not show me the email before and sorry about this. I probably misspelled his name - Peripitus (Talk) 21:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 July 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:11, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

FT letter re Statisticians

I agree with your point about this piece which I moved from Karen Dunnell's biography article to the ONS article. I did not write it but thought it better in the ONS setting where it could be reviewed and as there is a somewhat dodgy section already on criticisms of ONS. I was in the course of editing and referencing it rather better when you deleted it. As the crits are real and these controversies can be readily referenced, maybe someone would like to write a more balanced version?

Offend?

Have I offended you or do you usually give a loaded answer. (Interestedinfairness (talk) 00:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)).

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 July 2009

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 12:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 3 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 05:24, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ninetyone/Archive_6&oldid=1166514312"