User talk:Pigsonthewing/Archive 11

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Pigsonthewing. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

→

Birmingham the second city redux

Hi - You removed the {{fact}} tag from tne Birmingham article - I'm curious to know whether this is to avoid potential POV (e.g. it might lead to too many references to Birmingham being second city, where it may be a contentious issue), or you don't agree that the phrases "considered by some" or "widely considered" are weasel words. - Tiswas^(t/c) 10:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I refer you to the same, extensive, talk page debates referenced in my edit summary. Andy Mabbett 10:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Which, in all fairness, is not refering at all, merely brushing off. I have, of course, made the effort to read the Birmingham|discussion pages. There is limited discussion with regard the use of weasel words, other than echoing that either claims are to be verified or not included, in order to avoid weasel words. You appear to have made the reversion summarily - Tiswas^(t/c) 11:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

1) Please read WP:AGF. 2) "You appear to have made the reversion summarily" - Yes: "without delay". Andy Mabbett 12:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Good faith is assumed by default. I'm not sure that I understand your implication`. I'm merely seeking a more reasoned response for what appeared to be a perfunctory edit - Tiswas^(t/c) 13:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

"I'm not sure that I understand your implication" - you accused me of "brushing you off". My edit was considered, based on the discussions to which I once again refer you. Andy Mabbett 13:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

In which case, and to avoid any ambiguity or misunderstanding, feel free to point me to the specific section (or sections). As mentioned previously, I found nothing pertinent to the attachment of a {{fact}} tag. - Tiswas^(t/c) 14:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Not to worry - I've found the relevant section. - Tiswas^(t/c) 14:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Skin complaints?

The alterations you made to the Infobox UK station template don't appear correctly with my browser (IE6) and skin (classic). I don't get any coordinates at the top, they just appear twice at the same place (see Image:WP Screenshot - Infobox Uk Station.PNG). If I switch to monobook, however, it works. I've cleared my cache and purged the page, without success. I've recently added the code to my standard.css (the classic equivalent of monobook.css) to make co-ordiantes appear as d-m-s - could this have something to do with it? Any help or suggestions you could offer would be appreciated. – Tivedshambo (talk) 15:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

It does look to me like either a cache issue, or mis-applied CSS changes. Try reverting your CSS changes, then doing them again, from scratch. If that doesn't fix it, please replot it on the {{coord}} talk page. Andy Mabbett 15:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll ask for that to be fixed. Andy Mabbett 16:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Template:Main coordinates templates

The template has been unprotected by another sysop via RFPP, so now you and Docu can edit it on equal footing and I can go on to other things. The goal is to encourage everyone to compromise, not to enable an edit war, so please try to find a compromise everyone is willing to accept. CMummert 20:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd be happy to compromise; but it's difficult, when the other person won't even say why they're reverting edits or what they have against them. Andy Mabbett 20:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

My hope is that now that everyone involved has the ability to edit the page, this will encourage dialogue. Good luck. CMummert · talk 23:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

hCard on Infobox musical artist

Hi, saw that you added hCard marku to the template and want to use class="fn" and class="fn org" conditionally. One way to do this would be to create a template subpage. It itself will be a template with one parameter, the background color, and based on that, it would return either "fn" or "fn org".

For example, replace
<big class="fn">{{{Name}}}</big>
with
<big class="{{Template:Infobox musical artist/hCard Class|{{{Background|}}} }}">{{{Name}}}</big>

In the sub-page, use a switch to map the colors to either "fn" or "fn org" like
{{#switch: {{{1|}}} | solo_singer = fn</nowiki> | non_vocal_instrumentalist = fn | non_performing_personnel = fn org | group_or_band = fn org | cover_band = fn | classical_ensemble = fn org | temporary = fn | {{{1|fn}}} }} --soum (0_o) 07:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Bad Cat!

Hi - could I ask you to comment out or remove Category:UK railway maps from User:Pigsonthewing/scratchpad5 please. It is a user page appearring in an article category (see WP:CAT#User namespace and WP:CAT#Keep cats out of the sandbox. Many thanks. – Tivedshambo (talk) 09:58, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not on that page. Andy Mabbett 10:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes it is - bottom line [1]. I've taken the liberty of commenting it out for you - hope you don't mind! – Tivedshambo (talk) 10:33, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

OK - no prob. Andy Mabbett 10:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding User:Lewisskinner

Hi Andy. Whilst I note your opinion that Lewisskinner has been uncivil towards you on a number of occasions, I'd suggest that highlighting this during discussions is not the best course of action. Instead, I feel it would be better to ignore any such issues and concentrate on the matter of discussion. If you feel that Lewisskinner's behaviour continues to be inappropriate then you should of course raise this through the appropriate channels which I'm sure your familar. Regards. Adambro 11:58, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Horace Alexander

We seem to be the only fans around ! Very interesting biography I presume. Unfortunately do not have access to much of the material. Perhaps you have access to the Oxford DNB [2]. Cheers. Shyamal 12:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

You've got e-mail ;-) Andy Mabbett 12:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Do you have the Duncan J Wood book ? Shyamal 01:38, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes. It's a good read. Andy Mabbett 04:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

I am sure it is. Unfortunately I dont think I can get my hands on it easily. Could you please check and let me know the summary of his contributions to Indian ornithology. Apparently there is a chapter on it. Thanks a ton. Shyamal 04:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do, but Amazon UK have it (despite what they say, it's not a hardback); and the publishers are on-line. Andy Mabbett 17:18, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Reversal

Please contribute to Template_talk:Infobox_Swiss_town before reversing. -- User:Docu

Template talk:Infobox musical artist

This is to confirm that I didn't knowingly make any deletion. If I did make one in the course of editing, it was completely unintentional. --Kleinzach 00:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Untested additions to often used template

Please discuss changes first, rather that adding untested additions to templates. Such changes may negatively affect many articles.

You may use Template:Infobox_Swiss_town/Test to debug your additions. -- User:Docu

I haven't made nay "untested" additions to templates. Andy Mabbett 10:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:AVFC-infobox

Template:AVFC-infobox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Qwghlm 08:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Please don't

Your suggestion that the Comic opera and Opéra comique articles be merged is exceptionally unhelpful. Opéra comique is a specific genre of French opera and it is important not to confuse it with comic opera. As the (somewhat inadequate) article itself says: "Associated with the Paris theatre of the same name, it is, despite its name, not necessarily comic or light in nature." --Folantin 13:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

RE Coldspot

Yeah, that was a particularly tricky AfD closure - the Delete !voters had a stronger argument, but they were numerically outnumbered by Keeps, and I felt I couldn't close according to my own opinion. At the time I wasn't aware of the sockpuppetry. Unfortunately, procedure doesn't let me reverse my decision - what I would suggest is that you take it to WP:DRV, and I will add a note supporting deletion. Walton ^{Need some help?} 08:24, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Reversals

Please participate in working out a solution at Template:Infobox Swiss town/Test or Template talk:Infobox Swiss town#Font problems. -- User:Docu

Birth and death

Hi Andy,

Just run first test on Afrika Bambaataa, birth only atm, looks OK. There are a lot of articles.... <grin> Rich Farmbrough, 19:18 5 May 2007 (GMT).

Ok I'm not happy that {{birth date}} displays a leading zero, though, see Hagigat Rzayeva. Rich Farmbrough, 20:16 5 May 2007 (GMT).

"My bad." I should suppress the zero, the template re-adds it for the ISO function. Rich Farmbrough, 20:40 5 May 2007 (GMT).

Help to work out a new version

Pigsonthewing, please contribute to Template_talk:Infobox_Swiss_town#Vcard to work out a new version. -- User:Docu

RL delayed answer

Ping here, apologies on the delay -- interesting btw! // FrankB 17:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Articles needing coordinates from May 2007

Andy, do you know how articles listed in this category are being categorised? I cannot fathom how the category is being attached to the article - presumably some sort of esoteric template-fu. Reason I ask is that I'm concerned that we should be boxing a little cleverer in categorising articles needing co-ordinates. Specifically, I've been going through the April 2007 list picking off UK locations. All well & good, but my heart sink at the thought of wading through hundreds of Indian location (I know damn all about the place) looking for UK locations which I might add a coordinate to. The - to me - sensible solution is to categorise articles needing coords by their geolocation, so giving us a list of UK locations needing coords, Indian locations needing coords, &c. As I cannot work out how the current category is being generated, I'm at a loss to further my suggestion by discussing my concerns with whoever is causing the articles to end up in the cat. Any help / pointers you can give would be much appreciated. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)

Articles are added to that category by {{LocateMe}}, {{LocateMeLong}} and {{LocateMeText}}; and were being added by {{Infobox Indian Jurisdiction}}. I've now created Category:Articles on India needing coordinates from May 2007 et seq, for use by the latter. Andy Mabbett 07:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Excellent; thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Checkuser case completed

Hi, A checkuser IP Check case you filled has been completed by a CheckUser, and archived. You can find the results for 7 days at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/IP check/Archive. -- lucasbfr ^talk, checkuser clerk, 20:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

BT Tower

That was a genuine mistake by me, though, coincidentally, the Skyscrapernews.com link does state the number of floors as five. - Erebus555 15:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Railway Diagram Glitch?

Hi! Would you please help me by confirming a problem I think I have found with railway articles in the West Midlands area? I've noticed that in the following articles;

Rugby-Birmingham-Stafford Line

Coventry to Nuneaton Line

Leamington to Stratford Line

(There may be others)

The names of certain stations have disappeared from the diagram box. A quick look seems to lead to the insertion of the International Symbol of Access in blocking out the station names, but I'm not sure. I could remove the symbol to put the station names back but don't want to be stuck with an anti disabled label. Have a look and let me know what you think. Britmax 07:41, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Having just looked at these articles I see the problem is no longer there. I looked at them three or four times before asking for your help. Sorry! Britmax 07:55, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Andy Mabbett 19:31, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

FYI

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Infoboxes. Mak (talk) 20:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Hi Andy, Your suggestion posted over at the composers project page to take the general complaint with infoboxes to the larger bio project is a good one, and I am confident that active participants there will be happy to find ways to accommodate the challenges posed by composer articles. Until then, however, it is clear that many who actively edit composer articles are opposed to the use of such boxes. Surely it is preferable to let the consensus as it exists among such editors stand until a solution can be derived. When confronted with this general unhappiness, you claim that the composer project participants issue devolves to one of ownership and seem unwilling to tackle the problems of inaccuracy and absurdity of classification that were raised in the first place. This is an unhelpful response, since it does not address the issue. Surely, as a member of the bio project, you have a stake in seeing the problems of presenting accurate information resolved in a way that speaks to the overall value of what is, after all, a consensus-driven, community-built encyclopedia. Finally, look at the quality of many of the articles composers and then consider whether it might not be worth striking a more conciliatory tone with so many editors who are making a committed effort to building a comprehensive and accurate knowledge base in this area. Eusebeus 22:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

"Your suggestion posted over at the composers project page to take the general complaint with infoboxes to the larger bio project is a good one'@" - Thank you.

"I am confident that active participants there will be happy to find ways to accommodate the challenges posed by composer articles." - I'd like to hope so, but recent experience suggests otherwise.

"Until then, however, it is clear that many who actively edit composer articles are opposed to the use of such boxes. Surely it is preferable to let the consensus as it exists among such editors stand until a solution can be derived." - There is no such consensus, for many of the articles concerned. Apparent consensus amongst a relatively small "clique" in a relatively esoteric project does not trump the wider principles of WP community consensus.

"When confronted with this general unhappiness, you claim that the composer project participants issue devolves to one of ownership and seem unwilling to tackle the problems of inaccuracy and absurdity of classification that were raised in the first place. - That's a gross misrepresentation of my position - I'm one of the few, if not the only, participant in the discussion, who has attempted to do so.

"as a member of the bio project, you..." that appears not to be the only misapprehension you're labouring under.

"...have a stake in seeing the problems of presenting accurate information resolved in a way that speaks to the overall value of what is, after all, a consensus-driven, community-built encyclopedia" If you care to read what I've written, that's exactly what I've been trying to achieve. Andy Mabbett 23:51, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

If you don't already, thought you might want to know about this voting: Templates for deletion/"infobox needed" here. Nickbigd 04:50, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

arbcom note

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement#User:Pigsonthewing Fireplace 02:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

microformats

If I copy and paste the coords from Sheffield Town Hall (your version) I get 53°22′48″N 1°28′10″W / 53.379994, -1.469446 (which was a surprise). How would one display the degrees version?

Also, given that the link to coordinates mentions 3 coords, height being the 3rd, is it possible to display height as well (eg above sea-level)? -- roundhouse 10:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

For the former, please see {{coord}}; for the latter; no. Andy Mabbett 10:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Please forgive my ignorance re templates etc. I have looked at {{coord}} and find it admirable. However Sheffield Town Hall uses {{coord}} in an indirect (and, to me, mysterious) fashion via {{Infobox Historic building}} and I am still not clear how one would display the coords in degrees in this case. -- roundhouse 11:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

To change the display in your browser (I assume that this is what you want to do), follow the instructions at Template:Coord#Display. If you need assistance in doing so, put a note on your talk page with {{helpme|how do I edit my monobook.css}} Andy Mabbett 12:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Indeed - voila. Many thanks indeed. So one advantage of microformats is that they are more flexible. -- roundhouse 12:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

You;re very welcome. The template is more flexible, and outputs a microformat. The microformat allows parsing by user-agents such as browser plug-ins and other websites (so you can, for instance, add an address to your address book, or send coordinates to a map site or GPS unit). Andy Mabbett 12:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I have now found and installed such a plug-in for firefox and indeed now have a toolbar which alerts me to microformats on a given page. We live and learn. I'll see if I can find an address to import. -- roundhouse 13:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Try Heaton Manor School. Andy Mabbett 14:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that worked - it imported with 1 click an hCard.vcf into MS outlook with name, address + fax no. Seems useful to me. Flickr is using the geo ones too: again it looks useful. -- roundhouse 15:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Plants Brook

I've written the article Plants Brook today and I copied the table from Digbeth Branch Canal to do my own features list for it. I noticed there were these microformat codes in there and I just thought that you could possible have a look to see if they've been used correctly because I have no idea how to use them or what they are (despite extensive research!). Thanks - Erebus555 14:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

The hCard mark-up was fine. I have, though, rounded-up your five-figure-decimal longitudes, as your latitudes have only 4 decimal places. I'm concerned that your research proved fruitless; I'd like to improve matters. Where did you try? Was something unclear, or did you just not find what you were looking for, Did you try WP:UF and the pages linked to from there? Andy Mabbett 14:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for checking the article. I did look at the WikiProject and it was the technical aspect of it that confused me more than anything. I downloaded the Mozilla add-on, Operator, and I noticed that the button for the coordinates worked but I was confused to what the other buttons did. - Erebus555 14:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

In Operator, under "options", are you using "actions" or "microformats" display style? I'll have a think about how to make the Wiki Project pages more clear. Nice article, BTW! Andy Mabbett 15:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I am using the microformats style. The options display style made the bar at the top disappear. And thanks for the compliment - I aim to please :) - Erebus555 15:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

In that case, the "hCard" button will add contact details to you address book - try Heaton Manor School. hCalendar adds events to your diary or calendar; try [3]. For other uses and examples, browse the microformats wiki. Andy Mabbett 15:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Terrific (sorry for butting in). I also found difficulties finding out what microformats are all about (one wants examples and a link to Operator + whatever works for ie) but Andy's answers above (particularly the last one, www.westmidlandbirdclub.com which has everything except ~~favourites~~ bookmarks) go some way towards providing insight. Must go and experiment with some html. -- roundhouse 17:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Protected area

Hi,

can you have a look at the last change you made to this template as it is now giving expression errors in the call to the coord template that you introduced when adding hcard information. Keith D 21:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. there was nothing wrong with the infobox as I left it, but some articles have a conflicting template which also uses the title bar to display coordinates, so I removed the title display from the infobox. In the long term, it should be restored, and the duplicate coordinates removed. Andy Mabbett 22:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix. Keith D 22:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Banned from infobox-related edits

Under your general probation, you are hereby banned from making any infobox-related edits for a period of one month. You may not add or remove infoboxes from articles and may not edit infobox templates. You may make suggestions on appropriate talk pages. This ban may be enforced by blocking (starting with 24 hours and escalating as appropriate). Thatcher131 04:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

What? This is utter bullshit! Andy Mabbett 11:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

It's about this report, and this discussion. By banning you from a topic area where you have been disruptive, rather than blocking you for disruption, you can continue to edit other areas of interest. You can ask any other admin to review my decision. Thatcher131 11:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I have not been "disruptive". Perhaps you were not aware of the history of those debates, not least Lewis Skinner's sockpuppetry and abuse; nor of the vast number of infoboxes I am in the midst of editing (as my contribution history would show you). I invite you to review your own arbitrary, unwarranted and unjustified action. Andy Mabbett 11:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

POSH

Hi Andy,

I see you have added an advert tag to the POSH article after I edited it last. Could you possibly rewrite it in a way you are happy with, or put some more specific pointer up as to how you feel it should be reworked?

Cheers,

Keith

It reads like a puff-piece for the microformats community (of which I'm a part, to declare an interest). See WP:NPOV and WP:COI for further guidance. I only just restrained myself from proposing its deletion as a neologism... Andy Mabbett 15:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

West Bromwich Network Church

Hi there, I think you might be the guy who has added an advert tag to the WBNC article. I'm sorry I removed it, I didn't know I wasn't supposed to, but after re-writing it to pull in other references and create a larger framework for the article (taking in the reason why it looked like an advert) I thought it would be ok. My apologies if that was wrong.

I am a little bemused as to why you've put the advert tag back in though. Can I ask what the ongoing issue with it is please? Thanks. Evan.

Phrases like "notable in that it is experimental and is the focus of considerable interest" and "this is not really a fair comment" (the later in relation to criticism) are hardly neutral (or at least require citatations from neutral third-party sources). An understanding of policies like WP:NPOV and WP:COI may be useful to you . Andy Mabbett 15:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, fair enough. They were put in explicitly to point out to someone outside (I'm guessing that) the church of england, as to why this is a venture of national interest. Sadly there are few internet related points of reference now. this post however is a recognised one of experiment and research which will inform future directions for the Church's development across the UK, along with the posts in Telford, Wolverhampton and Stoke. It is not always possible to provide the 'neutral' references you desire, whilst also wishing to make a case for the fact that it is indeed an interesting project which has many pairs of eyes watching in the wings. I'm not sure how to take this one forward to your satisfaction to be honest. I'm not trying to do anything other than create a point of information for folk. That's all. Part of my brief is to inform the wider church and secular organisations, of what is going on. Wikipedia seemed like a perfect vehicle for doing that. I will try to brush up on the documents you provided links to. Thanks.

(→Station links - why? - use semi-colon to de-categorise, but still link to link categories, thus)

Aha That's how you do it! Thanks! Lynbarn 15:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Colon, not semi-colon. My mistake! Andy Mabbett 15:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Coord region parameter

What is the region:GB part of region:GB_type:city giving us in the coord template? I've read the advice at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Geographical_coordinates#region:R but I'm just not getting it. I've experimented with & without the parameter & have not spotted a difference. Can you help me out? --Tagishsimon (talk)

I think it affects the zoom level on links to some external map sites. I couldn't say which! You may need to ask at the talk page for the above. Andy Mabbett 15:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Coords template in MOS

You recently updated the Manual of Style Geographical coordinates section to say

As of April 2007, templates {{coor d}}, {{coor dm}} {{coor dms}} are deprecated. they have been superseded by {{coord}}.

Here are the relevant changes [4]. Was this change debated somewhere? If not, does it truly reflect the consensus of the community? I ask this as an observer of the ongoing discussion at Template talk:Infobox lake#hCard microformat (and coord) -- Patleahy 16:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes. I'll dig out refs later; it was a while ago. {{coord}} does everything the other templates do; and some. Andy Mabbett 16:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I asked this question again at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Coordinates section. -- Patleahy 07:18, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

How odd. Andy Mabbett 09:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I've added refs there. Andy Mabbett

I want to talk to you personally about the arguments on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Coordinates section. Simply put, the changes you made to the MoS do not have the support of the community and ignore some serious concerns. I want to remove references to the {{coord}} template and work to add geo microformat support to the {{coor }} family of templates.

I have no intention of getting into an edit war so I ask would you revert this change if I made it?

Secondly, why do you believe it is not practicable or possible to add geo microformat support to the {{coor }} templates? -- Patleahy 19:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

{{coord}} is a valid, live template and is widely used. The current wording is a compromise - revising the changes I originally made, and which were certainly not opposed at that time - which I proposed. It would be misleading to remove reference to it as though it does not exist, or have currency.

Adding Geo microformats to all of the "coor *" templates may be technically possible, but would be inordinately complex. coord was created specifically to resolve these difficulties, and there seems little point in investing effort in repeating the exercise the hard way, when nobody seems to suggest that they will not be replaced, in the medium term, by coord.

Andy Mabbett 20:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

You are simply ignoring the problems with {{coord}} and the objections to it.

Could you be more specific about the problems adding geo microformats support to the {{coor }} templates? If there can be a one-for-one replacement such as {{coor d|10.2|N|-20.3|E}} to {{coord|10.2|-20.3}} I can't see why a implementation which would work for one would not work for the other.

-- Patleahy 20:46, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

"You are simply ignoring..." - no, I am not. I repeat: "The current wording is a compromise ... which I proposed."

"Could you be more specific about the problems..." - no; it's not worth my time or effort, for the reasons I've already given you.

Andy Mabbett 20:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

To take Commons as an example, the microformat was easily added using the same markup as here, by having the templates produce a display:none element. The dms one is the more complicated one, but still so simple. I don't see why it would be any more complicated here. Since all coordinates should be entered using the standard templates, later on there should be no problem converting the wikitext either way. --Para 21:06, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Easily, and badly :-( Andy Mabbett 21:15, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Why badly? Above you were only concerned of the geo microformat not being implemented with {{coor *}} templates and that it would be "inordinately complex", but the computer that reads the microformat gets the coordinates in decimal format and that's everything it needs. --Para 21:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

"...not worth my time or effort, for the reasons I've already given you". Andy Mabbett 21:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Whilst I've had my disagreements with Andy, having a single template which can handle a variety of input formats and then provide a consitnetly formatted output seesm preferable to requiring the editor to work out which of a series of templates is most appropriate for a given article. Using the Coor family could require a template chagne as well as a simple data change if more accurate coordinates are added to an article. Our focus here should be to make life easier for editors, rather than unduly worrying about the re-use made of the data - if coord gathers critical mass here, Google will have to support it. David Underdown 08:28, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

There is no doubt that coord is better than the coor templates. But is it so much better that the added features outweigh the benefits of machine readability? I think not. Andy is a strong advocate for microformats, and it has now been shown that it's easily possible to have them with the current templates too without having to change the wikitext. The other features, mostly cosmetic, can wait until everyone supports the new template. They don't need to happen now. --Para 09:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

"is it so much better that the added features outweigh the benefits of machine readability?" - coord has more machine readability than any of the other templates. Andy Mabbett 11:25, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Lionel Monckton

What is wrong with the link you are deleting at this article? It seems to me both relevant and helpful, as it gives information about the only remaining orchestra giving regular professional performances of this seminal musical theatre composer's work. -- Ssilvers 22:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Please see WP:EL. Andy Mabbett 22:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe that WP:EL says that this is the kind of link that should be included in this kind of article. Can you explain what your issue is here? -- Ssilvers 22:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Monckton isn't even mentioned on the page you're; linking to. Andy Mabbett 22:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Sorry, they removed the Monckton info from their website. Too bad! -- Ssilvers 23:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:OWN

Andy, it is you who needs to read WP:OWN. How many times have you been in direct war with a WikiProject over something where the WikiProject agrees on but you don't?

Aren't YOU claiming ownership? User:CenturionZ_1 11:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

No. HTH, HAND. Andy Mabbett 11:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Let me directly quote from WP:OWN.

Firstly search WikiProject in WP:OWN. Does it mention anything about WikiProjects? No. So WikiProjects abide by the same rules as you over ownership. But:

Some contributors feel very possessive about material (be it categories, templates, articles, images, essays, or portals) that they have donated to this project. Some go so far as to defend them against all intruders. That really sounds like what you did with the infoboxes.

Article changes by different editors are reverted by the same editor for an extended period of time to protect a certain version, stable or not. (This does not include removing vandalism.) How many different editors removed infoboxes only for you to remove them?

If we are going to resolve this, I think the best thing is for everyone to take a break. I'm not a member of WP:Composers and I won't be - biographies of people are always contentious and I stick clear. Their music on the other hand speaks for itself usually and that's why I work with WP:CM. I'm rather glad that you are on a cooling off period, during that period it would probably be wise to read some of these WP pages you keep throwing around to make sure you aren't the one contradicting the guideline. I've never made an edit to an composers article. How am I supposed to lay ownership? I am merely pointing out the overwhelming consensus to remove infoboxes at WP:Composers, WP:CM and WP:Opera.

This will be the last of this matter you will hear from me. I'm off to do other things. Please at least consider what I've said. Thank you. User:CenturionZ_1 11:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

" That really sounds like what you did with the infoboxes." - nonesense.

"How am I supposed to lay ownership?" - where have I said that you have?

"I am merely pointing out the overwhelming consensus" then you are "merely pointing out" smoke and mirrors. There is no such consensus.

"This will be the last of this matter you will hear from me" - SFX: cheers, tickertape.

Andy Mabbett 11:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Plot Summary contribution to 42 (Doctor Who)

You asked to discuss this on the talk page of that article. I've given you my response there, but received nothing in return. Where do we stand on this issue? Digby Tantrum 19:02, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I apologise for not replying quickly enough for you; would you like a refund? I am waiting to see if other editors have a view. Andy Mabbett 22:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'll give it a day. If we've had no extra input by then, I'd like to hear your response on the matter. That sound fair? Digby Tantrum 07:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Your AIV report

I've removed your AIV report for Tj 146 (talk • contribs), the edits do not look like vandalism and POV pushing as you put it certainly isn't vandalism but a difference of view point. May I suggest engaging in discussion on the Sutton Coldfield talk page with the other editor first to find out why he did these changes, and almost certainly removing the warning you issued. If I've misread the situation and there is some clear cut vandalism don't hesitate to give me a shout, send me some diff's and I'll take the necessary actions. Regards ^Khukri 10:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Shout. Removing cited, indisputable, factual information is vandalism. Andy Mabbett 10:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

No it's a difference of perception, you are in discussion on the talk page which is good, but flying around with things like shout and desist do not strengthen your argument. Put the citations for these indisputable facts on the talk page and persuade the other editor he has erred instead of trying to shout everyone down, including myself who is trying to help the situation. ^Khukri 11:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

"If I've misread the situation [...] give me a shout" - sigh. Andy Mabbett 11:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violation in Image:Below Pontcysyllte icon.png

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Below Pontcysyllte icon.png, by Geni (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Below Pontcysyllte icon.png is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Below Pontcysyllte icon.png, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 22:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

It was really helpful to see that warning, first thing this morning; the image having been deleted overnight. Andy Mabbett 11:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Your message on my talk page

Hi, Andy, thanks for your message on my talk page; I'm sorry not to have replied sooner; I've been off-wiki for approx. 5-6 days (I think, haven't actually checked when my last contrib was). I have continued to follow the discussion at the Composers project; I have accepted the outcome of the previous discussion as a consensus, as expressed in the statement about infoboxes on the project page; the stated position of the project does not inhibit any editing that I personally would intend to do.

If at some future point there were a new discussion on the issue, due to different circumstances arising, I would contribute to that discussion if I believed it to be helpful; currently I think that attempting to prolong the previous discussion, with the same group of editors that have already spoken (on both "sides" of the issue), is "generating more heat than light", as the saying goes.

Thanks, Lini 12:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom notification

You have been reported here for breaching your revert parole. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 12:48, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The revert parole has expired. However you also appear to have violated the 3 revert rule. I frankly don't care who you are reverting against, it is a content dispute and not simple vandalism. If this person is a sockpuppet of another banned user, take it to WP:RFCU or the admins' noticeboard for action. If this person is not a banned user, but someone who you feel is harassing you specifically, take it to WP:SSP or start and RFC. In any case, "penis" and "shit" edits are vandalism, a dispute over how to describe a town is a content dispute, and there is no such thing as "POV vandalism". It appears, however, that you have found a loophole in my earlier infobox topical ban. For edit warring over the infobox on Sutton Coldfield (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) the ban on infobox-related edits is expanded to include editing infoboxes themselves and extended to one month from today. You may not edit infoboxes or their contents on any article, may not add or remove infoboxes from articles, and may not edit infobox templates [5]. You may make suggestions on talk pages. Please seek appropriate forms of dispute resolution rather than edit warring. Thatcher131 13:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

"there is no such thing as "POV vandalism"." - poppycock.

"It appears, however, that you have found a loophole in my earlier infobox topical ban." - nonsense - none of those edits changed an info box at all.

Andy Mabbett 13:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

You may wish to comment here. Thatcher131 14:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Birmingham article - Central Mosque

I'm adding back in the Birmingham bit to the Central Mosque line, as the offical title for birmingham central mosque is Birmingham Central Mosque, in much the same way you would not call Birmingham university just University in an article about Birmingham

Re:

You do realise {{vandal}} just redirects back to {{userlinks}}. –Se bi ~ 21:44, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Microformats project

I have found another project which is similar to your project. Perhaps you could become their decendent? Wikipedia:WikiProject Geographical coordinates. Simply south 22:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. That's certainly a "related project" for the Geo microformat, but not relevant for hCard as it applies to people , or other microformats, which we are not yet in a position to implement, @Andy Mabbett 08:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)