Jump to content

User talk:Plasma east/Archive 2

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

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Quebec North Shore and Labrador Railway herald.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Quebec North Shore and Labrador Railway herald.png. 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. BetacommandBot 14:39, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject Ships

WikiProject Ships
WikiProject Ships

Hello Plasma east! I noticed your contributions to HMS Patrician, and thought you might be interested in WikiProject Ships, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of ships of all kinds.

If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! Maralia 16:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind invitation. I'll look into the project as it meshes with many of my interests.Plasma east 19:06, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that template fix - had just noticed it on another template moments ago. Appreciate it. Maralia 14:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

River Hebert River

I noticed you renamed River Hebert (River) to River Hebert (Nova Scotia) back in August. It hasn't been on my watchlist, so I didn't see it until this morning.

I had named it the former due to confusion between the latter and the name of the article for the town, River Hebert, Nova Scotia. Is there a standard for naming Rivers et al that have the same name as towns on them? Andrew647 11:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I think I edited these article names when I was creating sub categories for communities by county. The only guideline that I have found are the following, which discourages using a title such as River Hebert (River).
I would suggest that the river article should be just River Hebert and the community should stay at the River Hebert, Nova Scotia, since this specifies the jurisdiction in the format according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (settlements). If there were multiple rivers in the world using the name "River Hebert", then we could use the River Hebert (Nova Scotia) article name (as per the river naming convention), but until that time, this can just redirect to River Hebert. I'll make the changes shortly and alert you to them and this response.
Cheers, Plasma east 14:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Cool, thanks for keeping me up to date on it! Andrew647 15:36, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Edits on HMCS Gatineau etc

Thank you. I see you've been applying the warships template to these. I wasn't aware of its existence. Only thing is, the pennant numbers are now becoming hidden to the reader, although still present in the URL. Can this be generically corrected, or does it have to be done manually on each one?LeadSongDog 18:26, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I just browsed onto Template talk:Warship and the United States Navy sub-template, Template talk:USS, and note that while the USS template does allow the pennant to be displayed, the warship template does not. I am sure this could be fixed and might look into it over the next few days since I've been editing all RCN and CF ship articles with the new template.Plasma east 19:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

What is the point in these weird formats for links?

{{warship|HMCS|Kootenay|H75}} produces exactly the same as [[HMS Decoy (H75)|''HMCS Kootenay (H75)'']]. But the first is opaque, whilst the second is tolerably clear. So what is the point is in {{warship|HMCS|Kootenay|H75}} ?

Similarly many pages have opaque code such as {{HMS|Ganges|1782|6}} which means [[HMS Ganges (1782)]]. I have no idea what the meaning of the "6" is. What is the point of the opaque code?

The reason for asking you this question is that you did an edit on HMCS Kootenay replacing understandable code with opaque code. And I have no idea why.--Toddy1 19:58, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

The format you are referring to is the Template:warship which I became aware of several weeks ago on several RN pages. You are correct in that it performs exactly the same as the comparison you have provided, although I'm not sure what the additional 6 would mean for the HMS Ganges example.
I've been editing the RCN and CF ship pages using this template following the lead of the RN pages; many USN pages are also using the related Template:USS.
As for the point? I think the warship template simplifies the formatting for links to these articles as not every editor on Wikipedia has been italicizing the ship name while leaving the prefixes non-italicized (ie. the proper format for referencing a ship). Ditto, many Wikipedia editors have not been including the pennant numbers in article names.
Hope this helps!Plasma east 20:22, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
While not directly involved in this conversation, I may be able to answer some of the questions on this topic. Since getting ship names correct requires a lot of repetitive typing (43 characters in Toddy1`s example above), the members of WikiProject Ships created a few parsing templates ({{HMS}}, {{USS}}, and {{warship}}) to make it both easier (now just 29 characters) and more accurate (note the typo in the second to last sentence here). The 6 code truncates off the pennant/hull number from the output so that only the ship prefix and name are listed. --Kralizec! (talk) 22:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

PEI Population Estimate

Sorry if you had to revert the estimation. I cited it and hopefully it's good enough. Estimates do look strange when compared to census figures, not just for PEI, but for all provinces. It may look like a jump but there is a note explaining this by Statistics Canada http://www.statcan.ca/estimadet-en.htm So it is very normal to see two differences since census figures and population estimates are two different things. The census figures tend to miss some people (as...not all are counted) whereas the estimates account for everyone living in the said province according the statistic datas (births, migrations, deaths, etc etc) from all provinces. Hope that clears it all up! Pieuvre 00:29, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Annapolis class destroyer

Hey, was just tagging this article today and noticed something odd. Why are many of the Canadian destroyer escort class articles named "x class destroyer" but piped to "x class destroyer escort" in much of their usage? In fact, most of the class articles' intros are phrased as though 'escort' is part of the article name. I don't mean to quibble over which is the proper term - I'm familiar with the difference - it's really the inconsistency that bugs me. Is there a compelling reason these articles aren't named "x class destroyer escort"? Maralia 02:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Not being a naval historian, I really have no idea. Perhaps NATO mandated a simplified classification system that consolidated everything under "destroyers"? I created that article and the one for the Mackenzie class by copying much of the template from the St. Laurent class article while relying on info from hazegray and other sites but didn't really give much thought to the actual naming. I'm sure if we had access to info from Jane's Fighting Ships, we'd have a more authoritative source to base the names upon.Plasma east 03:13, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
In the WWI/WWII RN, the norm was that aging fleet DDs were reassigned to ASW escort duties {where their restricted speed was less of an issue) so becoming DDEs. Later came lower-cost purpose built DDEs like the interwar standard C,D,E, and F classes, without the big guns of the fleet destroyers. My understanding is that the Annapolis, Restigouche and St. Laurent classes all started out as DDEs but were reconfigured as DDH's when the advent of the Beartrap (aka RAST) allowed heavy helos like the Sea King to operate in the North Atlantic. There was also a change in classification schemes that started to use FF for ships that previously would have been called DDEs. WP classification now lumps DDEs under Frigates, but treats DDHs as Destroyers. Some improvement would seem possible.LeadSongDog 18:12, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to C and D class destroyer

Your edit effectively undid mine. Was there a reason to remove these classication tags that I should know about?LeadSongDog 18:17, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I've replied to this query on the user's talk page.Plasma east 18:41, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi - I didn't browse the history behind the C and D class destroyer article when I removed those categories but here is the logic for what I've been doing:
* Currently categories such as Category:Royal Canadian Navy destroyers and Category:Royal Navy destroyers (or any other warship type, or specific era categories such as Category:World War II destroyers of Canada) are becoming cluttered with individual vessel articles.
* To try to constructively organize the individual vessel articles, I think it makes more sense to have the ship class categories, such as Category:C and D class destroyers, categorized under the respective navies that used them (Category:Royal Canadian Navy destroyers, Category:Royal Navy destroyers, etc.)
It reduces duplicate categorization in articles and provides for a consistent hierarchy. Hope this helps! Cheers,Plasma east 18:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Seems to make some sense, but not without problems. Is it the agreed approach? No point having every editor running madly off in all directions. In any case, rather than delete the tag, I'd suggest you just comment it out, e.g. <!-- [[:Category:Royal Navy destroyers]] --> It's harder to reconstruct the link if need be than just uncomment.
I don't see a lot of rationale for avoiding duplicate categorization. A given ship may even be different classes at different times in her career. The RN articles have taxonomies of classes, of names, and of ships. A ship article is categorized by class. A class article is categorized by navy and as . A name disambig article is categorized by navy (and as disambiguation list of ships). (all this by memory, ymmv.)LeadSongDog 20:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I think you are correct in stating what form of categorization applies to certain types of articles and categories. By no means is what I am proposing the correct way... I've been trying to work on editing many Royal Canadian Navy articles - largely vessels and classes - which have had inconsistent formatting, use of templates (or lack thereof), and categorization, so I'm afraid my editing zeal was applied to the C and D class destroyer article in this manner. I'll try looking around WikiProject Ships to see if they have any suggested practises.Plasma east 22:28, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I found this page which explains some of the recommended practises:
* Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships/Categorization
Plasma east 22:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Very useful, thanks. I'll reiterate my above w.r.t. not losing the existing category tags. Please just comment them out if you think there may be discussion following. LeadSongDog 15:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Possible sourcing problem with Image:Cape_Breton_and_Central_Nova_Scotia_Railway_logo.png

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

(This is an automated message from a robot.)

Hello, I am an automated process which tries to help Wikipedia stay clear of images which may violate copyright laws by applying the Wikipedia Community's fair-use rules.

I noticed that you uploaded or modified Image:Cape_Breton_and_Central_Nova_Scotia_Railway_logo.png, an image for which I could not determine whether or not it has a valid source. Uploaded images must specify where they came from, in order that others may confirm the copyrighted status, or lack thereof, of those images. If you did not create this image yourself, the owner of the copyright needs to be identified in the image page. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with an explanation of that website's terms of use for its content, is usually sufficient. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page.

If I have made a mistake and simply wasn't able to read the copyright information you've already included (bots like me have trouble reading certain types of data), I apologize for cluttering up your talkpage. If you would like to leave any feedback that might make this bot better, please contact my owner. Thank you. OsamaK 15:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Possible sourcing problem with Image:Cape_Breton_and_Central_Nova_Scotia_Railway_logo.png

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

(This is an automated message from a robot.)

Hello, I am an automated process which tries to help Wikipedia stay clear of images which may violate copyright laws by applying the Wikipedia Community's fair-use rules.

I noticed that you uploaded or modified Image:Cape_Breton_and_Central_Nova_Scotia_Railway_logo.png, an image for which I could not determine whether or not it has a valid source. Uploaded images must specify where they came from, in order that others may confirm the copyrighted status, or lack thereof, of those images. If you did not create this image yourself, the owner of the copyright needs to be identified in the image page. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with an explanation of that website's terms of use for its content, is usually sufficient. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page.

If I have made a mistake and simply wasn't able to read the copyright information you've already included (bots like me have trouble reading certain types of data), I apologize for cluttering up your talkpage. If you would like to leave any feedback that might make this bot better, please contact my owner. Thank you. OsamaKBOT 04:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bay Ferries Great Lakes logo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Bay Ferries Great Lakes logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

HMCS Assiniboine (DDH 234)

Hi Plasma, I like a lot of the work you're doing on the infoboxes, but, your edit at [1] seems to have deleted a bunch of content, particularly citations. This isn't a come-back-and-fix-it-later thing. Please restore as you go along. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LeadSongDog (talk • contribs) 22:56, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Oops! Didn't realize I'd dropped the reference to the Crowsnest Magazine article. I think I've maintained all the other info and had added additional references using the Template:Infobox ship Plasma east 00:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi again! I see you made this edit which introduce a whack of content, including a ref to a pretty low-credibility source. Am I missing something?LeadSongDog (talk) 21:33, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

HMS Lossie

Why have you deleted the information in the original article? --Bill Reid | Talk 09:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I've placed a reply over on your talk page - it appears that the info was deleted instead of being moved from HMS Lossie to HMS Lossie (K303). I've replaced all of the missing information (I hope) but will contact an administrator to see about restoring the article history.Plasma east 00:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, that's it sorted. --Bill Reid | Talk 19:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Ensigns

The 1921 ensign was used until 1957. Its debatable if the blue ensign is appropriate here (vice the white), but in any case, it should be time-appropriate.LeadSongDog 16:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll check into the template designers for Template:Country data Canada and see if the flagicon can be modified as such. At any rate it should be easier to modify the various articles if they use templates instead of linking to individual image files.Plasma east 16:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Should be just a case of using -1921 vice -1957 in the template, otherwise no difference.LeadSongDog 19:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
OK, I hadn't noticed the 1921 version in the template so I've started changing all RCN vessels commissioned pre-1957 to that one. What about the white naval jack? Do you know whether the RCN had one and if so, should it be used in place of the naval ensign? I notice that the navy|RN template shows a white jack...Plasma east 19:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
At Canadian Red Ensign#Canadian blue ensign it's pretty clear that the Canadian blue ensign was used by Canadian government vessels as a distinguishing jack when dressed with the Union Flag or the White ensign (flown as a flag). All very confusing, just as the Naval type people like it.LeadSongDog 22:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Use of warship template

I RV you'd work on the Tribals because there was no actual benefit from doing it but there was the additional effort at the server end to transclude the template when the page is rendered (see Wikipedia:Transclusion costs and benefits for whys and hows). The best use of the template is when writing an article to keep down the typing, though for RN ships you can use HMS template which goes {{HMS|Ship Name|ID}} for even less work. GraemeLeggett 16:55, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Very interesting! Plasma east 19:39, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
the false premise there is that there is no benefit to offset the transclusion cost, but clearly there is one, in data integrity checking against both typos and vandalism. If we were to use the syntax HMCS Grzky, there'd be no red link with the error in the displayed text, even after vandals changed it to USS Lemieux.LeadSongDog 20:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I would tend to agree with you. To better illustrate your point I am copying your example and placing nowiki tags around it: [[HMCS Gretzky (N99)|HMCS ''Grzky'']] vs. [[HMCS Gretzky (N99)|USS ''Lemieux'']]
I still think the warship template is a very valuable addition from the Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships participants. Ditto for using the convert template for various measurements, the flag templates, etc. The transclusion costs for processing power on the Wikipedia servers vs. the time and effort saved by editors, not to mention kilobytes of storage space on Wikipedia servers seems to lean in favour of using these templates, at least in the interest of standardization of vessel articles. I'll watch to see what transpires with the entry for Tribal class destroyer (1936).
Plasma east 15:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

An Invite to join Saskatchewan WikiProject

Hi, you are graciously extended an invitation to join the Saskatchewan WikiProject! The Saskatchewan WikiProject is a fairly new WikiProject. We are a group of editors who are dedicated to creating, revising, and expanding articles, lists, categories, and Wikiprojects, to do with anything Saskatchewan.

As you have shown an interest in Wascana Trail we thought you might like to take an interest in this growing WikiProject.
Please assist with any ongoing requests
You might like to take an extra interest in our To Do list
Another project dedicated to Saskatchewan is the Saskatchewan Roads and Highways Wikiproject
Also, a descendant project for Saskatchewan is the WikiProject Saskatchewan Communities & Neighbourhoods
We look forward to welcoming you to the project! SriMesh | talk 17:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Charlottetown Rural High School

An article that you have been involved in editing, Charlottetown Rural High School, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charlottetown Rural High School. Thank you. J (talk) 16:23, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

No. 441 Squadron RCAF

I noticed that you had been editing CFB's and had an interest in the military, so could you take a look at the article. I came across it while trying to track down information on Buck McNair. I noticed that the squadron creation date in the Amazon blurb and the 441 article didn't match. Eventually I found the 441 history at the Air Forces site. It appears to me that a lot of the dates are well off and the official history makes no mention of the 1986 disbanding. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:25, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I've been mostly editing RCN and CF warship articles so haven't been paying too much attention to RCAF and CF squadron articles, although I know a lot of them need editing updates and standardization...
I checked out Wikipedia's 441 Squadron article and it appears to be correct based on DND's information. You provided the link to DND's site on 411 Squadron, not 441, so try comparing the Wikipedia 441 article with this one: 441 Tactical Fighter Squadron It appears to also check out with this information from rcaf.com: No. 441 Squadron
Cheers, Plasma east (talk) 16:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I glad I got a second opinion rather than change anything. Not long after I looked at that I wnet to bed and as I was falling asleep I started wondering if I had typed in the wrong number. Thanks for saving me from myself. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 21:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
You're welcome! Always good to have sober second thought I guess. I've run into the same problem during some of my editing zealousness. Plasma east (talk) 22:57, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Prince Edward Island

Just to let you know of a new WikiProject Prince Edward Island that has just been created. As you have shown an interest in the creation and editing of Prince Edward Island articles, you are cordially invited to join.SriMesh | talk 04:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I undid your last edit, which put the navbox under just Category:Evergreen Line templates rather than Category:Canadian transportation navigational boxes, Category:Rail transport navigational boxes of Canada, and Category:TransLink (Vancouver). Not sure why this box should be under Evergreen only, since it covers multiple lines as well as non-rail transport, plus similar navboxes for Edmonton, Calgary, and Toronto appear in the same categories. Feel free to discuss about your edit with me. Kelvinc (talk) 11:56, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I also took out the Canada Line category from the regional rail category because the Canada Line right-of-way is exclusive and doesn't take on regular rail traffic: see photo of Canada Line train. I only know the Vancouver and Toronto transit system with much certainty, and don't know much about the Canadian rail system in general, so that's all I'm changing. Keep up the good work.  :-) Kelvinc (talk) 18:10, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Northern Alberta Railways logo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Northern Alberta Railways logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Carrington Hospital

A tag has been placed on Carrington Hospital requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ukexpat (talk) 17:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

EPCOR

Is not owned by the goverment of Alberta but by the city of Edmonton. Perhaps we need a seperate category for this and the former EdTel since right now it doesn't seem to fit anywhere. Kevlar67 (talk) 21:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Municipal Companies

Yes, all by all means create a Canadian sub-cat. Or I do it right now. I'd say it's uncontroversial, we don't need permission from anyone, I 'll just do it. Kevlar67 (talk) 16:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

After I left my comment I saw that you had already done it. Good work. Kevlar67 (talk) 21:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nfl ferries logo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Nfl ferries logo.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) 05:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Template:Flower class corvette

Hello! I've tried to tweak this template in a few ways, partly to make it more consistent with others, but mainly because it's so friggin' huge. I really feel for you; it must have been a giant pain in the you-know-what to put it together. I've got it down from two screens in length to just over one, so hopefully it's an improvement. Let me know what you think. Maralia (talk) 03:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

It looks great! Thanks very much for inserting the changes to remove the prefixes - I wasn't aware that the warship template had this capability added. Cheers, Plasma east (talk) 04:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
It's a very recent change; it wasn't in yet when you made the template, so you can hardly be faulted for not using it :) Glad you like the new look. Maralia (talk) 04:26, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

CSTC Albert Head

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article CSTC Albert Head, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of CSTC Albert Head. Sancho 23:08, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Redirect of Albert Head Air Cadet Summer Training Centre

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Albert Head Air Cadet Summer Training Centre, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Albert Head Air Cadet Summer Training Centre is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Albert Head Air Cadet Summer Training Centre, 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. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 17:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Heritage railway category

Hi, working heritage railways would be far more accurate for the west coast wilderness railway than museum - have you a good reason or cite/infor source to justify that change? Cheers SatuSuro 11:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

No problems - if I can be of any help - I have travelled or have some knowledge of some of the operations - but not all. Any cleaning up of categories is a thankless but essential task in this vast goldfishbowl :) SatuSuro 12:08, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Alberta Railnet logo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Alberta Railnet logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Canadian Hydrographic Service logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Canadian Hydrographic Service logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Halifax and Southwestern Railway herald.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Halifax and Southwestern Railway herald.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Talk:List of crossings of the Ottawa River#Correct order

(List of crossings of the Ottawa River)

  1. Can someone help me with the correct order, from down stream to up stream, of all crossings west of Ottawa?
  2. Ditto for all power stations which I have not yet listed see List of Ontario generating stations on the Ottawa River?
  • Otto Holden (Ottawa River)
  • Chenaux (Ottawa River)
  • Des Joachims (Ottawa River)

Peter Horn 14:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm probably missing at least one RR bridge and perhaps other bridges. Peter Horn 00:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
This Map mentions a Traversier Fasset. Google can't find it. Does it go by another name? Peter Horn 00:50, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Could you be of some help??? Peter Horn 01:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

All crossings and generating station have been added in the correct order heading upstream to the end of the river.Plasma east (talk) 04:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Un gros merci. Peter Horn 20:09, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
I have added List of crossings of the Ottawa River#Entirely within Quebec, I also moved the coordinates you supplied to the intended column. Peter Horn 20:34, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
List of hydroelectric stations in Quebec#Outaouais. I'm still looking for "Bryson". Peter Horn 00:36, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
And have I put Hull-2 in the correct order? Does it have another name? Peter Horn 00:44, 24 February 2008 (UTC) Make that Bryson generating station, there are already three links to it. Peter Horn 01:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

List of crossings of the Ottawa River

Saint-Joseph, Quebec is a disambiguation page listing ten (10) "Saints", so which one is it? Il-y-a trop des saints au Québec!! Peter Horn 04:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

This "Saint-Joseph" appears to be none of the first nine (9) and the tenth, as a lake, is irrelevant. Peter Horn 04:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
List of municipalities in Quebec#List Pontiac L'Isle-aux-Allumettes, Quebec is linked to both to Highway 148 (Ontario) and Quebec Route 148 as well as Pontiac Regional County Municipality, Quebec. No "Saint Joseph" there. Peter Horn 05:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
This "Saint-Joseph"[2] would need a "handle" to distinguish it from the other ten (10) communities also named Saint-Joseph in Quebec. There were nine and I have since discocerd a tenth one which I provisionally labeled Saint-Joseph-Bas-Saint-Laurent, Quebec (which I may change to Saint-Joseph (Bas-Saint-Laurent), Quebec) because it has, except for "Saint-Joseph", absolutely nothing to do with the previous nine. The "goofupment" of Canada ("gaffernement" du Canada) put a nice little trap for you. They should have known better, and they should appologize for their ignorence! So I would suggest Saint-Joseph (Pontiac), Quebec to distinguish it from all the other ten or so. Peter Horn 16:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
I have made the change to Saint-Joseph (Bas-Saint-Laurent), Quebec. Peter Horn 16:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thank you. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 21:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Smile

WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

-WarthogDemon 04:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Railroad bridge cat change

Slade's Ferry Bridge was not only a rail bridge, but also a pedestrian/road bridge. - Denimadept (talk) 20:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

question...

Could you please explain some edits you made?

I asked over on Talk:Polar 8 why you said the press was incorrectly describing the proposed replacement for the Louis St Laurent as "polar class".

That was before I saw your revision of Category:Polar Class icebreakers -- which seems to indicate you might be asserting that only US vessels should be described as "polar class". Other nations' vessels are described as polar class. Would you call those descriptions incorrect as well?

If "polar class" is a description that can be applied to vessels of any nation then I think your revisions to Category:Polar Class icebreakers were, um, misplaced. I saw you then removed Kapitan Khlebnikov (icebreaker), and the other vessels that have been described as "polar class" from the category. No offense that is circular reasoning.

Please note that the very first line of WP:VER says the wikipedia aims for "verifiability, not truth". Kapitan Khlebnikov and Oden have been described as "polar class" -- which, IMO, was sufficient justification for including them in the group. Now, if you have references that state they weren't polar class...

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 04:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Note: When I added Oden to the category I added a reference where the Oden was explicitly called a Polar Class icebreaker.
Note: This reference calls the Kapitan Khlebnikov a Polar Class icebreaker. Geo Swan (talk) 04:27, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
My apologies as I didn't intend to engender controversy by putting the Category:Polar Class icebreakers exclusively under the USCG and removing the proposed Louis S. St-Laurent replacement as well as the Oden. I made those changes during an editing blitz back on the weekend and forgot about them after getting into non-related work. My initial search for vessels classed as "Polar class" turned up the USCG Polar class icebreaker almost exclusively. I have a pile of additional literature from various classification societies referencing IMO changes in ice classification of ships after 2004, so I'll create a Polar class icebreaker article to reflect this info.Plasma east (talk) 20:52, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
I've created a Polar class article which provides more details about the use of this term which will hopefully alleviate any confusion. You will note that ANY vessel that is capable of operating in sea ice can correctly be termed a "Polar class ship". This is largely what I was referring to with the confusing references to a "Polar Class" in various Canadian media and government communication spin-doctoring.Plasma east (talk) 21:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Springville and Sardinia Railroad

Where did you find out that the Springville and Sardinia Railroad is a 3' narrow gauge? I read the references carefully and didn't see any indication of the gauge. RussNelson (talk) 18:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Whoops! I copied the Category:Narrow gauge railroads in the United States and mistakenly grabbed that one as well. Will remove it. Thanks!Plasma east (talk) 19:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

edit summaries

Thanks for your work cleaning up articles. In the future, would you please add an edit summary explaining what and why you are doing it? This makes patrolling for vandalism easier (usually vandals don't provide an edit summary). Thanks. —EncMstr 19:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for not being very vigilant in doing this during my recent editing blitzes. Will try to do so in the future. Cheers! Plasma east (talk) 19:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Bike path categories

Hi, I saw you created some bike path categories, which is cool, but some of the states you created them for already have a similar category, like Massachusetts and Minnesota. You'll need to check in with Cfd to see about merging and renaming them. Cheers! Katr67 (talk) 18:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I just saw that. I'll try to clean up the non-conforming categories. Plasma east (talk) 19:28, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Huh?

The australian rail transport heritage thingy didnt lead to any conversation anywhere - I am slow or what happened? SatuSuro 00:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry if I was a bit quick on the draw. I noticed the Category:Railway preservation in Australia was the only sub-category in Category:Rail transport preservation by country that didn't follow the naming convention so I recategorized it to Category:Rail transport preservation in Australia to ensure consistency. Plasma east (talk) 11:15, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough - that makes sense SatuSuro 11:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Category deletion

Please see Template:Cfd for correct usage of the cfd templates; just typing {{cfd|Reason}} does not create a correct link to the Wikipedia:Categories for discussion page; also, you need to then list the categories you want to delete on the discussion page, otherwise the deletion request will be ignored.

Moreover, in many cases, you don't need to go through the CFD process at all—if a category is empty, just put {{db-catempty}} at the top. --Russ (talk) 13:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks! Plasma east (talk) 13:35, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiCookie

Just stopping by with wikicookies for those editors who started new articles today. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Very tasty! Thanks. ;-) Plasma east (talk) 03:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Summer!

HMCS Endeavour (AGOR 171)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of HMCS Endeavour (AGOR 171), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Endeavour class oceanographic research ship. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 06:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Fixed the duplication. CorenSearchBot caught me between edits.Plasma east (talk) 06:31, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal of Floating storage and offloading unit and Floating Production Storage and Offloading

Hi. I proposed to merge Floating storage and offloading unit and Floating Production Storage and Offloading articles. Your comments are appreciated.Beagel (talk) 14:53, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Ferries and strikethru

But wait, there's another existing ferry in Connecticut! wooooooo

BTW, is there a reason you've got <s> (strikethru) on every entry? - Denimadept (talk) 17:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm still going through the Category:Ferries in the United States and recategorizing by state.
I use strikethrough for entries on my talk page that I've responded to.
Plasma east (talk) 18:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Ferries in the United States renames

I've listed your changes at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy. If this series of renames indeed meets the criteria for speedy, then a bot can do all the work. In the meantime, I'd stop with the emptying of the categories. Thanks. Katr67 (talk) 20:27, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

P.S. You will need to add the proper cfd templates to each proposed change per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#How to use this page. Thanks. Katr67 (talk) 20:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
P.P.S. Talk pages are a public record of sorts and are here for others to read as well as yourself (people can then see if things they wish to bring up have been discussed before). The strikethroughs make your page very hard to read. Would you consider using a template such as {{done}}, which looks like this:  Done instead? Katr67 (talk) 20:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Whoops! I just saw my message indicator at the top of my editing page. Sorry!
It's been a while since I've given any thought to this talk page so I'll definitely look at the template.
I did some additional looking at the cfd template and saw the renaming template cfr.... Is that considered appropriate for this case, considering I've partially gone through and created some of the new sub categories and listed old ones for deletion? Plasma east (talk) 20:44, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, please follow the directions for the remaining renames. See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 January 6#National Historic Landmarks. Please add your rationale to my stopgap speedy nom per the instructions, tag the ones that still need to be moved, relax for a couple days and let the bot do all the moves for you. Katr67 (talk) 21:00, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
OK, thanks.Plasma east (talk) 21:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
The Category:Ferries and sub-categories for countries are standardized using Category: Ferries of <country name>. Should this not be followed for sub-national jurisdictions like U.S. states? Should Category: Ferries in <state name> be an exception to this standard? Plasma east (talk) 22:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I personally don't care which way the categories are named--you need to make that argument at the Cfd. But I see you have continued to move the categories by hand and haven't updated the listing at the Cfd. I don't have time to fix this, but this is kind of a mess. Any reason why you don't wish to follow the established procedure? I am missing something? Please reread Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#How to use this page and if you don't understand what I am talking about, let me know. Katr67 (talk) 19:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I guess I am not 100% sure about what I need to do at this point to correct what I've done. Here is what I have done:
  • I have read the Cfd instructions but I didn't realize that I had to create a separate entry for each Cfr request that I tagged. I will do that now.
I'm also in the process of creating the following hierarchy for ferry transport as per the Category:Ferry transport in Norway which makes it easier to find ferry companies vs. vessels, etc.:
Category:Ferry transport in the United States
(of which Category:Ferries of the United States is a sub-category as per WP:Ships)
Category:Ferry transport in <state name>
Category:Ferries of <state name> (follows WP:Ships)
Category:Ferry companies of <state name>
Plasma east (talk) 19:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I had already deleted the discussion from the speedy rename area and moved it to the controversial rename area so it would get more attention. So I copied and pasted your post here: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 August 14#Category:Ferries in the United States. Other editors should be along shortly to help out. Cheers! Katr67 (talk) 20:27, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks very much for your help!Plasma east (talk) 14:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Blackball Transport

A tag has been placed on Blackball Transport requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Mayalld (talk) 06:29, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Plasma_east/Archive_2&oldid=1192829075"