User talk:Stephen/Archive January 2007

NPWatcher welcome

You've been approved to use NPWatcher. Please give me any feature requests or bugs. I'm also happy to help if you have any problems running the program, or any questions :). Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if I've made a new release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Finally, enjoy! M a rtinp23 14:16, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What version of the .NET framework are you using? I've had problems reported when users have been using .NET 3.0, and as it's happened again, I'm going to post a message on the Microsoft forums to try to find the reason. Anbother question - did you have any other AfDs work? Thanks (and I suggest that you avoid using the AfD feature for now!) Mart inp23 22:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, should have stated that. I installed .NET 2 especially to run NPW. I had 1.1 prior, and didn't upgrade to 3 as I saw you mentioned there were problems. --Steve _(Slf67)^talk 22:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK - I've done one small thing which may work (though I honestly doubt it). Please can you get a test version from http://wp.southportbeekeepers.co.uk/NPWatcher2.zip ? I'd appreciate it if you could try nomming an article and see what happens. I know that this is some issue to do with local environment, as only two users have had the problem so far, but I'm having difficulty pinning it down. Final question - what is the UTC offset on your PC clock (Ie, what timezone is it in)? Mart inp23 23:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll download and have a go. UTC Offset is +11 (Sydney) --Steve _(Slf67)^talk 23:10, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK - according to the helpful person on the MSDN forums, it has to do with the time format settings on the system (which would probably make sense). I've tried to fix it, and have uploaded to NPWatcher2.zip again. Could you have another go when you get the chance? Thanks, Mart inp23 12:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK - the first bug you mentioned is strange - can you tell me if it still happens after this update? And, yep, I've fixed that error where it cuts the end of the name off. If you need any of the mistaken creations deleting, leave a list in my talk apge (sorry about it). Thanks, Mart inp23 23:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ETAP Yachting

You nominated the ETAP Yachting article for deletion, and I was wondering if there was any way to convince you to change your mind. I just came accross the article's disscusion page, and according to the creator, the ETAP Yachting brand is one of the few creating unsinkable yachts, and I believe if and expand template is added (which is already is), and the creator is told to talk about THAT more, than the article will be noteworthy. Danielfolsom 00:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Responded here

OMG Ya while I made that argument I must have had my wires put together wrong because the second after I finisehd I was like, "Waitasecond ... think about that ...." and then I went to withdraw my support. well hey, sorry to bother you, Danielfolsom 05:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bronze Medallion - New York City Award

Hi. Thanks for spurring me on to get more information about the Bronze Medallion. I think you are confusing it with the Bronze Star, and you may wish to reconsider your speedy deletion notice. --Adam Brink 10:51, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Person AfD

Thanks for your comment. More important is to restore the original Person page with acceptable use of the word 'persons' rather than the totally inappropriate, in the context, 'people'. Emeraude 11:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arte para aprender la lengua mexicana

I don't think so. Most references to it only capitalize the first letter. --Ptcamn 09:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

misplaced warnings

Hi, it seems that you are misplacing warnings on non-existent user talk pages by dropping the last character of the user name. Perhaps this is due to a malfunctioning script. For example:

[1] on User talk:Doug churc should have been User talk:Doug church
[2] on User talk:UrbanMongoos should have been User talk:UrbanMongoose
[3] on User talk:Golem1 should have been User talk:Golem14
[4] on User talk:Mahjong should be on User talk:Mahjongg (this one is odd because these seem to be two different user names Mahjong (talk · contribs) and Mahjongg (talk · contribs)

There are many others, but you get the picture. I don't necessarily disagree with any of the suggestions to delete, but it seems a shame they aren't being informed of the deletions. Cheers. older ≠ wiser 22:02, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Afd

I meant keep by no consensus, but i changed it to reflect that. Happy editing! :) Cbrown1023 23:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1a

Thanks for you comment and for identifying the glitches in 3c. Are you a good copy-editor? If so, we'd love to see you around the review pages in the WP:FAC and WP:FAR rooms! Tony 04:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rocky Roe

Unfortunately, it's been tagged now for AfD, so I can't speedy or protect now. Thanks for the heads-up though Jimfbleak.talk.07:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rocky Roe

I listed this for AFD, I used google and his name comes up many times. Also you posted, a duplicate message on my talk page. BuickCenturyDriver 07:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Faraday Hall

No, it doesn't preclude an AfD, but why do it when you can merge? crz crztalk 01:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletes

I tossed speedy tags on top of AfD's on several articles today, as far as I know, so long as it's an obvious speedy candidate, there doesn't seem to be a problem with that. Example, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flarbenslarb Tubezone 02:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vandalism

Just took some vandalism of your user page, in case you don't see it. It's from the editor who keeps trying to create his "poli" article --Steve _(Slf67)^talk 02:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :D. Mrmoocow 03:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

How are you doing? BuickCenturyDriver 02:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on my RfA

Thanks for the comment! I was getting to it, but you got it exactly right. I don't have a problem leaving your comment there.--Isotope23 02:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Top Gear

Yeah, the article badly needs to be cleansed. Way too crufty. Anyway, keep up the good work yourself. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 09:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for blocking Blocked

... and I hope it holds. Paul 23:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Diobesity

Thanks much. Kudos to you too! Regards, Accurizer 00:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revision of France Winddance Twine article

While I understand the need for this article to be cleaned up I don't agree with the strategy of simply removing the data which makes it look like a resume. This effectively removes a great deal of significant data. Would it not be more effective to incorporate the data into the text?Canticle 09:42, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there; The author of this article, who is my adoptee, has spent a great deal of time on it, And both I and another admin editor who has peer reviewd it were happy with it. Obviously neither you nor I want to get into an edit war over this. Given that in the article as submitted there are, if anything, an excess of references and publications quoted, none of them actually detract from the value of the article; would you feel able to reconsider your position? --Anthony.bradbury 01:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your understanding.--Anthony.bradbury 11:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re More Twine

Thank you for your prompt and professional answer. I had obtained a copy of this professor's CV and was working to quickly justify notability to prevent deletion. I am aware that my style of writing is to write and then revise over time. This leaves some of my writing initially appear trite, non-notable, etc. And I am a relatively new wikipedian still learning the acceptable formattings. Rest assured I will attempt to integrate this data into a more acceptable format.Canticle 03:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article Ballarpur Industries Limited

The article is W.I.P- been 15 minutes into it and it's got tagged, please have patience and wait for the finished product. Haphar 09:08, 18 January 2007 (UTC) Please do refer to the following language of the speedy deletion process too :- "Before nominating an article for speedy deletion, consider whether an article could be improved or reduced to a stub; speedy deletion is for cases where an article does not contain useful content. Note that some Wikipedians create articles in multiple saves, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its initial creation. Users nominating a page for speedy deletion should specify which criteria the page meets; it would also be considerate to notify the original author." Haphar 10:50, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grenadines

Thanks for that - I'm just making a few very short stubs - looks like St Vincent's pretty under-represented on WP. Hopefully someone will be able to add in some more information. Grutness...wha? 12:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

La donna del lago

That's the way Italian titles are written. We try to follow the spelling conventions of the original languages when giving opera titles. For instance, I've just created a stub for a German opera called Der ferne Klang (The Distant Sound) - in German titles, nouns have capital letters but adjectives don't. If you want to create a redirect from La Donna del Lago, that's fine. Hope this explains things. --Folantin 10:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proteus (WAM-V)

Greetings, your speedy deletion of Proteus (WAM-V) succeeded before I had a chance to expand the article. I have been advised by the deleting administrator to recreated this article in my userspace and to list it for a deletion review. Please comment on its entry in the deletion reviews. Fosnez 14:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1990s CTV prime time schedules

I had planned on adding an article about the prime time schedules by decade for CTV as a part of the main CTV television network article, but I wanted to do this in order to get the ball rolling on possibly creating an overall article for Canadian prime time network television schedules by decade, similar for those for the United States (i.e. 2006-07 United States network television schedule). Starbuck-2 03:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re Philanthropic organisations

I understand the need to delete this duplication. I was wondering if the links which I provided to various articles will also be corrected so they will point to the proper link? Thanks.Canticle 09:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nocera

Steve, I am not sure I am entering this in the appropriate place to get your attention but beginning late yesterday or in the wee hours of this morning I started writing on several topics on which I have some expertise. One Nocera's Law. for reasons that I am not certain of, appears to have been deleted without fact checking which is my fault because in haste I did not adequately go into sufficient detail. I posted the requisite hang on, and an explantion and request for guidance, but in appears that it was just summarily axed. The next article was on the Family Forest Project. I cannot find it currently to see what its status is. And the third was a minor inclusion on a list under the heading of communications therory in which I hold a graduate (M.A. degree. Can I ask you to provide some guidance as whomever was riding herd here at that time appears to have logged out without responding to my earnest hang on comments and questions. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ancestralmktg (talk • contribs) 05:26, 22 January 2007.

Thank you for explaining where to properly enter the que to provide feedback and explain issues that are contested. Thank you for the assistance. Please, allow me now to clarify some misimpressions and pertinent facts.

First, about the Family Forest Project. This heading was entered on its own merit. It has a very significant number of online references and is a different entity from the Family Forest, which is a brand name that is owned by the e-publishing concern also principally owned by Bruce and Kristine Harrison: Millisecond Publishing Company, Inc. of Kamuela, Hawaii. If the data entry has somehow been lost, then I will try to find time to re-enter the pertinent information and key online sources. Incidentally, the brand name, Family Forest, by itself, is not as appropriate for entry from a scholarly view point. The 12 year old endeavour called the Family Forest Project is the compilation and digitization of published and sourced data transforming into the world's most easily searched, fully sourced, deep family history is what should be listed. FamilyForest.com is a domain name used by the company to help those familiar with the brand easily find their way online to find more information.

Next, please note that not all references to Nocera's Law have found themselves to the conveniently searched Internet. What I would ask now is to notate that the decision to delist is protested, but accepted as a interim decision pending the appearance online of more references. I will re-submit Nocera's Law once more online references show up online.

Last, regarding Thomas Nocera under the heading of contributors to Communications Theory. In addition to postulating the above law, "Tom" Nocera has been frequently quoted in a far ranging online resources. (Search Google News under "Tom Nocera" and see if he is not in the news a number of times within recent months. Or, use regular Google and see more long term references. His communications services are currently contracted for by the U.S. government. That appears on his professional website: www.tomnocera.com which indicates other contributions to the field of communications relating to a famous quote by Albert Einstein. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ancestralmktg (talk • contribs) 03:11, 23 January 2007

Banksia

Sometimes people are joking when they joke. And sometimes people make jokes as a light-hearted way of saying what they really think. There is a degree of similarity between the better Banksia species articles: B. brownii, B. integrifolia, B. telmatiaea, B. epica, B. rosserae. I'm curious as there was a serious statement beneath the joke that I should be taking on board: do you think these articles are too similar? Hesperian 23:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and no need to apologise. Hesperian 23:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kidman Info

Thanks for your info and support on the issue. The last thing I want is a battle, and I see his point...but we should maintain consistancy. Thanks :-) NYKenny 01:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Australian Greens/Comments

Subpages of existing talk pages do not qualify for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#G8, and the "/Comments" subpages are used by the WP:1.0 assessment system. Please do not tag these pages for speedy deletion. Thank you, Kusma (討論) 09:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved here --Steve _(Slf67)^talk 22:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re Mellon Foundation

Once again appreciation is offered for your guidance. I am, as you have said before, learning the formatting, conventions, etc. And I appreciate the guidance of yours and the other hands kindly offered to me thus far.

If you will continue to tolerate my lack of experience I will attempt to scale this learning curve and continue to write and edit for this fine venture.

ThanksCanticle 22:04, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN#Nicole Kidman

No problem! It seems to have slowed down; he either ran out of socks or got tired of being blocked. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 23:07, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Builder's Fantasy Warns You

The fellow players of the Builder's Fantasy association found this person to be a liar and make false talk of vandalism. Do not listen to this dirty man's lies! HE RAPED US WITH MICHAEL JACKSON IN OUR BEDS!!!! :( :( :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maging Warrior (talk • contribs) 15:11, 27 January 2007

Left in response to my tagging a non-notable web game for speedy deletion --Steve _(Slf67)^talk 04:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LSI Logic

What do you mean, vanity? They are the higher-ups at LSI Logic, Corp., and I think they deserve their spot on the page. If you would like, I could go through and make pages for all of them, or I could just change the word 'notable' to something that you see fit. -- Austin 00:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Top Gear

The article itself is pretty good. The sub sections in the article also look really good. I do have a few concerns: 1) A few more sources would be nice. A few sections (the survey section for instance) currently have none. 2) I think there should be some section dealing with critical reactions and ratings (I've tried researching this on multiple occasions without much luck, but I am probably just looking in the wrong place). The article has quite a few controversies listed, which is great, but those other topics would balance it out. 3) Some of the subpages are really bad when it comes to sources. They are also rather disorganized. I am a little worried that they might get nuked or merged back into the main article. 4) The template seems a little weighted toward the new show, which is understandable because there are more articles for it. However, there is nothing that designates which item belongs to which version of the show, so it is a little confusing to people who aren't familiar with Top Gear.

I'd also love to see some free images found for the article. Flickr has quite a few images relating to Top Gear, but most have copyright restrictions. Another contributor and I were able to secure free images for the Michael Jordan article. The images were previously under an incompatible license, but after contacting the owners of the image on flickr, 3 of the 4 changed their license to make it compatible with Wikipedia. We might be able to have similar luck on the Top Gear article. It is time consuming, but it really strengthens the article, especially with the recent push on Wikipedia to move away from fair use images. Since it is a TV show, some fair use images are naturally acceptable, but we should minimize them as best we can.

I feel that if these issues were addressed, this article would be well on its way towards GA status. With some further refinement (and the subpages substantially improved) FA status should also be doable. Keep up the great work. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 03:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]