User talk:Thewinchester/Archive/2007/March

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Thewinchester/Archive/2007, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Hope you meet up with rest of the keen Perth editors - they're a friendly and helpful mob! (BTW the who am I bit's better on the user page )SatuSuro 04:02, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Atmospheric generator article

Hi Thewinchester,

This is Ashvidia the initiator of the article Atmospheric water generator. Read ur comment on the discussion page and was happy to see some one is taking some action to stop vandalism of the article. But read the history page and wanted to inquire wat u meant by rv changes by Ashvidia, inappropriate changes and deviates from accepted positions Wats the accepted position.

As far as the manufacturers goes I had a clear approval from GraemeL provided I write a footnote explaining the reason for displaying the manufacturers names and expressly stating this is not spam. My disclosure was as follows:

Note: Even though manufacturers are listed, the above write up is not spam nor an advertisement. The above technology of AWG being at its concept stage it was felt that interested readers can have a look at the real machines of different manufacturers by having ready access to their sites. THE ABOVE LISTING IS NOT INTENDED TOWARDS ANY SALES PROMOTION.

So wats the prob...pl elaborate the same. I have taken painstaking effort to make this article a good one because I hd done a project on the same technology in my college fair...so I have a bit of knowledge regarding the same.

Trust u agree on the disclosure aspect.

Regards, Ashvidia

Shopping centres

Hey you're going well! Sorry a bit slow with resurrecting some of the details of the more obscure arcades...SatuSuro 01:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People who are much better at explaining this are the template king User:Orderinchaos78 - or if he's not around - User:Moondyne, User:Gnangarra. User:Hesperian - they are worth meeting - all local, friendly eds (the last 3 are admins - always worth knowing for a lot of reasons) - hope that helps. SatuSuro 02:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC) BTW your signature is coming out black, not sure what you're up to there - are you using the 4 tildes ? SatuSuro 02:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, using the for tildes. thewinchester 09:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

OIC appears to be on at the moment - and I've alerted him ...SatuSuro 02:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Small world! Once long ago at the turn of the century, Thewinchester and myself worked together... Orderinchaos78 02:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With comments like that OIC, i'll take a stab at suggesting that you're a former employee of the iiBorg Empire. thewinchester 09:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I see what you're saying - what I'd do is save a skeleton in your user area (eg User:Thewinchester/Shopping centre base - name at will) and then just copy the content into whatever new article you're writing. On Mozilla I've used the bookmarks toolbar folder to save a few things so I can grab them right away. If for whatever reason you want to get rid of anything in your user area after you're finished with it, whack a {{db-userreq}} on it and some admin will clear it out within a day or two. Orderinchaos78 02:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for that OIC, will look into doing that and see how I go. thewinchester 09:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Try Dodgy & Sons (and nephews, and cousins, and various other nepotistic cronyish people) :) Orderinchaos78 09:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That would be the one :) (although you do realise you just spoke its evil name!) Orderinchaos78 09:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My userpage should make it blindingly obvious who I am. I'm amazed you haven't guessed yet :P Orderinchaos78 09:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

Hello, Thewinchester/Archive/2007! I see that you have expressed an interest in being adopted by an experienced editor. I accept your request, being an experienced editor myself. Whether you want to learn about wiki markup, find something to do, or just talk to somebody, I'm the one you can talk to - just leave a message on my talk page. Good luck with Wikipedia! --Daniel Olsen 05:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure you're a new editor? You handled that situation exceedingly well. Once the spam insertions die down, you can remove the spam template from the article. If it doesn't, you can list the IP on WP:AIV and he/she will probably recieve a temporary block.

As for the signature issue, go up to the very top of your screen and click My preferences. Under the User Profile tab, uncheck the box that says "Raw signature", and then you should be good to go. If you have more questions about signatures, you could look at WP:SIG and that should be able to help you out. Good luck, and happy editing! --Daniel Olsen 19:51, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPWatcher approval

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 17:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You left the IRC channel before I got a chance to say hi! You're approved :) have fun! M a rtinp23 17:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simple File System

(Was originally Paranoid, no?!, changed for logic and navigation purposes) I've noticed how fast you posed so-many defects to my article about the Simple File System... Well, I use my right of disagreeing with you. However, I've not already removed any of your categorizations, so I'll let you do it if I convince you...

I totally disagree that it breaks NPOV. When I say "aims for ease of implementation", I'm refering to design goals, and not exactly the kind of non-neutral judge that breaks NPOV...

About the features, when I list "lack of features" as "features" that, in fact, increase ease of implementation, I'm refering to design goals once more... The people who designed the filesystem want that (lack of) feature(s) to increase ease of implementation.

About the lack of sources, I hope you were refering to the inexistence of a link to the OSdev forums... I added it...

If you were talking about the SFS spec, I'm afraid that some guy invented a so dumb system such as the SPAM blocklist and called it a "Mediawiki feature"! The spec is at bcos.hopto.org/sfs.html , which is blocked by that "feature", so wait until some sysop add it to the whitelist, please...

Thanks, João Jerónimo 18:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article is extremely light on detail, one sided, lacks technical information, and there are no references or sources from credible entities that comply with WP:WEB or WP:RS. Additionally, the article reads as if it has been written by someone who has involvement or investment in what is being written, thus clearly flying in the face of WP:NPOV and also coming close to WP:SPAM. The categorisations will stand and I will check back on this page in 14 days to see if it has improved. If there are no significant improvements which bring this article up to a minimum required standard then I will move for speedy deletion. If you're going to write an article on this, I would look at some other articles in this area such as NTFS to see how they have been written up and work from there. thewinchester 18:53, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright... One-sided? What if ther is only one side in this case?

In the aforementioned forum (which is, by far, the only "space" where there could be two-sides/opinions), people know the limitations of SFS and know the uses it was designed for... AFAIK, there's no one who doesn't agree about what I've written... Although, I've not already pointed them the WP article...

Lacks technical information? Ok! I'll add a stub template, if that's the problem! By the way, stubs are each time harder to use! Now you have categorized stubs! A dozen categorys for stubs!! What about KDE-related stubs? Why aren't they classified as "Blatant advertising"?!

Now, about what you say that "...the article reads as if it has been written by someone who has involvement or investment in what is being written, thus clearly flying in the face of WP:NPOV and also coming close to WP:SPAM"

Well, I haven't even beed involved in the process of writing the SFS spec... I don't understand why you think there is an advertisement of a product or company...

I ask you to read what was linked by the template you added to the SFS module: WP:SPEEDY#G11... It reads: "Note that simply having a company, product, group or service as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion."... I think that's what you missed...

I added the article because it was lacking... My goal is not attract people to implement SFS in every OS they know (it would not, really!), but to add information to WP...

And about the standard layout for FS articles, I apologise and will convert it when I have the time...

João Jerónimo 20:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

George William Rud

Hi, TheW... GWR is an article in progress, but I am going to go head and remove the {{wikify}} tag if its OK by you. V. Joe 19:11, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer that the Wikify tag is kept in place, and that you also correctly Stub the article while it is a work in progress as per the Manual of Style. thewinchester 19:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, will restore V. Joe 19:24, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPWatcher

Using the above tool, you just nominated a song for WP:CSD A7 (people, bands, etc). Thought you might want to know in case it is malfunctioning. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 20:05, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: IDT Corp.

notability does not always mean reliability. A small paper in a town of 500 may not be notable, but it may have been around for 50 years or more, making it reliable. Tabloids are certainly notable, but not very reliable. I won't be able to help you out for the next couple weeks, but good luck, and happy editing! --Daniel Olsen 20:26, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lucille Ricksen

Dude . . . I just started the article about 5 minutes ago. Give me a break already. Jeez. Patience, my friend. ExRat 06:01, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever. It's an unfinished stub. There are plenty of those around, and I hardly see how it is particlarly in "bad shape" thus far. ExRat 06:08, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm getting to it! I'm still tinkering with it. Sheesh. I work this way . . never had complaints before. Happy Holidays. ExRat 06:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Responding to a moron"

Why don't you try to learn how to act in civil manner towards other Wiki editors? Perhaps you should peruse Wikipedia's policy against name calling. There was no need for that insult. ExRat 22:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With messages like this - (a) remind that sandbox is the area to create articles if they dont want speedy deletion (B) remind them of WP:Civility (c) if they persist or start using emotive language - never respond - pass on to admins SatuSuro 22:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah SatuSuro, put it down to some of this horrible weather in WA a slip of the fingers on my part. Thanks for the ideas on dealing with such people. thewinchester 09:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Best to _- apologise if you do slip - otherwise you can be caught up in WP:NPA if someone chooses to throw that at you - regardless of the weather ( 45 on dashboard at 3 pm) - and if they are wrong! Refer repeat errors to another editor or admin - rather than ever trying to take on! I can cite you some bad exampless of pointless discussions and debates - where the time, emotions and energy are countreproductive. Have a cold shower would be the best solution SatuSuro 09:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Attention flag

Hi, just letting you know Grand Boulevard, Perth has been created as a stub. Orderinchaos78 18:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GPT Group / General Property Trust

On reading the intro to Centro Properties Group I can see something similar is needed at General Property Trust but I have no idea where to get half of that sort of corporate information. Even a one paragraph entry would be an improvement on a one-liner. They used to own Centro Warwick and have a heap of office towers and shopping centres over east, and this link mentions a joint venture with Babcock & Brown. ASX code is GPT. I put up the logo at Image:GPT Logo.png as well. Cheers Orderinchaos78 14:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perth Roads infoblock

BTW you do know that infoblock for Perth Roads may be going the way of the dodo? That's why it wasn't added to the articles until matters on the talk page were resolved. Hesp's still waiting for a response from any one of the main editors of it. (I noticed as I have all the road articles watchlisted :P) Orderinchaos78 18:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The matter's been resolved anyway. Orderinchaos78 05:33, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mystery Shopper Response

You left me this uncalled for message: Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia articles, such as those you made to Mystery shopping, even if your ultimate intention is to revert them. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. thewinchester 02:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was not a "test edit. I simply edited the page appropriately. There is no reason for the third-level header on that page. You're leaving me a message about that? I certainly don't see why this upsets you. That's about the most minor of minor edits I've ever made. Tell me why it is wrong. /Timneu22 13:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yoshitsugu Tatekawa

Hi Thewinchester! I'm wondering why the Yoshitsugu Tatekawa is classified as a stub. The page can be improved tremendously, but I don't consider it to be a stub as the most important facts are mentioned (at least the facts I know), and the page already reached a certain minimum length. Sijo Ripa 14:35, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan James (filmer)

I've removed the speedy deletion tag from the above article. While the subject might not be notable, the article does assert notability in a reasonable way. You may wish to list it at WP:AFD instead. Thanks for your time and your hard work reporting these articles - even though I'm not deleting this particular one, your efforts are very much appreciated. Kafziel ^Talk 21:27, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up: I've nominated the page for deletion, here, if you're still interested. Kafziel ^Talk 04:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ENAD

Do us a favour, would you be kind enough to revisit this page and (as your tagging reads) "explain why you believe the article should not be deleted on its talk page." StephP 14:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry if you took it that way but do you realise how annoying it can be when literally within a few seconds of a first edit, and in the midst of adding material this tag pops up?

Even more so when the tagging comes from someone who (according to your About Me page) has no background on the subject at hand.

So if I were you I would sit back have a long think about your actions, admit that your tagging was immature and next time research the subject at hand before making such edits. Even in the article’s infancy the bit that reads “first division” is an indication to most editors of the standing of a club. But you obviously overlooked that, I would assume through lack of knowledge on basketball.

Another strategy you could employ would be to just leave it to those who know more on the subject. Because although I am sure your intentions were genuine, you ended up making more work for everyone, time which could be spent more constructively elsewhere.StephP 11:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, what matters to me is that the article is kept (which it is). The mere fact that your tag was swiftly removed by an administrator says more than something. All I am doing is offering you some advice so that you don’t run into similar situations in the future (as you have in the past) that just waste everyone’s time. It’s up to you if you wish to disregard it.

And, in all seriousness, I don’t have the time nor am I in the mood for a tit for tat conversation. I have better things to do on and off WP. Plus I won’t be following your example and commenting on levels of experience or education. So let’s just leave it at that, shall we?StephP 16:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion tag

I guess you accidentally tagged this page for deletion. The subject is obviously notable. Sangak 14:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Thewinchester! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 03:52, 21 February 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Durand Line

Hi. Good to see a sane voice enter the Durand Line discussion. Welcome! I wrote most of the 3rd and 4th paragraphs of the article a long time ago (though not the original article) and for some time lately have been only marginally successful at keeping most of the slanted views and incorrect facts (such as the mythical 1993 expiration of the treaty) out of the article. But it's been tough, and as you noticed, cooments are a bit more strident lately on the POV front. I was in the NWFP of Pak. a few months ago and met lots of very rational and nice Pashtuns, by the way, so there is hope. My speciality at the US Dept of State is international boundaries, which means I have to stay out of such political squabbles. But I have spent years studying the Durand Line and I can attest to the accuracy (at the moment) of the 3rd and 4th paragraphs. Hopefully together we can tone down the POV slanted comments and overstatements that tend to creep in regularly.....it will take regular attention, I predict. I'm only an occasional editor, not a grizzled veteran-Wiki expert. (That was me (tonight I'm getting logged out whenever I try to edit something....what's with that?) with the 22Jan 03xx edit, and you'll see some of my comments mixed in on the discussion page too.) DLinth 04:19 22 January 2007

In regard of this edit: see WP:CIVIL. The article is POV and was mostly written by a known racist and Pashtun nationalist who has tried to mess up all kinds of articles in Wikipedia, and who attacked my user:page with racist rants (just go through the history). The article Durand Line is POV, it is based on unsourced Pashtun-nationalist POV (including the "fairy tale" about Afghanistan's "3 glorious victories against the British"; the truth is: Afghanistan lost 2 of them, and was able to regain its independence with Russian help in the 3rd one!). Besides that, Balouchestan has NEVER been a part of Afghanistan. At the time of the Durand Line, Balouchestan was already a part of British India. Before that, it was an independent fiefdom of Balouch Khans. Stop supporting NisarKand's racist and unsourced POV, and stop accusing others you do not know! I have contributed to so many articles in Wikipedia, and I was one of the main editors who turned the articles Pashtun people, Iranian peoples, and Azerbaijani people into Wiki-FAs! It was NisarKand who flooded the article "Pashtun people" with nationalist nonsense, until the FA status of the article was taken away! Tājik 23:49, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whew, these emotion-laden topics can be tough to police, yes? Thanks Thewinchester for tipping me off. I'll leave a gentle note for Jacksimpson4295 who added a huge amount of largely irrelevant history in a non NPOV manner that he may want to suggest changes on the discussion page first.....apparently it was his first edit. I was hoping that the current article had been balanced out enough to be largely left alone for awhile, and things had been quiet. We'll see! Thanks again. DLinth 20:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)DLinth[reply]

Guildford Grammar Preparatory School

I referenced the edits and removed the {{fact}} tags. Aurora north (WikiDesk) 07:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Aquinas College, Perth edits

Hey, sorry to bother you. but in future, please be more careful with your edits, your edit to the Aquinas College, Perth page removed two important templates: Public Schools Association & WA JSHAA Members. please be more careful next time, i know you are a good editor, and acted in good faith. Thanks SM BarnZy 09:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more careful! in your RV you deleted the See also section! The template applies to Aquinas College, and until it has been deleted it will remain on the article! SM BarnZy 10:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your JSHAA Edits

Please stop vandalising the JSHAA page! removing the link to the main article of WA JSHAA Member schools is VANDALISM and it will not be tolerated. You started by making poor edits to the Aquinas page and now the JSHAA page, once again - this will not be tolerated! I have reverted your edits. Please be more careful next time, ok? if you have a problem with this, talk to me on my talk page. SM BarnZy 12:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnzy is correct. We don't start removing templates from articles just because they're being discussed at tfd. Per WP:AGF, such actions are impolite. Wait for the discussion to finish. The world won't end if they stay there a few more days. —Moondyne

To be clear, I was referring to the removal of templates (which is what I thought I said). With respect to the categories, I agree with your actions. —Moondyne 13:01, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there was no need for the page long essay on all of that "stuff" - to be honest im not too concerned - all i was trying to stress is that you reverted my attempts to place-back the templates on the Aquinas page etc etc etc. In future, dont write such long comments - it wastes time. All that needs to be said is that the articles are fine as they are, and the community will come to a consencus on the AfD/CfD and everything will take its course. Can you just move on from the issue? its not really that big, ok? SM BarnZy 12:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please re-add the templates which you deleted from all the JSHAA and PSA articles? it would be poor form not to given Moondyne's comments, thanks alot SM BarnZy 12:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It appears, that you think i was against your edits on the categories! i was just expressing concern at you deleting the Template on the Public Schools Association and the WA JSHAA Members template, because in order for you to have the right to remove them - there needs to be a TfD consencus, and there was none - PSA template was not even up for TfD. Im just curious, why did you remove the PSA and JSHAA Templates? SM BarnZy 12:54, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you just go and add back the categories, which you deleted, this would be good form. Dont beat around the bush, fix the problem! or do you want me to do it? Actually, i will do it, because you are getting no where and have done some pretty poor edits, thanks alot SM BarnZy 13:00, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted the PSA and JSHAA Templates from those ~10 articles, i have restored those articles to their former glory. Thank you for your edits tonight, they have been most productive. SM BarnZy 13:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thewinchester, you seem like a pretty good sort, from what I've seen so far. But like many of us, myself included, you need to learn the fine art of knowing when not to bother. Smbarnzy is doing an adequate job of making a complete goose of himself, so there's no need for you to help him out with that. You've now seen that challenging him achieves nothing but a dismissive TLDR. It would be better for all concerned if you treated the above comments with the contempt they deserve, and ignored them. Hesperian 13:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment Hesperian. I was already there two talk page edits ago, but having worked in customer service and the public service for as long as I have it's occasionally fun to let people proverbially hang themselves. thewinchester 13:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Gargoyles voice actors

Why did you add {npov} to this page? 66.92.46.192 19:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Aquinas College, Perth

I am somewhat confused about the current status of this article. The article's authors have in the past tried to bump up the rating of the article and they have also jumped the queue on the schools collaboration of the week. Their past actions have therefore raised my suspicions about their motives. However, it would appear that one reviewer has given the article Good Article status. Is this review legitimate? It's very difficult trying to make sense of the talk page history. I note that you reverted the article back to a B class. The article is part of two different projects. Does it have to be rated as a good article independently for both different projects? Dahliarose 12:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've been told it does now appear that the good article rating was legitimate. I had in fact previously highlighted the issue on the Wiki Project Schools page so if anyone disagrees with the assessment then they can easily check the history and re-assess the article if need be. I shall leave Wiki Project Perth to their own devices. As these editors seem to have such a troublesome history no doubt they will already be keeping a close watch over the article. I hadn't realised they'd caused quite so many problems. Many thanks for your help. Dahliarose 23:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Never

Nah - I have a long rave - if we ever meetup - ask me for the one about form blindness - dont ask me now I am flooding enough talk pages as it is. Nah - john cleese's phrase the bleeding obvious and its ramifications springs to mind but nah theres too much on that page anyways Satu Suro 12:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]