User talk:Twittenham

A warm welcome from Bottesiηi

Hello, Twittenham, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.
Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up very shortly to answer your questions. Don't be afraid to ask!
If you would like to experiment with Wikipedia, I invite you to do so in my own personal sandbox (just follow the simple rules!) or in the Wikipedia sandbox.
When you contribute on talk pages or in other areas, it is important to sign your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date.

Happy editing! — ßottesiηi ^{Tell me what's up} 21:47, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of "athletics"

Thanks for your message on my talk page; it certainly explains the misunderstanding. In that case, though, perhaps the correct category for the rename is something like Category:Proposed sports venues... Best, --MCB 22:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stub Category template

The purpose of the category parameter of the {{Stub Category}} template that is used to provide the basic boilerplate for stub categories is to list most appropriate the non-stub parent category. I've reverted your changes to Oceanian stadium stubs, European stadium stubs, South American stadium stubs, Asian stadium stubs, and African stadium stubs, as a result. I will agree that it is unsightly for all 5 as well as stadium stubs to be in Sports venues, but it is at present the most appropriate non-stub category. A solution to the problem of having 6 different stub cats feed into Sports venues would be to create a Sports venues by continent category populated with Sports venues in Oceania, etc, and then have the appropriate country cats and the associated stub tempates feed into the continent level categories. Caerwine Caerwhine 07:17, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your changes look awful so I will revert them. If an arbitary rule produces an undesirable result it should be changed. There is certainly no need for a "sports venues by continent" category. Twittenham 22:27, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All stub categories should have a non-stub category as a direct parent. They are not intended to exist in isolation. Caerwine Caerwhine 01:31, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So you say, but I disagree, so I will revert again. In my opinion you are putting the cart before the horse. It is the article categories which matter, the stub categories are an administrative matter and should intrude as little as possible. Twittenham 14:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The whole goal of stub sorting is to place them where people interested and capable of expanding them so that they are no longer stubs can find them. One means of doing that is by making certain they are accessible as directly as possible from the regular categories. Caerwine Caerwhine 02:04, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stubs are a minor, self-referential editors feature. Wikipedia should be optimised for readers, not for editors. Twittenham 11:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Animals in sport

Thanks for creating Category:Animals in sport - I've been meaning to since creating the animals in sport article but hadn't gotten around to it yet, so it's great that you've made it. violet/riga (t) 11:46, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Five tool player

I have clarified the intent of the five tool player category and explained my rationale at the CfD page you voted on. This may not change your opinion of the matter, but I felt it best to notify you of the change. Erechtheus 00:19, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorism in Kazakhstan

Thanks for adding those categories to Terrorism in Kazakhstan. KazakhPol 01:37, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recovering commonwealth english spelling

Very prosperous new year wishes to you - I wish you the best with that - without leting loose my biases - your effort is appreciated! SatuSuro 11:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Articles with unsourced statements

I am preparing a new CfD (Category for deletion nomination) for the category known as "Articles with unsourced statements" (i.e., articles with one or more fact templates). Given the increasing demand for more sourcing, this cat could quite foreseeably ultimately grow to encompass the vast majority of articles on the wiki. In my estimation that's far too broad to be an effective category. But perhaps more importantly, this cat was reinstated virtually unilaterally by an admin after a successful CfD, after which another CfD was short-circuited with a very arbitrary "speedy keep" only two days after it was opened. I probably will file it this week, after I further research the background of the issues that attend to this situation. Some of the attending issues can be found in a recent exchange at Category Talk:Articles with unsourced statements#This_category_should_not_even_be_here.2C_AFAICS.

Among the various issues involved are: 1) overly inclusive categories; 2) categories that constantly change in response to minor issues in individual articles (such as when fact templates are added and removed throughout the wiki); 3) the impossiblility of ever clearing such a massive list as new fact templates are placed and removed throughout the wiki; 4) the arbitrary nature of citation-needed templates throughout the wiki--there are many facts in need of citing, and such a category only accounts for those that have been actually noted as a template; 5) administrative truncating or short-circuiting of community process as happened with "Category:Articles with unsourced statements", and what properly is the range of admin discretion in closing AfDs, CfDs and DRVs prior to seven days under the "speedy" criteria; 6) how to properly deal with mistaken or abusive admin procedure after the fact when it is later discovered after having gone "under the radar"; 7) the related widespread use of User:SmackBot, which under an initial broad grant to use the bot for "various categories" has now managed to tag fact many tens of thousands of fact templates throughout the wiki as "February 2007", thereby letting us all know nothing more than that the bot was active in February 2007.

Thought you might like to know about it. Thanks, ... Kenosis 00:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This category is now up for deletion review at the following location: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_February_20 . ... Kenosis 12:44, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]