Hello, Greyskinnedboy, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place ((helpme)) before the question. Again, welcome! -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 08:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
David Davidjcmorris, although I agree streamlining the overview section was a good idea, I think a timeline would be beneficial in the article; deleting all of it like you did is not the best way to inform wikipedia readers of the growth and history of today's Kanban. I will try to combine your approach, with a summarized timeline too.
Hi there. I see what you mean - I'm just not fond of seeing the two boxes on the same side of the screen. Ironic really - that's the reason most people use the placed TOC in the first place. It just seems less natural from the default behaviour.
It don't really bother me eitherway, so revert if you so wish. Bobo. 01:55, 24 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fair enough. I was unaware the format for em-dashes in Wikipedia would be different from the style guide I use habitually for other work. Thank you for enlightening me. Greyskinnedboy Talk 07:58, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, I removed your edits to the BPM article again and explained here. Please respond first and try to get some consensus, before adding this info again.
P.S. I refraished my initial comment and will look into it some more. I don't oppose this kind of informtion being added to Wikipedia. In fact I favour more personal notes about the people involved in BPM. But this kind of information has to be added on the right place.
Well done for that (bunch of editors who haven't read WP:NEO properly 8-( ) Andy Dingley (talk) 11:13, 24 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I notices the Web 3.0. Would you mind if I moved it into the Wikipedia namespace. In particular to Wikipedia:Incubator/Web 3.0, as a sort of experiment to place articles that are deleted because is seems to be impossible to write an article about those topics at the current time. This would reduce the risk that the history of the article gets lots in userspace. It might increase the risk that is gets deleted from Wikipedia space as well, though (but in that case it can just be moves back to your userspace.)
The inconsistent application of rules was a result of my haste, so I've taken a more careful look and re-did some of my original edits more consistently across the article. Please see full response on my talk page. Everything counts (talk) 10:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The prospectus I read was printed in the early 1980s, under Shepherd's (sp?) headship, and mentioned several of the staff of that era. I don't know if we still have it or where it is; perhaps one of the other guys has it or could distribute a scanned copy. The prospectus was still in use until 1990; Mike Smith had a new prospectus printed in 1990 (there is a picture of me and Darren Young reading one of my computer magazines in Nelson dorm in there). I don't recall IQ per se being mentioned as a criteria in all the time I was there; the talk was of bright or intelligent boys and academic ability. If IQ was a criterion, we would have had to take an IQ test before entering, which I didn't and don't recall anyone mentioning it.
Other schools did use IQ; Bicknell school in Bournemouth did, and the headmaster of that school told me and my parents that he had removed a pupil from that school for coming below-par in an IQ test. Very few pupils were expelled from KHS while I was there (1989-93) and never for that reason. IQ is actually a controversial test of intelligence and not all education authorities would have used it.
You can find a definition of "bent" here and that's what the authors of the prospectus meant by it:
1 a: a strong inclination or interest : bias b: a special inclination or capacity : talent —Preceding unsigned comment added by IndigoJo (talk • contribs) 19:20, 16 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As some one who has edited the Kesgreave Hall School section of the Kesgrave Hall page before it was split off to it's own Kesgrave Hall School page, can I have your help on a number of issues relating to the page. I have posted to the Talk page. Thanks Mrodgers2099 (talk) 08:14, 14 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
With this edit to the above page, you removed some major delatil about Matthew Yusuf Smith, I have added the information back.
You also incorrectly marked the edit as "minor" - I think you may not understand what a minor edit is. To help you may want to take a look at WP:MINOR, taken from the page :
Checking the minor edit box signifies that the current and previous versions differ only superficially (typographical corrections, etc.), in a way that no editor would be expected to regard as disputable.
Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if the edit concerns a single word, and it is improper to mark such an edit as minor.
First, let me say that I accept I made a mistake in marking the change as minor, apologies for an unintended slip because I was in 'clean-up' mode. Including the religious and political views of a former pupil undermines the assertion that "everything ... written on the page is ... about the history of the building and the school" (clipped from your own user talk page). I'm not disputing that it is factual, just that it's not relevant to an article on the school. Anyone interested in who he is and what informs his views can follow the wikilink to the page on him. To keep it in unfortunately starts look personal, something not appropriate or encyclopedic. Greyskinnedboy Talk 01:59, 6 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A tag has been placed on Product camp requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: 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.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding ((hang on)) at the top of the article, immediately below the speedy deletion (((db-...))) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate), and providing your reasons for contesting on the article's talk page, 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. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Hi. Just a note to say I partially reverted your edit to the Rag (student society) article. Wikipedia to cite itself, so the cite you added wasn't a reliable source. If you can find mention of this elsewhere please feel free to re-add. Thanks. --Escape Orbit(Talk) 21:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Hi Rhododendrites, I happened to have this page on my watchlist and noticed your message. I fully agree with your assessment that the article turned into a linkfarm, and lacked reliable sources. In trimming down the links and adding some definitions from reliable source, I hope to have solved most of the problems. -- Mdd (talk) 12:02, 30 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Images in question
Problems with upload of File:InternationalInstituteOfBusinessAnalysis.jpg[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:InternationalInstituteOfBusinessAnalysis.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Fair use rationale for File:InternationalInstituteOfBusinessAnalysis.jpg[edit]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:InternationalInstituteOfBusinessAnalysis.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Radiant chains (talk) 07:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for pointers about fair-use policy. Could you take a look and check that I've marked it up correctly now? Thanks. Greyskinnedboy (talk) 09:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, the image is correctly tagged now. I also removed the deletion template, since you addressed the issue. Radiant chains (talk) 09:10, 27 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:PDMA logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.
If you received this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add ((bots|deny=DASHBot)) to somewhere on your talk page.
Orphaned non-free image File:GRASP button, on IBM 360, from SDI in 1973.jpg.png[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:GRASP button, on IBM 360, from SDI in 1973.jpg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
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) 16:19, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Davidjcmorris. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Hello, Davidjcmorris. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Hi, Davidjcmorris. I just wanted to thank you again for your help on the Scaled agile framework article. I've proposed some additional updates on the article's talk page, if you're willing to help out. Thanks! JB at Scaled Agile (talk) 21:59, 28 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Davidjcmorris. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Hello, Davidjcmorris. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nomination of A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge for deletion[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Thanks for uploading File:InternationalInstituteOfBusinessAnalysis.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
