Toolbox | ToDo | Sandbox | WIP'S | Commons | Meta-Wiki | Wiktionary
Welcome!
Hello, SFC9394/Archive2006, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, you can post to the help desk or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --TimPope 10:40, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed your AFD vote on Principality of Marlborough and thought you might also be interested in these similar votes that are currently underway: [1], [2], [3] and [4] --Centauri 02:29, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Yo! You guys contribute stuff to your user pages, why can't I contribute to the User:66.122.0.126 user page. In my oppinion this is not an article, so I have more freedom to do stuff to that page. I also understand your side of the argument. I will not upload more images to that page, But can it be kept the way it is for now? PLEASE? --BorisFromStockdale 06:16, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
User:66.122.0.126 - have a read of Wikipedia:No personal attacks before you bother posting on my talk page again. SFC9394 20:32, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
I'll submit the information because it is valid information. How well known the information is does not make it more or less qualified as Encyclopedia information. Examples such as Digg, half.com, slashdot.org, are all of the same family as UniversityNote.Net. I find it quite disturbing that information is policed in such a way that number of "google hits" is a determining factor as to the relevancy of the information. Optikshell 23:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Leaving a message with no personal content or reference does not qualify as a personal attack. Optikshell 23:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm not the one starting the war. Copernicus was and is Polish astronomer. The problem with wiki is that some German nationalist try to insert German propaganda from WWII. See articles about Copernicus in any serious encyclopedia like Britannica, Encarta, Columbia. He's always described as Polish there. Ak47K
Following our discussion about Scottish Infobox Map Standardisation... I have breifly looked into generating maps with freely available tools and data. FreeGIS was quite good, but I was still overwhelmed by the amount of software available. Can you give me some pointers on the software/data you used to create the Scotland topo map. cheers. Hellinterface 16:29, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi, fair enough changing the source - I was searching for a better one before you edited. Closest thing I can find to Horrocks saying other media news offices prefering Sky News over News 24 was this Daily Telegraph column [5] (third story down), but seems to be the columnist reading into things a bit. I guess it depends whether "key opinion formers" is interpreted to include news media. Anyway cheers for the edits, my major objection was the anon IP blanking stuff with no apparent effort at checking for a source. --Matthew Humphreys 15:09, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Forgive my memory, but there are so many wiki acronyms that I don't know them all! - what does this one stand for? I recognise what I was posting was potentially useful to certain individuals - but surely something should be done about it rather than just ignoring it? It is a live problem (it struck me when I first went to the talk page), so it is something that certainly needs to be fixed. SFC9394 23:36, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes SFN is notable enough to have an article, other sites with less have one so its only fair :)
Hi SFC, I was working away clearing out some backlog at WP:CSD. I see you have started tagging redundant Scotland infobox maps - GREAT. Some of them, however, are not totally redundant yet (Image:Forfar-Scotland.png for example). Can you please make sure that all linked pages have been updated with the new image before tagging for speedying. If you prefer, you can just pass me a list for deletion in due course and I will work my way through it as part of the effort. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:20, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
That is not a "second Infobox" that I restored to the Selkirk article, it was the original one! Somebody had created a 2nd Infobox, despite a polite request at SCOWNB not to, pending conclusion of discussion. You also managed to blanket reveret many other edits at the same time and revert to the broken layout. Please do not blanket revert, but rather only revert specific items to which you object. --Mais oui! 12:31, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
As you are an expert on topographical mapping and I am a complete waste of space at anything computergraphical, I'm after a favour if at all possible. Please. For using in Scottish historical articles (and the demographic and economic history ones that aren't done yet), it would really very useful to have a simplified "land use" map of Scotland (ideally extended south in England to the Tees and including Ulster as far west as Lough Neagh, but beggars can't be choosers, and that could just as well wait until I figured it out for myself). Stealing someone else's good idea for a simple solution, because a proper soil and land cover map would be impossible, showing just three elevations would do. That would give an idea of land use possibilities (farmland, grazing, mountaineering). The limits would be =<200m, =<600m and >600m. Is that something that would be possible ? And if it is, would you be interested in making such a map ? Cheers ! Angus McLellan (Talk) 12:35, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Wow, these wall-chart things are really impressive. I'm always pleased to find that wikipedia can still throw up surprises like this. Good work! What's the reason for the colour coding in the headings for 'First round', 'Second round', etc? Flowerparty☀ 05:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
I just found out about your pages on the World Snooker Championships, the template tree looks good and is clear. Keep it up! - Nick C 19:20, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
This is the excerpt from Wikipedia:Avoiding common mistakes:
Deleting your User Talk page or removing text from your User Talk page. Your User Talk page is the best way others have of communicating with you. It's OK to clean up or archive old content, but please be careful before removing content from your User Talk page; it may look as though you're trying to hide criticism. --ComSpex 01:15, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Also, I agree on the opinion meta:Anonymous users should not be allowed to edit articles. That's the reason why I usher users into login page before writing to my talk page.--ComSpex 01:24, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Any POVs having nothing to do with the sole purpose of Wikipedia are not necessarily reviewed by busy editors so intensively, save that I respect your freedom to advocate your own POV about talk page. I'd like to know why you are so much interested in my talk page among many other talk pages similar to mine.--ComSpex 02:32, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Eager McBeaver - posted a fake warning here due to me reverting his/her vandalism SFC9394 20:49, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I wouldn't worry about his warning on my talk page, the user is a vandal who is just unhappy because I reverted his vandalism (see Physics history for a full run-down of situation). Ironically I am currently in discussion with User:ComSpex on the very issue of how much control a user has over his/her talk page. Aside from reverting obvious vandalism (as I have done with Mr Eagers warning) I would probably air on the side that comments should be made available for other editors to see - which is what comspex is disagreeing with. SFC9394 20:43, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't want to block that IP because it isn't adding spam links right now (within a few minutes), so it isn't an imminent threat, and it is registered to "African Network Information Center", which no doubt has multiple users. I hope that cleared this up, if you really think this IP should be blocked post a message to WP:ANI. Good luck, and happy editing! Prodego talk 22:11, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
219.105.45.236 originally placed (another) sock warning here - which I replied to below pointing out the wonders of checkuser (both that it would clear me and implicate him) funnily enough he then removed the sock warning. SFC9394 18:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
I have removed this - anon IP - 219.105.45.236 (who I am in no doubt as to who it really is) seems to think that I am a sockpuppet of someone else - and someone else is a sockpuppet of me - clearly doesn't have a very good handle on exactly what sockpuppetry is - or on providing any evidince to back up a completely and wholly false claim. I shall be reporting to RFI shortly. SFC9394 16:57, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
I have made some changes to the Snooker infobox, check it out at the Marco Fu article. Thanks. - Nick C 19:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Another fake warning by the vandal Eager McBeaver - seems he/she is on a fastrack to a ban. SFC9394 15:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Sorry for vandalising your page. I'll stop now.
Dear SFC, Just a quick note of thanks for sending me all those great links in your welcome message. It was much appreciated...and it has kept me so busy I forgot my manners. Well, belated thanks. :). Best wishes, Pia 21:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
If I see any more vandalism from you on the "Snooker" page, I'll ask to have you blocked from Wikipedia. bigpad 23:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
You appear to have some great skills (and software) for topographical mapping & I have neither of these so I was wondering if I could ask a favour. I've been doing some work on the Chew Valley page & have just put it up for FA status but it really needs a map. If you look on the talk page there is a big discussion about the water catchment area versus common usage & I put in a request for a map to make this clearer in March - but no one with the expertise has been forthcoming. Cheeky I know but I really would appreciate any help you could offer. Rod 13:09, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your thoughts. Yes the valley is really the area within your red line & perhaps we could zoom in a bit on the valley itself. My ideal would be something like - shading (or similar) to show the water catchment area (or perhaps two maps as you suggest - I'm not sure which is best & really have no expertise); including villages, rivers, lakes, SSSI's etc - in fact everything on Template:Chew Valley but I think this would get too "busy". There are no rail services (just a disused line roughly parallel to the A37). It would be nice to also show the A368 & possibly go as far as the A38 in the west - but this would depend on scale & shape of the map. The rivers, lakes & tributaries really define the valley so they would be the most important features & most of the settlements are at points where it was possible to bridge/ford the rivers. It definitely needs to go from Chewton Mendip (grid reference ST597531) to Keynsham ST654684 & include as far west as Winford (grid reference ST540651).
It also need to have North pointer of some kind & a scale (the one someone made for me of the lake at Image:Chew Valley Lake map.PNG has been criticised for not having a scale). I really appreciate your help & I'd be guided by your expertise. Rod 06:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
I think "Chew Valley" is OK as the title as that is what the article is called the other chew valley near Manchester is Chew Valley, Manchester. RE: Highpoints there are some Marilyns, Beacon Batch (Black Down, Somerset) probably doesn't make it on but Dundry Down should. — Rod talk 19:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello.
It was I who initially changed the definition of physics so let me explain myself: the physics article has been recognised as an important one, and as such required a proper definition. I will not personally change it back to my definition but I will outline the reasons why I think the current definition is terrible in the discussion page. I would like to get as many people as possible talking about this so if you have an opinion, please let it be known. Thank you. Krea 17:16, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the welcome! (Although, it's not much of a "home page"). An agreement about what everyone - or at least, people who know anything about physics - prefer is all that I hoped for. Hopefully, my counter-response made the point that I was labouring to get at: I sure do hope people start talking about the issue as it's very important. Anyway, I won't bother you again on you (much better) home page about the topic: I'll leave that to the discussion page... Krea 19:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
We'll give it the weekend then; although, I don't expect anyone to make a contribution: I've noticed people seem to disappear for long periods of time after I make my opinion known (for some reason I haven't quite worked out). Anyway, I'll be very busy until Thursday so don't be surprised if it takes me a while to get back to you, or the discussion page; I should be relatively free after that. Just give me a shout when you're happy to proceed. Until then, Krea 12:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
I've re-formulated my definition and placed it on the physics talk page: let me know if you have any objections. I'll make my own intro section and see how people like that (or not, as the case may be) soon. Later, Krea 23:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello. P0M seems to be happy with the definition (I hope). Do you have any comments about it? Also, nobody else seems to be bothered to contribute, so what now? Krea 14:20, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Good one, I've merge them both together: Perth Airport (Scotland) /wangi 21:47, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
You need to ask about stuff being put on the spam bloacklist here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist
Geni 11:51, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello, why you delete links? for example look http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_26 http://www.tnl.net/when/12/26 and **** why you remove this?
Regards —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.38.164.139 (talk • contribs) .
rv edit by Gavin@... - addition doesn't have an article, and if it did I doubt it would meet WP:CORP
Sorry but what is wrong? I add a new site with informations about Gran Canaria, Im living there and all informations is up to date. I have the same site on danish language without any problems and all the communities in the island know my site. If we not can add some new sites by ourself there is a lot of sites on wikipedia there not can be on the site.
Best regards, webmaster canario.co.uk
The use of "treats of" in the exposition is not improper as the Webster's Dictionary, 1913 definition of physics employs the same diction in a similar context. Also, as I have aforementioned in the history of the article in question, replacing "treats of" with the "study of" transforms the second sentence into another definition of physics, while unneccessarily ridding of a proper encyclopedic tone. Further, snickering over someone's inability to revert an edit until twenty four hours have elapsed is not amusing nor proper conduct of a Wikipedian. -- 68.224.247.234
Remove the argument between you and me on the hearts discussion. They no longer serve a purpose since I no longer debate the issue of the definition of country. Snowbound 02:36, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
You're right, I will delete anything I damn well please on MY talk page. As for your pompous "advice". You know where you can put that. And kindly stay the hell away from my profile. Snowbound 04:40, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Seems you're a tad confused about how this place works, despite claiming to be a big contributer? I'll remind you of what you said shall I?
"The control you have over your own talk page is greater than an article namespace page, and what you can and can't do with it has been the subject of some debate in the past - I don't think you should have deleted the NPA warning that was posted to your talk page - but ultimately that is little to do with me."
Bit of a contradiction is this not? On the one hand you're chastising me for wiping the Hearts discussion page, which is fair enough, I hold my hands up that that was against the rules. In the same breath (therefore still on the subject of board clearing) you claim I have more control over MY OWN discussion pages. Hinting that I am able to clear anything on there.
Further more, you more or less claim that it is in black and white that I cannot clear warnings from my talk page, and yet you also say this is still being debated? Is it a rule or not? You also say that these issues are little to do with you, but at the same time are quite prepared to moan about me doing it? My point is that you seem to be contradicting yourself all over the place and giving out false information. As a fairly new editor I will admit I have made a few mistakes. However as a supposedly "experienced" user of wikipedia, you need to stop giving out contradictory information to people. Snowbound 22:50, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I've just been looking at the great map that you made for the Chew Valley. I was thinking of making something simmilar for a parish that I'm working on and wondered where you got your information from and what the resultant copyright status would be? Hope you can help, take care Mammal4 14:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your message, I suppose you got me from the industrial revolution page. I just started editing wiki, I like to 'dig' and debunk myths, and sometimes I do small alterations to articles. I currently specialise in industrial revolution because I'm a libertarian, very rare in The Netherlands.
I noticed you added a bit about Opera on the WP:SPOKEN main page, but have you ever tried having it read WP though? It pauses at every link, which on WP means it becomes intolerable pretty quickly. If there's a way to fix this perhaps you could shed some light on it - for both the page and my own use. Thanks. Moulder 04:55, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your note about the Physics review, SFC9394. My approach in recent weeks has been to stay away until things settled down, but perhaps that is unlikely to happen without the current drastic move. My own interest is in the foundations: historical, etymological, and philosophical. I am equipped to contribute authoritatively with these things – not with the detailed content of the rest of the article. I can help, though, with copyediting for structure, grammar, punctuation, consistency of various kinds, and the like. I'll take a look at the proposal now. Noetica 01:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for bringing this to my attention.
I am starting to look at the state of the article, and hope then to go on to help.
Recent articles in Physics Today say that explaining (teaching) physics to non-mathematical people is still an "active area of research".
Perhaps one thing I can bring is my memory of an unusually fine early introduction to physics. If we could repeat what I heard when in high-school and before, to readers, the problem might be half solved. David R. Ingham 04:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I already see inconsistencies. Wikipedia seems now much better at detail than on general subjects. Reading on. David R. Ingham 05:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
SFC9394, might it be time for a vote? -- Ancheta Wis 12:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Physics/wip"
This edit by an IP address looks very much like the work of User:Wikinorthernireland. Thanks. --Mais oui! 12:16, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
How do you do those nice maps for the infoboxes? --Mais oui! 00:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
SFC9394, I was delighted to see what you have done to initiate the next phase of development of the Physics article. To be perfectly honest, I was worried that the process might be ready to stall; but things are looking very promising, now! A couple of procedural points I would like to air, here rather than there:
I hope you don't mind my putting these ideas to you. I want to help, of course: and I'm sure others will too. Meanwhile, congratulations on a fine start! – Noetica 00:40, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I agree he's a spam username; however WP:AIAV isn't quite inteded for that sort of thing, I would take it to WP:ANI. I'll block him though ;-) The Land 10:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
You have said on my discussion page:
" An edit like this is also incorrect. The flag is copyrighted and has been tagged as such. It is used under United States Fair Use rights - wikimedia servers are based in Florida and content here is under the jurisdiction of Florida & US laws. The flag can, and should, be used - it is not illegal to do so."
This has nothing to do with Florida and US laws nor anything to do with copyright. What it has to do with is the law of arms in Scotland. The flag that was being displayed is the banner of Orkney Islands Council (OIC), it displays the arms of OIC - that is the arms of the body OIC, not the arms of Orkney the Council Area of Scotland. These arms are used on official seals etc. of the Council. The laws of arms in Scotland are strict. The way the flag was being used in the wikipedia template implies use or endorsement by OIC and so in Scotland is illegal. In the absence of an "official" Orkney Community Flag (there is an official one in the offing, by the way), I replaced OIC's banner by the unofficial Orkney Community Flag, as this is widely recognised as "Orkney's flag", both within in outwith the isles and, furthermore, its use infringes no law.
When it comes to Orkney matters, by the way, I DO know what I am talking about (which is why I have so resented the constant harassment I have been subjected to by User:Mais oui! ). I would love to be able to contribute my knowlege to Wikipedia, but unfortunately I cannot do it without constant attack by the aformentioned.
Regards, Mallimak 12:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Ages ago you helped me with a map for Chew Valley & wondered whether you might be able to help with another map. It's not actually Bristol, but not far away. I've been doing some work on the Kennet and Avon Canal & have put it up as a FA candidate. One of the comments made was that it would be improved by a map. I've seen maps here, here and here but don't have the knowledge or skills to create one. — Rod talk 20:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I think both the K&A canal map & the locks map are brilliant - will you link them from the article pages? Thanks again for all your work on this. Any chance of Somerset Coal Canal one? — Rod talk 12:13, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting the vandalism to Stranraer carried out by the sock puppet of someone who obviously feels it was wrong of me to revert their earlier vandalism. Fraslet 17:43, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Where do you think they got it from? The got it from here in Wiki! http://www.20minutestolessstress.com/nemo%20sushi.jpg DocEss 21:00, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi SFC9394. Thanks for all the good work you're doing on the Physics/wip project. You might feel you already have enough to do with your moderator responsibilities, but I don't think that those are incompatible with your contributing to the discussion as well, if you want to. This project will only work if there are a good range of editors, and the numbers at the moment seem a bit low. --MichaelMaggs 17:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
We may almost have beaten eachother to some sort of consensus on this. Would you have a look and see if you think it's now time to guide editors towards a final conclusion? (I'm away all next week, btw). --MichaelMaggs 15:41, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
You may need to jump in again to stop more discussions which are going nowhere.--MichaelMaggs 10:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi, you recently had a dicussion with a user regarding a copyright image of Nemo as sushi. The same user has uploaded another image as his own work. However, it looks very professional. I was not able to find the image using a quick google image search. I was wondering if you knew of any tools for such a search. Sincerely, --BostonMA talk 19:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
So, what section of the article do you think I should put the "East Galloway = Kirkcudbright", "West Galloway = Wigtonshire" formula in? I've had a look at the structure of the article and can't see anywhere obvious, which is, y'know, why I put it in the intro in the first place: this is the only part in the article where Wigtownshire and the Stewartry are actually mentioned, so bar doing a major rejig that was the only place where it flowed. Morwen - Talk 21:57, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
I have just received a message regarding links, we have a network of visitor information websites around the UK which we believe will be extremely helpful for people who are wishing to learn about any individual town and as such I am currently adding links to the relevent section on this website such as www.bostonuk.com etc would I be ok to continue this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.163.87.53 (talk • contribs) .
Some moderation would be appreciated.
As it is, the project and/or structure is flawed, with plenty of evidence to show this. It is not for lack of trying. Hundreds of thousands of words have been written. I believe the page structure is dysfunctional. Work ought be done on the wip page, and talk ought to go on the talk:wip page.
If the project were to die, it could be used as an example of what not to do and how not to do it. I have mentioned on the page that it seems to have re-created a Nupedia situation.
It seems to me that you ought to have an interest in making this project succeed.
--Ancheta Wis 12:33, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Is the edited link spam? Are you insane? Don't delete my edition any more! I am full of anger to your deletion of my first edition. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chemistrypal (talk • contribs).
If you feel that this article is worthy of inclusion you may want to edit it. As it stands it offers no notability or verification. As for criticism of other peoples actions, if you believe two or three mistagged CSD per year are excessive I bow before your perfection. Nuttah68 16:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi again, After your fantastic work on the maps for Chew Valley, Kennet and Avon Canal and Somerset Coal Canal would you be willing to tackle the Somerset coalfield which overlaps with some of the others? I've included all the pits with grid refs in the article, but it would be useful to include the rivers, roads, railways & tramways/trackways which joined them all together. I'm still working on the coalfield article but any thoughts appreciated.— Rod talk 17:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
if you are unhuppy with situations like this please consider to visite from time to time Wikipedia talk:Fair use,where this insane policy was made and participate in the votes.Please also trie to atracte others to the isue.--Bootstrapping 14:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi there,
You are quite right: Mohammed Yousuf is an amateur player and miles away from reaching the list of notable players (all-time greats). All the best and Happy Christmas bigpad 20:03, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
one of my friends thought it would be funny to edit pages while i wasn't at the comp during school, using my acct. --Chain Impact 14:59, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello,
Thank you for your comments regarding Brain Chain . . . I added the Brain Pill and was going to write quite a bit more, but had to go do "Christmas things" . . . and now that I see your comments I believe you are correct that a full article should not be devoted to that. . . I am not sure how to delete a full page, can you help me with that?
I will also edit Brain Chain (which I believe is a worthwhile topic but could be wrong) per your comments. I also thank you for those and for your help in making Wikipedia better! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeaglin (talk • contribs) 07:58, 25 December 2006 (UTC).