User talk:Boothy m

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Boothy m, 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! 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!  Peripitus 12:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] BATracer

Hi, I've marked this article for proposed deletion as it seems to simply be an advert for an online game with no assertion that it is notable enough for wikipedia. If you want to contest this please follow the instructions on the page - Peripitus 12:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:BATracerScreenshot.jpg)

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:BATracerScreenshot.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. 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.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BigDT 17:29, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Some of your recent edits, such as those you made to Joe Davidson, have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Rettetast 12:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Agreeing is fine.

Okay, two things, Wikipedia:Sandbox and Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not Andante1980 12:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cricket graphs

Hi there. Raven taught me how do it. If you send me an email Special:Emailuser/Blnguyen I can send you the examples. thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in replying, I've been rather busy with a new job. I see Blnguyen is assisting you (thanks Blnguyen!). Raven4x4x (talk) 03:22, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Balwearie High School

Can you explain why you reverted my addition of the external link to the school's own web site please? As per "If you are undoing an edit that is not vandalism, explain the reason in the edit summary rather than using only the default message" I can only assume you believed my edit to be vandalous. This was certainly not the intent and I'm unclear as to why you would think so. The web site may only have contact details and an image of the school badge at present but is clearly genuine and a pertinent addition to the article. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:02, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

So since my edit wasn't vandalism, as per the instruction you should have explained the reversion. Although "because it has the correct domain name,...that (does not necessarily) make it genuine", neither in a site containing such mundane and apparently correct data is there anything to suggest it is "quite obviously...not "[a] clearly genuine [website]". If you have reason to believe that it is bogus, spurious or fraudulent, details would have been useful in an explanation.
All that said, as the domain name is also listed on Scottish Schools Online and Scottish Government, that would suggest it is genuine. More evidence of its falsity is required than simply your claim of inside knowledge as you attended the school earlier this year. If you have such evidence, it's even more important that you explain this fully as that would mean a false domain is being listed as genuine on government and government supported sites.
You may find this useful regarding reversions. Also, please AGF and sign your comments as per guidelines. All the best. Mutt Lunker (talk) 01:28, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi again, FYI I've added this to the Balwearie entry's talk page. Mutt Lunker (talk) 01:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I have never and do not query your GF. Pointing you towards some guidelines which your editing may indicate that you are unaware of does not mean I question your good faith. I’m sorry if you feel offended and we should try to focus on issues of notability and avoid a personal punch-up. This will be difficult if you maintain an accusative tone towards my motivations for the addition of the link. Some background might be useful:
I came across this apparent Balwearie site for the first time last week when looking for information to clear up an apparent contradiction between the Kirkcaldy article and the Balwearie article. I had never seen the site before and am sure I would have done had it existed in previous months, for example when trying to find citations for matters regarding the motto in March and April (see the talk page if you're interested (drew a blank on that by the way)). Having chanced upon the site I added a link in Wikipedia, in good faith. I noted however that it is "apparently under construction" as it had only recently (a few months at most and possibly much less) made an appearance, with only the homepage and contacts page with any content. As there are other linked pages on the homepage, there would appear to be, or have been, intent to construct these. The date the domain was registered is neither here nor there. It has apparently been entirely unused for most of the interim.
The listing of the website on official government sites further indicates it is at least genuine. It may possibly be dormant, recently awakened, inaccurate (“the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth”), pure rubbish, but if it is genuine, has a place as a link in the article. When I said “if you have reason to believe that it is bogus (etc.)”, I meant this literally, not as a rebuff. If, despite any indications to the contrary, it is in fact spurious, garnering some evidence on this would be really useful. If it is genuine but inaccurate, note this by the link.
I hope this won’t sidetrack us but you have specifically requested an answer to “what (I) thought (I) would gain”. My answer was there; purely and simply AGF. I may or may not be mistaken in believing the website to be genuine but I'm puzzled as to the basis for your apparent belief that I added it to the site for some unspecified gain. Why do you refer to my credibility when the issue is surely the credibility or otherwise of the edit/website therein? You say that it was intended by the school to produce a website. If and when that website is produced wouldn't it be the article (not me, or you, or any individual user) that gained from having a link added?
To change the subject back to the school motto (mentioned in passing above), as a more recent pupil if you have any leads on any Scott of the Antarctic (or Scott of Balwearie) connections I’d be interested to hear. All the best - and I mean it - Mutt (not Matt). Mutt Lunker (talk) 15:23, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
The recent clarification regarding the Balwearie site was interesting and useful. I'm bemused as to why you should apparently view this as a personal dispute. Regarding "numpty", see under the Petty examples here [1] Mutt Lunker (talk) 08:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC)