User talk:David Newton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello there David, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page or how to format them visit our manual of style.

Experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Angela 12:42 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Hey David :)

I have created a new navbox example that could be used instead of the Alphabetical and List of Ships infoboxes. What do you think?

v • d • e
Ships of the Royal Navy
Alphabetical list of Royal Navy ship names

A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I - J - K - L - M - N - O - P - Q - R - S - T - U - V - W - X - Y - Z
Types of Vessels
Miscellaneous

Kind Regards

MiniEntente

Archive 1 - Archive 2 - Archive 3 - Archive 4

[edit] Very good work

Yes, I too have found that people are quite ignorant when it comes to lesser known military items. I have also seen how so many have no understanding of copyright and read sections that have been just lifted from books - with NO reference to them. Shameful. Well, that’s our job, I guess - to clean up and make it credit worthy.

On seeing your interests, I have know doubt our paths will cross again. If I can help on anything - RAF related that is - then let me know. --Rafbuffeditor 09:42, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Ship fate table fate

Hi, I just noticed that a template you created, Template:Ship fate table fate, is unused and appears to be abandoned. I've marked it as deprecated, meaning it'll be deleted in two weeks' time if nobody objects. If there's a reason to keep it please leave a note at Wikipedia talk:Deprecated and orphaned templates and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. Thanks. Bryan Derksen 03:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Redirect of Gettysburg Confederate Order of Battle

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Gettysburg Confederate Order of Battle, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Gettysburg Confederate Order of Battle is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Gettysburg Confederate Order of Battle, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 08:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox UK Legislation

Good work on this David. We need to get this into use. I have added some comments on the template talk page but will not attempt to edit is as aesthetics are not my strong point.Cutler 09:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

An open question/suggestion for you and Cutler: Shouldn't Template:UK legislation and Template:British legislation lists, Acts be merged? – Swid (talk · edits) 05:30, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Ship test depth

A few templates you created, Template:Ship test depth, Template:Ship fate, and Template:Ship fate box 2 active in service, have been marked for deletion as deprecated and orphaned templates. If, after 14 days, there have been no objections, the templates will be deleted. If you wish to object to their deletion, please list your objections here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the templates. If you feel the deletions are appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. Bryan Derksen (talk) 10:12, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, looking through User:Woohookitty/S, there appears to be a whole bunch of similar ship templates you created back in 2005 that are now completely orphaned. Can I clear them out en masse? Naturally I'll only delete the ones that are unused, I figure skipping the {{deprecated}} step makes sense in cases of large groups like this. Bryan Derksen (talk) 10:16, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question about a possible typo

I found what may be a typographical error in USS Vestal (AR-4)#Repairing the USS Pensacola:

  • "One has to be something of an artificer," her commanding officer recounted, ". . . to realize the problems that came up to dp with this job, such as underwater welding and cutting, which was still a fairly new thing."

I suspect "dp" in the above quote should actually be "do", but I am not entirely sure. WikiBlame identified the first revision in which this passage appears. Since that revision lists you as the author, could you check that quote for correctness? Thank you. --Teratornis (talk) 06:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] infobox ship

David, The info box on RMS Queen Mary 2 has this error Career [[{{{ensign2}}}|60px|{{{ensign_description2}}}]] {{{ensign_description2}}} could you please have a look to see if possible to fix/remove. Thanks. Palmiped 17:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wiki Doctorate

Wiki Doctorate is a new scheme designed to recognise the people who "do all the work" on Wikipedia. It has been mainly developed for Wikipedia administrators however if you have done lots to keep Wikipedia on "the straight and narrow", including being members of different groups which help Wikipedia i.e "The Welcoming Committee. We have selected to email you because you can apply for the doctorate and we would be very grateful if you did and put the userbox on your user page to boost advertising. The following link will take you straight to our homepage.

Yours sincerely

--Dr.J.Wright MD (talk) 23:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvio on The Baptist Union of Scotland

Hi David – perhaps I'm just being slow here, but I'm working through the backlog at WP:ABL and I can't see the copyright violation on the above linked article. There's no resemblance between our stub and the external page, as far as I can tell. Your comment would be appreciated. Cheers —αlεx•mullεr 18:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] UK Legislation Infobox

Good work on this David! Did you use <sup> rather than <small> to shrink the text for any particular reason? I have picked up User:Swid's point at Template talk:UK legislation.Cutler (talk) 21:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Not every Act of Parliament is notable (though I think that most are). It makes sense to me to:
  • Discuss some Acts within the context of more notable Acts. For example, I have just written Wills Act 1837 and it seems sensible to put a brief discussion of the Wills (Soldiers and Sailors) Act 1918 in the same article.
  • Wrap up the minor Acts for a year into a Minor Acts of Parliament of the United Kingdom in 2008 article - like the List of recurring characters from The Simpsons article (sort of)
Now I would also like to include all the important info on each Act as per the Infobox but that leads to a huge column down the right. The answer would be to have a mini-version of the Infobox that could be hidden/ autocollapsed like a NavBox. Any ideas how to do this?Cutler (talk) 12:48, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Done it - test soon.Cutler (talk) 17:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, <sup> it is then. I had had a quick look and thought that they came out the same but if <sup> is shorter it is definitely superior.Cutler (talk) 19:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

You've reverted the changes I made to the way the infobox shows delegated legislation. I would submit that the changes I made were correct. "Statutory Rules and Orders" is a misleading heading - these days there are only Statutory Rules in N Ireland. In the rest of the UK its Statutory Instruments, which replaced Statutory Rules in 1948. Indeed, the page List of Statutory Rules and Orders of the United Kingdom only covers rules up to 1947. Therefore I think the general heading of Delegated Legislation is correct as it covers both the former Rules and the current Instruments, which should be subheadings. (I've no problem with the capitalisation etc changes you made). Dmvward (talk) 16:25, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Indian Army

Please see Talk:British Divisions in World War II#British divisional article titles --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 10:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of 9th Carrier Air Group

A tag has been placed on 9th Carrier Air Group requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. LegoTech·(t)·(c) 14:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of 9th Carrier Air Group

I have nominated 9th Carrier Air Group, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/9th Carrier Air Group. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. LegoTech·(t)·(c) 16:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] US Army Transport Vessels

I noticed that you started a list on US Army transport vessels. Do you have any source material on a 150 foot transport vessel, General Frank M. Coxe, which was built in 1922 and decommissioned in about 1947? It was used to transport personnel around San Francisco Bay with scheduled service from Fort Mason to Fort McDowell (Angel Island), and provided some services to Alcatraz during and before federal prison period. It was later converted to a luxury tour ferry and finally to a floating restaurant. After sitting as vacant hulk for 20 years, it was recently restored as a restaurant. I'm working on an article and would appreciate any ideas or sources. Thanks! --Kevin Murray (talk) 09:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead with General Frank M. Coxe (ship) as a start. I'd appreciate your feedback. Should we add it to the list of list on US Army transport vessels? --Kevin Murray (talk) 04:21, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Support of User:Enforcer

I write in support of the user named above in this statement. I too have serious doubts about the legality of any of Wikipedia's activities under my own home state's laws (it's New York, horse racing central in the late summer). I'm not sure they're registered as required by the New York Non Profit Organizations laws. I'll enquire of this to the Attorney General of New York, Andrew Cuomo. And as to Mr. Wales not being a public figure, you're wrong. He's been in the media many times so now he has no protections of a private citizen if Enforcer chooses to sue in Florida. An NY Supreme Court justice would dismiss his countersuit in an instant if it was filed here. I'd like your opinion in this matter. 68.236.154.131 (talk) 18:45, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CfD nomination of Category:Royal Navy ships

Category:Royal Navy ships, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Bellhalla (talk) 14:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Ship table box aircraft yes

A template you created, Template:Ship table box aircraft yes, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. Bryan Derksen (talk) 01:22, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of template

Your (apparent) sandbox page User:David_Newton/New_Format_Ship_Tables/Prototype_tables contained a link to the template Template:Ship capacity box none which was otherwise orphaned and has been deleted. If you are still using your your prototype page, you should fix this. If you want the page deleted, add {{db-u1}} to the top of the page. --Selket Talk 17:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CfD nomination of Category:Military bases

Category:Military bases, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 00:14, 24 May 2008 (UTC)