User talk:Woody/archive6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Thanks

It seems everyone is leaving you thanks. I think you deserve a barnstar, so I'll be back. But I also re-read your message, and realized you were wondering if the Miller name was publicly available. In order to gain Wikinews accreditation, a person has to register his or her real name. So it's not a secret and it doesn't bother me. But I do keep Shankbone as a pen name. --David Shankbone 02:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Red Barnstar
Thank you for keeping your eyes peeled for others. David Shankbone 03:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Muhammad

Vandalism ????!!!! tell me abt it ... then what do u consider promoting religious hatred, i always thought of wikipedia as a source for information not as a place where you can promote hatred against others, the least you can do is to remove the faces from offensive pictures, thats if you don't want to remove them ... unless thats what you really want, to insult other's religions —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajai (talkcontribs) 13:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Fembots 2 APIMOM.jpg

I noticed you removed[1] the speedy delete I7 tag I placed[2] on this image. I have since replaced the tag [3] as I believe the image still meets the criteria which states "Non-free images or media that fail any part of the non-free content criteria and were uploaded after 13 July 2006", I do not think that the image meets with WP:NFCC criteria 10c which requires "a separate fair-use rationale for each use of the item". Currently the images uses the same rationale for two instances of its use - in the article Gynoid and the article Fembots (Austin Powers). Regards, Guest9999 (talk) 16:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I would like to point out that I notified the uploader[4] of the images Image:Fembots 2 APIMOM.jpg and Image:Fembot 3 APTSWSM.jpg almost immediately after I tagged them for speedy deletion[5][6]. Regards, Guest9999 (talk) 16:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Ah, yes you are right. I completely misinterpretted the way WP:CSD#I7 was written. Thanks for fixing my mistake, I won't make it again. Keep up the good work. Regards, Guest9999 (talk) 16:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)


Woody

Ah sorry, i forgot about the order. Rebel Redcoat (talk) 17:18, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Milhist newsletter

I think Roger was planning to put in some sort of message regarding the coordinator stuff, so you might want to ask him before sending it out.

As far as the logistics go, sending out the newsletter basically involves:

  1. Updating the links on the outreach department page.
  2. Leaving Cbrown1023 (talk · contribs) a note asking him to send it out.

Hope that helps! :-) Kirill 17:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Woody. I've updated the newsletter and added some stuff about BCAD (B-Class Assessment Drive). I'd be grateful if you'd give it the once over for typos. (You know me, typo-city!) May I leave arranging the remaining technicalities to you please? Many thanks, --ROGER DAVIES talk 08:06, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again, --ROGER DAVIES talk 12:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

(Outdent) Once you've added the new Admin section bit, can I leave it to you to arrange despatch? Or would you prefer I do so? --ROGER DAVIES talk 04:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Hilary Duff at FAC

But why did she fail the article??? the objections raised were minor prose issues which i had addressed a few days back. Since the opposing editors didnt respond, I left a note today on the opposing editors talk page to let them know that their objections had been addressed. Without giving some time to the nomination and without giving any opportunity to discuss this issue, how can she arbitrarily remove the nomination without specifying any reason??? I am posting a copy of this message on Sandy's talk page also.Gprince007 (talk) 18:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Article Quality rating

I have reverted your edit at Hulk (comics). The article actually FAILED, not just delisted. It was delisted as a result of the fail. Please read the talk page. You'll see that Admin David Fuchs failed the article. Thank you though for making an effort, but accuracy is important. ThuranX (talk) 19:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I do understand what you're saying. However, the admin states the article should never have passed. Therefore, his determination is that the initial pass was invalid on its' face, and so the article never should have been listed. This means that the five weeks it was listed are actually, well, let's call it a bureaucratic error. As such ,saying that it passed but was later delisted would be inaccurate. Delisting occurs when between the pass and the GAR major changes occur to ruin the quality of an article. This article never had sufficient quality, and thus failed from the get go. As such, I'm afraid that it's best to leave it as is, per Admin David Fuchs. Thank you for your efforts, but we must abide by consensus. ThuranX (talk) 20:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
You're not looking closely enough at the situation. I've tried to explain it to so many people, but they don't get it. It's not two stage charging each other, it's that one editor worked his ass off, getting help all over the place, and had consensus, and that an admin ignored consensus, gamed 3RR and so on. There's an AN/I section about it, where you can see all the relevant links. ThuranX (talk) 20:47, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm afriad I can not go to the talk page about this any more. I'm only pursuing this topic and no other until I get a community ban, or someone actually rebukes David Fuchs. Either way, at the end of that, I'm leaving. He's outright lying about me at this point, so there's no point in bothering with this project ever again. I jsut want to see if this ends with him or me banned. ThuranX (talk) 21:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Aston Villa edits

Hi there, I have reverted your edits to Aston Villa F.C. and Aston Villa F.C. seasons as they do not really improve the article for the layman reader. The shortening of the names in the seasons article would be confusing to those who don't know much about football (Albert Arthur Brown is confusing enough as it is), and this version of the names is preferred at WP:FLC.

I see your point but when you hoover over full name appears and I feel by reducing the depth of the rows you are able to get a clear understanding of the development/progression of the club over the seasons. Is there another way to do this? (Staylor st (talk) 21:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC))

Regarding the main AVFC article, some people don't know which flags are whose and so the nationalities are needed to distinguish this. The same can be said of the dates, the shortended version is against the Manual of Style, our style guide. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to leave a message at my talkpage. Regards. Woody (talk) 19:28, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Strongly disagree with regards to the nationalities - there is too much emphasis placed on this, surely this would be an issue with the players as well??
With the dates I can see your point of view, I felt by shortening them it would help to put emphasis on the years. Regards (Staylor st (talk) 21:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC))


Malmedy Massacre edits

Thanks very much for your help, I was a little hasty!fogle45 15:27, 03 March 2008 (UTC)

Birmingham derby

I'm sure you've got it covered, but similar recentism edits re:hooligans have been added to the Birmingham derby article. Best wishes. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:51, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Leo J. Meyer

Please have a look at the DRV for Leo J. Meyer (currently seen at User:Meyerj) located at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 March. Its my opinion that the article met the standards for verifiability and notability. I would appreciate your input into the matter. MrPrada (talk) 18:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Irish VC list

Hey, Woody. I've just initiated 29th Battalion, CEF to further blue-ify the list ;-). Its agonising to behold such a sub-stub but they're all valid, huh? Regards, SoLando (Talk) 21:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Unblock

Thank you kindly sir for handling this miscommunication like a gentleman. Creamy3 (talk) 22:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

In the news

I removed the "a" you added to "a FARC commander", because the A would only be necessary if we didn't give his name; since we've specified the commander, the "a" isn't really necessary. Alternately, we could say "killing a FARC commander (Raul Reyes)". Thoughts? Master of Puppets Call me MoP! 13:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

killing Raul Reyes, a FARC commander, and initiating... sounds good. I'll change it to that, if you don't mind. Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! 16:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Another Reddy Tor edit

User:134.48.216.40 .... Oy, on behalf of my country, I feel embarassed.... FlowerpotmaN·(t) 23:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

  • (reply) Yeah, just kidding there, but really, he has turned all stalkery now. oh, last one was 193.239.206.132 FlowerpotmaN·(t) 23:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)

The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 08:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Cut & paste help

Thanks a lot for all your help, and the heads up on where such requests would be better served next time. Much appreciated! :) AllynJ (talk | contribs) 17:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

February FAC reviewer data

Hey, Woody. I asked Epbr123 to work with me on this long ago, but he's semi-retired, so I spent the afternoon working this up myself. You used to pass out Reviewer barnstars; would you mind watching WT:FAC for the post I'm going to make there, and doing the honors? I don't think the barnstars should come from me. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much, you're a gem :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Now, if I had the nerve to publish the negatives, the backlog at FAC might disappear. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:40, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
It's true that the backlog isn't that bad since I stay on it daily, but it's also true that some reviewers have to work extra hard to overcome some less judicious declarations and pull articles through to status. My real concern is what happens if those reviewers burn out on us. There are some wonderful articles sitting there getting nothing, while the diligent reviewers have to work on articles that get premature support before they're FA ready. It was interesting to do the spreadsheet and see that my perception was right: we need to take care of the solid reviewers so they don't burn out. I wish there was a way to discourage those who consistently lodge premature Supports, as that places a burden on other reviewers. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:43, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but. The issues aren't necessarily coming from new reviewers. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Well ... my first comment went well enough. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:03, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

your note

Too kind, Woody. Thank you. Tony (talk) 11:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi, Woody, thank you for your kind words and the shiny barnstar! I'll display it with pride. :) María (habla conmigo) 13:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

What a nice surprise this morning. Thank you! Maralia (talk) 16:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

HMS Hecla

Hi, no problem at all. Colledge also lists only seven, with the one serving as a depot ship being active during the Mahdist wars, having been purchased in 1878. From what it sounds like, she was probably in the Red Sea involved in the ferrying of troops, and keeping them supplied during the conflict. As to where your man got his VC from, it was not unusual for mobile detachments of sailors to be formed to support land operations, a similar example is HMS Powerful (1895) in the Boer War, and earlier examples in the Crimea and the Opium wars. I'm not sure why your other source says HMS Hecla (A133) was the eighth though... Is there any context with the claim? Hope this is of some help, Benea (talk) 17:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I've added a little more to it from Uboat.net, but she doesn't appear in Colledge, or Geoff Mason's ship histories, making me wonder whether she was formally commissioned, or was just used as a support vessel with RN crew? Benea (talk) 19:04, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Honoured

Wow. I can certainly say I did not expect that. Thank you very much. Peanut4 (talk) 19:27, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

CCPS vandals

If you would really like to help out, soft block 169.139.98.194, 209.26.221.66, and 63.171.102.131 indef, we can't have these vandals getting an abuse report initiated just because they want to test the system. I'm sure I'm not the only one who knows how to access Wikipedia from school, but it is clear that no one but experienced users with user accounts have known about the "secure Wikipedia" until recently. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 21:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the barnstar! I really appreciate it! Awadewit | talk 01:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Contest

On this page, I noticed that you graded last months, but seeing as you have some articles up this month, would you mind if at the end of the month I graded and did the setup? ~ Dreamy § 02:44, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Or must you be a coordinator to do that? ~ Dreamy § 02:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Alright, that makes sense, thank you for the reply and clearing that up. ~ Cheers! Dreamy § 19:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Advice

I advice you in connection with my intention which was in good faith and never I made legal threats. My talk page is fully protected and I can answer only here. Regards, PIO 9 Mar 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.87.245 (talk) 16:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes my user page is open but my account is blocked by Yamla with a ban: I request annulment of this unfair ban!!!! Regards, PIO 9 Mar 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.87.245 (talk) 16:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Retail Investor

I completely agree that User:Retail Investor was a spam account. However, I wasn't aware that we typically deleted user pages in this situation. Would blanking and salting be enough? The reason I ask is because I'm encouraging the user to WP:CHU and I don't know how deleting the user page might impact that. Just curious. Ronnotel (talk) 20:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

My request for bureaucratship

Thank you

Thank you for semi-protecting article Gene Green Dbiel (Talk) 19:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Got a minute?

When you've got a moment could you please take a look at WT:MHCOORD#Admins? It would be nice to resolve it one or the other :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 13:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, --ROGER DAVIES talk 14:15, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

JSTOR

Looking for this article:

The Fifty-first Annual Meeting
David A. Shannon
The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 52, No. 2 (May, 1986), pp. 213-238
This article consists of 26 page(s).

Can you help? I'll drop you an email now, so you have my address. Thanks! Maralia (talk) 21:41, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Delighted you were able to get to me so fast - but it hasn't arrived yet. Slow mail, perhaps? I will be patient :) Maralia (talk) 02:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I got what must have been the second try - thanks very much! Hope your two week break is for a fun reason! Maralia (talk) 15:22, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review idea

Hi, I have made a proposal that no peer review request be archived without some response. To aid in this, there is a new list of PR requests at least one week old that have had no repsonses beyond a semi-automated peer review. This list is at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog.

There are just over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, so I figure if each of these volunteers reviewed just one or two PR requests without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog (as there have been 2 or 3 such unanswered requests a day on average).

If you would be able to help out with a review or two a month from the "no responses" backlog list that would be great (and much appreciated). Please discuss questions, comments, or ideas at the PR talk page and thanks in advance for your help, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

PS Welcome back

Strange question ?

Have you ever played the computer game called "age of empires 3" online ?--Burds (talk) 08:12, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Royal Navy volunteer at WP:PR?

Could you review this? Basketball110 Go Longhorns! 20:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thanks!

BCAD

Just the gentlest of gentle reminders ... could you spare a little time to finish off your range at BCAD please? The drive has only a week or so left to run :) All the best, --ROGER DAVIES talk 06:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Spring!

PIO

Hi Woody. I'm a sysop of it.wiki. There are some problems with user PIO. For same reasons, he was blocked infinite on it.wiki. He writes in Italian on my talk page: he says that admins are a problem because blocked infinite users (sic), that wiki isn't a free enciclopedia, that wiki is like Mao Zedong regime. PIO's first message in my talk referred to his infinite block on it.wiki; there are personal attacks and flames tentatives. I see that you've other contacts with his user. Excuse for my English, regards and thank you. --Leoman3000 (talk) 18:36, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

FLC

I have left comments at the FLC for List of Victoria Cross recipients of the Royal Navy -- αŁʰƏЩ @ 20:14, 25 March, 2008

Flower class corvettes

Hello
I see you are involved in the ship project and the military history project, so perhaps you can advise me. I’m involved in a discussion at Flower class corvettes on the correct class name, and I’m needing some perspective. Can you make a suggestion? How can I resolve it?
Xyl 54 (talk) 17:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I've given my opinion at the page. I'm afraid I was a little short but I was gobsmacked by the fact that there was even a debate. The sources are very clear, the user in question is basing his argument on a misunderstanding of Royal Navy conventions and a rather baffling refusal to dismiss any sources that question his reading of the situation. Benea (talk) 19:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
(Moved over so as to see all discussion) Regarding your recent disagreement there, may I ask you to stop your circular argument. Another user has just listed a rather complete list of reasons why your name change is unneccessary and accurate. The discussion has degenerated into a circular argument with sources backing up the other side. Could you please agree to disagree and back away from the page? Woody (talk) 20:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
If the page stays at "Flower", I can live with it. I've sourced the in-page change, which (AFAIK) is all I need to keep it in the page; you can argue with Preston over "misunderstanding of Royal Navy conventions", 'cause it's his authority I'm relying on, not mine. If he's wrong, I still want to see an official source saying so, 'cause I'm not buying generic names as official, & all the sources on the other side don't (AFAIK) say Gladiolus is not the class name; they just don't say it is. So who's misunderstanding the sources? Or conventions? Trekphiler (talk) 21:17, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
According to the string of sources that people have taken the trouble to list, that would be, err you. Why would they bother to write "The Flower class corvettes, which were not called the Gladiolus corvettes, were built..." This is called "Proving a negative." And where have you got this concept of a generic name from, which seems to state that a ship class must always officially known by the first ship? An official source would help your case though somehow I wouldn't be surprised if you failed to provide one. Benea (talk) 21:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
A belated thank you for your (and Benea’s ) intervention. Yes, it was going in circles, and yes I can agree to disagree and find something else to do; I’m not short of projects and this has been eating up the time. It seems to be resolved now anyway. Xyl 54 (talk) 15:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

About Electrobe

In fact this user has been joining many edit war and editing without consents of other wikipedians. (see his user talk) I have also try to revert some of his edits but you can not withstand with him finally. I see you are experienced wikipedian, can you suggest furthur actions to be taken against him? --Anglicaneditor (talk) 12:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

MILHIST template

OK sounds good--Kumioko (talk) 18:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Getting exasperated...

No worries dude. I could have expressed it better. Let's move on. I'll reappraise tomorrow and let you know how I feel. I only added comments when I saw your note to Scorpion, thought I could add another support and guarantee promotion. Problem was I found a few snags. Anyway, should be four supports tomorrow... have a good evening, no hard feelings all round I hope. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, 2-0 at halftime was all I saw. Waiting for MOTD... Take it easy... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hofkirche

If you read the article, you will see it was built as a mausoleum, but the body was never in the end moved there. I think it was better before, but I can't change it. Johnbod (talk) 15:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)