User talk:Ian13/Archive10

Archive 10

Please do NOT edit this page, If you wish to reply to any message on here then please copy the whole conversation to my current talk page. Thanks! Ian¹³ /t 21:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MedCabal

Hi, we have a heavy backload of cases at WP:MEDCAB and since you are on the mediator list I thought I would request your help. Thanks! --Ideogram 10:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox version

This is a userbox version of the barnstar that I previously gave you. Use if you wish : ) - jc37 10:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Original Barnstar - For being the first to be helpful as explictily requested, I award you a Helpful Barnstar : )
- Jc37 15:45, 3 September 2006

-Thanks :) Ian¹³ /t 21:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Title Paragraph

Hi, I would like to write up a new article as wikipedia:titleparagraphs. I'd appreciate your assistance. Title paragraphs often called 'opening' paragraphs in the literary world are very important to seize readers’ attention and encourage them to read on. Title paragraphcs need to be written in a surmising style in as few concise but detailed sentences as possible.

Notice the difference between this article and this one. A remarkable difference. Are you going to read the a whole title paragraph like that for every article you look up? Long title paragraphs deter users who are simply surfing or frantically looking for the low down of a specific subject at handm, they are also a pleasure for the serious researcher.

Unfortunately this is not a guideline. I think editors should be advised about this point and I would feel privileged to start the article. Please let me know how I could go about it. Thanks

Chavatshimshon 07:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:LEAD. Ian¹³ /t 18:34, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concordia council

Dear Ian,

Not really. I'd be willing to hold a semi-active seat, perhaps with just an advisory role over a voting one.

Still, I believe Concordia should be disbanded. (not the spirit, I know).

Thanks,

Joe Computerjoe 's talk 22:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Concordia

I'd be happy to resume an active role in the organisation if it is revived - • The Giant Puffin • 22:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. --Osbus 22:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind letting me know what you have in mind? (Paranomasia not intended.) (^'-')^ Covington 08:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am just looking to re-promote civility. I would send out a newsletter to all of our members inviting them to help out. We could promote the civility cup token and barnstar to make us known more widely, and try and get an effective noticeboard for where help may be needed in maintaining civility (this could be small, and people make sugestions on the notice board and admins post). Ian¹³ /t 09:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know when you are starting up. I am busy this week, but after that, I should be open. (^'-')^ Covington 12:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't seen you around since long. — Nearly Headless Nick ^{L} 08:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, I have been on a bit of a WikiBreak. Ian¹³ /t 18:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back. We need more hard-working people around. Cheers. — Nearly Headless Nick ^{L} 13:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concordia Newsletter

NEWSLETTER

Concordia is currently trying to relaunch. I, and all the members of the ex-council, wish to welcome new members to the group. We are a group who aim to promote remaining civil, in an environment where messages can easily be interpretated wrongly.

Help out now!

Try and help people remain civil! Talk to them, and help them in any way possible. Do not be afraid to use the talk page.
Give people the Civility Barnstar.
Make and spread some Wikitokens so people know there are people to help if they want assistance.
Add banners or logos to your userpage to show your support.
Suggest some ideas! Add 'em to the talk page.

We are a community, so can only work though community contributions and support. It's the helping that counts.

Decision Making

The council expired one month ago, but due to the current position of the group the current council will remain until the position of the group can be assessed, and whether it would be sensible to keep Concordia going. For most decisions, however, it will be decided by all who choose to partake in discussions. I am trying to relaunch because of the vast amounts of new members we have received, demonstrating that the aims are supported.

If you wish to opt of of further talk-page communications, just let us know here.

- Ian¹³ /t 20:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC). Kindly delivered by MiszaBot.[reply]

User:Sussexman

Thank you for your comment on this user's Talk page, but I cannot see where he personally issued a legal action or why he personally would have done so? Chelsea Tory 20:44, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as far as I was aware, this was the whole reason for blocking, and from what I gathered, such a notice was not in dispute. Ian¹³ /t 21:30, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

I just wanted to wish you a Merry Christmas -- UKPhoenix79 25 December 2006

Undeletion Discussion for G.ho.st

An editor has asked for a deletion review of G.ho.st. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. TareqM 19:15, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concordia

Hey. My time is vastly diminished by school, so I don't think I'll be able to serve on the Concordia council. I might pop in once in a while. Thanks — Ilyan e p (Talk) 01:23, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you review my user page?

Could you review my user page and help me determine why the userbox notice is gumming up the look of it? Thanks, Scienter 18:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This edit broke your userpage (and lots of other peoples). I have now reverted the edit. Thanks for pointing it out - because there was probably a lot of confused people out there. Ian¹³ /t 19:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! I appreciate your timely help. Salud, Scienter 20:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Şebinkarahisar

Ben bu topraklarda Şebinkarahisar da yaşıyorum bu topraklada doğdum bu topraklarda büyüdüm ve neler yaşandığını sizlerden daha iyi biliyorum ama benim şehrimin benim yaşadığım yerin tarihinin yanlış taraflı ve lobicilik faaliyetleri içerisinde insalara olmayan bir şeyi sahte, asılsız ve düzmece kaynakları sunarak olmuş gibi göstererek anlatılmasını önleyemiyorum banlanıyorum yada Şebinkarahisar maddesi kilitleriniyor. Sizler bu topraklarda yaşadınızmı da biliyorsunuz ? Ermeni Diasporası tarihi istedikleri gibi yazabilir mi ? Ellerinde yetkileri var diye bu yetkilerini kendi çıkarları için kullanabilirler mi ? Neden tüm Türk sayfalarına sadece asılsız ermeni soykırımı hakkında bilgiler ekliyorlar Vikipedia tarafsız ve özgür ansiklopedi değilmi ? Madem bu admin arkadaşalar çok bilgili neden coğrafi, ekonomik, nüfus bilgilerini insanlar için faydalı olacak bilgileri girmiyorlarda sadece asılsız ermeni soykırımı hakkında bilgiler veriyorlar. BU HAKKI NEREDEN BULUYORLAR ? --88.231.200.89 10:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, I am unable to read Turkish. Ian¹³ /t 12:28, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look I Can Make Up Words Too

uwghduohw vauihuoavrh iwvehauarvh hvhudh hidsh hdsi iasvdh iasjdijdc hdshuh dcuhuh ;aiha agdu uagcuiuadh uhdah cub; ahuhdu caagcy acagdsuyg c;adghc hvdctceghdxjg ujcegyhvchsb hbhb bxh lhwg lyhgqecy yqwxgyi x admin. Dog cicero 10:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dog cicero (talk · contribs)

It appears you seem to be mistaking Dog cicero (talk · contribs) for Cicero Dog (talk · contribs). It's an easy mistake to make but there seems no reason why Dog Cicero should be blocked - only made to change names. CDMS 15:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check user procedure

You recently compiled and listed a case at requests for checkuser. A checkuser or clerk has requested you supply one or more diffs to justify the use of the checkuser procedure in the case, in accordance with the procedures listed in the table at the top of the requests for checkuser page. For an outcome to be achieved, we require that you provide these diffs as soon as possible. This has been implemented to reduce difficulties for checkusers, and is essential for your case to be processed. A link to your recently-created case which has this information missing is here. Thanks for your co-operation. -- lucasbfr ^talk 15:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC), checkuser clerk.[reply]

I have not idea why you suggest I am involved. CDMS 18:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am just curious as to why a very new user would spend most of his time concerned with such a case. You appear to have quite a developed wiki knowledge (yes, this is your second account I believe) but I just wondered why you were interested in a case where one admin has blocked, and 3 others refused an unblock request. Ian¹³ /t 20:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meetup

I saw your interest on Wikipedia:Meetup/Manchester ... another is being organised at Wikipedia:Meetup/Manchester 2, hope you aren't too busy and can come! :) Majorly (hot!) 00:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I sadly have exams at this time, and then back into lessons. Ian¹³ /t 17:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Dick

Hi I was wondering if you could help us here. HoneyBee and Myself have some difficulties with a new user Joe Dick. He has removed a large amount of content from the Methos and Duncan MacLeod articles and each time the content is reverted back he claims vandalism on our parts and refuses to discuss his reasons on the talk pages. Not only that he has been reverting the warnings placed on his talk page leaving a message on our talk page stating Please do not post any further invalid warnings to my talk page, or I will report you. Please can you help resolve this as he will not listen to any regular users, Thanks -- UKPhoenix79 22:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its all over before it began. But Thanks anyway :-) -- UKPhoenix79 23:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday!

The Wikipedia:Birthday Committee is proud to wish you a very happy birthday.
May all your wishes come true!
Thank you for all of your contributions to this wonderful encyclopedia.
Yours truly,
Eddie 00:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Ian¹³ /t 10:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Arnon Chafffin/Happy Birthday!Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 16:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Per Above. — Taggard (Complain) 09:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

— Taggard (Complain) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Motorways userbox

Hi, as a member of Motorways WikiProject, you might like this userbox: {{User Motorways Wikiproject}}, which produces:

This user is a member of United Kingdom Roads Task Force.

Thanks — superbfc [ talk | cont ] — 13:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Nice

Now that is a good userpage quote. Benjwong 05:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Ian¹³ /t 15:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: M62

In all honesty, I don't think I would be able to - I only really know the layout of the M62 as I've been on it so many times, and even with that map, I'm sure there are several errors (like part A goes north too fast or part B isn't as south as it should). Will ^(talk) 17:37, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the copyright on the aerial photos, as I think it would be classed as a derivative work, yes. Will ^(talk) 17:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Motorway Routeboxes

Hi Ian, would you mind putting the road numbers at the end as we have on the motorway tables? The A500 road received [{WP:GA]] status using that format. Thanks, Regan123 17:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have personally been using M62_motorway as my template (also a GA), and to me it appears more readable as it shows the connecting roads (which themselves have multiple destinations). It also removes the need to bold all of the road names, improving readability. Maybe we should try and get some community opinion on this if we still share different opinions, like at village pump? Thanks. Ian¹³ /t 17:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I personally have some accessibility concerns about the M62 table particularly with regard to the colours of the table as per the {{WP:MOS]] and Wikipedia:Accessibility. I think it should be as plain as possible, which is why I was about to decolour all the existing tables. For readability the number at the front to my mind jars as where the road goes is more important than the number and doesn't match the road sign structures we have in the UK. (I'll keep this page under watch so feel free just to reply here) Regan123 17:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think the M62 box is a lot plainer than the old ones, but I would be happy to decolourise all the no exit boxes. We are not trying to provide a road map here, and I think it is more encyclopaedic if we list the road name first. It is the road that intersects the motorway, and then we can list all the possible main destinations by following that road. I think that part of making it more clear and accessible is reducing the need to separately bold certain things - and if the road name is placed first then we don't need to bold it at the end (not bolded but at the end is personally a REAL pain to read and associate a destination with a road) and it is more clear as to what destinations we are referring to. The road name at the end always seems a mess to me (dest1, dest2 Axxx dest3 Bxxxx) as opposed to a more structured form (Axxx: dest1, dest2. Bxxxx: dest3.). We are never going to be able to list all the possible destinations of a road, but listing the road names implies a connection to all of those possible destinations, and the notable ones can be listed for reference. Hope that sort-of makes sense to you. Ian¹³ /t 18:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The whole point of a road is to get you to X. For destinations I have used various sources to get what is on the road sign. I find the M62 box to now be confusing and not at all easy to read (eg. J8). Encyclopaedic would include approaching the issue as it is handled locally (e.g. British/US spelling) and in the UK destinations are considered on signage to be more important than road numbers. Take off the bolding but leave it at the end is not a problem to me, but these updated tables are to me worse than the older ones. Now the opening time line is fantastic. I must get round to looking at that for a couple of other articles I have worked on! (Sorry for the more bullet point text but about to go out and wanted to reply) Cheers, Regan123 18:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will look into putting it at the end - but I find this gets very hard to read, especially when the listed destinations go over multiple lines. If anything, not bolding but at the end (as I mentioned last time) is harder to read than either of the other choices. Motorway signs, whilst they position the road number at the end, make that number bigger than other text (I am not suggesting we do this here) rather implying that the road number is more important and encompasing of the previous items. This is something we cannot replicate here (sensibly), so I personally think that it is better to put it at the front and use standard English grammar (:'s) to indicate the list of destinations. Ian¹³ /t 18:50, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Current	New	A compromise?
LONDON, Bristol (M32) M4 E SOUTH WALES, Chepstow (M48) M4 W	M4 E: LONDON, Bristol (M32) M4 W: SOUTH WALES, Chepstow (M48)	LONDON, Bristol (M32) — M4 E SOUTH WALES, Chepstow (M48) — M4 W
I find this very confusing as to which road gives access to the others	Clear list, but doesn't emulate road signs	It's still a little confusing over things like line breaks, but it is better than no seperator

(Try resizing the screen to see what I mean when road names end up on new lines.) Ian¹³ /t 19:01, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry haven't been here for a few days! What about a &nbsp which should stop the line breaking over? Regan123 15:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Where abouts would you propose putting the &nbsp though (bearing in mind we don't want too much wikicode either to help editors). What are your thoughts on my 'A compromise?' proposal (final column). Ian¹³ /t 16:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Like the compromise. Thinking the nbsp could go between the destination and the road number which would keep them together. Regan123 23:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Using &mdash&nbspAXXX (to produce — AXXX) after the list of destinations would seem fine to me. Ian¹³ /t 16:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

G.ho.st notability

G.ho.st notability now is very high it returns nearly 120,000 Google results. There are plenty of worthy articles on internet. G.ho.st has been reviewed in Red Herring, PC Magazine, Info world and thousands of Blogs.

An editor has asked for a deletion review of G.ho.st. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rami Abdulhadi (talk • contribs).

Question about userboxes

Hello, I recently posted a question about userboxes at WP:UB to no avail, so I thought I'd ask you. This is what I posted at the WikiProject: "...if you take a look at my user page, you'll see that when you expand "me," a little gray bar appears over the first userbox. How can I fix this? Also, how can I make my userboxes appear under the Babel box?" I'd greatly appreciate any help. Thanks, -- Cielomobile ^{talk / contribs} 10:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The little grey bar seems to be because the Wikipedia show/hide box isn't fully repositioning when the Me show/hide is expanded. Aligning all of the boxes to the right can be solved by putting them all in a container table. I have done this for you [1], but it still might not show correctly for you (I am on Ubuntu/Firefox) so if the error persists, let me know. Ian¹³ /t 17:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It works perfectly; thank you very much! -- Cielomobile ^{talk / contribs} 20:36, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Motorway Maps

I'm slowly finding ways that this would be possible. I'll keep you informed. --Grand Edgemaster _Talk 22:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great thanks. Ian¹³ /t 16:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A sample of the M25 it needs a coastline, and the border removed. --Grand Edgemaster _Talk 22:21, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And full UK (and a bit of France) I don't know how complete it is. Still looking for a coastline. --Grand Edgemaster _Talk 15:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First thing that strikes me is that M25 isn't a complete loop, but it looks pretty good. Thanks. Ian¹³ /t 16:04, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thankyou Ian13! You reverted the vandalism on my user page. It's funny I didn't notice until now. H irohisat^{Talk Page} 07:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia UK

Hi,

At some point you expressed an interest in supporting meta:Wikimedia UK. We're now ready to begin receiving applications from prospective members. If you would like to join, application forms and further information can be found at: http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/join. Feel free to ask me if you have any questions, either via my user page at the English Wikipedia or by email ([email protected]).

Thanks, Andreww 14:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Membership officer, Wikimedia UK)

Unprotection of Scott Mills

If I may ask, why did you end the semi-protection of Scott Mills before it was set to expire on Sept 19? I had recently taken the page to WP:RPP to get it protected, as the subject of the article had mentioned the article on his show recently, dramatically increasing the number of anon vandal hits without increasing the number of anti-vandal eyes on it. While I'm not a big proponent of protection, I think it may have been early to pull the protection on this page. - Fordan (talk) 23:12, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied [2]. Ian¹³ /t 17:37, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to reply here; I watched your talk page based on your comments at the top of it. And thank you for your reply, as well as the work you do to improve Wikipedia. As a general rule, I agree with you; I realize that many editors come here and don't really believe that anyone can edit the content, and that seeing that they are able to do so may allow us to "hook" new editors. Turning off the ability to edit for anonymous users shouldn't be done lightly. But in this case, there was a strong history of vandalism, and worse, the vandalism wasn't of the page blanking/curse-word type, it was generally deliberate introduction of incorrect but generally plausible facts into the article, which doesn't set off the alarms of editors causally scanning the changes, takes time to confirm, and is a lot more likely to slip through the cracks and stay in the article. It seemed to me that the vandalism was accumulating far faster than the anti-vandals could pull it down, and things were being missed.

I was going to take a wait-and-see approach after your unprotection, and take it back to WP:RPP if it seemed to get out of hand again, but as you noted, it seems another admin came in and reprotected it. I tossed the semi-protection tag back on the article, but that was the extent of my involvement with the reprotection. I do agree with the reapplication of semi-protection, but I also agree with shortening the scope from the original Sept 19 date, since as you note, the vandalism had calmed down. - Fordan (talk) 19:31, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I can see the need for protection, and I am sorry if my intentions were easily misinterpreted. September 19th was a little severe though, hopefully the article will stabilise sooner. Thanks, Ian¹³ /t 22:22, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:VandalProof Ian13 error.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:VandalProof Ian13 error.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 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 21:12, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Two expedition boats cruise along the Yangtze ..jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Two expedition boats cruise along the Yangtze ..jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not my image, I only reduced the resolution but did state I was not endorsing the claim of fair use. Ian¹³ /t 19:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SMRT-Crest.png

Thanks for uploading Image:SMRT-Crest.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UBX help

Hello, Ian13; I was told I could ask you for some assistance if I was having trouble with creating a userbox? Well, I know how to use the template to construct the box, but I don't know what to do from there. The WP:UBX naming conventions section says to name my box with something along the lines of:

{{User:Mizu onna sango15/NAME OF BOX HERE}}

But, I don't know how to make all that wikitext that I use to make the box link to that name. And, also, once I've done that, can I post the finished userbox in the gallery? I hope what I'm asking is making any sense, I'm still sort of getting a hang of templates. :) Thanks in advance; Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 06:32, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday

from the Birthday Committee

Wishing Ian13 a very happy birthday on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!

Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake!

Idontknow 610^TM 19:18, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]