User talk:Bhoeble

Wikipedia doesn't work because no-one controls rogue admins. If telling an misbehaving administrator that they should not be an administrator (with reasons) is a "personal attack", then Wikipedia is a tyranny. This is my last edit. Bhoeble 11:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

2012 Summer Olympics - Slalom canoeing/slalom racing

The article 2012 Summer Olympics formerly linked to the article Slalom canoeing with the link text Slalom racing. However Slalom canoeing makes no reference to racing, and describes a sport which is essentially an 'against the clock' type of event with only one competitor going at a time. I assumed that this was the correct sport, with a rather loose link text, and changed the text to slalom canoeing.

It seems I was wrong, as you reverted my change with the comment there is slalom kayaking as well. However this still left a link called Slalom racing pointing at an article not about racing and not referencing slalom kayaking; either the wrong article or an article in need of a rewrite. For now I've turned these into redlinks to Slalom racing. If I've misunderstood, please feel to correct . -- Chris j wood 11:25, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

It's rather confusing. The name for this sport given on the main list of sports on the IOC site is "canoe/kayak", but this is a portfolio term for the two disciplines of "Canoe / Kayak Flatwater" and "Canoe / Kayak Slalom". However it appears that the official body of the sport uses the terms "flatwater racing (sprint)" (which is a division of "canoe racing" which also includes the non-Olympic sport of "marathon racing") and "slalom canoeing" and the Wikipedia articles uses these names, so there's an inconsistency whatever names we use. I'll use the IOC terms in the 2012 article and add references to them to the canoeing articles. A timetrial is usually considered to be a form of race. Bhoeble 16:27, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Euston station

Please can you give a URL for the map you referred to in your recent edit summeary for Euston station? I'd love to see it! Thank you.. Andy Mabbett 15:43, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

I would have linked it, except that the motco.com maps are only available as pop-ups, which don't have urls. You can find the 1862 map here [1] Click on "Overview maps" and then click over Euston twice to get to the detailed level. Rather confusingly the large scale map then appears in first window. Bhoeble 00:34, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

I've replied on my talk page. Andy Mabbett 08:02, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

terminology for motor racing circuits

Hi - Can you please comment on my latest response at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion#Category:Motor racing circuits? Thanks much. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:31, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

UK agencies

Just thought I'd lend my support to your tidying of the UK government bodies articles. Given that Executive Agency seems to have a precise definition, I agree that only articles on those agencies on the official list should go in that category, and others should be moved out. Note also that some of the bodies do not exist any more. By the time you read this I will have created a new category called Category:Former public bodies in the United Kingdom; feel free to populate that as part of your tidying SP-KP 10:45, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Vauxhall

Hello, Could you please tell me the source you used to create the article on Vauxhall Gardens? I am writing a masters thesis that deals with 19th century entertainment in London and it would be very helpful include citations about the admissions charged to Vauxhall, specifically the fact charges peaked in the early-19th when Vanity Fair is set. Thank you! This information will me as I finish project.

Hi. I got your reply, but forget to thank you. I cited an expert who runs a Vauxhall webpage. --Kevind81

Congratulations for starting the Vauxhall Pleasure Gardens page 87.80.152.198 21:39, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

New vote for Tanakh moved

You can find the NEW vote to rename Category:Hebrew Bible/Tanakh --> Category:Tanakh now located at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion#Hebrew Bible/Tanakh [2] Thanks again. IZAK 17:13, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Help and support needed

It would appear as though there are certain "editors" who wish to remove the lesser known literary punk genres, not only is this a blatant witch hunt which emerged from my argument on the Dark City talk page that the movie is a relveant component in reference to the dieselpunk genre, but also extremely vindictive against myself and those who have helped in categorising and adding content to the literay punk genres. For further info: Talk page here Piecraft 16:33, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Category:Chinese newspapers

Please be informed that some background information was presented at WP:CFD regarding the above mentioned category. Thanks. — Instantnood 14:22, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much. — Instantnood 16:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Category:Cinema of England and Category:Cinema of Scotland

Since you voted, this has become a vote for deletion rather than a renaming. The discussion has also been split into two separate votes on England and Scotland. I'm hoping you can vote on both, as since they were split your vote has somehow ended up under the Cinema of Scotland debate. Thanks. JW 23:21, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Category:Regional theatre and Category:Regional theatre in the United States

Hello Bhoeble,
Re your proposed rename on WP:CFD, I've just tried reorganising Category:Regional theatre in the United States as a subcategory of Category:Regional theatre, so you might now want to reconsider the move. Apologies in advance if I've missed something obvious or done something stupid. Best wishes, David Kernow 17:23, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Erm, yep I think you have. The term may be used, but I wouldn't want to see it applied to the category system outside the U.S. and I'm not even certain it is a good idea in that case. I will be amending my proposal to delete. Bhoeble 18:23, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Sam Harris 1.jpg

Please refrain from removing categories from images in the future without asking about this policy. We over in Wikipedia:WikiProject Neuroscience are rather meticulous (anal) about keeping track of all neuroscience-related materials, as images are often used repeatedly in new articles. Please read [[Meta:Help:Image_page#Categorizing_images]] for more information on Wikipedia policy on image categorization. Thanks. :) Semiconscious • talk 21:38, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Images do not belong in categories. Use Commons instead. You are in a tiny and shrinking minority in putting images in non-image Wikipedia categories, which imo is the equivalent of dropping them on the floor. Bhoeble 13:00, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice; I'll look into changing my practices. However for now we're in the middle of a huge cleanup over Wikipedia:WikiProject Neuroscience and we'd appreciate it if you don't mess around with what at the very worst is our temporary measure for cateloging what we have. In the meantime, comments such as:

• "You are in a tiny and shrinking minority in putting images in non-image Wikipedia categories, which imo is the equivalent of dropping them on the floor."
• "...but I see you've been making a mess all over the place."

are rude and unnecessary. Lay off. We're doing what we're doing for a reason and we don't need someone on a mission to mess up our temporary system. Semiconscious • talk 20:22, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'd appreciate it if you didn't tell people not to contribute to sections of Wikipedia. You don't own the rights to any section of it. Bhoeble 16:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Give me a break buddy; let's be adult about this. I never said "DO NOT CONTRIBUTE", nor did I ever act like I own any rights to anything. I said, right here, and a talk page that has no power whatsoever beyond that of a friendly appeal, that "we'd appreciate it if you don't mess around with what at the very worst is our temporary measure for cateloging what we have". If you keep recategorizing images while we're in the process of restructuring neuroscience-related categories, it's just going to make our job a little more difficult. You will do what you will do, however. All I'm doing is respectfully asking that you wait a while before doing whatever it is you're planning on doing. What's your deal man? Semiconscious • talk 18:53, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I had already finished, but I won't be saying sorry again. Bhoeble 18:03, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Kurd stub

Have you seen?

• Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion#.7B.7BKurd-politician-stub.7D.7D_.2F_Cat:Kurdish_politician_stubs

--Mais oui! 05:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Philip Epstein Article

Hello,

I noticed that you edited out the Category "American writers" in the Epstein Article. I included it so that we can have, in addition to the lists of specific types of writers, e.g playwrights, etc., a complete list of all American writers. Any thoughts on this?

Thanks,

Michael David 19:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I am removing every article from American writers. I've done hundreds and this is the first complaint. Almost none of the most celebrated writers are in the category and people don't keep putting them back, so its clear which way things are going. Bhoeble 19:46, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Why are you doing this? Isn't Philip Epstein an American writer?

Michael David 19:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Look at three other broad categories: Category:American musicians, category:American scientists and category:American politicians - people are working to keep them clear too. The writers category is well behind the other three in the cleanup process, so I'm helping out. Epstein could also go in Category:United States and Category:People, but we have to draw the line somewhere, and I'm confident what I am doing is in line with consensus. Bhoeble 19:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Here we go again....

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turkish Kurdistan - Bertilvidet 00:36, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

hip hop category move

I gave my two cents... I urge you to reconsider your vote on a potentially disastrous and unwarranted move.--Urthogie 16:52, 9 April 2006 (UTC)#

Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_April_13#Category:War_of_the_Worlds_actors

Hi this cfd was invalidly closed in order to subvert process- you may want to restore your comment to the relisted cfd at Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_April_17#Category:War_of_the_Worlds_actors. Regards Arniep 16:00, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion

Re: Latter Day Saints vs Mormonism. Please be aware that the Wikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement has established naming conventions, particularly based on the appropriate use of "Latter Day Saint", "Latter-day Saint", and "Mormonism". Various factions of the movement use different names, and Mormonism is not used universally not is it always well received. Some members of the movement find it pejorative. I notified the project page of the voting, and myself voted to Rename BUT to History of the "Latter Day Saint movement". Please come to the project page if you would like to discuss this. Thank you. WBardwin 09:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Policy

I'm not fictionalizing policy. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Ardenn 16:49, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

That isn't what you wrote is it? People who don't know better may have been misled into thinking you were quoting directly, but you weren't. Bhoeble 16:53, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I said Wikipedia isn't a junkyard. Same thing really. Ardenn 19:33, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Category:European sport

I'm sorry, but I had to close the debate on the above category as merge to Category:Sport in Europe. OTOH, I personally agree with your comments about the purpose of the category, and how the merge does not serve those purposes. I suspect that it's quite possible that the two who gave their opinion before you did not even come back to see your comments. I don't however, see why categories for both purposes could not exist. So you could crete your more clearly named category and populate it with those items from the merge that fit the original purpose. Put it as a subcat to Category:Sport in Europe, and you should be good to go. You get a clearly named category, and those who want the merge of the two categories with very close names get their merge. - TexasAndroid 19:32, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

It's one of those cases where someone was bound to create the category at some point, and someone else to recreate it at some point if it was deleted, so one might as well live with it and adapt and improve it. Bhoeble 13:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Category:Non-fiction

It was created for a single magazine, just to point out that it was non-fiction. However it has since become useful and I've withdrawn my nomination. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:35, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Apology

I apologize for the hobgoblin quote. It's just what came to mind when I was thinking of a new way to say nearly the same thing again. However, you do have me confused with someone else as I have never used that quote before in Wikipedia. --JeffW 13:17, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Pump

Thanks for your support on the Palestinian article issue. I would appreciate your dropping by Rachel Corrie if you have time. Thanks Arniep 16:49, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

CfD on "Cities destroyed in WW2"

Hi there. As the nominator for this CfD, I wondered if you could take a look at the articles I've found that seem to be covering the area of history that the categories might have been intending to cover. I've summarised this in my comments at the CfD. Thanks. Carcharoth 21:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

*ahem*

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Category:Wold Newton family members Tim! 16:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

You are not a fit person to close votes and should be permanently banned from doing so. You should be ashamed of the action you took. Bhoeble 17:00, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

Please read the deletion review. Consensus is not just vote counting. I certainly won't be driven off from closing cfd discussions because someone disagrees with one decision. Tim! 17:04, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

You made an appalling decision and should be dismissed as an administrator. You are patently biased towards the retention of cruft and found an excuse to act on that bias. I note that you are immediately utilising your ability as administrator to make block threats, which is far more harmful to the community than anything I have done. Bhoeble 17:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I have listed your tirade at WP:PAIN as it would obviously be inappropriate for me to block you, which I definitely shall not do. Tim! 17:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

CFD

With pleasure. I very almost renominated myself, but got distracted. --Mais oui! 17:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Regarding these edits: [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]:

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. Paul Cyr 07:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

It is Tim who should be disciplined, but he is an admin so he can get away with anything and he knows it. I have made thousands of valuable edits, but will not make any more. Bhoeble 10:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Tim's conduct is not an excuse for bad behaviour. If you do feel he should be disciplined, post on RfC Paul Cyr 15:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi

I noticed on Paul Cyr's page that you said that you were so upset you might leave WP. I would not like to see this happen. I also have had disagreements with others, usually admins. Always remember that the valuable people here on WP are those who construct parts and whole articles. If you ever need any help, you can always put a note on my talk page. I believe that I do not have any agenda, and also am not afraid of anyone (except my mother-in-law). Wallie 17:32, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:St Peter's Eaton Square, Belgravia.jpg

File:St Peter's Eaton Square, Belgravia.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:St Peter's Eaton Square, Belgravia.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:St Peter's Eaton Square, Belgravia.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 16:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

File:All Saints, Camden Town.jpg is now available as Commons:File:All Saints, Camden Town.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 16:31, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

File:St Pancras New Church in 1827-28.jpg is now available as Commons:File:St Pancras New Church in 1827-28.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 16:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

File:St Pancras Old Church in 1815.jpg is now available as Commons:File:St Pancras Old Church in 1815.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 16:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Frost Fair of 1683.JPG is now available as Commons:File:Frost Fair of 1683.JPG. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Waterloo station - 1948 poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Waterloo station - 1948 poster.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).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:48, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Salisbury Cathedral. Interior view from choir. James Valentine c.1890..jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Salisbury Cathedral. Interior view from choir. James Valentine c.1890..jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:56, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Law Courts by James Valentine c.1890.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Law Courts by James Valentine c.1890.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:56, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Margaret Thatcher's listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Margaret Thatcher's. Since you had some involvement with the Margaret Thatcher's redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:58, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

"Five pillars of Wikipedia" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Five pillars of Wikipedia and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 31#Five pillars of Wikipedia until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. FAdesdae378 03:39, 31 July 2022 (UTC)