User talk:Cactus.man/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

DYK

Check out Talk:Main page, where there are a couple complaints about the shortness of Filippo Salvatore Gilii. I had skipped over that one when updating DYK, since it seemed too short to me. — ₀₉₁₈^BRIAN • 2006-06-01 02:40

Thanks for the note regarding Filippo Salvatore Gilii. The article was borderline in size but interesting (or at least I thought) so I was bold, gasp. The pleasures of doing one's bit to help out ... :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 07:09, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Many Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my User Page. --Wisden17 16:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Scottish east coast fishery

Hello Bill, I see you have been doing some excellent work on these articles, good to see. I have been toying with the idea of working up some new articles on the Skaffie, Baldie and Zulu for some time now. There is already a decent article on the Fifie. I suspect your knowledge in this area is infinitely better than mine so I wondered if you would like to take the lead on this?

Also, as Tagishsimon pointed out, there is some duplication in your articles with the content of other existing articles such as the Fifie. In such cases it is useful to keep content to a summary level, and provide a link to the main article by using the template {{main}}. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on articles for the other boat types. --Cactus.man ✍ 10:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello and thanks for your comments. Apologise for delay but have been away. I've started to tackle the duplication issues also. You suggested that I take on the role of producing information on the historical fishing boats but wonder if it should be one article encompassing all of the boats or separate articles for each type. What do you think? Billreid 16:44, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello Bill, fishing is not really my area of expertise, but from my research so far I think it's probably correct that the Skaffie and Fifie were the two predominant fishing boat types on the east coast, and further tinkering with designs produced the Baldie and Zulu towards the end of the 19th century - correct me if I'm wrong. My thoughts at the moment are that the Fifie article is perfectly good to stand alone and the Skaffie is probably worth breaking out into it's own article. The other two could probably remain in the Scottish east coast fishery article in the Fishing Boat Development section, I'm not sure that there's enough information to warrant separate articles. Thoughts welcome. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:13, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Anichkov Bridge

Hi Ghirla, I'd like to include the article in the next DYK update. Would you have any objection to the simplified wording I've suggested on the talk page. I agree with Lar that the hook is a bit obscure within the article. I would appreciate your thoughts, thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 09:15, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for drawing my attention to the problem with this nomination. To be honest, I don't like the readiness with which Lar and Brian invent new guidelines for every nom. They seem to forget that the purpose of DYK is not to present the best that WP has to offer but to encourage the creation of new articles, which are to be improved by others due to exposure on Main Page. They have no qualms about promoting pitiful stubs, yet large articles get slammed because "their hook is hidden in text". And what is a hook? Is there any definition? It is all very subjective IMHO. Unlike Lar, I can't see any hook in the nomination of Network SouthCentral, for instance. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 09:58, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you're so upset about this, after all you did state "please vet my nom if needed", so somebody did. I just spent half an hour preparing the next update and asked you a courteous question whether you would mind if I used the alternate wording I put on the talk page, hardly a diatribe as you characterise it. (Struck due to cross-posting edit conflict). I agree that there is too much negative commentary appearing on the page now, and you will note that I hardly ever comment on other noms. I occasionally do a minor tweak to the wording and will only ever comment if it is a major departure from the original nomination wording (as in this case), or if there is a technical problem with the nom.

I agree with you about the aims of DYK, and that they should be kept simple and flexible (you might want to have a look at the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Requirement_for_referencing, which got somewhat hijacked by referencing hardliners). Yes, selection of items will always be subjective, and that's not a bad thing. The problem I saw with your wording was that it didn't relate clearly to the text of the article which says that "Klodt depicted his powerful enemy's face under the tail of one of the bronze stallions", which is a bit ambiguous. That reads to me that the figure beneath the horse is the horse tamer (but sculpted with the face of Klodt's enemy), rather than the actual enemy in question, OR (unlikely) the face of his enemy was literally sculpted on the horse beneath the tail. I spent a good deal of time trying various rewordings, including mention of his death after discovery of the missing tongues, but couldn't develop anything that read well in relation to the article (IMHO). Hence my simplified version and my initial post here. Please rest assured I was not trying to be difficult or picky, and please do continue your excellent work in writing, finding and nominating new articles such as this. Best wishes. --Cactus.man ✍ 10:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your long response. I didn't mean to offend you, my grudge is against those persons who invent new guidelines for each nom. When I ask "to vet my nom", I mean improve my grammar, because my command of English is limited, you see. As for that face, yes, one of the horse tamers has a face of Klodt's enemy. I wish I had more data to expand on the subject. Please keep up the good work you do for DYK. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 11:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Ghirla, no offence was taken. If you're OK with this tweaked wording, I'll go ahead and update shortly:

• ...that the Anichkov Bridge in Saint Petersburg features one of the city's notable landmarks, The Horse Tamer, a group of four neoclassical bronze sculptures by Baron Peter Klodt?

I think it reflects the article content fairly well. --Cactus.man ✍ 11:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

It's OK with me. I shall start the article about this guy Klodt in a few minutes. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 11:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Looking forward to seeing the article on "this guy Klodt" ... :-) Hopefully it will also make it to DYK. If you have something ready in the next few hours let me know and I can link to it on the DYK template. --Cactus.man ✍ 11:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Quick work on Baron Klodt, nice article. I've fixed the link on DYK. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Admin intervention on DYK talk

Hi. Seeing your work particularly on DYK, I'm requesting your admin intervention against disruption episodes like following:

• a nasty unprovoked personal attack
• providing deliberately false info for suggestions evaluation

This is an official request which will be reflected on respective admin noticeboards. Thank you in advance, Ukrained 13:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. It looks like you have numerous nationalism related disputes with various editors, although I cannot follow much of it because many messages are not in English. I would remind all parties, yourself included, to remain mindful of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. The first link you provided is in contravention of these and I will leave a note to that effect. The second link you provide is merely a statement of opinion that the article is a stub (an opinion I agree with, BTW). Please remember that admins are not referee's here to dish out punishments or take sides in disputes. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ghirla, I have received a complaint from User:Ukrained about your comments on Template talk:Did you know. I can see there is some history of nationalist related disputes between you, but I know I don't need to remind you of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Please don't let these disputes spread elsewhere and lead you to violate these key policies. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

As for Klodt, this is a mere place-holder. I hope someone more interested in the subject than myself will expand. As for Ukrained, I believe the guy is stalking me. His fellow nationalist editor, User:AlexPU was recently blocked for a month after I posted this announcement on WP:ANI. After AlexPU asked Ukrained to seek revenge, I view his comments and delations as the fruit of this zeal. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 15:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ghirla, I suspected as much from reading some of the history. I had some of that early on in my wiki life and responded with "troll" comments, but in hindsight it really is pointless and is just a "feeding exercise" giving them the attention they need. Dignified restraint is usually much more effective. Your comments on Klodt are also noted, I might just have a look at doing some work on him myself if I can source enough interesting material. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Mr.Cactus, thank you for your answer either. I'll suggest even more thanks after your admin reactions. Answering some of your statements here:

• I hope you're not taking sides when talking of my (?) numerous nationalism related disputes. I only and exclusively have disputes related to trolling and POV-pushing conducted by the group of editors including Ghirlandajo. It is actually a one big dispute, and it may appear neverending :(((.
• I would never start or support any disputes (especially nationalism-related ) within DYK talk. Otherwise I would have answered the pernicious RU troll Ghirlandajo right there. Instead I requested your admin intervention. So we can now appreciate and encourage each other's reaction on the incident :)
• This your thought: admins are not referee's here to dish out punishments or take sides in disputes sounds both confusing and disturbing for me. Hope to discuss it somewhere sometime.

Thank you again for your kind help. Ukrained 21:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Mr. Cactus, I even more thankful after studying your talk where you communicate with Ghirlandajo very kindly. Sorry for asking your intervention, this will never happen again :(. Ukrained 21:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK archiving done

Done! created some 13 archives. btw, some suggestions for DYK - given that there are so many old candidates still around, I feel that a principal reason is that many admins find it too daunting to update. We should reduce the work done by an admin. We should just stick to dyktalk rather than notifying users or expand templates. Also, newest articles shd go to special:newpages - I responded on the relevant thread on the DYK discussion page. --Gurubrahma 17:06, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Gurubrahma, thanks so much for doing the archiving, no doubt you have saved me much pain and suffering as I would have feebly attempted to make sense of it all (and possibly failed). I am indebted :-) Is there any word on whether the bot will come back on line or should we instigate a new archival method in the meantime?

I can understand your sentiments about simplifying the notification process to encourage more updaters, but I disagree. For me, it is mere courtesy to say "thank you, we appreciate your efforts" to all, newbies or veterans alike. After all, it is not really so much extra work to place 5 or 6 additional templates, 5 minutes work or so, and admins should be willing to invest the time to do the extra work entrusted to them (IMHO). Also, fostering of community spirit is essential if we are to thrive, and notifications help build that.

The question of what "newest articles" should link to is more complicated. I saw your posting on the DYK discussion page and I agree that it doesn't make sense to link up recent additions twice. However, neither solution is perfect. Special:newpages is a new-user unfriendly morass of (largely) junk, and often profanity-laden material, yet Wikipedia:Recent additions is also deficient because it only lists past DYK featured articles. The solution?? We need a wise man, is your name prophetic?

Please let me know your thoughts on the interim archival method as I would like to implement something soon. Best wishes. --Cactus.man ✍ 19:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Featured article Keratoconus

Hello Bill, I've just noted your comments on Talk:Main_Page. I sincerely hope you haven't taken any offence to my remarks on the issue of the appropriateness of the originally featured image, or thought that I was in any way belittling the medical condition or the quality of article and images. I have re-read my postings and am now worried that they may be misconstrued as flippant and dismissive. I was merely aiming to comment on my astonsihment at the furore that seemed to have erupted over the originally featured image which, in my view, is the one that best illustrates the article on the main page. I was also trying to inject a little bit of humour but, with this imperfect digital communication medium, I am now worried that this may have been taken wrongly. I hope that clears things up (if necessary). Best wishes and happy editing. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message! To be honest, I'm absolutely astonished at the furore that has arisen over this image, and would never have used it for the front page if I had thought it was going to be like this. In all the time it has been in the article and queued up on the front page nomination page, no-one had ever voiced a word. Oh well, if people had never heard of keratoconus, they have now. :-) Regards, --BillC 17:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, you certainly have raised awareness (in some quarters at least), and your decision to use the image on the front page was absolutely correct IMHO. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Main Page

Please do not remove my comments from the Main Talk page. Perhaps you might endeavour to read all of the preceeding discussion before doing so. Thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:10, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Blame an edit conflict - I was trying to revert some vandalism but somebody beat me to it. Sorry. — sjorford++ 08:08, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for getting back to me. I was just a bit flabbergasted to have my first revert for "vandalism". Happy editing. --Cactus.man ✍ 09:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Button nowiki.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Button nowiki.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 13:05, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

This is a quick reply by Cactus.man - tagging fixed, creator identified. --Cactus.man ✍ 13:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On June 7, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Henri Huet, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Did you know...

• ...that the remains of Henri Huet and three other noted war photographers, shot down in their helicopter over the Ho Chi Minh trail in 1971, have never been found?

DYK

Hi, I made two nominations (this and this) to DYK in the nick of time (within 5 days); the points are, IMO, meaty and the pages large in size. I am hoping that they were overlooked (since they were hardly there for a few hours, and surrounded by rejection debates) rather than rejected. Is it possible for you to reconsider them? Thanx, ImpuMozhi 12:45, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello ImpuMozh, thanks for your nominations. They are both interesting articles, but I declined to feature them because they were listed in the 2 June section and thought that they fell outwith the 120 hour time limit at the time I did the updating. Looking at the history again K. B. Sundarambal could qualify as being unstubbed by you on 7 June. If you re-nominate in the 7 June section I am sure all updaters will give the article due consideration. History of measurement systems in India looks to fall outside the age guidelines however. Hopefully that helps. --Cactus.man ✍ 13:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanx for the reply -- this gives me a better grasp of the rules governing nomination. I had imagined that 5 days from the date of page-creation is the rule, but I see that major expansion of an old page also counts. I have renominated one proposal as per your advise. Regards, ImpuMozhi 14:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. One minor point to note is that the nominated article should be formatted to appear in bold text. I've fixed your entry, but something to bear in mind for future. Keep up the good work and happy editing. --Cactus.man ✍ 14:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Just FYI, it's good to include any useful images with your nominations. I've added Image:K.B.Sundarambal.jpeg to the nomination. Good luck, hopefully it will be featured. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanx for taking the trouble to fix the formatting and include the image! It is really good of you. Sorry to cause the trouble, I'm new to this and although I was imitating the other entries, I missed it. Regards, ImpuMozhi 16:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK Update

Hi Brookie, I've added back the two articles you removed so that they get the minimum 6 hour exposure on the main page. Items being removed should also be archived on the template talk page, all the necessary instructions are there and at Wikipedia:Did you know/Guide. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Brookie here - thanks for your note - I had archived the ones I removed - which I did because the template page mentioned that there should normally be only 4 articles there - but this is the first time I've had a go at this. By reinstating the other two you have removed my J Cahn one - when will this get its airing now?

Thanks Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! ^(Whisper...) 15:50, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

:-) the 4 items thing is a mistake I made when I started updating DYK. Since the main page redesign the rule is now up to 6 items to suit the space available on the main page. Maybe the instructions are still out of date - I'll have a look. Also, you need to nominate your J Cahn entry on the template talk page under the date of article creation. The general rule in updating is to use the older items first, working up to the newer ones. That way all articles get a fair shot at being selected. It will be great if we get another pair of hands to help the updaters. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:04, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - we live and learn - will call by and help when I can Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! ^(Whisper...) 16:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK

How do you get that template? FellowWikipedian 01:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Are you asking about {{UpdatedDYK}}? If so it is placed on your talk page when an article that you have created is featured on Did You Know?. The process is explained at Template talk:Did you know and Wikipedia:Did you know. Hope that helps. --Cactus.man ✍ 04:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK

That was my vain attempt at keeping DYK more alive and fluid. If several entries had decent pictures, I'd be for switching them around periodically. There's no real reason why one entry should remain at the top position with the picture. — BRIAN0918 • 2006-06-09 16:08

Thanks for your note. The potentially short turn around time keeps it alive and fluid IMO and I really don't think it's necessary to rotate images within a DYK featured cycle, and certainly not without discussion beforehand. But I appreciate what you were trying to do, thanks for the explanation. --Cactus.man ✍ 07:02, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shaker Aamer

Two more articles about Guantanamo detainees have been nominated for deletion:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rasool Shahwali Zair Mohammed Mohammed
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abaidullah

One of your fellow admins, a guy named User:Stifle, voted to keep the first one, but said it needed serious POV trimming. He voted to delete the second one, on the grounds that wikipedia is not a soapbox. Of course you know who the soapbox complaint reminds me of.  :-) It may be that the reminder precludes me from taking complaints that remind me of you know who with the seriousness they deserve.

I think I have been doing a pretty good job of writing about the Guantanamo detainees. I have had other complaints of bias, from other people besides our friend. But, in general, like him, they can't cite specific passages. And I am left with the impression that their complaint is evidence of their bias not mine.

I asked the guy who nominated those two recent articles, User:MilesToGo, to explain, in more detail, why he put an {npov} on the Rasool article. Instead he nominated it for deletion. (FWIW, I suspect MTG is a sockpuppet.)

Anyhow, I trust your judgement. I'd appreciate your opinion on whether I allowed an unconscious bias to taint these two articles.

Thanks. -- Geo Swan 02:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Geo, thanks for your message. I've had a look at the articles as requested and voiced my opinion on the AfD pages. The articles could benefit from some copyediting and tidy up, but which articles couldn't? I don't see any particular bias or POV problems, they are well sourced and, although I have not checked all the references in extreme detail, I know enough from your previous work to be comfortable that it is properly presented. The only possible problem I do see is a stylistic one which may lead some readers to draw a POV conclusion, particularly in the "Testimony" sections. Perhaps more of a summary style might help, as written they almost read like mini essays. Something like:

The testimony given by Mohammed at his Combatant Status Review Tribunal included the following evidence:

• He was born in Afghanistan, but, like most of his immediate family, he had left Afghanistan for the duration of the Taliban reign.
• Along with his older brother, he had lived in Pakistan during the Taliban reign. Their father had been working in Dubai ....

Just a thought to help the articles read as more of a factual report on matters which might alleviate percieved POV issues somewhat. I don't really know about the sockpuppet issue, but if you think there is an emerging pattern you can always request a CheckUser. I hope this help. All the best. --Cactus.man ✍ 11:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Lithuanian Security Police on DYK

I think this particular claim is result of misinterpretation of sources. Original source used in article says that one regional branch was modelled under Gestapo, see [1]. I suggest to remove it from DYK. Sigitas 12:14, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, but you seem to be referring to a content dispute. I am not competent to comment on the accuracy or otherwise of your comments, but it's something that should be raised on the article talk page. Exposure on DYK will possibly open up that discussion to wider informed debate. That's what this place is all about after all. --Cactus.man ✍ 12:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: DYK Perihan Magden

Thanks for letting me know. I'm so proud! :) Sláinte, --Gordon Finn 12:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks from Samir

Dear Cactus.man, thanks so much for your support during my recent successful request for adminship. I really appreciate it, especially from an experienced editor and admin like yourself. Take care -- Samir धर्म 08:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

---

stop blocking us from editing you punk. If you want some, come get some. Now'll we'll edit your page. Remix part 3 haha! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.225.189.4 (talk • contribs) 08:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK

You updated DYK less than 12 hours after the previous update! Jooler 13:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Hehe ... just managed to comply with the new "rules", 12hrs 43mins by my calculations, but I'll take it on the chin anyway :-)

Cactus.man is not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!

--Cactus.man ✍ 14:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Right I get an article in DYK and then I'm asleep while it's up there. Great. Jooler 15:03, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Matchsticks for the eyeballs is the best I can recommend at the moment. Updates can happen anytime after 6 hours from the previous one. But as you missed it, here it is again. --Cactus.man ✍ 18:30, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

What new rules??? ++Lar: t/c 19:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

these ones ... :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 05:34, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Tireless contributor

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For your continuing supervision of the DYKs, I, Piotrus, hearby award you with The Working Man's Barnstar. Wear it proudly and keep up the good job! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Isted Lion

Thanks for telling me. You really made my day :) It will definitely not be my last contribution to DYK. Regards. Valentinian ^(talk) 21:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem, it was a nice article and an interesting fact for using on DYK, keep them coming. And thanks for fixing the typo on my DYK page, I dont mind at all, cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 06:38, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Mid update?

are you in mid update at this moment? I ask because you don' tuse warns and an image I expected to use has already been protected... actually that was Pharos and it's in the news so the DYK isn't eligible. Anyway I just started a run, msg me back if you are in fact already updating.. ++Lar: t/c 13:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK advice

Hi Samir, thanks for doing the last DYK update, nice selection of articles and hopefully you will continue updating as a "new pair of hands". Just a few minor things to remember: don't forget to archive the previous items from the template to the top of Template_talk:Did_you_know#Archive, including a link to the featured image in parentheses; images hosted on commons should be uploaded locally to WP if they're not protected on Commons, and tagged with the {{C-uploaded}} template; don't forget to actually protect the image and unprotect the previous one that's just been replaced (or speedy delete it if it was C-uploaded). I've fixed these bits and pieces, so no need for you to do anything, just wanted to let you know for your next update !!! Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 12:59, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks man, saw it hadn't been updated for a bit and wanted to try my hand at it. Will look out for the archiving and image issues next time! Cheers and thanks for the advice! -- Samir धर्म 23:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay dude, I updated again and hopefully got everything straight! Take care -- Samir धर्म 09:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Samir, almost perfect, but don't forget to actually apply the protection to the new featured image as well as adding the relevant protection template. Other than that, looks pretty good. There's also quite a wide ranging series of discussions going on about the whole DYK method, including appropriateness of admins selecting their own entries, suggested changes to the selection process and feedback on non-selected nominations. You may wish to chip in or keep an eye on it, as it may affect how things get done in future. In particular, the comment on non selected nominations seems to be undergoing a sort of trial right now. --Cactus.man ✍ 11:23, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK nomination

Hi, I have just now made a nomination for DYK of an article unstubbed on 24/June. It seems rather inconspicuous, in the middle os a sea of old nominations, so I am pinging you to draw attention -- if you ever promote it, it must be in the next 24 hours at the latest. Regards, ImpuMozhi 22:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

A new userbox you might like

Hi Cactus,

I couldn't resist making the following userbox after reading the attached link. After being insulted on numerous occasions by trolls I decided to fight back the best way I know how -- with a witty userbox! Feel free to remove this from your talk page if you don't appreciate the humour. = )

Cheers,

 Netsnipe  ^(Talk)  05:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

File:Gavel icon.jpg

WP: Policies & Guidelines This Wikipedian is proud to be a “Bureaucratic Fuck”.

Thanks for the note and the box with the link. I had no idea that I'd reached such a level of infamy :-) I don't use userboxes, but I'll leave it in place on my talk page. The only problem is that Image:Encyclopaedia damatica logo.PNG is under a fair use license. As such it can only be used in the appropriate article about the topic, and NEVER in userspace (see Wikipedia:Fair_use#Policy, in particular item #9). Could you find a free alternative or change the image for some text. I've resisted the temptation to be a Bureaucratic Fuck and do this for you :-) Thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 07:17, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I've picked a suitable public domain image. --  Netsnipe  ^(Talk)  08:06, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that, speedy work, and a good replacement image as well. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 08:44, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Archiving DYK

In this edit you claimed to have archived DYK, but articles like CornerShot aren't linked in the DYK archive. Did something go wrong? - Mgm|^(talk) 08:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• Hmm, somehow they ended up on WP:RA instead of the archive you edited after removing the image from DYK talk. seems okay now. Sorry to have bothered you. =- Mgm|^(talk) 08:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

It's just a sequencing thing, I should probably update the real archive before removing items from the talk page. Check now and you'll see all is well, you were just too fast off the mark and beat me :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 08:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Main Page edit links

David, your proposal for the main page is excellent. However, the lone square brackets around the edit links are wrong. Look at the portal template, or any other portal out there, and the main page is a portal after all. Bracketless is the correct form. With brackets contradicts the standard method and is visually "clunky". --Cactus.man ✍ 13:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I see what you mean. I wasn't thinking about the portal headers; I was emulating the links that appear at the tops of most page sections (such as this one). I've reverted to your version. —David Levy 13:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

You > Bots?

You beat the bots? :-D --Andeh 07:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

HeHe, thanks. It's not easy, but nice when you can get one over on them :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 07:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Mad Bomber

It's all on the RFA in its full glory, totally signed.Blnguyen | rant-line 08:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I was just reading the RfA page as you replied. I recommend a name change to "Mad User Who Shoots Himself in Foot". Blocking looks fine to me. --Cactus.man ✍ 08:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Nicole Manske DYK

Thank you letting me know about Nicole Manske DYK. I really appreciate it! Chris 16:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

re: DYK update

Hi Grue, I see you've started an update. I had one ready to start, but please carry on. Just FYI, in case you are going to use the Vitebsk Rail Terminal article and image, I have already uploaded and protected Image:Vitebsky vokzal.JPG from Commons. If you're not going to use this let me know and I'll delete it. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 10:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I wanted to use a postcard picture, but it didn't look very good as a thumb so I used the photo you uploaded (which is also not very striking but whatever...). I finished the update - hopefully I didn't mess something up.  Grue  11:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

The update looks fine, good work and keep doing more please!! I agree that it's not the most inspiring image but as you say, whatever... --Cactus.man ✍ 11:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello Akash, I have replied to your query on Template_talk:Did_you_know. I would have included the article, but when I updated it was the last one to be selected without an image, so I had to bypass it. I see it also got passed over again, I think because Grue felt he had too many biographies. If I manage to get the next update done before anyone else I will definitely include it. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 18:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking out the time to leave a message on my talk page. I had already seen your reply to me at talk:DYK. I have already posted my reply there. I would have added that picture earlier, but couldn't find it. Had to search for 1 hour for a suitable photo and scan it. (Prof. Pisharoty is a relative, so I could find a photo from the family wedding albums :)). Cheers! - Aksi_great (talk) 18:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

And you can call me Aksi if you like. I have no problem with that. - Aksi_great (talk) 18:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Hehe - so does that family association make you semi-notable? I look forward to the article. I'm not sure where your username comes from, so I'll probably still call you Akash in future if that's OK - seems to be the norm on your talk page. --Cactus.man ✍ 18:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Then Akash it is. Wish I can see Akash Shah on DYK soon. That would be an honour. - Aksi_great (talk) 18:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Underwater panthers

Glad you enjoyed the underwater panthers :) And I love the Wikipedia Signpost -- our very own newspaper, how swish! Bookgrrl 12:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Misza13's pile!

Thank you for contributing the impressive the pile of supports gathered on my RfA, which passed with a final tally of 0x0104/0x01/0x00. I'm happy that so many people have put faith in my abilities as an admin and promise to use the tools wisely and do my best not to let you down. If I ever may be of assistance, just leave a note on my talk page. Misza13, the rouge-on-demand admin wishes you happy editing! NOTE: This message has been encrypted with the sophisticated ROT-26 algorithm. Ability to decipher it indicates a properly functioning optical sensor array.

Thank you, dear Cactus Man!

Ain't he cute?

Thank you so much, my dear Cactus Man! :) Hearing words like your praise for my modest work makes me blush - but hey, don't let that stop you ;) Btw, I'll take this opportunity to tell you you look so CUTE in your pic at Facebook - correct me if I'm wrong, tho... you had not shaved yourself that particular day, right? ;) Big hugs! Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 11:02, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Dear Phaedriel, thanks for your nice message, it gave me good reason to emit a long wiki-smile - something that's all too rare around here these days. No need to blush about the compliments, Frank Rinehart is a great article with fantastic images, but the main one selected has a haunting beauty for me that evokes what must have been the sadness about the fate that befell her nation. Keep all the good stuff coming. And just FYI, Cactus.men NEVER shave ... :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 11:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I also meant to say that your soundtrack project is a fantastic idea. I'll add things in the next few days hopefully, but where the Hell do I start? There's just TOO MUCH STUFF. --Cactus.man ✍ 12:02, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Bonie and Hatie

Aww, yet, even more thanks then! ;) Normally, don't re-reply messages, even those as beautiful as yours, as I enjoy and cherish the beauty and happyness they transmit and continue with my business - well, I bet most of us do! But I'd like to share a little bit more of info with you now that you've mentioned your thoughts about that particular picture. Hattie Tom was the daughter of a Chiricahua Apache chief whose name I can't recall now, and who accompanied her father to the Omaha exposition. While she was there, she met Bonie Tela, also an Apache, but from another tribe, the San Carlos. Bonie was also the son of a chief, and in the months they spent in Omaha, they fell for each other. But when the time came, instead of marrying, they both agreed to part ways because of the bad relation that existed between their tribes.

A sad story, and one more couple who didn't get to be together because of the foolishness of politics and prejudice. I hope I've not bored you with this story, my dear unshaved Cactus Man - have a great weekend! :) Hugs, Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 12:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Link to deleted content

Hi! The link you provided in the sean Black RfA seems to be wrong. Any chance of reposting it? Thanks. --Guinnog 16:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Stole your words of wisdom

And I'm currently using them on my own user page. Hope that's ok with you. Excellent quotes! --Guinnog 16:33, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Guinnog, I've fixed the link in SB's RfA as requested. Not sure what happened there but thanks for spotting the problem. And feel free to steal all the words of wisdom that you wish, after all, they're not mine. I just thought they were spot on. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Could you please update DYK, it's not been updated in almost a day. Cheers, Highway ^{Return to Oz...} 17:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Pages listed on Categories for deletion

Discussion on CFD - proposal to merge all subcats of Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Scottish constituencies up into the main cat. Relevant categories which would be deleted are:

• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Aberdeen constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Dundee constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Edinburgh constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Fife constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Glasgow constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Highland constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Orkney and Shetland
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Paisley constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Stirling constituencies

I think that this is a rather important discussion for editors interested in Scotland-related articles, especially Scottish politics and Scottish biographical articles (particularly local history). Please have a read and ponder, and contribute to the debate if you like. Thanks. --Mais oui! 17:51, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

It would also be relevant in this context to consider the discussions in the parent category for the UK parliament: Category talk:British MPs. I find it regrettable that Mais oui! has engaged in a restructuring of that category without entering into the discussions there. --BrownHairedGirl 18:03, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_23#Category:Members_of_the_United_Kingdom_Parliament_from_Scottish_constituencies is just about to close. I would really appreciate your contribution, because this debate needs some serious input. --Mais oui! 09:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Mais, thanks for the reminder. I saw the nomination had beeen withdrawn last week so didn't do anything. I've now commented and think this is a good example where dual categorisation makes sense, and is also a good compromise. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks. I get the very strong impression that some of these people think I am a complete numpty, or evil, or somesuch. I really do appreciate "heavyweight" Wikipedians like yourself contributing to the debate, because it does illustrate that I am not really utterly isolated from common sense, nor (quite) as daft as a brush. --Mais oui! 16:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

For your help at DYK

For all your good work at DYK, and being a fellow Scot, I award Cactus.man this well earned barnstar. Harmonious editing, Highway ^{Return to Oz...} 19:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar, it's much appreciated. My wiki time is a bit limited at the moment, so I'll not get much DYK updating done for a while, but I'll get back onto it when I have more time. There seems to be a few extra people helping with updates now, so that shouldn't be a problem. Keep up the good DYK work yourself. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 08:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

bad boys blue edits

There is a problem with the content. the info is presented in a very biased way and does not constitute the actual chronology of events pertinent to the band and its members' reshufflings. the person who created this page is affiliated with the least noticeable band member and he keeps this nonsense as the real deal. this page either should be edited or deleted all together rather than continuing to display this disinformation. please intervene. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.209.25.103 (talk • contribs) 17:07, 25 July 2006 UTC

Thanks for your message. I'm sorry, but I don't know enough about the topic to help regarding what is or isn't accurate. When large sections of text are removed from articles without explanation, most editors regard that as a form of vandalism. The normal way to proceed in these situations is to raise your concerns on the article talk page and try to reach agreement with those other editors you are in conflict with - see Resolving disputes. Remember though that material should be written from a neutral point of view, be verifiable and be properly sourced. Please also see Three-revert rule. Engaging in endless reverting is counter productive, and all parties who are doing so are liable to be blocked. I hope that helps, and good luck. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Re User:Langzi

I see you are making many edits to User:Langzi Userpage. They look legitimate but are coming from this IP address (also 60.229.220.120). Are you User:Langzi, and got logged out without realising it, or forgot to login? If you are Langzi, please log in and confirm on my talk page so that I don't need to investigate this any further. Many thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 12:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm the user himself. Sorry about the confusion casued. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Langzi (talk • contribs) 12:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

So does it look ok?

*continues to hope I didn't screw the update up* Syrthiss 14:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Yep, brilliant for your 1st time - no longer a Virgin :-). Thanks for doing it, I've not had much time to do it recently, so it's always good to have more on "the team". You've probably spotted the couple of minor things that I fixed. I was going to leave you a note later, I have to dash out, but I'll do it now.

(pictured) is usually in italics; include the image link with tooltip in the archive section at the end of the top entry; dont forget to unprotect or delete the image when it's off the main page. Other than that, a perfect update. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I saw the italicization happen, but hadn't noticed the link for the image. I was just about to delete the image when you did it. ;) thanks! Syrthiss 15:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Keep up the good work, those are just minor points. And, no need to spare me from "the orange bar of doom" (great phrase), often it's somebody with a nice message. We all live and learn, sometimes we get compliments too. Keep updating, please. --Cactus.man ✍ 13:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Revert

Thanks for cleaning up my userpage! --Chris (talk) 11:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem, IP is now blocked. Happy editing :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 12:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Why You Change Stuff Back?

Is very important people know good, or bad about people. You remove it why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.175.139 (talk • contribs) 13:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Please read neutral point of view and verifiability. Here are some useful other links to help you get started:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Wikipedia Tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• The Manual of Style

If you need to experiment and improve your editing skills, you can use the sandbox quite safely.

Happy editing .... --Cactus.man ✍ 14:05, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

NOOR LEGHARI

Answer: a copy of the birth certificate of Haroon Leghari is available for anyone interested. It is not a fake and is verifiable by checking the records of the registrar of births for The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea at the Town Hall off Kings Road, Chelsea, London.

I trust as per law and any other verifiability purpose this suffices as proof until proven otherwise by objectos or editors. I would request that any reverts on the entry of Haroon Leghari ceases forthwith so that the public at large are aware of the facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.133.70.3 (talk • contribs) 06:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Err, I have no idea what you are referring to, can you enlighten me? --Cactus.man ✍ 17:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Check out Talk:Main page, where there are a couple complaints about the shortness of Filippo Salvatore Gilii. I had skipped over that one when updating DYK, since it seemed too short to me. — ₀₉₁₈^BRIAN • 2006-06-01 02:40

Thanks for the note regarding Filippo Salvatore Gilii. The article was borderline in size but interesting (or at least I thought) so I was bold, gasp. The pleasures of doing one's bit to help out ... :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 07:09, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Many Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my User Page. --Wisden17 16:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Scottish east coast fishery

Hello Bill, I see you have been doing some excellent work on these articles, good to see. I have been toying with the idea of working up some new articles on the Skaffie, Baldie and Zulu for some time now. There is already a decent article on the Fifie. I suspect your knowledge in this area is infinitely better than mine so I wondered if you would like to take the lead on this?

Also, as Tagishsimon pointed out, there is some duplication in your articles with the content of other existing articles such as the Fifie. In such cases it is useful to keep content to a summary level, and provide a link to the main article by using the template {{main}}. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on articles for the other boat types. --Cactus.man ✍ 10:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello and thanks for your comments. Apologise for delay but have been away. I've started to tackle the duplication issues also. You suggested that I take on the role of producing information on the historical fishing boats but wonder if it should be one article encompassing all of the boats or separate articles for each type. What do you think? Billreid 16:44, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello Bill, fishing is not really my area of expertise, but from my research so far I think it's probably correct that the Skaffie and Fifie were the two predominant fishing boat types on the east coast, and further tinkering with designs produced the Baldie and Zulu towards the end of the 19th century - correct me if I'm wrong. My thoughts at the moment are that the Fifie article is perfectly good to stand alone and the Skaffie is probably worth breaking out into it's own article. The other two could probably remain in the Scottish east coast fishery article in the Fishing Boat Development section, I'm not sure that there's enough information to warrant separate articles. Thoughts welcome. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:13, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Anichkov Bridge

Hi Ghirla, I'd like to include the article in the next DYK update. Would you have any objection to the simplified wording I've suggested on the talk page. I agree with Lar that the hook is a bit obscure within the article. I would appreciate your thoughts, thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 09:15, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for drawing my attention to the problem with this nomination. To be honest, I don't like the readiness with which Lar and Brian invent new guidelines for every nom. They seem to forget that the purpose of DYK is not to present the best that WP has to offer but to encourage the creation of new articles, which are to be improved by others due to exposure on Main Page. They have no qualms about promoting pitiful stubs, yet large articles get slammed because "their hook is hidden in text". And what is a hook? Is there any definition? It is all very subjective IMHO. Unlike Lar, I can't see any hook in the nomination of Network SouthCentral, for instance. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 09:58, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you're so upset about this, after all you did state "please vet my nom if needed", so somebody did. I just spent half an hour preparing the next update and asked you a courteous question whether you would mind if I used the alternate wording I put on the talk page, hardly a diatribe as you characterise it. (Struck due to cross-posting edit conflict). I agree that there is too much negative commentary appearing on the page now, and you will note that I hardly ever comment on other noms. I occasionally do a minor tweak to the wording and will only ever comment if it is a major departure from the original nomination wording (as in this case), or if there is a technical problem with the nom.

I agree with you about the aims of DYK, and that they should be kept simple and flexible (you might want to have a look at the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Requirement_for_referencing, which got somewhat hijacked by referencing hardliners). Yes, selection of items will always be subjective, and that's not a bad thing. The problem I saw with your wording was that it didn't relate clearly to the text of the article which says that "Klodt depicted his powerful enemy's face under the tail of one of the bronze stallions", which is a bit ambiguous. That reads to me that the figure beneath the horse is the horse tamer (but sculpted with the face of Klodt's enemy), rather than the actual enemy in question, OR (unlikely) the face of his enemy was literally sculpted on the horse beneath the tail. I spent a good deal of time trying various rewordings, including mention of his death after discovery of the missing tongues, but couldn't develop anything that read well in relation to the article (IMHO). Hence my simplified version and my initial post here. Please rest assured I was not trying to be difficult or picky, and please do continue your excellent work in writing, finding and nominating new articles such as this. Best wishes. --Cactus.man ✍ 10:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your long response. I didn't mean to offend you, my grudge is against those persons who invent new guidelines for each nom. When I ask "to vet my nom", I mean improve my grammar, because my command of English is limited, you see. As for that face, yes, one of the horse tamers has a face of Klodt's enemy. I wish I had more data to expand on the subject. Please keep up the good work you do for DYK. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 11:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Ghirla, no offence was taken. If you're OK with this tweaked wording, I'll go ahead and update shortly:

• ...that the Anichkov Bridge in Saint Petersburg features one of the city's notable landmarks, The Horse Tamer, a group of four neoclassical bronze sculptures by Baron Peter Klodt?

I think it reflects the article content fairly well. --Cactus.man ✍ 11:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

It's OK with me. I shall start the article about this guy Klodt in a few minutes. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 11:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Looking forward to seeing the article on "this guy Klodt" ... :-) Hopefully it will also make it to DYK. If you have something ready in the next few hours let me know and I can link to it on the DYK template. --Cactus.man ✍ 11:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Quick work on Baron Klodt, nice article. I've fixed the link on DYK. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Admin intervention on DYK talk

Hi. Seeing your work particularly on DYK, I'm requesting your admin intervention against disruption episodes like following:

• a nasty unprovoked personal attack
• providing deliberately false info for suggestions evaluation

This is an official request which will be reflected on respective admin noticeboards. Thank you in advance, Ukrained 13:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. It looks like you have numerous nationalism related disputes with various editors, although I cannot follow much of it because many messages are not in English. I would remind all parties, yourself included, to remain mindful of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. The first link you provided is in contravention of these and I will leave a note to that effect. The second link you provide is merely a statement of opinion that the article is a stub (an opinion I agree with, BTW). Please remember that admins are not referee's here to dish out punishments or take sides in disputes. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ghirla, I have received a complaint from User:Ukrained about your comments on Template talk:Did you know. I can see there is some history of nationalist related disputes between you, but I know I don't need to remind you of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Please don't let these disputes spread elsewhere and lead you to violate these key policies. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

As for Klodt, this is a mere place-holder. I hope someone more interested in the subject than myself will expand. As for Ukrained, I believe the guy is stalking me. His fellow nationalist editor, User:AlexPU was recently blocked for a month after I posted this announcement on WP:ANI. After AlexPU asked Ukrained to seek revenge, I view his comments and delations as the fruit of this zeal. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 15:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ghirla, I suspected as much from reading some of the history. I had some of that early on in my wiki life and responded with "troll" comments, but in hindsight it really is pointless and is just a "feeding exercise" giving them the attention they need. Dignified restraint is usually much more effective. Your comments on Klodt are also noted, I might just have a look at doing some work on him myself if I can source enough interesting material. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Mr.Cactus, thank you for your answer either. I'll suggest even more thanks after your admin reactions. Answering some of your statements here:

• I hope you're not taking sides when talking of my (?) numerous nationalism related disputes. I only and exclusively have disputes related to trolling and POV-pushing conducted by the group of editors including Ghirlandajo. It is actually a one big dispute, and it may appear neverending :(((.
• I would never start or support any disputes (especially nationalism-related ) within DYK talk. Otherwise I would have answered the pernicious RU troll Ghirlandajo right there. Instead I requested your admin intervention. So we can now appreciate and encourage each other's reaction on the incident :)
• This your thought: admins are not referee's here to dish out punishments or take sides in disputes sounds both confusing and disturbing for me. Hope to discuss it somewhere sometime.

Thank you again for your kind help. Ukrained 21:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Mr. Cactus, I even more thankful after studying your talk where you communicate with Ghirlandajo very kindly. Sorry for asking your intervention, this will never happen again :(. Ukrained 21:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK archiving done

Done! created some 13 archives. btw, some suggestions for DYK - given that there are so many old candidates still around, I feel that a principal reason is that many admins find it too daunting to update. We should reduce the work done by an admin. We should just stick to dyktalk rather than notifying users or expand templates. Also, newest articles shd go to special:newpages - I responded on the relevant thread on the DYK discussion page. --Gurubrahma 17:06, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Gurubrahma, thanks so much for doing the archiving, no doubt you have saved me much pain and suffering as I would have feebly attempted to make sense of it all (and possibly failed). I am indebted :-) Is there any word on whether the bot will come back on line or should we instigate a new archival method in the meantime?

I can understand your sentiments about simplifying the notification process to encourage more updaters, but I disagree. For me, it is mere courtesy to say "thank you, we appreciate your efforts" to all, newbies or veterans alike. After all, it is not really so much extra work to place 5 or 6 additional templates, 5 minutes work or so, and admins should be willing to invest the time to do the extra work entrusted to them (IMHO). Also, fostering of community spirit is essential if we are to thrive, and notifications help build that.

The question of what "newest articles" should link to is more complicated. I saw your posting on the DYK discussion page and I agree that it doesn't make sense to link up recent additions twice. However, neither solution is perfect. Special:newpages is a new-user unfriendly morass of (largely) junk, and often profanity-laden material, yet Wikipedia:Recent additions is also deficient because it only lists past DYK featured articles. The solution?? We need a wise man, is your name prophetic?

Please let me know your thoughts on the interim archival method as I would like to implement something soon. Best wishes. --Cactus.man ✍ 19:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Featured article Keratoconus

Hello Bill, I've just noted your comments on Talk:Main_Page. I sincerely hope you haven't taken any offence to my remarks on the issue of the appropriateness of the originally featured image, or thought that I was in any way belittling the medical condition or the quality of article and images. I have re-read my postings and am now worried that they may be misconstrued as flippant and dismissive. I was merely aiming to comment on my astonsihment at the furore that seemed to have erupted over the originally featured image which, in my view, is the one that best illustrates the article on the main page. I was also trying to inject a little bit of humour but, with this imperfect digital communication medium, I am now worried that this may have been taken wrongly. I hope that clears things up (if necessary). Best wishes and happy editing. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message! To be honest, I'm absolutely astonished at the furore that has arisen over this image, and would never have used it for the front page if I had thought it was going to be like this. In all the time it has been in the article and queued up on the front page nomination page, no-one had ever voiced a word. Oh well, if people had never heard of keratoconus, they have now. :-) Regards, --BillC 17:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, you certainly have raised awareness (in some quarters at least), and your decision to use the image on the front page was absolutely correct IMHO. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Main Page

Please do not remove my comments from the Main Talk page. Perhaps you might endeavour to read all of the preceeding discussion before doing so. Thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:10, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Blame an edit conflict - I was trying to revert some vandalism but somebody beat me to it. Sorry. — sjorford++ 08:08, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for getting back to me. I was just a bit flabbergasted to have my first revert for "vandalism". Happy editing. --Cactus.man ✍ 09:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Button nowiki.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Button nowiki.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 13:05, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

This is a quick reply by Cactus.man - tagging fixed, creator identified. --Cactus.man ✍ 13:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On June 7, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Henri Huet, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Did you know...

• ...that the remains of Henri Huet and three other noted war photographers, shot down in their helicopter over the Ho Chi Minh trail in 1971, have never been found?

DYK

Hi, I made two nominations (this and this) to DYK in the nick of time (within 5 days); the points are, IMO, meaty and the pages large in size. I am hoping that they were overlooked (since they were hardly there for a few hours, and surrounded by rejection debates) rather than rejected. Is it possible for you to reconsider them? Thanx, ImpuMozhi 12:45, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello ImpuMozh, thanks for your nominations. They are both interesting articles, but I declined to feature them because they were listed in the 2 June section and thought that they fell outwith the 120 hour time limit at the time I did the updating. Looking at the history again K. B. Sundarambal could qualify as being unstubbed by you on 7 June. If you re-nominate in the 7 June section I am sure all updaters will give the article due consideration. History of measurement systems in India looks to fall outside the age guidelines however. Hopefully that helps. --Cactus.man ✍ 13:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanx for the reply -- this gives me a better grasp of the rules governing nomination. I had imagined that 5 days from the date of page-creation is the rule, but I see that major expansion of an old page also counts. I have renominated one proposal as per your advise. Regards, ImpuMozhi 14:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. One minor point to note is that the nominated article should be formatted to appear in bold text. I've fixed your entry, but something to bear in mind for future. Keep up the good work and happy editing. --Cactus.man ✍ 14:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Just FYI, it's good to include any useful images with your nominations. I've added Image:K.B.Sundarambal.jpeg to the nomination. Good luck, hopefully it will be featured. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanx for taking the trouble to fix the formatting and include the image! It is really good of you. Sorry to cause the trouble, I'm new to this and although I was imitating the other entries, I missed it. Regards, ImpuMozhi 16:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK Update

Hi Brookie, I've added back the two articles you removed so that they get the minimum 6 hour exposure on the main page. Items being removed should also be archived on the template talk page, all the necessary instructions are there and at Wikipedia:Did you know/Guide. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Brookie here - thanks for your note - I had archived the ones I removed - which I did because the template page mentioned that there should normally be only 4 articles there - but this is the first time I've had a go at this. By reinstating the other two you have removed my J Cahn one - when will this get its airing now?

Thanks Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! ^(Whisper...) 15:50, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

:-) the 4 items thing is a mistake I made when I started updating DYK. Since the main page redesign the rule is now up to 6 items to suit the space available on the main page. Maybe the instructions are still out of date - I'll have a look. Also, you need to nominate your J Cahn entry on the template talk page under the date of article creation. The general rule in updating is to use the older items first, working up to the newer ones. That way all articles get a fair shot at being selected. It will be great if we get another pair of hands to help the updaters. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:04, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - we live and learn - will call by and help when I can Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! ^(Whisper...) 16:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK

How do you get that template? FellowWikipedian 01:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Are you asking about {{UpdatedDYK}}? If so it is placed on your talk page when an article that you have created is featured on Did You Know?. The process is explained at Template talk:Did you know and Wikipedia:Did you know. Hope that helps. --Cactus.man ✍ 04:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK

That was my vain attempt at keeping DYK more alive and fluid. If several entries had decent pictures, I'd be for switching them around periodically. There's no real reason why one entry should remain at the top position with the picture. — BRIAN0918 • 2006-06-09 16:08

Thanks for your note. The potentially short turn around time keeps it alive and fluid IMO and I really don't think it's necessary to rotate images within a DYK featured cycle, and certainly not without discussion beforehand. But I appreciate what you were trying to do, thanks for the explanation. --Cactus.man ✍ 07:02, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shaker Aamer

Two more articles about Guantanamo detainees have been nominated for deletion:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rasool Shahwali Zair Mohammed Mohammed
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abaidullah

One of your fellow admins, a guy named User:Stifle, voted to keep the first one, but said it needed serious POV trimming. He voted to delete the second one, on the grounds that wikipedia is not a soapbox. Of course you know who the soapbox complaint reminds me of.  :-) It may be that the reminder precludes me from taking complaints that remind me of you know who with the seriousness they deserve.

I think I have been doing a pretty good job of writing about the Guantanamo detainees. I have had other complaints of bias, from other people besides our friend. But, in general, like him, they can't cite specific passages. And I am left with the impression that their complaint is evidence of their bias not mine.

I asked the guy who nominated those two recent articles, User:MilesToGo, to explain, in more detail, why he put an {npov} on the Rasool article. Instead he nominated it for deletion. (FWIW, I suspect MTG is a sockpuppet.)

Anyhow, I trust your judgement. I'd appreciate your opinion on whether I allowed an unconscious bias to taint these two articles.

Thanks. -- Geo Swan 02:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Geo, thanks for your message. I've had a look at the articles as requested and voiced my opinion on the AfD pages. The articles could benefit from some copyediting and tidy up, but which articles couldn't? I don't see any particular bias or POV problems, they are well sourced and, although I have not checked all the references in extreme detail, I know enough from your previous work to be comfortable that it is properly presented. The only possible problem I do see is a stylistic one which may lead some readers to draw a POV conclusion, particularly in the "Testimony" sections. Perhaps more of a summary style might help, as written they almost read like mini essays. Something like:

The testimony given by Mohammed at his Combatant Status Review Tribunal included the following evidence:

• He was born in Afghanistan, but, like most of his immediate family, he had left Afghanistan for the duration of the Taliban reign.
• Along with his older brother, he had lived in Pakistan during the Taliban reign. Their father had been working in Dubai ....

Just a thought to help the articles read as more of a factual report on matters which might alleviate percieved POV issues somewhat. I don't really know about the sockpuppet issue, but if you think there is an emerging pattern you can always request a CheckUser. I hope this help. All the best. --Cactus.man ✍ 11:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Lithuanian Security Police on DYK

I think this particular claim is result of misinterpretation of sources. Original source used in article says that one regional branch was modelled under Gestapo, see [2]. I suggest to remove it from DYK. Sigitas 12:14, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, but you seem to be referring to a content dispute. I am not competent to comment on the accuracy or otherwise of your comments, but it's something that should be raised on the article talk page. Exposure on DYK will possibly open up that discussion to wider informed debate. That's what this place is all about after all. --Cactus.man ✍ 12:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: DYK Perihan Magden

Thanks for letting me know. I'm so proud! :) Sláinte, --Gordon Finn 12:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks from Samir

Dear Cactus.man, thanks so much for your support during my recent successful request for adminship. I really appreciate it, especially from an experienced editor and admin like yourself. Take care -- Samir धर्म 08:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

---

stop blocking us from editing you punk. If you want some, come get some. Now'll we'll edit your page. Remix part 3 haha! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.225.189.4 (talk • contribs) 08:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK

You updated DYK less than 12 hours after the previous update! Jooler 13:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Hehe ... just managed to comply with the new "rules", 12hrs 43mins by my calculations, but I'll take it on the chin anyway :-)

Cactus.man is not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!

--Cactus.man ✍ 14:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Right I get an article in DYK and then I'm asleep while it's up there. Great. Jooler 15:03, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Matchsticks for the eyeballs is the best I can recommend at the moment. Updates can happen anytime after 6 hours from the previous one. But as you missed it, here it is again. --Cactus.man ✍ 18:30, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

What new rules??? ++Lar: t/c 19:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

these ones ... :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 05:34, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Tireless contributor

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For your continuing supervision of the DYKs, I, Piotrus, hearby award you with The Working Man's Barnstar. Wear it proudly and keep up the good job! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Isted Lion

Thanks for telling me. You really made my day :) It will definitely not be my last contribution to DYK. Regards. Valentinian ^(talk) 21:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem, it was a nice article and an interesting fact for using on DYK, keep them coming. And thanks for fixing the typo on my DYK page, I dont mind at all, cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 06:38, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Mid update?

are you in mid update at this moment? I ask because you don' tuse warns and an image I expected to use has already been protected... actually that was Pharos and it's in the news so the DYK isn't eligible. Anyway I just started a run, msg me back if you are in fact already updating.. ++Lar: t/c 13:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK advice

Hi Samir, thanks for doing the last DYK update, nice selection of articles and hopefully you will continue updating as a "new pair of hands". Just a few minor things to remember: don't forget to archive the previous items from the template to the top of Template_talk:Did_you_know#Archive, including a link to the featured image in parentheses; images hosted on commons should be uploaded locally to WP if they're not protected on Commons, and tagged with the {{C-uploaded}} template; don't forget to actually protect the image and unprotect the previous one that's just been replaced (or speedy delete it if it was C-uploaded). I've fixed these bits and pieces, so no need for you to do anything, just wanted to let you know for your next update !!! Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 12:59, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks man, saw it hadn't been updated for a bit and wanted to try my hand at it. Will look out for the archiving and image issues next time! Cheers and thanks for the advice! -- Samir धर्म 23:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay dude, I updated again and hopefully got everything straight! Take care -- Samir धर्म 09:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Samir, almost perfect, but don't forget to actually apply the protection to the new featured image as well as adding the relevant protection template. Other than that, looks pretty good. There's also quite a wide ranging series of discussions going on about the whole DYK method, including appropriateness of admins selecting their own entries, suggested changes to the selection process and feedback on non-selected nominations. You may wish to chip in or keep an eye on it, as it may affect how things get done in future. In particular, the comment on non selected nominations seems to be undergoing a sort of trial right now. --Cactus.man ✍ 11:23, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK nomination

Hi, I have just now made a nomination for DYK of an article unstubbed on 24/June. It seems rather inconspicuous, in the middle os a sea of old nominations, so I am pinging you to draw attention -- if you ever promote it, it must be in the next 24 hours at the latest. Regards, ImpuMozhi 22:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

A new userbox you might like

Hi Cactus,

I couldn't resist making the following userbox after reading the attached link. After being insulted on numerous occasions by trolls I decided to fight back the best way I know how -- with a witty userbox! Feel free to remove this from your talk page if you don't appreciate the humour. = )

Cheers,

 Netsnipe  ^(Talk)  05:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

File:Gavel icon.jpg

WP: Policies & Guidelines This Wikipedian is proud to be a “Bureaucratic Fuck”.

Thanks for the note and the box with the link. I had no idea that I'd reached such a level of infamy :-) I don't use userboxes, but I'll leave it in place on my talk page. The only problem is that Image:Encyclopaedia damatica logo.PNG is under a fair use license. As such it can only be used in the appropriate article about the topic, and NEVER in userspace (see Wikipedia:Fair_use#Policy, in particular item #9). Could you find a free alternative or change the image for some text. I've resisted the temptation to be a Bureaucratic Fuck and do this for you :-) Thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 07:17, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I've picked a suitable public domain image. --  Netsnipe  ^(Talk)  08:06, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that, speedy work, and a good replacement image as well. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 08:44, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Archiving DYK

In this edit you claimed to have archived DYK, but articles like CornerShot aren't linked in the DYK archive. Did something go wrong? - Mgm|^(talk) 08:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• Hmm, somehow they ended up on WP:RA instead of the archive you edited after removing the image from DYK talk. seems okay now. Sorry to have bothered you. =- Mgm|^(talk) 08:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

It's just a sequencing thing, I should probably update the real archive before removing items from the talk page. Check now and you'll see all is well, you were just too fast off the mark and beat me :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 08:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Main Page edit links

David, your proposal for the main page is excellent. However, the lone square brackets around the edit links are wrong. Look at the portal template, or any other portal out there, and the main page is a portal after all. Bracketless is the correct form. With brackets contradicts the standard method and is visually "clunky". --Cactus.man ✍ 13:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I see what you mean. I wasn't thinking about the portal headers; I was emulating the links that appear at the tops of most page sections (such as this one). I've reverted to your version. —David Levy 13:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

You > Bots?

You beat the bots? :-D --Andeh 07:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

HeHe, thanks. It's not easy, but nice when you can get one over on them :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 07:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Mad Bomber

It's all on the RFA in its full glory, totally signed.Blnguyen | rant-line 08:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I was just reading the RfA page as you replied. I recommend a name change to "Mad User Who Shoots Himself in Foot". Blocking looks fine to me. --Cactus.man ✍ 08:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Nicole Manske DYK

Thank you letting me know about Nicole Manske DYK. I really appreciate it! Chris 16:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

re: DYK update

Hi Grue, I see you've started an update. I had one ready to start, but please carry on. Just FYI, in case you are going to use the Vitebsk Rail Terminal article and image, I have already uploaded and protected Image:Vitebsky vokzal.JPG from Commons. If you're not going to use this let me know and I'll delete it. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 10:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I wanted to use a postcard picture, but it didn't look very good as a thumb so I used the photo you uploaded (which is also not very striking but whatever...). I finished the update - hopefully I didn't mess something up.  Grue  11:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

The update looks fine, good work and keep doing more please!! I agree that it's not the most inspiring image but as you say, whatever... --Cactus.man ✍ 11:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello Akash, I have replied to your query on Template_talk:Did_you_know. I would have included the article, but when I updated it was the last one to be selected without an image, so I had to bypass it. I see it also got passed over again, I think because Grue felt he had too many biographies. If I manage to get the next update done before anyone else I will definitely include it. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 18:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking out the time to leave a message on my talk page. I had already seen your reply to me at talk:DYK. I have already posted my reply there. I would have added that picture earlier, but couldn't find it. Had to search for 1 hour for a suitable photo and scan it. (Prof. Pisharoty is a relative, so I could find a photo from the family wedding albums :)). Cheers! - Aksi_great (talk) 18:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

And you can call me Aksi if you like. I have no problem with that. - Aksi_great (talk) 18:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Hehe - so does that family association make you semi-notable? I look forward to the article. I'm not sure where your username comes from, so I'll probably still call you Akash in future if that's OK - seems to be the norm on your talk page. --Cactus.man ✍ 18:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Then Akash it is. Wish I can see Akash Shah on DYK soon. That would be an honour. - Aksi_great (talk) 18:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Underwater panthers

Glad you enjoyed the underwater panthers :) And I love the Wikipedia Signpost -- our very own newspaper, how swish! Bookgrrl 12:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Misza13's pile!

Thank you for contributing the impressive the pile of supports gathered on my RfA, which passed with a final tally of 0x0104/0x01/0x00. I'm happy that so many people have put faith in my abilities as an admin and promise to use the tools wisely and do my best not to let you down. If I ever may be of assistance, just leave a note on my talk page. Misza13, the rouge-on-demand admin wishes you happy editing! NOTE: This message has been encrypted with the sophisticated ROT-26 algorithm. Ability to decipher it indicates a properly functioning optical sensor array.

Thank you, dear Cactus Man!

Ain't he cute?

Thank you so much, my dear Cactus Man! :) Hearing words like your praise for my modest work makes me blush - but hey, don't let that stop you ;) Btw, I'll take this opportunity to tell you you look so CUTE in your pic at Facebook - correct me if I'm wrong, tho... you had not shaved yourself that particular day, right? ;) Big hugs! Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 11:02, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Dear Phaedriel, thanks for your nice message, it gave me good reason to emit a long wiki-smile - something that's all too rare around here these days. No need to blush about the compliments, Frank Rinehart is a great article with fantastic images, but the main one selected has a haunting beauty for me that evokes what must have been the sadness about the fate that befell her nation. Keep all the good stuff coming. And just FYI, Cactus.men NEVER shave ... :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 11:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I also meant to say that your soundtrack project is a fantastic idea. I'll add things in the next few days hopefully, but where the Hell do I start? There's just TOO MUCH STUFF. --Cactus.man ✍ 12:02, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Bonie and Hatie

Aww, yet, even more thanks then! ;) Normally, don't re-reply messages, even those as beautiful as yours, as I enjoy and cherish the beauty and happyness they transmit and continue with my business - well, I bet most of us do! But I'd like to share a little bit more of info with you now that you've mentioned your thoughts about that particular picture. Hattie Tom was the daughter of a Chiricahua Apache chief whose name I can't recall now, and who accompanied her father to the Omaha exposition. While she was there, she met Bonie Tela, also an Apache, but from another tribe, the San Carlos. Bonie was also the son of a chief, and in the months they spent in Omaha, they fell for each other. But when the time came, instead of marrying, they both agreed to part ways because of the bad relation that existed between their tribes.

A sad story, and one more couple who didn't get to be together because of the foolishness of politics and prejudice. I hope I've not bored you with this story, my dear unshaved Cactus Man - have a great weekend! :) Hugs, Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 12:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Link to deleted content

Hi! The link you provided in the sean Black RfA seems to be wrong. Any chance of reposting it? Thanks. --Guinnog 16:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Stole your words of wisdom

And I'm currently using them on my own user page. Hope that's ok with you. Excellent quotes! --Guinnog 16:33, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Guinnog, I've fixed the link in SB's RfA as requested. Not sure what happened there but thanks for spotting the problem. And feel free to steal all the words of wisdom that you wish, after all, they're not mine. I just thought they were spot on. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Could you please update DYK, it's not been updated in almost a day. Cheers, Highway ^{Return to Oz...} 17:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Pages listed on Categories for deletion

Discussion on CFD - proposal to merge all subcats of Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Scottish constituencies up into the main cat. Relevant categories which would be deleted are:

• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Aberdeen constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Dundee constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Edinburgh constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Fife constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Glasgow constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Highland constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Orkney and Shetland
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Paisley constituencies
• Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Stirling constituencies

I think that this is a rather important discussion for editors interested in Scotland-related articles, especially Scottish politics and Scottish biographical articles (particularly local history). Please have a read and ponder, and contribute to the debate if you like. Thanks. --Mais oui! 17:51, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

It would also be relevant in this context to consider the discussions in the parent category for the UK parliament: Category talk:British MPs. I find it regrettable that Mais oui! has engaged in a restructuring of that category without entering into the discussions there. --BrownHairedGirl 18:03, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_23#Category:Members_of_the_United_Kingdom_Parliament_from_Scottish_constituencies is just about to close. I would really appreciate your contribution, because this debate needs some serious input. --Mais oui! 09:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Mais, thanks for the reminder. I saw the nomination had beeen withdrawn last week so didn't do anything. I've now commented and think this is a good example where dual categorisation makes sense, and is also a good compromise. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks. I get the very strong impression that some of these people think I am a complete numpty, or evil, or somesuch. I really do appreciate "heavyweight" Wikipedians like yourself contributing to the debate, because it does illustrate that I am not really utterly isolated from common sense, nor (quite) as daft as a brush. --Mais oui! 16:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

For your help at DYK

For all your good work at DYK, and being a fellow Scot, I award Cactus.man this well earned barnstar. Harmonious editing, Highway ^{Return to Oz...} 19:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar, it's much appreciated. My wiki time is a bit limited at the moment, so I'll not get much DYK updating done for a while, but I'll get back onto it when I have more time. There seems to be a few extra people helping with updates now, so that shouldn't be a problem. Keep up the good DYK work yourself. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 08:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

bad boys blue edits

There is a problem with the content. the info is presented in a very biased way and does not constitute the actual chronology of events pertinent to the band and its members' reshufflings. the person who created this page is affiliated with the least noticeable band member and he keeps this nonsense as the real deal. this page either should be edited or deleted all together rather than continuing to display this disinformation. please intervene. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.209.25.103 (talk • contribs) 17:07, 25 July 2006 UTC

Thanks for your message. I'm sorry, but I don't know enough about the topic to help regarding what is or isn't accurate. When large sections of text are removed from articles without explanation, most editors regard that as a form of vandalism. The normal way to proceed in these situations is to raise your concerns on the article talk page and try to reach agreement with those other editors you are in conflict with - see Resolving disputes. Remember though that material should be written from a neutral point of view, be verifiable and be properly sourced. Please also see Three-revert rule. Engaging in endless reverting is counter productive, and all parties who are doing so are liable to be blocked. I hope that helps, and good luck. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Re User:Langzi

I see you are making many edits to User:Langzi Userpage. They look legitimate but are coming from this IP address (also 60.229.220.120). Are you User:Langzi, and got logged out without realising it, or forgot to login? If you are Langzi, please log in and confirm on my talk page so that I don't need to investigate this any further. Many thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 12:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm the user himself. Sorry about the confusion casued. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Langzi (talk • contribs) 12:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

So does it look ok?

*continues to hope I didn't screw the update up* Syrthiss 14:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Yep, brilliant for your 1st time - no longer a Virgin :-). Thanks for doing it, I've not had much time to do it recently, so it's always good to have more on "the team". You've probably spotted the couple of minor things that I fixed. I was going to leave you a note later, I have to dash out, but I'll do it now.

(pictured) is usually in italics; include the image link with tooltip in the archive section at the end of the top entry; dont forget to unprotect or delete the image when it's off the main page. Other than that, a perfect update. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 15:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I saw the italicization happen, but hadn't noticed the link for the image. I was just about to delete the image when you did it. ;) thanks! Syrthiss 15:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Keep up the good work, those are just minor points. And, no need to spare me from "the orange bar of doom" (great phrase), often it's somebody with a nice message. We all live and learn, sometimes we get compliments too. Keep updating, please. --Cactus.man ✍ 13:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Revert

Thanks for cleaning up my userpage! --Chris (talk) 11:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem, IP is now blocked. Happy editing :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 12:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Why You Change Stuff Back?

Is very important people know good, or bad about people. You remove it why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.175.139 (talk • contribs) 13:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Please read neutral point of view and verifiability. Here are some useful other links to help you get started:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Wikipedia Tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• The Manual of Style

If you need to experiment and improve your editing skills, you can use the sandbox quite safely.

Happy editing .... --Cactus.man ✍ 14:05, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

NOOR LEGHARI

Answer: a copy of the birth certificate of Haroon Leghari is available for anyone interested. It is not a fake and is verifiable by checking the records of the registrar of births for The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea at the Town Hall off Kings Road, Chelsea, London.

I trust as per law and any other verifiability purpose this suffices as proof until proven otherwise by objectos or editors. I would request that any reverts on the entry of Haroon Leghari ceases forthwith so that the public at large are aware of the facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.133.70.3 (talk • contribs) 06:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Err, I have no idea what you are referring to, can you enlighten me? --Cactus.man ✍ 17:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)