User talk:Pdfpdf/Archive25

Archives

Jan-Feb07 Mar-Apr07 May-Jun07 Jul-Aug07 Sep-Oct07 Nov-Dec07
Jan-Feb08 Mar-Apr08 May-Jun08 Jul-Aug08 Sep-Oct08 Nov-Dec08
Jan-Feb09 Mar-Apr09 May-Jun09 Jul-Aug09 Sep-Oct09 Nov-Dec09
Jan-Feb10 Mar-Apr10 May-Jun10 Jul-Aug10 Sep-Oct10 Nov-Dec10
Jan-Feb11 Mar-Apr11 May-Jun11 Jul-Aug11 Sep-Oct11 Nov-Dec11

Removing of rank images from rank pages

Please have a look [1]. Thank you. --Nicola Romani (talk) 23:07, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Image of ranks insignia on ranks insignia pages fell under WP:NFCC#8, WP:FURG is fully respected, and WP:NFLISTS#6 permit rank insignia image used in articles wich describes ranks! THIS IS CLEAR. --Nicola Romani (talk) 12:19, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Slimy Sycophant Barnstar

		The Slimy Sycophant Barnstar
		To you Pdfpdf, I award the Slimy Sycophant Barnstar for exceptional flattery [2]. May the wearing of this barnstar permanently wrinkle your lapel! :) --Hammersoft (talk) 17:32, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Yay, I'm a suburban warrior! Let all them tremble who put recyclables in the wrong wheelie bin, else face the wrath of a sternly worded note left in their letterbox. :-) LordVetinari (talk) 12:58, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Hear hear!! Pdfpdf (talk) 12:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Benacre and related pages

Hi. I notice that you moved some of the Benacre articles around back in February. I was wondering if there was any reason you'd object to moving Benacre village back to Benacre, Suffolk - which would fit with just about every other village in Suffolk! I understand why you'd maybe want a separate Benacre dab page (although at the minute the quality of the articles is limited and they could, in theory, all be merged except the Australian one), it's just that the move to Benacre village itself doesn't necessarily follow for me.

I'm quite happy to go about the doing of it all, just wanted to run it by you first in case there was some kind of obvious reason for doing it that I missed. Ta. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:39, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Originally, the article was at "Benacre", "Benacre, Suffolk" was a redirect to it, "Benacre village" was unused, and there were assorted other "Benacre" entries.

So I moved "Benacre" to "Benacre village" and turned "Benacre" into a dab page.

I don't remember doing any other moves regarding Benacre. (Did I?)

I'm OK with you moving "Benacre village" to "Benacre, Suffolk" if you wish, but you'll need to ask an admin to do it for you. I couldn't move it to "Benacre, Suffolk" myself, so I chose the unused "village".

(BTW: As far as I'm aware, "Benacre, Suffolk" has always been a redirect to "Benacre", so it's not a case of "moving it back".)

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 04:49, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

This is probable - and thanks for the explanation btw, it's much clearer now! I'm happy with the dab given the Australian page and the handful of other pages about the place. What I'll prolly do is ask for a procedural deletion on Benacre, Suffolk and then move the page across to maintain it's history I think. Unless there's anything obvious you can see that would suggest that's not a good idea? Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:36, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

That sounds good to me. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 09:31, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Reply

G'day, the problems that I was having were specific to my computer. I deleted the internet browsing history and all of the TEMP folders off my hard drive. It's been fine since, except that I can't use the Bold or Italic icons or add any of the wikimarkups when I'm editing - but that has been the case now for months, I get around it by copy-and-pasting what I need. See ya YSSYguy (talk) 23:21, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Examples at sortname documentation

Hi, I was confused by the helpful examples you added at Template:Sortname/doc, mainly by what comes out as pure code in the right-hand columns (which mean almost nothing to a non-techie like me), so I tried to add some specific ones. I hope my additions are correct without messing up your own intentions. But I'd welcome any advice, information, clarifications or corrections. I don't quite understand the double-piping before "||sort", which doesn't seem entirely consistent. —— Shakescene (talk) 04:35, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. Yes, you are quite correct - it is only helpful to a techie.

Sortname is a very versatile template, able to specify 5 different things at once:

1. What you see displayed on the page,

2. What you sort by, and

3. What you link to:

3a. Link to what you see displayed

3b. Link to something else

3c. Don't link to anything

I'll have another go at the documentation.

Again, thank you very much - very useful feedback. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:28, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll have another look when I'm less sleepy and then mull it over, but what you've got now seems great to me. It also clears up a couple of small misinterpretations of mine. Thanks. —— Shakescene (talk) 12:59, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't have enough time right now to pursue all the details, but I've tried some alternatives out (incompletely) at Template talk:Sortname/doc. There are all kinds of traps and quirks for the layman, e.g. some of the variants are no easier than the equivalent in {{sort|}}, and the order is non-intuitive:

1&2: display; 3: alternative link target (or blank); 4: sort order; Last: no link.

Obviously it would be easier if nolink fell in third position, instead of last; then the double pipes would make more sense to the layman (and the order would be more intuitive and easier to remember). There's more, but not now. Of course your observations are always welcome. —— Shakescene (talk) 22:24, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it's:

1: display1 (& maybe link1), or blank;

2: display2 (& maybe link2);

3: alternative link target, or maybe blank, or maybe missing;

4: sort order, or missing;

Last (could be position 3 or 5) nolink=1.

Hi. I'm not sure what goal you are trying to achieve.

My goal was simple: "How do you use sortname?" / "What does sortname do?"

I'm not sure, but it seems you are wanting to compare it with "sort". Why?

Obviously it would be easier if nolink fell in third position, instead of last - I disagree that it's obvious. But do agree that if there was a way to add the "nolink=1" functionality to 3rd position, independent of the existence and/or contents of the 4th position, that would be an improvement. (It would also be compatible with all the current uses of sortname, so there would be no need for a recoding conversion.)

My major dislike of sortname is that [[ | ]] is [[target-link|what's-displayed1 what's-displayed2]], whereas sortname is {{sortname|what's-displayed1|what's-displayed2|target-link}}. My preference would be that sortname had been implemented {{sortname|target-link|what's-displayed1|what's-displayed2}}. But it wasn't.

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:28, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Admirals

Sorry, wasn't ignoring that bit you just took off, just didn't get round to replying after I had a quick look earlier (you did say low priority)... ;-) If it matters now, my main concern when I looked at it was that the table was too detailed -- I thought the method used in the similar list of RAAF Air Marshals was perhaps easier on the eye. Also there's a mix of abbreviations and spelt-out ranks. Certainly a list worth having though, I think. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:49, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.

Yes, I did say low priority. (And meant it. I'm not upset. In fact, I'm rather please you replied.)

I'm interested to learn why you feel it is "too detailed", and why that is a problem?

(Yes, perhaps the method used in list of RAAF Air Marshals is easier on the eye, but I've always preferred substance over form, so I guess I have a different bias, and I'm interested to understand other PsOV.)

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:59, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

30K

Congratulations - your stamina can only be admired! jmcw (talk) 10:09, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm. More likely it's a sign I need to get a life ... But thanks! Pdfpdf (talk) 14:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Doug butler/John Howard Clark‎

Clark was editor of The Register and part of the AEI story. Family lived for some considerable time in Hazelwood Cottage, Burnside or Knightsbridge, probably named after a location in Manchester. Perhaps origin of suburb Hazelwood (Park). Can you shed any light? Doug butler (talk) 00:15, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, saw this I thought I might be able to help. The property Hazelwood Cottage was named by Francis Clark, and was located on Greenhill Rd. It was named after Hazelwood School, Birmingham, as Francis Clark had lived there, due to the connection with Thomas Hill, his father in law. John Howard Clark, Francis' son, laid out the suburb, hence the name. Reference: Manning, Geoffrey H, (1986) "Hazelwood Park" in The Romance of Place Names of South Australia, self published, p. 88. There's also quite a bit in Warburton's The Paddocks Beneath (good book, by the way). Pdfpdf probably has more, though. - Bilby (talk) 00:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Bilby. That's very flattering of you, but sadly it's undeserved. The "more" that I have is but a tiny subset of what you've already said. Many thanks, and please, there is absolutely NO need to apologise for being helpful! Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

3RR

I don't think I need to template the regulars here, but note that this is the needed warning that you are involved in an EDITWAR at Ash Power. Next time either of you reverts you will be blocked. Please, please, sort this out amicably on the talk page. Failing that, step away from the article and each other. Woody (talk) 14:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

In line with the above note, I have blocked you for breaking the Three revert rule on Ash Power. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Woody (talk) 14:36, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Please note that the offending edit was made BEFORE the above warning was made to my page, so it does seem a little extreme that you made the warning and then blocked me without me doing anything additional between your two events.

In the meantime, it would be appreciated if you could impress upon young Bryce that his OPINION is just that, his opinion - it ain't fact. It would also be appreciated if you could impress upon his that reading WP:POINT might be a good idea.

Oh. Yes. If you read the edit summaries, you will see that I was NOT "involved in an EDITWAR". I was trying to get young Bryce to STOP reverting my edits and discuss the matter. He refused to do so. See you Monday. Pdfpdf (talk) 14:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I left the note at 14:30, you reverted at 14:31, looking at that it would be fair to assume good faith that you weren't aware of the warning before I blocked you. You were involved with an edit war, it is the perfect example of one. You made an edit, it was reverted by another editor, you reverted and so on. The way to stop someone reverting your edits is to discuss it with them, not revert them. He has asked me to offer my opinion and I will do on the talkpage.

Given the chance that you didn't see the warning I am happy to unblock you with the proviso that you do not make any edits to the article until you have come to an agreement on the talkpage. Woody (talk) 14:55, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. What ever you think is fair. Pdfpdf (talk) 15:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

P.S. I realise that it doesn't really address your point, but I'll remind you that I've already stated that I won't be editing again before Monday, so I have NO problem fitting in with your proviso about not editing. On-the-other-hand, I won't be editing anywhere else before Monday, either.

So as I said:

Thank you. What ever you think is fair. Pdfpdf (talk) 15:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Understood. Looking at it precisely, there was only 51 seconds between the warning and the revert, it is therefore reasonable to assume that you hadn't seen it: I have unblocked you now. I have offered my opinion on the talkpage, you can of course ask for other opinions when you return on Monday. Have a good weekend, hopefully everything can be resolved amicably when you return. Woody (talk) 15:11, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

link to email?

Where/how do you look to find if a user has email enabled? Thanks in advance, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

AFAIK, you click on the special page and see if it errors. For example, my alternate WormTT has no email and so errors. Worm^TT · (talk) 12:30, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Or you can go to the user's page and see if "E-mail this user" appears under the toolbox tab in the left. (Works under vector skin; unsure about others.) Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:35, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Simple ;) Pop over to the user you want to email, click on toolbox on the left hand side, Email This User should be an option. There's more info at Wikipedia:E-mailing users. Worm^TT · (talk) 12:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Too easy!! Thanks guys, most appreciated. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:40, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Meetup 12 June 2011

Hi! I just wanted to let you know that Liam Wyatt is in town, so we were thinking of doing a quick meetup at Brunelli's cafe in Rundle Street (at the Rundle Mall end, near the car park) at 6pm on Sunday, with a possibility of drinks afterwards. So if you're interested we hope to see you there. :) - Bilby (talk) 12:51, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Sunday evening in the East End sounds MUCH better than either "the box" OR wikipedia. Given that Monday's a holiday, the Belgian Beer Cafe sounds like a stopping point ... Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:56, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the Belgian Beer Cafe was my thought, too. :) - Bilby (talk) 13:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh come on! Adelaide is not that small! Pdfpdf (talk) 13:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC) Hmmmm. On reflection, maybe it is ...

Military Info Boxes

It seems Ian Rose not keen on our changes to the Info Boxes! I seem to agree the Small/Big/Small is a waste of time. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 09:26, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I have a different POV. Personally, I'm not keen on the pre- and post-noms appearing in the infobox. But if they're going to be there, then I prefer the small/big/small. - see Ian's talk page for more. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:11, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Why didn't the Japanese surrender with germany?

The japanese surrendered a few months after germany. Why didn't the Japanese surrender at the same time as Germany? Pass a Method talk 15:12, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh wow! Simple question, but a thorough answer would fill pages.

Very short answer

They didn't surrender at the same time because they didn't have to.

Short answer

• Remember that Germany and Japan were but two members of "The Axis" - there were quite a number of other members.
• None of the Axis members wanted to surrender - they all intended to win the war. Each surrendered when they were no longer willing/able to resist the various onslaughts of the Allies. i.e. Not every member of the Axis surrendered at the same time.

Slightly longer answer

• The Germans surrendered when they did because they could no longer withstand the Soviets/etc from the one set of fronts to the east, and the British/British Commonwealth/Americans/etc from another set of fronts from the west and south.
• As this was happening in Europe, the Japanese were still resisting the onslaught of the British/British Commonwealth/Americans/etc the in the Pacific.
• The Japanese had a neutrality pact with the Soviets, so "their borders" in East Asia were "under control". So much so that when the going got tough for the Japanese in the Pacific theatre, the Japanese steadily relocated their best resources away from East Asia and into the Pacific theatre.
• With the surrender of Germany, the Soviets were now able to divert their resources away from Europe. And so they did! Vast numbers of troops and vast amounts of resources were relocated to East Asia.
• At the various conferences of Allied leaders, (i.e. Cairo Nov 43; Tehran Nov/Dec 43; Yalta Feb 45; Potsdam Jul/Aug 45), various "promises" were made between "The Big Three", in particular, that three months after the surrender of Germany, the Soviets would enter the war against Japan.
• So, to the day, three months after the surrender of Germany, the Soviets broke the Neutrality Pact and invaded Manchuria.
• If the Japanese weren't already having enough troubles in the Pacific theatre, they now had the Soviets advancing VERY quickly from the previously "safe" north and east. And "to put the icing on the cake", the Allies had started dropping Atomic bombs on the Japanese "home islands". Also, it was obvious to the Japanese that invasions of the "home islands" had been planned and preparations for their execution were occurring.
• Thus, Japanese surrender eventually followed. (But it was not immediate, and it was not without all sorts of "Palace coups" and "goings-on" within the Japanese "Big Six" and other Japanese powerbrokers ... )

I hope that's useful? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 05:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Angus

Ref your note about the Commander with Swords of the Order of Orange-Nassau, if Angus has received the military version, it is with swords - the civil is without. However, I don't know the conventional descriptor, but the swords delineate the award..Lexysexy (talk) 10:12, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

That's useful to know. Thanks! Pdfpdf (talk) 10:16, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

UQ

Fellow Wikipedian, thank you for your post. As requested, I have compiled some evidence in support of the changes to the UQ and UQ (disambiguation) pages.

If you do a simple Google search of all the entries in the disambiguation page (15 June 2011):

• UQ "university of queensland" yields 1,750,000 results
• UQ "Université du Québec" yields 147,000 results
• UQ "O'Connor Airlines" yields 12,600 results
• UQ ubiquinone yields 80,100 results
• UQ "uncertainty quantification" yields 9,090 results
• UQ "universal queue" yields 564 results

From this, it is clear that the initialization is most commonly associated with the University of Queensland.

If you do a Google image search of UQ, the results are again dominated by images of the University of Queensland, its logo and its staff and students.

Furthermore, the identity of the University of Queensland is very well established. The UQ brand is well known internationally - it is currently ranked 4th in Australia according to reputation by Times Higher Education which is backed by extensive research by Thomson Reuters http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2010-2011/reputation-rankings.html This is supported by heavy use of UQ in the University's international website http://www.uq.edu.au/international/ and associated marketing material.

Other well established universities that are commonly associated with their respective initializations or abbreviations also redirect to their 'full name' pages: e.g. UCLA, UNSW, MIT, Monash If you look at the MIT (disambiguation) page, it makes the statement that MIT commonly refers to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology even when there is an extensive list of other MIT abbreviated items. Even for less well known institutions such as VIT in India, the VIT (disambiguation) page makes a similar statement.

Therefore, it would make more sense to have the UQ page redirect to the University of Queensland (an important subject of public and global interest), whilst having a separate and distinct disambiguation page for the five other entries which have a weaker association with the two letter combination.

I hope this information is helpful. If you would like to discuss this further please don't hesitate to post on my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tone.itdown1901 (talk • contribs) 04:32, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Abbreviations for ranks

Hi, Pdfpdf. Re this edit: Why are we on Wikipedia restricted to using official Aust Govt abbreviations? We're not, afaik, and they read far better with the standard way people would generally expect to see them, e.g. Maj-Gen, not the ugly MAJGEN. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 03:40, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Southern Suburbs (Adelaide)

Hi, I would like the Southern Suburbs (Adelaide) article to stay, so I have made the changes and removed parts you allocated weren't of good standards. If you want to expand it or if you have any ideas, could you put them in? I will find a bit more helpful information in the mean time. Also, I don't know how to link to the page you created for me, it's not working. Ashton 29 (talk) 07:43, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Liz Cosson

Hi, in April, I believe you left a on the Military history project talk page asking if Liz Cosson had retired. Earlier this week (Tuesday, I think), she was cited in an article in an Adelaide newspaper (I forget which, one of the WOs at work was reading it out to me), where she was described as "Major General Liz Cosson, the most senior female officer in the Reserves" (I'm paraphrasing). Obviously without the exact citation this can't be used, but it might help answer your question. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:47, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah ha! Now I understand. It's Friday!! (i.e. ALL miracle workers can walk on water on Friday ... )

Thanks mate, most appreciated. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries. Have a good weekend. AustralianRupert (talk) 13:25, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Australian Defence Force Rank abbreviations

You may find Talk:List of Companions of the Order of Australia#Australian Defence Force Rank abbreviations of interest. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 02:01, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for sending that to my Talk page. I was watching that article Talk and I've just made a suggestion. Let's all try to get the matter resolved on the article Talk page alone. Cheers, --Wikiain (talk) 03:26, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that was (is?) my plan. Pdfpdf (talk)

I have responded with a reference to the Defence Standard. Personally I don't think they should be abbreviated but it seems to work better in this table. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 00:12, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I have responded with a reference to the Defence Standard. - Ta.

The fact that you can't find ADFP 103 on the web probably explains why I can't, either. ;-)

Personally I don't think they should be abbreviated but it seems to work better in this table. - OK. Useful comment. I think you should state that on the talk page. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 00:17, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm no longer watching this. Cheers, --Wikiain (talk) 11:40, 19 June 2011 (UTC)