This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The just did not look right to me. This is why I added the . You are right in that the alignment did not look right. Another way could be to change the colour of the to hide them in the background. --Stewart(talk)08:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Stewart; are you missing those characters in your font? You shouldn't be able to see them at all (they're just space characters, like a Tab or breaking space), but if you select over them, they should be the same width as a normal digit. Do you have a screen-shot of what you are seeing and the browser/OS combination? —Sladen (talk) 12:21, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi - screen shot uploaded. I am using XP Pro with IE6. As regards fonts, I am not aware of any fonts missing. Interesting point though about fonts. If I am seeing this who else is and what is the specific issue. Next week I will have a look at the template at work to see how it displays there. The two laptop PC at home are displaying this way, later on today I will have a look on the desktop (98SE with IE6 and Netscape 7). --Stewart(talk)12:49, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Looking at Space_(punctuation)#Table_of_spaces does encoding it as   (eg. ] [) help at all? The boxes in the screen-shot are because the character isn't being found, rather than the intended look. There's also some break on one of the "Anglo-Scottish Border" lines, which could do with investigating (with the fixed width of the table in pixels not quite width enough?). —Sladen (talk) 12:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
In preview mode I added additional text to the first instance of "Anglo-Scottish Border". This made the box wider and the gaps on the second instance disappeared. I would guess that the [show] tag does not appear to be involved in the calculation to determine the width of the box. --Stewart(talk)14:25, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Tried out this on the desktop. 98SE and IE6 shows the same as on the laptops. However the thumbnail to the right shows what is displayed with 98SE and Netscape 7.1. --Stewart(talk)15:50, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Yup, that's what I'd expect; presumably all of the Mozilla-based browsers are fine, and it's only MSIE that is having issues. Does the HTML entity coding change the result of what you see? —Sladen (talk) 16:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Using   displays the square. Incidentally with NS7 the thumbnails above are to the left of the text, but around the middle of the page with quite a bit of white space to the right of them. --Stewart(talk)16:33, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Hanko-Hyvinkää imperial vs metric
Hi! I removed your note about the metric measurement drawings - I have copies of the "new", Hanko-made, drawings from 1875, and they're imperial... See the link that I added. Greetings, --Janke | Talk10:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
The original article was speedy deleted under criterion for speedy deletion A7, because it failed to assert notability -- that is, it did not even offer to explain why the group was renowned/successful/noteworthy enough for an encyclopedia. The article was also very short.
I've moved the content in the original article to your userspace at User:Sladen/Rail Riders. If you reliably source and expand the material, I'll be glad to move it to article-space for you once you've finished. Best wishes, Xoloz (talk) 15:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
7 minutes on Saturdays during a blue moon when Venus is visible
I was amused by your edit comment on the Grand Central page. Mind you, if their timetable was based on Lunar and Venusian calendar synchronisation, that might be worth including on the page! Talltim (talk) 15:54, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello there, I notice you did a revert removing two changes: (1) the current layout at Porthmadog Harbour railway station, and (2) noting the flat-crossing across the standard gauge BR line.
At Porthmadog Habour, the main station fan turns sharply to the left; the new through platform for through WHR trains is in a straight line with the causeway crossing. Unless there are new plans for a triangle where the current station buildings as, it will not be possible to for WHR trains to reach the current station layout without reversal; and (again, unless things have changed) through running is likely to be rare as the Garretts used on the steeper WHR have gauging issues on the FR—so necessitating a change). Additionally the current train will stay, but the platform for the WHR isn't currently joined up to the WHR...
It is probably worth noting that the flat crossing is a flat crossing (it being believed to be unique in the UK since reinstatement).
Admittedly, it sounds like you have been there more recently than me (...an in this fast-moving world, things change by the week! :-). —Sladen (talk) 13:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Quite a lot is happening at Porthmadog at present. Firstly, there is a possibility that WHR trains will initially have to use the existing platform. In discussion with the Deputy Operating Manager last week (and last summer) the intention is to use the through platform whereever possible (both FR and WHR trains) as it is straight and easier operate from.. Probably before Easter the plan is install the WHR points at Porthmadog in a similar position to the original point removed in the 1950's / 60's. Over the past I have been party to numerous discussions on the new layout and potential operations, and have also seen a lot of un-offical rumours which bear no resemblance to anything that is being considered. It has put me in an awkward position, until the offical line becomes public.
Out of interest, I was walking south along the new line between Nantmor and the site of the project Hafod-y-Lyn halt which is close to Afon Nanmor bridge. See the picture I took a week or so ago now on the official WHR site. Also Habour Station as work started last week (also that I have submitted to the offical site). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pencefn (talk • contribs) 14:55, 2 February 2008
I suspect most of my information on the WHR construction comes from the same place as yours... but second-hand instead of first-hand!:-)
The BR/WHR flat crossing, does indeed "appear" to be a flat crossing. At Porthmadog Habour there's two areas, one that exists and one which doesn't. One of which handles terminating traffic today and one of which may handle some, none, or all, of traffic in the future (but is capable of through running with a Fairlie, at least in the Dinas→Blaenau direction).
I think the single-"station symbol" layout might make more sense when things are open, my intention with the two changes was to add more clarity for the time being; perhaps it is a case that neither is wrong and neither is right? —Sladen (talk) 11:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
CIWL
Great job bringing it back to life. I hope to have some time to add something over the next couple of weeks. Ekem (talk) 02:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Indeed, the majority of signs immediately surrounding the station itself now have variations on "...International". Commuting by train Nottingham→London (and more recently Helsinki→London) I have been very lucky to see the gradual growth of the area around the redevelopment of the complex. A wonderful experience, even if I kept wishing it would happen a little bit faster.
Remember that the station infobox has to squeeze in information regarding routeing, ticket code (codes in the case of STP, even though the template does not allow that currently), management, colloquial name and history. The introduction of the "xyz International" branding relating for the CTRL services and Eurostar-managed area is very recent, and even Eurostar's own "Meet me at St. Pancras" marketing campaign did not [nor attempt to] try to alter the name of the historic station within the mind of the travelling public.
(I may be getting wrapped up in myself and off-topic here). I would like to thank you for your large number of edits, with the quantity of small, uncommented changes it was hard to follow. By restoring to the previous known-good version, whitespace noise can hopefully be re-added, clearly showing the most important changes, along with the reasoning behind each one along with its reference. —Sladen (talk) 14:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for building up the page. I think my intention with the edits to the area above the Table-of-Contents (the introduction) was to try give a high-level overview for a reader with no prior knowledge of the museum. I tried to move all the "numbers and details" further down the page.
Crich generally [since 1999] describes itself as "Crich Tramway Village, the Home of the National Tramway Museum"; I couldn't manage to improve upon that whilst keeping the word count low (this is for an introduction). Looking through the images already linked I moved the Leeds 180 up. This photo covers several things, countryside, street scene, a historic tram with typical adverts and neatly framed with the bridge... in essence a high-level overview. My hope is the opening text can achieve the same.
A "village" tends to have a pub, sweet-shop and the like (museums, certainly so); these details would be very useful under a detailed sub-heading (perhaps "Facilties"). A tramway might be expected to have a depot, containing trams. Details of the depot and numbers of trams might fit better under, say a "Fleet" heading. If the number of operational trams (kid: "what's a tram?") really needs to be mentioned, I'm wondering if it could be done in a way that won't easily age, or date the article (I did notice the Template:).
Would you be happy if the "details and numbers" were moved further down the article. I do believe they should be there, but it's quite alot of information to take in from the first four paragraphs. Once again, thank you for having put so much more energy into the page that I could possibly have assembled so quickly!
I was aware about CTV, but the artccle is about the NTM, so I swapped them over! It still mentions it! (I think we need an article about CTV, as that's the tourist attraction.)
Yeh I understand about word count. I think i'll rewrite the WHOLE thing this afternoon.
Do you want a pic with most things in it? I can get one on Sunday.
Yeh, let's add a section then. I will be updating the fleet list almost daily, and i'm setting up a system that counts the Operational systems in the fleet list, and then adds it too the temp.
Yeh sure. It needs a major clean-up. Would you have any objections if I adopted the article, along with the fleet list, and then reworked it in my sandbox?
Hi. I've restored the page, but there really isn't much meat to it. At the moment it's like a cross between an advert and a "best friend" essay. It would be vastly improved if some independent citations could be added. Deb (talk) 18:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Re:TGV
Here are the photos here and here. I didn't get a picture of it, though I should have, but you could see where they removed the "Eurostar" stickers on the train. It's at Paris Gare de Nord, and it was only service to Lille with through service to Calais. It's probably the Three Capitals set since I'm nowhere near North of London. I apologise if I'm wrong, maybe you can help me out. --MPDT / C22:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
The picture shows 3304; which is one of the shorter "North of London" sets, that SNCF started leasing a year ago. AFAIK, the full length ex-Eurostar sets are in semi-TGV blue/white and the short sets have had just had their logos removed—similar to the state they were in during the previous GNER lease. I'll revert the change for the moment since the photo seems to comfirm the status-quo, rather than despute it; please do keep a look out for any changes though! Sounds like you're in a much better position to than somebody living in Helsinki is! —Sladen (talk) 00:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Whitespace alteration Question
Hi there I just wanted to ask a question. I noticed that you were telling someone that they should not of altered the "Whitespace" in the Get This page. I edit pages a bit but I dont understand what you meen by this. Can you explain it to me as so I don't end up making the same changes/mystakes. Thankyou MattyC3350 (talk) 10:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello Matty. I suspect you're referring to the note at User_talk:Tabletop#White-space changes on Iobox (in reference to an edit to the Iobox) article. The best way to show this is to look at the edit that was made. This edit made a single-letter spelling correction, but at the same time made eight small white-space (layout of spaces, tabs and newlines) in the article source code; shown in green/yellow. There's some guideance about how the automated tools that do these small changes can cause problems when reviewing diffs (since it looks like much more has changed that really has) at Wikipedia:AWB#Rules of use. Hope that helps! —Sladen (talk) 10:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your polite and reasoned response. I realize that it may be frustrating to deal with vandalism and not have a block as the result of your hard work in that regard, but the problem with blocking stale IPs is that the next time that IP is used, it is a person that was not the target of the intended block. This is the reasoning behind the procedure at WP:AIV only to give blocks to active vandals, which tends to avoid the above situation. Also, note that per the blocking policy, blocks are not punitive; therefore, a block cannot be given to an IP here when there is no active vandalism or disruption. Despite this, good work with your anti-vandal work. It is certainly appreciated. Regards, Sephiroth BCR(Converse)03:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Search function changes.
In the last day or two someone has changed the search function, not necessarily advantageously. Would you know who?
The changes are:
No longer reports total number of matches, a real bummer.
No longer able to navigate up and down 20 matches at a time, another bummer.
Now always matches partial matches, with line of context, this is useful.
A tag has been placed on Template:Channel Tunnel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks for pointing Soyuz out to me. I looked before, but somehow missed it. I added a mention back to the article, but didn't include it among the bullets mainly because all the other bullet items correspond to very visible featured items. But if you disagree, please edit directly, I admit I don't know that much about Launchpad. Wesley (talk) 04:41, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Are Acid1, Acid2, and Acid3 often referred to as "Acid test"? I saw that you had replaced those links on the disambiguation page Acid test, but it did not seem clear that they could be easily confused with the term "Acid test", hence why I had removed them before. If they are easily confusable with that term, then they should certianly be there, but I was not aware of them being so. Any information you have would be much appreciated. -- Natalya17:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. It appears the articles mention it too - somehow I missed the "is a test page for browsers". Thanks for the clarification - pardon the doubt! -- Natalya19:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Summit Tunnel fire
Hi, I note that after you read my copyvio response on the talk page, you tidied up my indenting but didn't add any text. Looking at the last sentence of my response, I reckon I was being a bit snippy: if I briefly put your nose out of joint, you have my apologies. Ecb (talk) 19:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for not immediately adding a thank you and appreciation onto the Talk page; I was letting it simmer in my brain to see if there was anything else useful I could add. (And with living on a boat, my internet access is in bursts when I can find wifi!). Thank you reminding me—and also an explicit appreciation for immense work on the article, I thoroughly enjoyed reading it and went off exploring several other tunnel and underground-fire topics afterwards. I was particularly impressed with the effort put into getting hold of the raw pictures taken by the emergency services; something that definitely adds to the article! —Sladen (talk) 08:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
No worries, I'm just happy you didn't take it as a snub. You're right to lock on to the photos—they're the main reason I wrote the article in the first place, after reading the WYFA reports up at the Fire Service College in Moreton. If you have the patience to search around the web there may still be some copyrighted photos about: when I was writing the original text I found a classic picture of two firefighters next to the shaft 8 bunsen burner and a lot more aerial photos from Karran's report. Typically, I can't lay my hands on them now, alas. Cheers, Ecb (talk) 20:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, sorry it took so long to get back, but I am sometimes rarely here. Since I have the original file, it would take a few moments to change. The idea of using red is great. After spending much time finding, collecting, and generating the final image, I guess I slacked off at the end with the graphics.Gary Joseph (talk) 03:53, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
King's Cross Station
Hi,
I am concerned that the info Wikipedia carrys under the Restoration section of the King's Cross article appears to give the Network Rail view, which is highly controversial. If Wikipedia is to carry information about the proposed redevelopment of the station then it should at least give both sides of the debate - otherwise it looks like Wikipedia is acting as another PR vehicle for Network Rail. Help!
Hello Sophie. Wikipedia tries to maintain a neutral point of view, without bias in either direction; ideally with the information contained within articles should be entirely factual and verifable (see Wikipedia:Verifiability). The section discussing access from the future Underground entrance is based on available information at the moment about the indented purpose of the construction project. For people working at Network Rail, or local residents it may appear that the article does not "follow their own point-of-view"; however I hope that it strikes an accurate balance down the middle. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not a place for online petitions—for either side. I note that another contributor has now re-removed the link to the petition. Thank you for getting involved and contributing to Wikipedia! —Sladen (talk) 14:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Greetings Mair. I suspect the exchange rates have changed over time; I took your suggestion and updated all the prices to a single amount and referenced that back to the source. Thanks for the prod! —Sladen (talk) 13:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Hanko vs. Hyvinkää...
Hi Paul! I fixed a slight error of yours - the station in the pic is Hanko, destroyed by the Russkies in WWI, so it can't be the museum... ;-) Greetings, --Janke | Talk20:15, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much Jan! Hopefully I would have noticed it the next morning as I tend to look about over my edits the next day—but you were faster than me. Good to know there's an efficient check-and-balance on Wikipedia! —Sladen (talk) 13:51, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
You tagged Länsimetro with a "neutrality disputed" tag. Please explain on the article's talk page exactly why do you think it is disputed. JIP | Talk05:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello JIP; thanks for the reminder. I've put a short note about my perceived skew from having read the article on Talk:Länsimetro#Bias and started a rewrite/heavy edit and re-order since—however, it could still do with more work as the topics jump around quite a bit. Once again, my appreciations for reminding me! —Sladen (talk) 12:56, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
I have a question. Would you know where the banners you post on pages are? More specifically the banner that says, "Article cites only one source"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeluxNate (talk • contribs) 18:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello Delux, I think something like {{Onesource}} is what you're after. I always end up having to look this type of thing up if it's more complicated than a {{cn|article}}! Generally I search Google for wikipedia template and what I'm after, or find an existing article with the template I'm after and look in the article source-code. From the bottom of that template it lists some other related tagging templates and alternative aliases for single-source. Hope that helps. (BTW, please remember to start a new section header, and to sign your name!). —Sladen (talk) 18:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello (again) Baron1984. This comment is somewhat "out of the blue". Please could you provide examples of any edits of I have made (particularly those within the lifetime of the existence of your account: currently 10 hours, and counting) which might violate such a policy, or which could have been improved as a result of (re-)reading the suggested policy. Perhaps I have missed something. Once again, thank you for getting involved with Wikipedia. —Sladen (talk) 13:05, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, just wondered why you reverted my edit on Ben Collins regarding him supposedly being the Stig? I could understand if I'd waded in and just posted "Collins is the Stig" or "Collins is believed to be the Stig" etc. but I believe I had worded it correctly and adhered to the rules of posting. Forgive me if I did something wrong, Im new here. Thanks! AlexJFox (talk) 02:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Greetings Alex. Welcome to Wikipedia. Regarding the Ben Collins (driver) article, there are videos on Youtube entitled Stig's True Identity (Lewis Hamilton)[1], Fernando Alonso is The Stig[2] and similar other claims; random camera-phone footage on YouTube cut with TV snippets does not make something true... Wikipedia is WP:NOT a place for speculation or rumours (see WP:NOTCRYSTAL). Any statements must be backed by a factual source—a reputable source in this case would be Top Gear (current format), the BBC, or a related press-release. The source should be verifiable (note that the bottom of the edit box states this again "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable.").
The Ben Collins (driver) article is biography of a living person, therefore it is even more important that only details that are known to be true are included (try to imagine a page on the internet about yourself, that spread rumours, or perhaps later affected your career).
Hi, my apologies for getting back so long. I was able to saves a .svg version of the file, but am not able to view it in Firefox. Please let me know where I can send it to you. Maybe you have better luck opening it and can let me know if it is okay. Thanks much...Gary Joseph (talk) 06:26, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
"Welcome to St Pancras International...."
"Welcome to St Pancras International. This is a Network Rail owned and managed station with train services provided by First Capital Connect."
Hi there. I noticed you contributed to the debate and survey on the proposed move to St Pancras International. I saw the above static message on the platform monitor screens on the Low Level platforms (Thameslink) this very morning. I have taken a piccy and will upload as "Exhibit O" hopefully within the next 12 hours. best, Sunil060902 (talk) 10:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I removed the prod tag from the Postal Museum article. I feel the article is "less-than-perfect" (burdened as it is with external rather than internal links), but still "better-than-nothing". Someone who wants to look for info on a particular postal museum, but doesn't know the full name way well type in "Postal museum", and they should be presented with something else than nothing. There are five postal museums which have articles linked to from this page, and in that respect, this page serves a useful disambiguation function, imperfect as it is. Sjakkalle(Check!)08:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi again! Nice work you've done on this article. Some people get annoyed when their prods are disputed, instead you go ahead to improve the thing. Excellent, and thanks! Sjakkalle(Check!)13:37, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Fred Dibnah quote - citation
I'm not sure what the syntax is for giving citations, so if I give you the details, maybe you can edit the page accordingly.
All the quotations except the last one (fell down too early) are from The Fred Dibnah Story, Don Haworth, 1993, 0-563-38765-3. The last one is from Fred Dibnah - Memories of a Steeplejack, Fred Dibnah, Sheila Dibnah and others, 2007, 978-1-4276-2167-2.
Hello Bardenite, for the first use of a reference you can use <ref name="haworth">{{cite book|title=The Fred Dibnah Story|year=1993|first=Don|last=Haworth|isbn=0-563-38765-3}}</ref> and then for each follow-on one, it's shorter, just: <ref name="naworth"/>. I'll leave to extrapolate for the second one! (The rest of the fields like publisher= and others= are described at Template:Cite book if you need them). Hope that's useful, and thank you! —Sladen (talk) 16:11, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Category:White South Africans
I think this article is quite useful but if you deleted it, I wouldn't really mind. As there are categories for African-Americans I think this category should stay. --
WölffReik—Preceding undated comment was added at 17:19, 4 October 2008 (UTC).
Thank you very much. I've reverted one of your changes since, that altered the formatting of the material in one of the quote=s though! —Sladen (talk) 12:22, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Greetings again Sophie T, thank you for you interest in Wikipedia and getting involved. Wikipedia is a encyclopedic reference work covering facts, it is not a place for point-of-view pushing or a place to try and garner support for petitions. Wikipedia has a series of guideslines, of which WP:NPOV, WP:LINKS and WP:NOT cover some of the external links that were reverted (removed) on this occasion.
Some of the edits were excellent, giving detailed location information, however, some introduced external links pointing to local community action forums, which are unsuitable for Wikipedia's encyclopedic nature. As such they are generally removed from articles. If you believe that such external links might be relevant in this particular case and would like a broader cross-section of viewpoints—leading to a wider consensus—then I can recommend bringing the chosen links up for discussion at a new section on the Talk:London King's Cross railway station and Talk:Kings Cross, London pages.
If unsuitable content has been removed (as in this case), it is generally considered bad-form to replace it immediately (this appears to have happened in the past[3]), to do so repeatedly will flout the three-revert rule (WP:3RR). Some of these questions raised before (in June 2008), are answered at a previous query on User talk:Sladen/Archives/2008#King's Cross Station.
And again. Never had this before, and now twice in two consecutive nights. —Sladen (talk) 01:15, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
{{unblock-auto|1=217.171.129.74|2=Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "DarrellLucas". The reason given for DarrellLucas's block is: "Similar to existing user or recent meme. To appeal or request help, please [[Special:Emai|3=Luna Santin|4=1230217}}
Sladen, have you been hacking wikipedia from your mobile while hiding out in the Box???1? The truth must come out, this kind of crazy Box stalking cannot be permitted! MickMacNee (talk) 04:11, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
[edit] hot bulb
moved to Talk:Hot bulb engine#hot bulb references
please remove our toystore items from a technical article hot bulb. please do not remove referenced items and leave your ---- Wdl1961 (talk) 03:44, 29 November 2008 (UTC) are you aftraid to establish a record???Wdl1961 (talk) 03:46, 29 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wdl1961 (talk • contribs) Wdl1961 (talk) 04:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)Wdl1961 (talk) 04:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Wdl1961 (talk) 04:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
wiki c
does not know where it has been where it is going or who is writing Wdl1961 (talk) 04:42, 29 November 2008 (UTC),Wdl1961 (talk) 04:42, 29 November 2008 (UTC),Wdl1961 (talk) 04:42, 29 November 2008 (UTC),Wdl1961 (talk) 04:42, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello again Wdl, shortly after your message was posted, I left a message asking for clarification at Talk:Hot bulb engine#hot bulb references. (And this text above appears to be a re-paste of that message). It would be preferable to continue the previous conversation and to keep discussion all in one-place—as it is relevant to the content of the Hot bulb engine article. You may also aware that another editor previously and separately raised concerns about references that you attempted to add (see Talk:Hot bulb engine#Unformatted references). —Sladen (talk) 04:45, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, just wanted to inform you that something weird happened when you edited the article (parts of it duplicated), so I chose to revert it to the 12k version before you accidentally deleted half of it... I don't know exactly what was the purpose of your edit, but I thought that was the best way to go for now. /Grillo (talk) 13:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that; I've hopefully fixed it up now. It was left over from when I tried to fix up an earlier error/mistake (see where the page dropped to 5 kB for one revision) that resulted from editing a single section. Thanks for keeping an eye out. —Sladen (talk) 17:22, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Gifford Street Portal (aka London West Portal) is the concrete structure to the east of the ECML[4], the smooth structure that was placed around the ECML bridge is an acoustic cowling[ctrl 1] designed to dissipate and move the tunnel exit pressure waves away from the existing residential housing (near and above the portal). By using Image:BSicon KRZolf.svg on the {{Channel Tunnel Rail Link}} map, it meant that the layout could be kept to three-columns, with the CTRL running along the centre-line. The {{BS4}} template had introduced a horizontal discontinuity when it dropped back to an odd-number-of-columns arrangement below that. —Sladen (talk) 18:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
^"Channel Tunnel Rail Link (ECML Bridge)". ARUP. Retrieved 2008-12-02. Whilst the cladding enhances the aesthetics and hides the main structure, its primary role is to reduce airborne noise to local residents. Sophisticated noise and vibration analyses of the bridge were used to justify the choice of materials used to form the acoustic cladding.
.
uri geller bio
I m sorry this page,is not finished yet!thanks for your notice.Special:Contributions/94.66.51.7|94.66.51.7]] (talk) 21:34, 2 December 2008 (UTC)Niki76
Hello Niki76, welcome to Wikipedia. I did not delete your page, but I did mark it as being a Copyright infringement (it had been copied and pasted from http://www.uri-geller.com/unlimited.htm ). The page was subsequently deleted by another editor for "blatant copyright infringement". The aim of Wikipedia is to write new material from scratch, as such copied material must not be used. The edit page states this very clearly immediately below this box: "Content that violates any copyright will be deleted". Once again, welcome to Wikipedia! —Sladen (talk) 22:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
you shouldn t delete.I had n t finished editing.I will edit again
No, the point is that you did not write it. If you had written it, from scratch, it would have been fine (but pointless, as there is already an existing article). It would be more constructive to contribute to the existing Uri Geller article within the guidelines set forth for participating in Wikipedia. —Sladen (talk) 22:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Hanfu/qipao
Hey thanks for helping me editing the messy section i created in PRC "reemergeing Q and H" sections =] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lennlin (talk • contribs)
I would like and try to change the name and help with the meaning of the name and the information around this person.I want to talk with you,please.It s supposed that we all try to contribute.Wikipedia cannot be a space for controversy.Children are entering this,and many people.If some people want controversy they can do it in private blogs or websites.
My edit was characterised insulting.Insult to who and what?Because I ask some information to be corrected?
If someone would call you in a wrong name what would you do?I think that the person who edit this article should accept the information.The name"Gyorgy Geller"does not exist.
I m tired please trying to change a few things here.I m not insulting,I m trying to contribute positive information. --Niki76 (talk) 12:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC)Niki76
Yes,his name is Uri Geller.And I also would like please not to write that he is British-Israeli.He is Israeli.Mr Geller has also a Mexican passport.That doesn t makes him Mexican.
I also have american pass,because I work there,it doesn t means I m american,for God s shake.
People may have objections and different opinions and controversy in his work.But respect for someone,makes even controversy better.Thank you,I hope these information withdraw immediately,and being written properly.First of all,it will make wikipedia better in quality.
I think it would be most useful if you could add these comments (particularly with references) to the discussion at Talk:Uri Geller#Gellér György birth name, which will ensure that more people can see them. Wikipedia's barrier for what can be included is that of verifiability (see: WP:VERIFY) which is based on what information is already publically available. Particularly with biographes of living person (see: WP:BLP) is very important that the content match available references. —Sladen (talk) 16:19, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
December 2008
Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Scott Mac (Doc)12:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Excuse me? In this instance, I am free to publish my own transcript;[cv 1]
Fair dealing with a work (other than a photograph) for the purpose of reporting current events does not infringe any copyright in the work provided that ... it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement.
I notice that this was your first contribution to the Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/2008 IWF action project page; and that your second edit removed more content than perhaps intended (despite a helpful summary message[5]). Whilst I am happy for editors to use semi-automated tools (such as TW), the tools should be used extremely carefully and with manual oversight—which includes reviewing the page history and being fully away of the context.
I (would like to) assume that in future you will be more diligent and choose to contact the originator of the upload[6] and not merely those who have improved its accuracy.
I have just reviewed your changes to Channel Tunnel and for the most part I agree with them and they have improved the article. There was just one stylistic point that needed amending and is perhaps worth commenting on. That was the "world—however" combination which doesn't make any sense. Usual typographic convention is that the en dash introduces an interruption - it separates the two terms on either side of it. "However", on the other hand, is a conjunctive - that is, it joins together the two phrases either side of it. Since the two elements are perfoming opposites jobs having them both together is meaningless. CrispMuncher (talk) 20:23, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Yup, I certainly agree. I poked at the sentence several times and I didn't find an optimal wording that I was completely satisfied with. Please do dive in and try to improve it—and I'll try to be more wary of conjunctions following emdashes in future! —Sladen (talk) 21:33, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Kehä I, Kehä II, Kehä III
I noticed you have changed the articles Kehä I, Kehä II and Kehä III to Ring I, Ring II and Ring III, respectively. Please either a) change them back, or b) use the official English names for them: Ring Road I, Ring Road II and Ring Road III (as used by Tiehallinto).
One should always check the facts before making changes. You're probably new to Wikipedia, but don't worry, you'll learn.
Greetings, thank you for your interest in contributing to Wikipedia and your query as to appropriate naming of the articles covering Ring I/II/III (Finnish: Kehä I/II/III, Swedish: Ring I/II/II)—major roads in the greater Helsinki-area. Wikipedia has a number of policies relating to article naming; the ones that provide guidance in this case (on the English language Wikipedia) are WP:COMMONNAME (use the most common name of a person or thing) and WP:ENGLISH (Use the most commonly used English version of the name of the subject as the title of the article). Coincidently, this happens to the same as the Swedish naming (despite it being in another language!). If you were wondering, Kehä I, Kehä II and Kehä III remain as redirects. If you have any further queries, please do ask and I shall try to help you locate the relevant policy areas. Happy editing! —Sladen (talk) 21:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Please clarify: what makes "Ring I/II/III" the most commonly used English version of the name of the subject? It certainly isn't the official version, and I have never heard or read anybody use it until now (except for my Swedish-speaking friends, but that's beside the point). Tiehallinto (Finnish Road Administration) uses "Ring Road" — try googling "site:www.tiehallinto.fi "ring road"". I'm fine with the idea of changing the articles' titles into English, but I believe the translations you used are not the most common ones used. Almost Anonymous (talk) 15:39, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
"Ring I" is the phrase that Finnish speakers tend to use in English. "Ring I" is the phrase that English-speakers in Helsinki tend to use with other English speakers. In the same way that it tends to be Vantaa River and not River Vantaa. WP:GHITS is only a guide but is probably the easiest way to quickly demonstrate this:
Thanks for the heads-up on external links added to BSL page, I have read the links you kindly forwarded. Could I ask why several other communication service provider's links are being permitted in the same location?
We are establishing a charity from a successful project that has created the world's first BSL book and story library for Deaf children - if we were to write an article on the project, the library, the research and findings etc would this be an acceptible article? How would one go about defining search parameters - or does the Wiki engine do this?
Greetings! Ideally the External links should be pretty much empty except for highly relevant websites; so in the case of an article relating to a company, a link to the company itself. British Sign Language is a more general topic which means it's less obvious where to draw the line. I've trimmed back the External links even further, but you have any idea which further links could go I think that would be very useful to contribute (ideally the links should probably be less than half-a-dozen). WP:EL and WP:LINKFARM are the relevant guidelines to judge the links by. Once again thank you for getting involved with Wikipedia (and for following up!). —Sladen (talk) 17:12, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia Style
Thank you for your comment on my talk page. I am interested in your comment that "An article should make sense and remain encyclopedic, even when printed on a piece of paper (without hyperlinks)." is that from a style guide? I have been unable to find it. It is a good principle. You may be interested in the discussion here. Regards, Ground Zero | t04:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
To load and write my own article for the person do I need a copyright?I mean writing my own articles from my own sources,and writing it io my own words.What do you think?--Niki76 (talk) 15:58, 19 December 2008 (UTC)Niki76
.jpg){kind=link}
Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Scott Mac (Doc) 12:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)