User talk:Anotherwikipedian

Welcome!

Hello, Anotherwikipedian, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

Hello MikeMorley, Thanks for your contribution to the Punt Pole section of "Punts". I agree with you that traditional spruce poles are generally nicer to use, but is it really true that they are lighter? I have no scientific data available on the subject, do you? I note that R.T. Rivington's book says that both wooden and aluminium poles for pleasure punts weigh about the same (9-10.5 lbs). However Rivington also says that if a hollow aluminium pole fills with water (if the seal around the shoe is not perfect) it becomes uselessly heavy.

So... I tend to agree with you about wooden poles being nicer, but I think we need slightly less POV here. As I have been reminded several times WP is supposed to be neutral and "encyclopedic". In particular we might mention that most punt stations (in Oxford at least) now only use aluminium poles. I don't know why but I guess that its because (a) F. Collar's of South Hinksey (the only source of wooden poles in 1985) have closed down (b) wooden poles need more maintenance or (c) wooden poled can snap when old (I broke one once) or (d) aluminium poles are cheaper.

Do you have time to do some research, and to write a neutral, balanced paragraph about poles? Thruston 13:21, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oops...

Ta for fixing my typo in Duke of Devonshire :-) JackyR 18:51, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

LibDem leadership election

Cheers Mike for the help and updates on what could be a busy page and/or a magnet for vandals. Here's hoping for a decent article at the end of all this! doktorb | words 20:02, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fermi's golden rule

Thanks for letting me know. Unfortunately my to do list continues to expand faster than items are removed from it, but I'll make sure to take a look. — Laura Scudder ☎ 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks!

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive.
This week Denmark was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help…

Posted by (^'-')^ Covington 07:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC), on behalf of the the AID Maintenance Team[reply]

History of science collaboration

The current History of Science Collaboration of the Month is Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Science/Collaboration of the Month/current.

Thanks for voting. I hope you find time to participate this month.--ragesoss 02:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Suziperry.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Suziperry.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 06:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCast and debates...
[edit]
Hi.
A couple of months ago, you expressed some interest when a sugestion was made concerning getting Cmabridge Debates online..
WikiCast is still interested alibet if only as recorded material for the section on commons...
A response on this would be much appreciated...

~~ShakespeareFan00 17:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)~~ [reply]

spam tagging

Mike, I think some of your spam tags have been inappropriate. That tag is intended for blatant advertising. Just because an article is about a company or product, doesn't mean that the article is promotional. In any case, the last two I've seen were from an established editor, so I've replaced the speedy tags with a notability tag and an explanatory edit summary. As you may not know, it's actually considered a bit rude to speedy tag articles from established editors, rather than take them through a slower process like prod or AfD (in my opinion, it's confrontational to tag anything with speedy, but that's neither here nor there). I encourage you to continue new page patrolling (we need as many as we can get). I just hope my advice can make you a better patroller.--Kchase T 20:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Kchase - I hadn't actually investigate the page author which is a fault on my part, but I hope you can see that it looks a tad spamish to see a lot of new pages of the form "X is an implementation of Scheme. Link to X homepage." I thought speedy was the best way to do it, but I guess prod would've been better. Apologies! --MikeMorley 13:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike,

thanks for the apology on my talk page. Very nice of you. I know New Page patrolling is a tough job and it is easy to make mistakes. The reason for the stupid stubs I made is that I found it handy to have some minimal stuff like the external link and a minimal text to start a few articles from. I don't think necessarily all Scheme implementations need an article. I was just creating articles from the template at Scheme (programming language) naming the major implementations. Anyway no hard feelings. --MarSch 14:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike -- I've just removed a couple of your other speedy tags. There's a mistake you're making that's actually very common -- it's important to notice that the speedy deletion criterion A7 (for unremarkable people/groups/bands/etc.) sets a much, much lower threshold than the notability guidelines on wikipedia such as WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, et cetera. In other words: something not being notable is not a valid reason for speedy deletion (although it is a good reason for ordinary deletion). The two speedy tags in question: Bangalore Model United Nations claims significance (which is all that's required by CSD A7) when it says that Model UN conference is one of the premiere ones in southern India. Whether it's actually notable is quite debatable, which is why an AfD debate should be held there. The other was Cougnou, which you called a "non-notable baked good," which is an argument I don't think would fly even at AfD (but feel free to try it) -- not every class of thing has to be notable to be included. Anyway, like I said a lot of people have this confusion at first with speedy deletion -- but thanks for your work -- one way or another it's good to catch these questionable articles. Mango juice^talk 18:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Much the same applies to bio articles like Martin Hall. You tagged this as {{db-bio}} despite the article saying that the subject is "Head Coach of Wales Rugby League Team" — a clear assertion of notability. Similarly Liu Peiqi makes several assertions of notability; "he was awarded the Golden Rooster for Best Actor (China's version of the Academy Award).", " he was awarded the San Sebastian International Film Festival Award for Best Actor, becoming the first Chinese actor ever to receive that award." to name but two. Damian Gibson meets WP:BIO as "Sportspeople/athletes/competitors who have played in a fully professional league". As Mangojuice says, thanks for the patrolling you're doing, but it would be good if you could familiarise yourself with the notability guidelines, especially in specific cases such as sportspeople, actors and so on. Tonywalton | Talk 12:01, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers mate. All the best to you and yours this Xmas. Tonywalton | Talk

Cambridge Union Page

Greetings. The activity on the Cambridge Union page was brought to my attention and so I've proposed, what I hope is, an agreed NPOV text for the section that keeps getting anon edits. I've noticed you've worked on the page before and would appreciate your comments. Have also posted messages for the other main editors of the article.

nhartman

Thanks for letting me know about your re-write of the section in question. I like the new text and hopefully it will help with the recent issues of hostile edits in that section (although I now see that it's already been just change back around again with no explanation)...

--Nhartman 08:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help in resolving this issue. The hostile user and associated, alleged, sockpuppets seems to have decided to back off after my longwinded detailed post of why many of the things they were writing were false or misleading (but not without first deleting all that to cover it up and then a few more hostile posts in the article ;-) ). Anyway, the text now is essentially as proposed to begin with and it seems that the active editors of the article agreed with that so, assuming that the hostile user's activity stops, then this issue should (fingers crossed) be finally behind us. I'm fairly new to playing an active role in editing articles so I guess this was like jumping in the deep end! I've been able to work on some other articles too and now hope I can focus most of my attention there. I'll also have to see what other historical bits about CUS that might be of interest. Any advice is of course appreciated. Cheers!

--Nhartman 00:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability on the CUSU page

Not a big deal, but I thought the criterion for notability was not the existence of a page, but whether there were sufficient links to the person from elsewhere in Wikipedia, and the inherent notability of the person in question.

I'd agree it's a question of shades of grey in the case of Mike Grabiner, but just though it would be useful to clarify.

Mpntod 15:36, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify from my edit-summary (which perhaps wasn't clear), my line of thought ran along these lines: Grabiner was listed as a notable alumnus of CUSU, yet had a wiki-red-link. It was my thinking that Mike Grabiner probably hadn't met a notability guideline and, therefore, probably wasn't a notable alumnus.

It's normally worth taking a quick peek at the 'what links here' link as a second check. It's less of a problem recently, but it certainly used to be a problem that notable people didn't necessarily have a Wikipedia article about them.

Mpntod 17:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikicast

Hi Mike

WikiCast is still active and would appreciate you clarfying what happened in regard to taped debates...

ShakespeareFan00 22:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry for being out of touch recently, and for not replying to your earlier message. At the moment, the Union is in ongoing negotiations with the British Library Sound Archive about it's past archive, and with various other 3rd parties over it's modern archive and on-going recording of debates. Further, in house digital video recording is being developed. I'm not sure, in any-case, that Union debates could be released under a free license suitable for WikiCast. I will, however, keep half an eye on WikiCast and bear it in mind! MikeMorley 00:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please impress upon them, the need for debates to be accessible? Also can you leave some more detailed notes for me over on the WikiCast wiki in relation to the current situation?

Perosnally, I feel that to take the 'current' recordings under a restrictive licence would be a mistake, but this as I stress a personal viewpoint.

By allowing the debates to be on WikiCast (under NC if needed), would give both the CUS and the speakers a far greater profile than if they were under a restrictive licence.

I would of course suggest that the CUS hold a debate about open content in general. (assuming you can find speakers on both sides.) :-)

ShakespeareFan00 16:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The major reason for not allowing an un-restricted release of the debates is that it provides a disincentive for people to join the Union. As debates are only open to members and their guests (providing the guests aren't eligible to join the Union), we don't feel it appropriate to generally release the debates as it would really devalue the benefits of membership - something we're disinclined to do, given our major source of revenue is sponsorship. I'll leave something on the WikiCast wiki when I get a chance, but I'm currently revising for finals. MikeMorley 17:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK Thanks, That clarifys the matter.

So do you know anyone that would be willing to host 'open' debates albiet with support from CUS if needed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ShakespeareFan00 (talk • contribs) 19:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Michael Moore

Apologies for my incorrect edit on the Cambridge Union page -- I could have sworn I saw the UK politician of the same name listed to speak in a debate on a termcard, and erroneously jumped to the conclusion that someone else must have confused the two. Thanks for correcting me. - Simxp 02:49, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject History of Science newsletter : Issue I - March 2007

The inaugural March 2007 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter has been published. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse--ragesoss 04:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject History of Science newsletter : Issue II - May 2007

The May 2007 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter has been published. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse--ragesoss 06:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia UK

Hi,

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

Thanks, Andreww 15:00, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Membership officer, Wikimedia UK)

WikiProject History of Science newsletter : Issue III - September 2007

The September 2007 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter has been published. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse--ragesoss 00:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A new Oxbridge user box

MikeMorley...I am currently in the process of writing a user box for all of the colleges that are part of Oxbridge. This template is meant to replace your current college template. Please take a look at the work in progress and comment on it. My main concerns are college abbreviations and color choice. I am using scarf colors for the colleges. Thank you. - LA @ 17:38, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject History of Science newsletter : Issue IV - May 2008

A new May 2008 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter is hot off the virtual presses. Please feel free to make corrections or add news about any project-related content you've been working on. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse--ragesoss (talk) 23:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject History of Science newsletter : Issue V - January 2009

It's here at long last! The January 2009 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter is ready, with exciting news about Darwin Day 2009. Please feel free to make corrections or add news about any project-related content you've been working on. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse --ragesoss (talk) 03:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cambridge meetup

The second Cambridge meetup is confirmed for this Saturday, 3pm, at CB2 on Norfolk Street: Wikipedia:Meetup/Cambridge 2. Hope to see you there. Charles Matthews (talk) 16:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]