User talk:Mayalld/Archive/1

Hello Mayalld, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! DuncanHill 19:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC) Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Scouting WikiProject

Hi, there is a project to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Scouting, you can find out more at the Scouting WikiProject page. DuncanHill 19:19, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Template:BS-table-canal/withcollapsibles

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Template:BS-table-canal/withcollapsibles, which you proposed for deletion, because the page you proposed for deletion was not an article, user page, or user talk page. If you still think the page should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to it, as proposed deletion is only for articles, user pages, and user talk pages. Instead, consider using WP:TFD for this page. In some cases, a speedy deletion criterion may apply. Thanks!

I've added a speedy tag to it. KTC 21:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

River Don Navigation

Because the link has been repeatedly spamed across a large number of pages.Geni 14:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Not spammed across many pages evidences suggest otherwise. The template I dropped on Pennine's userpage told him to disscuss adding such links. They are free to do that. Untill they do I will continue to remove the links.Geni 15:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

see WP:SPAM#External_link_spamming removal of external link spaming does not require discussion. The only thing that account has done is spam wikipedia. I think we are beyond the reasonable doubt stage.Geni 16:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

All the links were to the same domain. No non link based content added to wikipedia. Therefor spam. Geni 18:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

History of the British canal system - Restoration

Hi Mayalld. Good work on cleaning up this section. I've done some further copyedited, but next week I'll need to follow my own advice and start referencing what I've added.Pyrotec 22:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Reminder

In most cases in discussions, don't forget to sign your name with ~~~~ Simply south 15:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hi. Please can you try to complete an edit summary before you submit a page? You can change a setting in your preferences to prompt you if the edit summary is empty, which I find useful.

Having a summary allows editors with long watchlists, such as myself, to assess whether to look at the edit or not. For instance, when you are 'only' adding assessments to project banners, I don't need to check/respond to what you are writing.

Thanks - EdJogg 23:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. There are about 40 changes on my watchlist since midnight, and about 1/8th are due to your rating activity. So your summaries are reducing my workload by 1/8th! EdJogg 09:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Please don't use words like 'a**es' too much like you did above (comment for EdJogg). Wikidont (talk) 16:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Removal of a valid message by yourself on SomeHuman's talk page

SomeHuman has removed your completely valid message on his talk page, on the (spurious) grounds that it went in between his and my reply to him. You may like to include it again. I would have done it, but am unsure whether this would be viewed in a good light by others. I am seriously getting tired of this editor's actions.  DDStretch  (talk) 16:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that. He seems determined to back himself into a corner, and I'm moving ever closer to the view that this isn't going to be sorted without getting official about it. Mayalld 20:39, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Template map in Sandbox

Hi Mayalld. Thanks for your welcome to the UK Waterways Project. I've noticed that you have a template map in your sandbox. As this has the category tag in, it appears on Category:Waterway_routemap_templates. Hmallett 16:03, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed! Thanks Mayalld 16:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Battling vandalism

Hi Mayalld, thanks for your quick action on my userpage protecting it from vandalism. I thank you, Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 06:04, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Rating of Birmingham and Fazeley Canal article

Hi, I noticed that you have rated this article as B-class, and I have added quite a bit of history to it since, but it still says it is a stub on the main page. Is it ok to remove the stub category now? I am unsure of the protocol. Bob1960evens 17:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure of the protocol either! I've removed canal sub templates where the UKW rating is above stub, but my rating of the article is based on it as a waterway article. As a west midlands article, the view may be different. On balance, I'd say that where an article is within multiple wiki projects, then I'd leave destubbing decisions to whoever rates the article there, but where there isn't a wikiproject, then we should destub completely. I suggest you remove the stub template.Mayalld 09:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Canals of Ireland Barnsley Canal Champlain Canal Louth Navigation M621 motorway Gloucester and Sharpness Canal M602 motorway Sheffield and South Yorkshire Navigation Stoke Bruerne Bude Canal Huddersfield Broad Canal Elbe-Lübeck Canal M64 motorway Dudley Tunnel M61 motorway Warwickshire ring Canal Saint-Martin Droitwich Canal Manchester Ship Canal

Cleanup Madreporite Barrow-in-Furness Ulverston Merge Anti-vaccinationist MyTravel Airways Blackpool Add Sources Samuel Oldknow Calder and Hebble Navigation Chenango Canal Wikify Hobie cat Thomas Dadford, Jr. Twechar Expand M9 motorway M2 motorway M40 motorway

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:05, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Red cross symbol removal from ICU templates?

Would you please explain your removal of the red-cross symbol from ICU templates, and the odd statement regarding the Geneva Convention? You could have at least brought the matter up for discusion first, instead of unilaterally imposing your interpretation of this odd so-called "rule." - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 16:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

We're discussing a change, as you can see on the project talk page. But your action was very heavy-handed, and I don't exactly see any Geneva Convention police knocking down Jimbo Wales' door to serve him with some sort of legal action. We have only your word to go on here, and given the nature of your action, I'm still a bit skeptical. Please, in the future, don't be so quick to rush in and do something like this. There's a fine line between being bold and being overly aggressive. It would have been much better to post a message along the lines of, "Hey! Are you guys aware of this?" plus an explanation, than to do what you did. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 21:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Sounds like you might be the Dave Mayall that I've debated newsgroups with in the UK hierarchy before, nice to see you're still about. pickaxe.demon.co.uk is no more, but I'm still alive and kicking, unlike some (Alan Hughes comes to mind). The other DM. DMcMPO11AAUK/Talk/Contribs 01:12, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

speedy

Speedy A7 for notability can be used only for the types of articles specified in WP:CSD, real people, groups, bands, companies, web content. Not schools. Necessary to use PROD or AFD for them . DGG (talk) 14:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Curious set-up where speedy deletion of non-notable articles depends on what they aren't well known for though! Mayalld 14:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Fact tag

Take a look at the member list! Does [1] count as a source ? 81.149.250.228 17:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 44	29 October 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Florence Devouard interview
Page creation for unregistered users likely to be reenabled	WikiWorld comic: "Human billboard"
News and notes: Treasurer search, fundraiser, milestones	WikiProject Report: Agriculture
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Cutting the mustard

It may not be Maille, but I believe that Margery Eagan cuts enough mustard now to avoid the abyss. - Crockspot 02:30, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Asserting importance

As a a gneral note, with respect to Talk:Anastasios Kyriakides: Asserting importance in the sense of WP:CSD#A7 is distinct from questions of notability, verifiability and reliability of sources. It should just assure that they possibly exist, but they do not need to be provided to avoid speedy deletion. Best regards --Tikiwont 15:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Foreign language articles that exist on another Wikimedia project.

The article Hemmerlin that you tagged with WP:CSD#A2 was - as afar as I saw - wriiten in French , but not copied form one of 'our' articles. --Tikiwont 15:23, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Senior moment! Looked at article, went to check in fr: got distracted, and carried on without looking at what was actually in fr: - my bad Mayalld 15:24, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Harbledown Cricket Club

Does not appear to meet speedy deletion criterion, since a claim of notability is made. If you want the article deleted, I suggest you take it to [{WP:AFD|articles for deletion]]. JoshuaZ 18:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Re Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Mppp111

No problem. I've never filed an SSP report myself, and I was just trying to figure out all the hoops one has to jump through to do so. Deor 13:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply

Do not remove information from case files (which are considerably sourced), thank you. - A Comment to it 14:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Wikipedia:Long term abuse, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. A Comment to it

On the day that stopping you from rewriting the account of your own long term abusive editing becomes vandalism, I'll happily put myself forward for a ban Mayalld 14:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I R dave, i want becum admin, get shiny badge, then everyone will kno i speshul. - Tenderlambleg 14:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Au contraire, I have no particular desire for my own mop. Mayalld 15:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

SSP

Don't create separate ones, just add to the first one please. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Will do. Somewhat new to using the more advanced bits of TW, and lulled into a false sense of security, because it is so damned good the rest of the time! Mayalld 15:35, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 45	5 November 2007	About the Signpost

Wikimedia avoids liability in French lawsuit	WikiWorld comic: "Fall Out Boy"
News and notes: Grant money, fundraiser, milestones	WikiProject Report: Lists of basic topics
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 3, Issue 46	12 November 2007	About the Signpost

Unregistered page creation remains on hold so far	WikiWorld comic: "Exploding whale"
News and notes: Fundraiser, elections galore, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Missing encyclopedic articles	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:01, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Lori and Reba Schappell

I was going to do the same thing but it appears there was a WP:RM several months ago for this. I was trying to figure it out when you moved it back. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

User:MaryPoppins878

Thank you for seeing that they are a vandal and that their edits are far from constructive. There is currently a vandal report AND a suspected sock puppet case pending against them. Your warning helps in this regard. Thank you again. Irish Lass 18:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Do you somehow get the feeling they think if they protest too much and behave oddly they think they'll be let back in? Have they never read Shakespeare? Oh, wait, I forgot who I was talking about.IrishLass 15:00, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

British Waterways and London

Hi, thanks for letting me know - reversion noted. I don't mind really, but it does seem a pity to have no association through the transport categories for London to BW at all. Maybe the individual London canal articles need to link into BW? Or a note in the category description? Not really my area, but it's a suggestion. All the best --Cnbrb 12:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from vandalizing this wikipedia page

For some reason, you are consistently vandalizing thewikipedia page for Beyond Race Magazine by calling for its deletion. Please refrain from this in the future. Beyond Race is a reputable, well-known magazine based in NYC that's presence on Wikipedia is justified. Please note Garland Jeffrey's Wikipedia entry, and Locksley's (the band) Wikipedia page which both make reference to the magazine. As this article is presenting purely factual information that is in the public domain, no references are really called for. As more specific information may be added, appropriate citatiopns will be used, i'm sure. Please note other magazine's Wikipedia pages such as Ozone magazine that are presenting similar information, in some cases, even going so far as to point out what stores the magazine can be found at. These pages are purely for advertising purposes where as this page is not. I am a reader of the magazine and as a reader and user of Wikipedia, I have the right to post an entry for this magazine. If you continue to vandalize the page, I will be forced to take further action. Thank you very much. Please respect others more carefully as you continue using Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samcoe42 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Nominating for deletion is not vandalizing. It is a process to prove worth. You, Samcoe42, would do well to watch falsely accusing people. IrishLass 20:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I have indeed nominated the page for deletion. I have done so, because I believe the magazine to be non-notable. That isn't vandalism, that is a legitimate process on Wikipedia. If you believe the magazine to be notable, you should contest the AfD. Simply removing the AfD notice will make no difference whatsoever, as the discussion will continue regadless. You don't ha a right to create an article. Editing is a priviledge, and one that can be withdrawn if abused. Wikipedia has standards of notability and verifiability in reliable sources which apply to all articles, and it isn't sufficient simply to claim that the information is in the public domain and that no sources are needed. I had never heard of the magazine, and have no way of proving that it exists, so sources are needed. If anything that is going on her is contrary to the principles of Wikipedia, it is you issueing threats Mayalld 22:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

You're going to love this

Timing is everything. Spends two days trying to convince us he's not MaryPoppins then when the page is fully protected, he comes back. Can we all say "BUSTED!" Seriously, I thought that was hysterical. IrishLass 17:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Navigable aqueducts

I understand your concern about using the proper terminology. In a way, I was impacted by the German Magdeburg Water Bridge. Anyway, it seems we agree that a person looking for transportation over aqueducts should be able to find it. I went through my edit list and created Category:Navigable bridges with the pages I had listed before and commented at the page. It seems that the consensus is that some category will be created and that will save the good samaritan that makes the change some work in the end.

---

Carrie (talk) 22:34, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:futile edit war

I do not have any intentions of attacking other editors.My apologies for the language used and i assure you it will not happen again.But i also want to point out the fact that i request other editors like the user in question 74.13.29.56 not to use words like "stupid" which i consider to be offensive.

---

Yes-minister (talk) 12:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Carers Alliance

I've removed the speedy tag from Carers Alliance because it does have quite a few Google hits, but I've tagged it for notability. Somebody from Oz should let us know if they're notable. Corvus cornix (talk) 21:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

User: Artaxia

Hi, you flagged my article on the Carers Alliance for deletion. I've wikified and referenced, so I've removed the warnings (if that's okay). I'm new 'round here, but I'm picking it up quickly. There are further improvements to come - will you consider removing the article from the deletion consideration list?

Cheers, (Artaxia (talk) 22:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC))

Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 47	19 November 2007	About the Signpost

An interview with Florence Devouard	Author borrows from Wikipedia article without attribution
WikiWorld comic: "Raining animals"	News and notes: Page patrolling, ArbCom age requirement, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: History
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

I have no qualms about making anyone who would censor me suffer agony beyond easy reckoning. I have done nothing but flaunt the stupidity of futile actions which only serve to rile my usually moderate temperament. My right to speak exactly how I feel is one that I sacrifice to no man, regardless of their intent. You have repeatedly attempted to remove my comments out of some delusional self-righteous crusade against what you appear to feel is naughty language. I have undone those actions repeatedly, I have not gone so far as to begin any vandalism whatsoever, I consider my actions to be justified and proper in response to your crude attempt at bullying me. 74.13.50.175 (talk) 22:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't take public arguments in which I feel morally superiour into the private realm, I continue raging on until I feel my point has been made, then I wander off surprised at how long it took to get that point made. This is not the first time I've had this /16 banned by an administrator with no understanding what-so-ever how to deal with a problem which could have easily been dealt with via discussion rather than attempts at censoring. Revertting away a person's factual data was an act you performed. Because you knew nothing of the topic you were editing, I do know about the topic, that is why I corrected and put in the discussion page the rationale for my actions. You then proceeded to remove those comments, and that is why this has gone on so long. 74.13.50.175 (talk) 22:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

No, the reason it has gone on so long, is that you persist in insulting people. You may feel morally superior, but your reliance on insults tells a different tale. Getting a /16 blocked is nothing to be proud of. Mayalld (talk) 23:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Who is the fool? I warned that such actions were futile with the simple /32 ban, do you really feel that actively trying to piss off someone who's already upset will ensure a good and lasting peace? I am not the one waving around the ban hammer instead of doing a good job at moderating the site's problems. The duty of an administrator is not to randomly bully people, it's to make them understand the situation and attempt to direct their energies towards a more productive path, your actions are simply fuel for a fire. 74.13.50.175 (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it's tough to defend against an IP that varies so much. I guess all we can do is issue succesively longer blocks until the user gets though his head that his behavior is not tolerated here. Also, since we know the range that this user operates under, we can go ahead and block as soon as the user violates policy, rather than waiting for a final warning. Keep me posted about the situation, okay? GlassCobra 23:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

You're no better than Mayalld is GlassCobra. 74.13.50.175 (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

You're the one that insists on sinking to personal attacks constantly. GlassCobra 23:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

So, calling stupidity stupidty is now a personal attack, rather than an assessment of an act? My God, I must not have gotten the memo about how the entire language had been changed. Sorry, my bad. 74.13.50.175 (talk) 23:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it absolutely is a permanent attack. Wikipedia is trying to foster a sense of community though constructive criticism, not hostility. Read Wikipedia:Civility. GlassCobra 23:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I think you mean personal, rather than permanent, but no, calling an action something is not calling the person who performed the action something, though it is directly reflective of the person. 74.13.50.175 (talk) 23:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Given the number of times that you have been pointed at WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL it is a mystery that you, my anonymous friend, didn't get the memo. Calling any action stupid, regardless of whether you (or others) may think it stupid IS a personal attack within the definition employed by the Wikipedia polict which bans personal attacks Mayalld (talk) 23:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Opinions do not come into play when dealing with facts Mayalld, a stupid action is stupid. Something which is pointless, careless, unlearning, that is stupid. The act of reverting my correction of Yes-minister's stupid edits was stupid of you. It's not an attack, it's a fully realised and justified assessment of your action which proved to be careless, since you did not bother to know about the topic before making judgement that a non-registered user was wrong, and a registered user that had gone on a edit-fest making completely incorrect edits in many articles was right. You did something stupid, that doesn't mean you are unlearning or pointless, but your actions do show signs of not being willing to learn, and you have taken some rather pointless measures which have searved no purpose. 74.13.50.175 (talk) 23:32, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Incorrect. "Stupid" is ALWAYS a value judgement, and never a fact. Perhaps you might like to return to the beginning of all this, and look what I actually did. I did NOT revert your correction. I looked at both versions, and created a compromise version. Now, I could call you stupid for getting it wrong. I could accuse you of deliberately misrepresenting the events. However, I set some store by WP:NPA, WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF, so I will assume that you made an understandable mistake in your reading of my actions, which anybody could have made. That doesn't make you stupid. It does make your comments inaccurate. As to being willing to learn, have you yet read the policies that I have pointed you at, so that you can learn why a number of people believe you to be in breach of them? Mayalld (talk) 23:41, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Mayalld, I suggest that we follow Wikipedia:Revert, block, ignore to the letter here. This user clearly has no interest in fostering a positive community here. We will follow up with the methods that have already been undertaken, and deal with this user in an appropriate manner. GlassCobra 23:42, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

How right you are!Mayalld (talk) 23:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Incense & Health

Thank you for your explanation, would you please review the discussion on the Incense talk page titled Incense & Health and give me more feedback.

BrerRabbit-at-Alices (talk) 13:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Artificially pumping up your # of contributions won't help you

Trying to increase the number of your contributions by going to new users' talk pages and teaching them about how Wikipedia is run is not the best way to become an adminstrator. Don't forget you are breaking "Don't bite the newcomers" WP:BITE. You will not become an admin by just focusing on the number of edits and breaking all the other rules in the process. That won't win you any hearts or minds, your application will be quickly rejected. Wikidont (talk) 16:42, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

What application? I haven't made an application to be an admin, and have no plans to do so. Mayalld (talk) 08:55, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

== UK postcode districts ==

I was using the article itself. All I was doing was normalising the format the information was in. Thanks for correcting it. Postcodes (talk) 13:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)