User talk:AulaTPN


User Page	Talk Page	Awards	Userboxes	Userspace	Sandbox	Watchlist	Edit

Start a new talk topic.

Unless you specifically ask otherwise, I will respond to your comments on this talk page.

Thank you

I'll try to be civilized, which might include less active, probably a good thing. Libertycookies 00:39, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Statement taken ...

Absolutely, try taking out the <p></p> tags - like this: Solar Sunstorm in fact you could just copy/paste it into your signature box. You could even split it so that 'solar' linked to your user page and 'sunstorm' linked to your talk page like this: Solar Sunstorm which is a similar thing to what I've done with my sig. Aula ^TPN 10:59, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like it! Thanks--Solar Sunstorm 17:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you said that you made your sig so that Aula linked to you user page and TPN to you talk, but TPN doesn't appear hyperlinked to me...maybe I misunderstood you, or maybe you modified it after you said that...just an FYI.--Solar Sunstorm 23:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes it won't work on this page because MetaWiki automatically removes any link to the current page but it works on other pages. Thanks anyway! Aula ^TPN 18:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking about jupping up my username

But I wasn't sure how to write in the various fonts. Could you de-fog things for me? Thanks. Serendipodous 13:33, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I sure can, what did you have in mind? Aula ^TPN 13:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you know, I was thinking of having my name boldened, and then the "pod" placed floating above it in red, just to highlight the spelling error. :-) Serendipodous 17:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Something like... Serendi ^podous ...perhaps? Ordinarily you would do it with a <span> tag but as the signature box accepts so few characters you have to cheat and use the evil, deprecated <font> tag. Also, notice that 'Serendi' links to your user page and 'podous' links to your talk page Aula ^TPN 19:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! Could it come in black? :-) Serendipodous 21:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course... Serendi ^podous ... trouble is that people might not realise your name is hotlinked. Aula ^TPN 23:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to help you on this, but...

I don't really know the ins and outs of consensus regarding nationality. Truth be told, I agree with the guy; nationality should reflect what is on your passport. Rowling is a British citizen, therefore she is a British author. If the Scots care so much about ensuring that no one calls her Scottish, they should declare independence already. Serendipodous 12:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Not constructive"

That edit i made was a grammatical correction, nothing more, nothing less. I can't remember what it was now but it was certainly constructive (albeit in a grammatical perfectionist way). That was stupid of you to revert it. 203.109.224.42 12:09, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, what you did was completely mangle the image link in the infobox so I would hardly call that constructive. Also please refrain from using personal attacks like calling people stupid. I suggest you read some of the Wikipedia policies and guidelines before you continue editing. Aula ^TPN 12:21, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus about Rowling

Well, show me where the consensus has been set. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 21:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually this discussion has come up many times in the past in both the J. K. Rowling and Harry Potter articles. You could check the archives of the talk pages. Please don't misunderstand my intention - I don't really have a preference but it seems to me to be wholly inconsistent that any attempt to describe, say, a Scottish person as British is instantly reverted by the involved editing community yet the same logic is nowhere near as vociferously applied to English articles. There seems to be a great desire when dealing with articles about non-English, UK entities to categorize by ethnicity (Scottish, Welsh, Northern-Irish). Like I said, I don't really have a preference although I do think stating the ethnicity is more informative than just blanketing everything with British, especially as many natives of other countries (generally and in my personal experience) don't actually understand the difference between the UK, Great Britain and England. I'd just like the editing community at large to decide one way or the other and then apply that consistently to all UK-related articles. In fact I'm considering an RfC to see if such a policy could be debated and created. Any ideas how that's done? Aula ^TPN 22:01, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are tons of flame wars about the nationalities. Trying to set some RfC handling this seems to be a hard problem close to impossibility, I am pretty sure it will end in the endless debate between two factions. I thought about that, little bit studied British Isles terminology (little bit complicated :) ), and it sounds reasonably. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 22:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I was starting to think that but then I found there was a discussion about this on the Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) article. As it stands it seems that the consensus is leaning towards referring to the individual nations of the UK rather than the UK as a whole. I've posted my thoughts with a view to maybe getting an outcome added to the manual of style so we'll see if anything happens. I doubt it though! Aula ^TPN 22:40, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quadratic Formula Derivation

Thank you! Algebra man 10:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're more than welcome! Aula ^TPN 11:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hermione Edits

I am rather hoping you would have read my edit summary prior to starting a low-grade edit war, but cie la vie. If you find that there is a back and forth on eidts, it needs to go to the Discussion page and get talked out. It's a common misconception, but no one is going to be able to muscle their edits through by reverting. Talking it out might convince the other person, they might convince you, or - most likely - some middle ground will be found. Please pursue this course. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 23:18, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Umm... I'd rather you didn't attempt to teach me to suck eggs. I was rather hoping you wouldn't make such cavalier edits without starting a discussion and seeking consensus but whatever. I'm certainly not starting an edit-war, I have way to much to do in RealLife^TM to be bothered with that. I'd have to say that prima facie you're the one trying to muscle edits through. Aula ^TPN 23:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but were I teaching you to suck eggs, you would be nationally certified to do so afterward. Your revert was not based in anything encyclopedic, and calling me out for not beginning the discussion you should have after the first removal is rather a case of 'hello pot, meet kettle.' I was trying to help you. Being snippy doesn't help me want to help you; it only makes me want to bring on the Larger Snippy. Disregard if you wish. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 23:28, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry you feel that way, it's certainly not my intent to p*ss off other wikipedians. I would like to point out that, despite your intentions, starting a discussion regarding many articles on one talk page without linking to it on the others, acting before most editors have even had a chance to read it then removing content before the discussion has matured doesn't exactly look like good faith. Aula ^TPN 23:35, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

English/Scottish/etc.

You may be interested to know that Wikipedia:Manual of Style (United Kingdom-related articles) has now been created and there is a discussion taking place on the talk page. Readro 21:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up, I'll be sure to mosey on over. Aula ^TPN 22:15, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aula

Just wanted to say sorry for leaving you to fight on alone, but I just don't have the patience to deal with the constant battles that I have to face over this topic. As far as Harry Potter is concerned, it seems I can't make a list, nominate an article for FAC, or edit a biography without it spiralling into some massive blowout over... what? It just seems so pointless. I'm glad to see you're still keeping your head up, though. Good luck. Serendi^podous 16:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh please! Don't worry about it. I made the mistake of getting involved with (what seemed like) a perfectly reasonable policy proposal to standardise the way UK articles are dealt with as an extention to the MOS - well.... you can imagine the sh*tstorm that ensued. No sooner had the proposed policy been created then it was flooded with bad faith edits from POV pushers - I'm not going to make generalisations but you can tell from the usernames involved that they weren't from the southern-most member state of the UK...

Needless to say after a particularly nasty personal attack (diatribe!) I've washed my hands of the whole sodding mess. It still annoys the heck out of me that the Scots, Welsh & Northern Irish claim their own as their own but you can't get away with calling someone/thing English because they'll argue the case for British until you either give up or have an aneurism or both! It just serves to highlight one of the things I absolutely hate about Wiki, and in my opinion its biggest flaw, that mob-rule wins over informed/expert opinion every single time - oh well.

But yes you're right - I'm keeping myself busy with more productive edits, did you see the announce list I added to the WPHP template?

I noticed someone offered to nominate you for an RfA, for what it's worth I think that's an excellent idea. Your edits are always well-written, encyclopaedic and nicely balanced and you've been more successful at keeping a level head than I have! If you choose to go that route I'd be more than happy to support you. Aula ^TPN 17:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bauer family tree

Hey, I'm about to remove 'Family' from the 24 infobox, under the proviso that a family tree of the Bauer family is created. I have no idea on how to go about that and I saw the Crufteater userbox you created - very impressive btw - and I was wondering if you could help me out here. I wouldn't normally ask, but the 24 community is fairly inactive right now. Cheers asyndeton 23:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just looking around, I see that one has already been created. Sorry for taking up space on you talk page! asyndeton 19:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No probs. I recently gained family tree experience through the many attempts to clean up Harry Potter's tree. If you spot anything wrong with the Bauer tree or if you think it's not clear enough then let me know and I'll have a tweak. Aula ^TPN 23:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm actually trying to get rid of 'Family' from the Heroes infobox as well, so your skills may be required over there, depends on what the Heroes community decides. I'll let you know if I need you. asyndeton 23:18, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cruft-Eaters Local 665

I wish you had let me know you'd finished with it! It looks brilliant! :) Might I use it as well? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, use away! Aula ^TPN 12:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Roger Taylor Happiness.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Roger Taylor Happiness.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen this?

Who is this guy, and what has he done with Libertycookies? :-) Serendi^podous 17:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aula, could you do me a teeny favour, pleeeez? [smiles and blinks repeatedly]

I'm in the final stage of getting JK Rowling approved as an FA, but it needs a final copyedit from from someone who hasn't edited it in a while. You're the only person I know who could take that on, and I would really appreciate it if you could have a go. Thanks. Serendi^podous 12:35, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The appropriate guide for this copyedit is WP:MOS. Thanks! :-) Serendi^podous 13:28, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The copyedit is still an issue, I'm afraid. The pass was only on condition that the copyedit take place, so yes I'm still very glad you're back in action :-) Serendi^podous 00:54, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and by the way...

You might be interested to know that the mother of all "English/British/Scottish" debates has broken out on Talk:J. K. Rowling. Serendi^podous 17:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A new Oxbridge user box

AulaTPN...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 @ 18:02, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Teddy Hall Logo

Hi Aula,

You may have noticed that I have added articles on Emden and Kelly whose red links were removed some time ago. That has led me on to putting together a template of Teddy Hall princpals (and working on the basis that an existing template makes a good template) I adapted the one from Jesus. The SEH template under construction is still on my user pages but now some bot has come and broken the link to the SEH logo that you created stating that the image is "fair use" and something about explicit explainations being requierd on each user page or template - I remain confused I confess. However, the logo for Jesus college is a construction based on a website image and is credited to the artist - and placed on Commons. Do you think that the SEH logo should be marked as copyrighted and fair use if you redraughted it and indeed mention that the real choughs only have black wings! I am still trying to get my had around why a bot is messing with work in progress on my user pages.

Floreat Aula! Oxonhutch (talk) 14:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edmund Rich

I reverted you on Edmund Rich, not because i think that you're intrinsically wrong (i'm sure that's spelled wrong, but i'm typing in the dark), but because i think that if Project Anglicanism is claiming him they ought to be allowed to. No offense, i hope. Cheers, Lindsay^Hi 19:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See the article's talk page. The banner was not intended to "claim" the saint as an Anglican. Rather, as an Archbishop of Canterbury, he merits some degree of attention from the project. Note the list in St Edmund's own Canterbury Cathedral which place him in the list from St. Augustine to Rowan Williams; second from the bottom on the first tablet:

--Secisek (talk) 21:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (File:SEH.gif)

You've uploaded File:SEH.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:44, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IP block

{{unblock|Dominic seems to have blocked the IP address 194.176.105.39 which is shared by the entire NHS. It would seem that even though I am logged in to my account, I still am being hammered by the IP block. Any help would be appreciated.}} Aula ^TPN 09:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking. This will allow you to edit through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.

Please read the page Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on IP block exemption conditions.

Note in particular that you are not permitted to use this newly-granted right to edit Wikipedia via anonymous proxies, or disruptively. If you do, or there is a serious concern of abuse, then the right may be removed by any administrator.

I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption.

Request handled by: עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:16, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

(pasted from the IP's talk page in response to a {{helpme}} tag) As you are editing on a IP talk page, your Wikipedia session may have expired. Log in with your username and password under AulaTPN and you should be able to edit. If not, a similar issue came up with another user about an hour ago. You may try using {{unblock-ip}} to seek help from an administrator. This message will be relayed to AulaTPN's talk page as well for reference. Have a good day. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 10:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this but I am logged in as me and I am still being blocked on this IP address. I'm not seeking to have the IP block lifted - simply to have editing reenabled for those with user accounts which seems not to be the case. Aula ^TPN 11:10, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now you should be able to. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu

Image tagging for File:MetaCriticCosmosRocksReview.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:MetaCriticCosmosRocksReview.JPG. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

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

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:08, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cosmos Rocks

You're right, I apologise. 86.129.215.18 (talk) 22:14, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ginny and Harry - linking the Peverells and the Blacks (Harry Potter)

I should have been more explicit in my comment. Even if that their marriage links the two wizarding families, how is that even relevent? Does it mention that Ron and Hermione's marriage links the Blacks (habitually pure bloods) to a family of "mud bloods"? Actually, of the two "facts", the latter is more relevent trivia. Ccrashh (talk) 11:56, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. In fact you could argue that the majority of the familial information in the HP articles is irrelevant save details on pure/mudbloods and the descendants of notable figures such as the founders and the Peverells and then only because it plays to several prominent plot threads. However hundreds would disagree with me and quite vocally! If you wanted to remove it again on the grounds that it's not particularly relevant then I wouldn't disagree but it would be interesting to see how long it took a fancrufter to stick it back in! Aula ^TPN 15:05, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh...so true. I'll just leave it then. I hate revert wars, and fancrufters are so good at it :) Ccrashh (talk) 15:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Oxford college

Thanks for reverting my removal of the rounded corners. I was meaning to revert that myself, but forgot to before logging off. Best Regards. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:32, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, unfortunately I don't seem to be able to override the padding that's inherrent to the infobox template. Well, not without expending a lot more effort anyway! Aula ^TPN 23:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean the padding around the top section? I can try to work on that if that's what you are asking about. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:00, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (File:MetaCriticCosmosRocksReview.JPG)

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:MetaCriticCosmosRocksReview.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 02:57, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

York meetup

Hi AulaTPN. Just to let you know there is a Wikimedia meetup being planned in York for Tuesday. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:10, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!!!

Hi, this is Jobin, a new wikipedia user. I came to understand that you have an interest in Computer and related topics. I am working on a few articles related to Programming in C. Therefore, I kindly request you to help me on these topics

You may also drop your valuable suggestions on other related articles on my talk page.
Jobin (talk) 15:28, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Atherosclerosis Edit

I'm using an IP that seems to be shared by several users. Two vandalism instances were corrected, and I was notified, but I had no involvement in either. One of the edits is of St. Edmund Hall, Oxford. I'm a student at the same college, so it seems clear that someone is vandalising from this IP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.76.7.219 (talk) 22:05, 20 February 2014 (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) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]