Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Thameside Radio, 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 read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Rapido ( talk) 20:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Barry Andrews (musician). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Rapido ( talk) 20:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Radio Centraal, you may be blocked from editing. Rapido ( talk) 20:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Andy Dingley. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Rapido ( talk) 20:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
One on-line dictionary, one mention in a book hardly makes it notable, although I accept that the reason for deletion may not have been correct. There is nothing significant that is not in Kappa, so perhaps a redirect to that might put it more in context? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:53, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
I would ask you to research further before making such comments. The picture of the 'sherman' is that of a Sherman Firefly, a British tank. It is an up gunned m4 sherman, with a 17 pounder gun. That is when the sherman became especially British. However, I will take your advice, and find a picture of a tank with greater scope.
EDIT: Come to think of it, why are you telling me this after all that's on YOUR talk page? what...3+ disruptive edits? pfff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Willdasmiffking ( talk • contribs) 18:43, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Regards.
Willdasmiffking ( talk) 18:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
British Tank
Hello Andy. With reference to your revert of my Scowles edit; Puzzle Wood is a very good example of a 'labyrinthine' scowle, but many (I would argue the great majority) of scowles take the form of shallow pits. The extract below comes from this website http://www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/media/adobe_acrobat/a/i/Scowles.pdf
"The irregular rocky, quarry-like features that have been subject to varying amounts of human intervention, such as those at Puzzle Wood, near Clearwell, are what most people picture when they think of scowles. However, many of the features recorded by the 2003-04 survey, which searched the whole of the geological outcrops where scowles could be expected, took the form of amorphous shallow hollows or sub-circular depressions."
The lede needs adjusting to take account of the varying type of scowles. Would you like to do it, or should I? Obscurasky ( talk) 11:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Did I detect a hint of bad faith on your part when you directly accused me of being POINTy? All I'm doing is simply trying to remove the spam that clutters these articles since their creation. Yes, I've read the concerns on my talkpage already, that's why I did not tag them with {{ db-meta}} outright. Also, please read the policy about sockpuppetry first before you go ranting off about it. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 03:57, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for Ányos Jedlik who invented it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.183.185.181 ( talk) 15:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
You might have noticed that there's a dispute at Talk:Coandă-1910 about whether the aircraft was the first jet. The article is now locked because of edit warring. I see you have been active on the page in the past, so could you jump in again and comment?
I have a sandbox version going at Talk:Coandă-1910/Binksternet, perhaps you can give your opinion on that. Cheers! Binksternet ( talk) 19:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Sorry for coming up in the middle of your discussion, but I could not resist to comment. I don't consider at all anything funny at Coanda-1910. And I suppose I'm not the only one, but anybody who cares about Wikipedia in general. The aviation museum in Bucharest did laugh at when I told them to have a look in the English Wikipedia articles about Coanda. Their answer was that Wikipedia is not considered as source for anything as it is completely written by amateurs with their personal views. Andy if you are still interested in this topic please check the discussion in the WP:RSN too.-- Lsorin ( talk) 20:03, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
As already answered, "It is pointless to try and categorize this engine and its propulseur according to a taxonomy from Wikipedia. WP is not a reliable source. If we do categorize it, we should describe it as a ducted fan." Andy Dingley ( talk) 14:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Just found this discussion. Thanks for recommending some books about these subjects. Should make interesting reading. Romaniantruths ( talk) 03:37, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
He's starting to annoy me now. If it wasn't for some of his work I'd be thinking he's just extracting the michael but I think he genuinely can't graps the concept of sigs. NtheP ( talk) 16:24, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for picking up the Jules et Jim (band) article, but I am not convinced the group is notable enough on its own. I can find no references to this band that are not their official site or user-generated content sites. I have looked into it a bit and I do not dispute the notability of members - but IMO there is simply not enough available, sourced information about this band to create any kind of article. At the very least, this content should be merged into the respective articles on each musician, and the albums listed in their discographies under a collaborations header. - Addionne ( talk) 16:05, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Andy, thanks for your support, I was really beginning to doubt myself. You actually may have saved me a doctor's visit... Jan olieslagers ( talk) 17:21, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Well done for starting the article - it's one I'd meant to get around to writing for ages. I have some more information which I'll add in, if you're happy for me to do that. Have you thought about putting it forward at WP:DYK? Ghmyrtle ( talk) 11:03, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
On 27 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lancaut, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Rlevse • Talk • 06:02, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Andy, rather than go personal on a fellow wikipedian when expressing your legitimate disagreement about the AfD you and I have been discussing, why not just find some sources and launch into article edits? The article first got on my watchlist by following links from other articles I watch (mostly on the topic of IQ testing, a topic I speak about in the public meetings that have become the latest topic being discussed on the AdD page). What I noticed as the article was on my watchlist for a few months is that there seems to be another editor watching that page ( User:Beetstra , who says he is away on holiday just now) who wants to make sure that the page becomes something more than just a link farm pointing to websites of various organizations who insert the links themselves, contrary to WP:COI. I share his concern. I think it would be great to see some well sourced actual content there about what kind of people join the various organizations, what their experiences are when they join, how the various organizations are received by society at large, how they all get along with one another, and so forth. Just as you take great care in sourcing and updating articles about inventions and places you know well, so too I would like to see someone—perhaps several editors—lavishing some care and attention on that article to make it more than the list that it currently is. If someone can find the sources to do that, that would be great. You could help with that, if you devoted the same degree of time and attention looking for those sources as you have devoted to finding out what Wikipedia tells you about me. With best wishes for much future collaboration in building the encyclopedia. -- WeijiBaikeBianji ( talk, how I edit) 00:29, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps you could explain, why pointing out that this image might have the wrong license, is a bad thing? Asking for a source was to assist in resolving the matter at hand. However, as you feel that image is acceptable at present, even without a source, I'll leave that one alone. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 10:44, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Please don't do a whole-scale reversion just because you object to one thing. Show a little courtesy to your fellow editors and just change what you object to.— Chowbok ☠ 01:27, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Thameside Radio, 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 read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Rapido ( talk) 20:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Barry Andrews (musician). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Rapido ( talk) 20:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Radio Centraal, you may be blocked from editing. Rapido ( talk) 20:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Andy Dingley. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Rapido ( talk) 20:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
One on-line dictionary, one mention in a book hardly makes it notable, although I accept that the reason for deletion may not have been correct. There is nothing significant that is not in Kappa, so perhaps a redirect to that might put it more in context? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:53, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
I would ask you to research further before making such comments. The picture of the 'sherman' is that of a Sherman Firefly, a British tank. It is an up gunned m4 sherman, with a 17 pounder gun. That is when the sherman became especially British. However, I will take your advice, and find a picture of a tank with greater scope.
EDIT: Come to think of it, why are you telling me this after all that's on YOUR talk page? what...3+ disruptive edits? pfff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Willdasmiffking ( talk • contribs) 18:43, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Regards.
Willdasmiffking ( talk) 18:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
British Tank
Hello Andy. With reference to your revert of my Scowles edit; Puzzle Wood is a very good example of a 'labyrinthine' scowle, but many (I would argue the great majority) of scowles take the form of shallow pits. The extract below comes from this website http://www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/media/adobe_acrobat/a/i/Scowles.pdf
"The irregular rocky, quarry-like features that have been subject to varying amounts of human intervention, such as those at Puzzle Wood, near Clearwell, are what most people picture when they think of scowles. However, many of the features recorded by the 2003-04 survey, which searched the whole of the geological outcrops where scowles could be expected, took the form of amorphous shallow hollows or sub-circular depressions."
The lede needs adjusting to take account of the varying type of scowles. Would you like to do it, or should I? Obscurasky ( talk) 11:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Did I detect a hint of bad faith on your part when you directly accused me of being POINTy? All I'm doing is simply trying to remove the spam that clutters these articles since their creation. Yes, I've read the concerns on my talkpage already, that's why I did not tag them with {{ db-meta}} outright. Also, please read the policy about sockpuppetry first before you go ranting off about it. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 03:57, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for Ányos Jedlik who invented it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.183.185.181 ( talk) 15:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
You might have noticed that there's a dispute at Talk:Coandă-1910 about whether the aircraft was the first jet. The article is now locked because of edit warring. I see you have been active on the page in the past, so could you jump in again and comment?
I have a sandbox version going at Talk:Coandă-1910/Binksternet, perhaps you can give your opinion on that. Cheers! Binksternet ( talk) 19:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Sorry for coming up in the middle of your discussion, but I could not resist to comment. I don't consider at all anything funny at Coanda-1910. And I suppose I'm not the only one, but anybody who cares about Wikipedia in general. The aviation museum in Bucharest did laugh at when I told them to have a look in the English Wikipedia articles about Coanda. Their answer was that Wikipedia is not considered as source for anything as it is completely written by amateurs with their personal views. Andy if you are still interested in this topic please check the discussion in the WP:RSN too.-- Lsorin ( talk) 20:03, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
As already answered, "It is pointless to try and categorize this engine and its propulseur according to a taxonomy from Wikipedia. WP is not a reliable source. If we do categorize it, we should describe it as a ducted fan." Andy Dingley ( talk) 14:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Just found this discussion. Thanks for recommending some books about these subjects. Should make interesting reading. Romaniantruths ( talk) 03:37, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
He's starting to annoy me now. If it wasn't for some of his work I'd be thinking he's just extracting the michael but I think he genuinely can't graps the concept of sigs. NtheP ( talk) 16:24, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for picking up the Jules et Jim (band) article, but I am not convinced the group is notable enough on its own. I can find no references to this band that are not their official site or user-generated content sites. I have looked into it a bit and I do not dispute the notability of members - but IMO there is simply not enough available, sourced information about this band to create any kind of article. At the very least, this content should be merged into the respective articles on each musician, and the albums listed in their discographies under a collaborations header. - Addionne ( talk) 16:05, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Andy, thanks for your support, I was really beginning to doubt myself. You actually may have saved me a doctor's visit... Jan olieslagers ( talk) 17:21, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Well done for starting the article - it's one I'd meant to get around to writing for ages. I have some more information which I'll add in, if you're happy for me to do that. Have you thought about putting it forward at WP:DYK? Ghmyrtle ( talk) 11:03, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
On 27 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lancaut, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Rlevse • Talk • 06:02, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Andy, rather than go personal on a fellow wikipedian when expressing your legitimate disagreement about the AfD you and I have been discussing, why not just find some sources and launch into article edits? The article first got on my watchlist by following links from other articles I watch (mostly on the topic of IQ testing, a topic I speak about in the public meetings that have become the latest topic being discussed on the AdD page). What I noticed as the article was on my watchlist for a few months is that there seems to be another editor watching that page ( User:Beetstra , who says he is away on holiday just now) who wants to make sure that the page becomes something more than just a link farm pointing to websites of various organizations who insert the links themselves, contrary to WP:COI. I share his concern. I think it would be great to see some well sourced actual content there about what kind of people join the various organizations, what their experiences are when they join, how the various organizations are received by society at large, how they all get along with one another, and so forth. Just as you take great care in sourcing and updating articles about inventions and places you know well, so too I would like to see someone—perhaps several editors—lavishing some care and attention on that article to make it more than the list that it currently is. If someone can find the sources to do that, that would be great. You could help with that, if you devoted the same degree of time and attention looking for those sources as you have devoted to finding out what Wikipedia tells you about me. With best wishes for much future collaboration in building the encyclopedia. -- WeijiBaikeBianji ( talk, how I edit) 00:29, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps you could explain, why pointing out that this image might have the wrong license, is a bad thing? Asking for a source was to assist in resolving the matter at hand. However, as you feel that image is acceptable at present, even without a source, I'll leave that one alone. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 10:44, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Please don't do a whole-scale reversion just because you object to one thing. Show a little courtesy to your fellow editors and just change what you object to.— Chowbok ☠ 01:27, 30 October 2010 (UTC)