User talk:VampWillow/Archive3

VampWillow/Archive3

December 2004 - April 2005

:Please do not edit or add to this page

Status

I am - provisionally - going to return to being a WP editor. What happened in the summer is over and archived and I don't propose to discuss further about the failure of process and attitudes displayed by people. I felt very hurt by it (some would say a thicker skin would help, no doubt!) but it is time to move on and get involved again, albeit not on such an intense level as I had got myself in at that time and with such disasterous results. Vamp|Willow 22:55, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for your help moving Spam (e-mail). I wasn't sure what really needed to be done, and was pleasantly surprised to find it all squared away. --FOo 01:11, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Please see

the discussion at Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/NAMC and at Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/NicoustiE, just above it. Your perspective would be appreciated. Respectfully, Michael Ward 18:22, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

About a member page

Answering an invitation to create a member page. Though I have no idea what I am actually doing (uses Wikipedia in alot of his private researches but not much of a contributor alas.) Druminor 17:12, 27 December 2004

CSD

Heya, please note that advertising is not a criterion for speedy deletion. You'll have to list pages like Familiar Linux for cleanup or on WP:VfD. --fvw* 21:02, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)

Footnote quotes

Hi - I just looked at you user page and was intrigued by your list of quotes in the footnote. Problem is my browser (Opera 7.54) just puts boxes after each indicating incompatability. Tried Netscape 7.1 (my backup) and it just showed question marks. Just thought I'd let you know about the prob. and I still don't know which you have done. {B-)} Vsmith 15:55, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Ignorant Newbie Question...

How does one send private messages to another wiki user, this particular talk page being public? Or is this not generally possible? Kazvorpal

Yikes, I know how to sign my edits, just somehow forgot...Kaz 23:53, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Kingsway tramway subway

greetings from Berlin! I noticed you´ve recently Corrected the LDO´s of the subway tram routes. May I ask where you get your info from?? I remember changing the dates earlier last year. My sources say 6th April 1952 was the LDO of the 33 & 35 and that the replacement bus routes FDO was 7th April 1952. May I suggest you are confusing the 5th July 1952, LDO of London Trams with 5th March 1952?? see [1] &[2]. IsarSteve 16:20, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Slut

Hi! Thanks for all of the edits and expansions you have made to Slut. I've been watching this page since it was first created, and it gets alot of vandalism and such, or referals to Wiktionary. Thanks! [jon] 23:25, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Copyvio of controlling drug prices article

I have been in debate with the unregistered user of said article who claims to be the copyright holder of the information, updating the reference given after the first time I saw it to provide evidence of such. The issue now is that what they have posted is a college paper, not an encyclopedia article. The empasis of course being that they're posting in good faith, just new here. -- Francs2000 | Talk 18:32, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

the issue in that case (should we accept that an IP-only poster can confirm that) is no original research instead. Whenever I see a whole big block of unwikified text and can find it quickly with a google on one line then it is safest to presume copyvio and act accordingly. --Vamp:Willow 18:38, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yes I have been considering placing on vfd or taking further action, however I've already upset the user once today, I don't want my user page being vandalised any more than it has already... -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 18:40, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Me on your watchlist

Hello. Believe it or not, I'm still working my way up a 500-article newpages list I got at 22:29, 9 Jan 2005, a bit after you did a bunch of new theatre articles. I think I've edited at least 60-70% of the articles I've looked at so far (I "only" have 100 left to do). I don't enjoy writing much--I mostly enjoy various 'housekeeping' tasks--fixing typos, polishing newcomers' formatting, etc. Niteowlneils 23:45, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

York Road

I altered the bit about York Road tube station reopening as LU are stating that it is not. Please see its Talk page - maybe we can discuss it further there. Regards 138.37.188.109 09:54, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Right thing to do?

wasn't sure what to do? newbie. didn't take a rocket scientist to realize that this was....? ok? --allie 23:37, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

country infoboxes

Hi, there's a new Solution E that's been proposed for the country infoboxes; I've changed my vote from the Solution D that I proposed earlier. The new option, proposed by Zocky, transcludes a subpage instead of using the template mechanism for this; it's basically what you suggested a few days ago.

I have some concerns about the new Template:Infobox Country. While a template such as this can help bring greater order to the pages, I don't think that it's quite ready to deploy. I don't think it will be appropriate for all country pages. I also like the idea of off-loading the implementation of the infoboxes to a subpage, whatever their implementation. I've tried to get a dialogue going with Netoholic (new template's "owner"), but he seems unwilling to engage.

Please see: Nepal's infobox is implemented at Nepal/infobox using Template:Infobox_Country; Tuvalu's is implemented at Tuvalu/infobox as a wiki table.

Discussion is @ Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countries and voting's @ Wikipedia:Country_infobox_vote.

Thanks. — Davenbelle 00:43, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks again. After I wrote the note about wanting to know more, Zocky clarified the syntax and I re-did the Tuvalu and Nepal infoboxes. I'm new to wikis, but have been writing code for a long time. I've been looking over country pages and they do seem to mostly have about the same information on them; some things, like maps, population, and area are going to apply to all and the current similarity of pages is probably mostly due to people copy-pasting tables and filling-in data for a specific country. Many countries do not have a National motto, for example (and I think they're silly), and what's being labeled a coat of arms is often really an official seal. Beyond the current state of the various country pages, there is always the possibility that some specific country (or group) may have some specific bit of information that deserves a spot in the infobox, but can't appear there due to limitations of the template. A more robust template may be able to handle more circumstances, but the option of using a hard-code table will always be there. It would be unfortunate if the template gets widely deployed and then has to go through revisions or has to get dumped from countries when some new, legitimate, piece of national-info gets added and can't work well with the template. Already bits of mark-up are having to be used in the template parameters. Anyway, thanks again for your vote. — Davenbelle 02:16, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)

Jedi

Please see [3]. Also you are confusing England with the United Kingdom. - actually checkign the figre on the Office of National Statistics page, ([4]) the figure is actually for England and Wales 80.43.208.225

Wikipedia:Image recreation requests

Greetings. I just started the Wikipedia:Image recreation requests project, and I thought you might be interested. Your help would be greatly appreciated. (I got your name from the list at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Graphic Artists.) Best regards, – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 03:13, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

Newquay page query

email received:

I see you've done some editing on the Newquay wikipedia page - mostly it's fair enough but I was concerned about your comment regarding my contribution - "doesn't seem to trace as copyvio although it looks it". I can't help wondering what lead you to this assumption? Also I'm wondering why you cut out all reference to the geology of the area? Please understand that I'm not being critical - just curious about your reasoning

my response:

I'm presuming you were the set of IP edits on Jan 10th, but there were two threads to my reasoning and I hope you'll understand why I did what I did. Firstly, when one sees a large block of text added to an article which is totally non-wikified (ie no internal WP links on terms such as "Domesday Book", "Pilchards", "Atlantic" in this case), and especially where that new text is added by a user who isn't logged into WP, then one looks closely at it to see how much it 'reads' as a text-book or copy&paste from somewhere else. In this particular case the content - whilst interesting and mostly relevant - did look quite strongly as though it may have been extracted from somewhere else (ie copyvio).

The article prior to your added text was very much about the town of Newquay and your text, being put right at the front of article and opening with detailed paragraphs on the geology of the area detracted from the purpose of the article. I copyedited the infomation about the town ('wikified' it) and summarised the 'physical area' information which related to the town. The paragraph The granite and shale geology of the area favours cliff formation and most of the coast takes this form, however the sea bed in the area is sandy and where it is sufficiently shallow it forms attractive beaches and in a few places the sand has built up into dunes. isn't really about "Newquay" but would usefully find a place in an article about the geology of Cornwall. If you look at the diff you'll see the local geology info is all still there and I hope you will continue to add to the WP articles ... --Vamp:Willow 16:29, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Nicky Line

Hi there. Thanks for your recent contribution to Nicky Line. Regarding your question about the date of the demolition of the viaduct: my source for the date was from the online articles posted by the Hemel Gazette, but from reading these they are obviously themselves condensed from newspaper articles previously published, rather than the actual articles themselves - so in other words they could well have got it wrong. I'll try and find the link that I used. I also notice that you removed the stuff I added about the connection to the main railway line at Hemel. This isn't terribly important to the article, but it is something of a curiosity to me - according to the book about the Nicky Line recently published, there wasn't ever a connection (due to company rivalrys) and the line terminated at Heath Park, but according to Ordnance Survey maps dated around 1880 or so, a connection clearly existed. Traces of this are still visible on map editions dated as late as the 1950s, though the track itself was removed at some point in between. It would be nice to somehow get to the bottom of this, if only for the satisfaction of knowing! Graham 21:47, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I've replied with more on this on my talk page. I'll try posting the map image I'm referring to once the database is unlocked. Graham 22:54, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Marylebone Station

Hi.

You write:

er .. there are *two* such-named stations; one on the tube, one overground. Have reverted the edits deleting 'tube'. Although, like other locations, they are adjacent they are two separate properties, owned by different companies, with different histories. To merge them therefore would (imho, obviously) be an error. --Vamp:Willow 11:20, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I (hope I) have addressed your concerns at my merging of the two Marylebone articles at Talk:Marylebone station; at least I've explained why I made the changes.

Incidentally, the three articles you reverted were only a small proportion of the articles I changed to link to the new name; really just making sure I didn't slow the servers down by making them follow redirects un-necessarily. If you want to revert all the others, be my guest, but please check the changes first. At least two of the articles I changed had Chiltern Railways trains terminating at [[Marylebone tube station|Marylebone]] or some similar nonsense; which I offer as a small additional reason for merging the station articles. -- Chris j wood 20:23, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

You further write:

indeed; I checked your recent edits after reverting the three pages and saw the massive list, so left alone to see what your consideration was. Have read the entry on the talk page and I think this is a symptom of a larger problem / issue (rolling of multiple articles into a single one where not copmletely appropriate). Will spend some time thinking about it tonight and post up a discussion in the next day or so. --Vamp:Willow 22:35, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

In which case I'm afraid I'd probably disagree with you. At the end of the day, these places are parts of a city's transport infrastructure; interchanges if you like. They should be dealt with as such, not as some kind of precious cultural/historical monuments. Could I just quote somebody here:

I'd tend towards the view that seperate entrances means separate stations so Mitchan, West Croydon, East Croydon etc aren't the same as the overground ones whereas Wimbledon clearly is. Likewise the two Hammersmith tube stations. That said, I'd agree with Tagishsimon that one needs a meaningful article first. --Vamp:Willow 17:04, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Even by your analysis (which I think is too limited), surely Marylebone has one entrance for both National Rail and LUL (the entrance is actually depicted in the article) and hence is a single station. -- Chris j wood 00:34, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Honour

Hi: Please can you explain the significance of the flickering "<!-- Spelling: en-GB, -ise -->" comment at the head of Honour? I am not seeking to take a position on this; I simply do not understand what is happening. --Theo (Talk) 13:04, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Spelling templates

Hi. I saw your comment on my page after I saw SpNeo's - please refer to my comment on User talk:SpNeo as an answer to yours. Oh, and by the way, you are confusing Britons with Brétons:) jguk 14:12, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Lemmy and ELP

Hi, I removed a reference to Lemmy being in Emerson, Lake & Palmer as a "small time group" in the sixties, but then decided to track down the edit and saw that you put it in. The reason why I removed it was:

• ELP were not a "small time band": they were one of the original "supergroups"
• I have no recollection of Lemmy ever being in ELP
• ELP formed in 1970, so they were not a 60s band

However, I'd be absolutely fascinated to know if Lemmy was ever involved with ELP... what a thought! -- The Anome 10:43, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

Ah. I see he was a roadie for ELP. -- The Anome 10:46, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

illegal blocking by Vamp Willow

Vamp Willow's abuse of admin status and illegal blocking of aroberts after deliberately miscounting rvs has now been revoked. You would be advised to count very carefully before attempting any further blocks.

From WP:3RR: The three-revert rule "does not grant users an inalienable right to three reverts every 24 hours or endorse reverts as an editing technique." — I stand behind VampWillow. Your long history of reverts of this article whilst narrowly avoiding the 3RR demonstrates that you have no wish to work collaboratively or accept consensus. If you continue to revert the article, you will likely either be re-blocked, or the article will be re-protected. - Mark 08:26, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Note to readers: see 3RR records for validation of my actions Vamp:Willow

Blomberg-Fritsch-Krise

Um, I noticed you protected Blomberg-Fritsch-Krise. I wanted to revert it to the pre-GeneralPatton version (see article Talk and Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Contributions_after_redirections_and_moves) to merge histories with Blomberg-Fritsch Affair--the former certainly shouldn't be deleted. Were you going to merge the histories? Niteowlneils 05:06, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

MP

Thanks 4 the heads up. I am aware of the law regarding the usage of 'MP' between the end of the current Parliament and the begining of the next Parliament. I will add the letters after the vote if they win again.

PS: Do you know anything about the LibDem Watch website?

Hoshie/Crat 23:04, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Quotes on wikipedia

It is not sensable to suggest to keep Danger, Will Robinson on wikipedia, I personaly hate waisting hours re explaning whats on the speedy delete note. Wikipedia is not the right project for quotes. That belongs to wikipedia wikiquote and please do not remove VfD tags. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 08:10, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)