User talk:Voice of Clam/Archives/2009

Translation tags

Hi. Please help me understand why you are removing all the "translated" tags from articles I have translated from de.wiki. Surely it is useful to know the origin of the article and that is the purpose of the tag? Bermicourt (talk) 01:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for the explanation. I will switch to the new tag on the discussion page. Bermicourt (talk) 12:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

St George's school in Switzerland

Dear Tivedshambo How observant you are! congratulations. I am working for St George's School and they have asked me to insert the school in Wikipedia on the same basis that other private schools in Switzerland can be found in Wikipedia. I think it blatantly honest to use the approved data on the school website, don't you? I am also planning to insert a recent article on the role of education within globalisation written by the school's headmaster, Mr Ilya Eigenbrot, and to be published in Marcket.ch next April. Please give me your normal email address and I will send you the copy of the article. Please advise how to insert St George's on your website Thanks and kind wishes for a happy 2009 Sixtine Crutchfield s.crutchfield-tripet@st-georges.ch —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sixtine (talk • contribs) 14:43, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking into this as it's shown up on OTRS as Ticket:2009010710017282. Stifle (talk) 16:05, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. — Tivedshambo _(t/c) 16:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Train / railway stations (Commons)

Responded on my page (on Commons, not the one at right). Cheers Ingolfson (talk) 13:26, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in addition, I suggest that you could place a hidden  in the "railway station" type subcats to prevent people like me from acidentially requesting it again. I suggest placing it hidden because it will be of no interest to 99.9% of all users (who aren't going to propose moves) yet would have stopped me from making the requests. Cheers, Ingolfson (talk) 14:01, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for help with new posting

Hello Tivedshambo,

Yesterday, I attempted several times to post an article about Akimbo, a notable American rock band.

Sorry for my ignorance. I don't know how to include information that would satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for "notability".

According to the guidelines for articles about musicians, the subject of the article must have been written about in major publications, had tour schedules posted, have published several recordings on notable independent labels, etc. The band has achieved all three of those requrements, and I've made mention of these facts in the article.

I'd appreciate it if you could take the time to explain what more needs to be done to make the article worthy of publishing.

Thanks,

Aaron

I've raised the matter with the administrator who deleted it. — Tivedshambo _(t/c) 16:47, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Akimbo" deletion

It had been deleted a couple of times before as looking like a typical NN band article and at first glance, that's what it looked like to me. No wikis, "Myspace" tone, etc. Upon looking at it again, there is some notability established further down the article. I was doing a lot of NPP last night and this one may have gotten by me. I'll fix it. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:53, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sorting that. — Tivedshambo _(t/c) 18:54, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for handling my user permissions request!

Hey, just thought I would stop by and say thanks for handling my user permissions request. I really appreciate it. :D Iridescence talk • contrib 19:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bhaskarawheel.gif

[1] I had a username change. Can you delete it please? –Capricorn42 (talk) 13:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks –Capricorn42 (talk) 13:41, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So you did - I hadn't spotted that. Done. — Tivedshambo _(t/c) 13:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Jim Emery

Hi. What evidence of notability did you see in Jim Emery? I can't see it myself. The article has already been speedied once today for notability. andy (talk) 15:58, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CSD#A7 reads "An article about a real person... that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant." There is some evidence for notability here, in that it states he interviewed a notable person. This may well be insufficient to pass WP:N, but CSD A7 is "is a lower standard than notability." I suggest you consider taking this to WP:AfD instead. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 16:02, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Railways

Hello Tivedshambo - I am sorry to bother you, but can I ask you your opinion on something before I go raring off and again butt heads with user User:ŠJů? Said user has just "Seecat"ed a number of categories like Category:Railways by country / Category:Railways and subcats like Category:Railways in Germany. He has effectively "sneaked in" an inofficial move of the contents of these cats to "railway lines"/"railway lines by country".

And that after he just recently fought pretty bitterly with me to keep pre-eminent such categories like "Heritage railways" when all I wanted to do was place a concept category above them! Inconsistent of him to now try to remove "railways" cats, but then I sometimes I do wonder whether he appreciates the distinctions between the terms fully. I have done my own mistakes, but at least mine were (mostly) with fully open-for-discussion move proposals and merge proposals rather than this way through the back door.

Now apart from the fact that I believe such changes should be discussed, I am also asking whether that is something that we should support at all. A "railway" could be either a company OR a railway line. A "railway line" is a much more specific thing. By moving all the companies categories into the subcategories, I think we are lumping things incorrectly.

Sorry if this constant wrangling is frustrating you as much as me. But I wasn't going to go off after ŠJů without sounding off others this time. Ingolfson (talk) 06:26, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, the above all applies to Commons, didn't notice I had been redirected to your Wikipedia page. Ingolfson (talk) 06:43, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a message on his talk page - I see another user has already reverted the changes. I've also fixed my sig (a leftover from the days when I only visited Commons to upload) — Tivedshambo (t/c) 07:49, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suspect additions to Bow Street, Ceredigion

Dear Tivedshambo

Somebody has been very busy over the past day or so on the Bow Street, Ceredigion entry. Initially someone called Weblog00 put up some things about the Bryn-y-castell being a “gatehouse” and having an “accompanying coach house” claiming there were “deed of title records and archives held at the National Library of Wales”, all of which sounded rather odd to me, so I reverted this only to find it promptly resubmitted with the comment “There are archives at Nat Lib which indicate the age & use & deeds elsewahere”.

I then asked if a reference to this material could be added, whereby someone (presumably the same person) using the IP address 91.84.205.45 simply put “NLW & RCAHMS” and then claimed that “You should easily be able to view several old (eg; 15th cent) maps at NLW and RCAHMS”. I think it highly unlikely that I am going to find old maps from the 1400s which would show Bryn-y-castell, and further this individual seems to have confused the RCAHMW (The Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales) with the RCAHMS (The Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland)!!

This same individual has also now removed the comments on Cock and Hen Street and Thread Needle Street, even though these come from a published source, and says that “Having been raised in Bow Street I can't recall anyone using these name for any lane. The cited author discussed several issues with locals, include myself prior to publication”. I don’t know if it’s just me but all of this seems rather suspicious, and I wonder if we have someone here deliberately trying to undermine the authority of Wikipedia’s entries, or someone who genuinely thinks they know something but can not justify their beliefs? I wonder if you could look into things, as I lack the experience to directly challenge this particular contributor. Many thanks.

Regards

(Lepidus Magnus (talk) 10:48, 30 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Having seen the same earlier edits I have reverted. Regards, Badgernet ₪ 11:19, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for looking at this Badgernet. Like I say I can’t make out if we do have someone who is actually from the area but simply can’t back up their assertions with facts, or someone who is deliberately making things up? Either way a lot of it sounds rather odd to me, and as for Cock and Hen Street and Thread Needle Street - I don’t see any reason to doubt Eddie Jones on this, and last time I spoke to him he confirmed that these were what the lanes were known as locally. Perhaps it is merely a question of these names now dying out with the older generation, but others I have spoken to are also familiar with them, such as Lord Elystan Mogan (though he called it “Thread and Needle Street”). If there were any maps of the area going back to the 15th century that would be quite a find, but I don’t think there would be any and they would probably not be at the RCAHMW (let alone at the RCAHMS). If this individual can back up what they are saying then that would be really interesting, and could well add to the article, but I really don’t know if it is genuine or not. Maybe you and/or Tivedshambo could keep an eye on this one? Many thanks

Regards

(Lepidus Magnus (talk) 12:31, 30 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Looks like our friend is back questioning the content of the existing article and adding his own unsubstantiated remarks. I really can’t make out what’s going on here – there is evidence that Rhyd-y-castell pe-dates Bryn-y-castell. I have personally seen the map that was noted, and the references for which has now been deleted by this person. I also recall seeing rentals that clearly showed the name change from one to the other. All of this strikes me as very strange behaviour, but I don’t know if you’d call it vandalism?

Regards

(Lepidus Magnus (talk) 13:57, 30 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I'm inclined to assume good faith on this at present, as I don't know enough about the subject to assume otherwise. However, there is quite a bit of original research involved here. I'll leave some comments on the talk page later. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 15:14, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I too would like to believe we are merely dealing with someone who thinks they know what they are talking about, but who simply cannot give actual references to back up their beliefs. If it is vandalism it is quite sophisticated – claiming to be from the area and being acquainted with one of the cited authors (but at the same time deleting the reference to that author’s work?), as well as adding comments that cannot be quickly substantiated or refuted. It is also odd that they keep jumping to change different aspects of the article, and making wild claims about deeds at the NLW and 15th century maps at the RCAHMS! They certainly seem persistent is putting up their views, I just hope that they are genuine. Anyway, like I said before given my lack of experience I’d be grateful if you’d keep an eye on things.

Best regards

(Lepidus Magnus (talk) 16:58, 30 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Dear Tivedshambo

Thank you for putting up something on the discussion page for this article. I have also now made an appeal to Weblog00/91.84.205.45 there to help by referencing his comments. I see you think he has actually been to the NLW, if that is so then he should be able to specify his sources. But the fact he seems to have confused the RCAHMS and the RCAHMW suggest to me that he is merely presuming the existence of material; such as 15th century maps of the area. If he can add to our knowledge of the history of the area then that would be good, but I’m afraid he is simply deleting things because he has no actual knowledge of them himself. Whilst I cannot personally counter his assertions about Cwmsymlog, Iwan Wmffre would not appear to agree with them. No doubt we will see what his reaction will be, but I just hope he doesn’t keep deleting things because he is merely unaware of something.

Regards

(Lepidus Magnus (talk) 13:43, 31 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

WIlliam_Thomas_(activist)

Curious why this article was deleted. Thomas is rather well known. He appeared in a movie and in a Tom Clancy novel, as well.

206.51.197.11 (talk) 22:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)D[reply]

I deleted it as an uncontested proposed deletion. There was little evidence of notability in the article, which didn't mention any movie or novel connections. if you think you add the notability requirements, let me know and I'll restore the article for you. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 22:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Derived page

Oooppps!!! I didn't realise I'd done that. I was trying to create a similar template on another Wiki to tag articles that have been copied and/or modified from en.wiki to comply with the GFDL rules. I didn't realise I was back in English Wiki - it was a genuine mistake. But it does explain why I thought I'd lost my changes and had to re-enter them! Thanks for picking up my mistake and correcting it! And thanks for all the other work you've done on my Wiki articles. Bermicourt (talk) 14:12, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I'll delete the resulting shortcut as an orphaned sub-page. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 14:17, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor's displeasure with my crop of his PD pic

Can you offer your thoughts on this matter? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:01, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

North Woolwich Old Station Museum.

It is closed - I phoned them. See my talk page... Gordo (talk) 15:06, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the delete of my subpage. --♪♫The New Mikemoral^talk_contribs 23:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yorkshire Museum of Farming Logo (190x200px).gif

Please delete the above image that I uploaded, as it has been replaced by a png version there is no need to keep it. :) Richard Harvey (talk) 17:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Tivedshambo (t/c) 17:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Changes made by SmackBot

Hi, thanks for your message, SmackBot makes a number of changes that are available to all WP:AWB bots - in general these provide a number of non-controversial minor improvements.

The issue you raise is related to these, and has already been fixed by the developers of WP:AWB.
Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 16:43 25 March 2009 (UTC).

Epileptic Gaming Wiki

Hey, I'd just like to know your reasoning for deleting the Epileptic Gaming page

I second that. Why was this deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.241.142.26 (talk) 00:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, can I have a good explanation for why this was deleted?

I demand an appeal for this wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.16.134.118 (talk) 00:44, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Epileptic Gaming — Tivedshambo (t/c) 05:23, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK so those were the reasons that the article originally posted in 2007 was deleted. This was a total remake of that article, had far more sources and was far more in-depth than the previous one, and yet it was still deleted? What more did it need? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.112.119 (talk) 16:41, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have another look at the article, comparing it with the original version, and get back to you... — Tivedshambo (t/c) 16:47, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've had a look and I agree with your appeal that it is significantly different to the original version, so it doesn't meet the speedy criteria WP:CSD#G4. I'm also slightly concerned that the user who nominated it for speedy deletion has made no other edits. I will therefore restore the article. However, I'll have a word with the original deleting admin, to get their second opinion. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 18:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further to the above - I've just had it pointed out to me that the AfD mentioned above was from 2007, and not a couple of weeks ago as I'd originally assumed. My fault - sorry for the inconvenience! — Tivedshambo (t/c) 21:45, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cut & Paste Move of Newmarket and Chesterford Railway

What have you done?

With another editor we have worked on grouping together many articles about this line, added references, we have put together a route map diagram, researched the stations, my collaborator (meant in the best sense) has grouped together the Newmarket stations, in short, we are trying to pull this all together, we have put in links on related articles, checked links, sourced and added new references. When I made this move I considered it carefully; I checked the links and because one was a redirect to another, and there were not many links to either, decided this was the easiest way to go.

Please tell me you have not destroyed our good work. Your (I assume automated) message on my talk page sounds a little sinister that you have "fixed the problem". That is what we have been working on all night together. SimonTrew (talk) 05:43, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Phew I see what you've done now, moved the history. Thanks for that. I must admit I hadn't thought of that, which is a bit stupid since deliberately earlier in the day we moved (copied) out of user talk into article talk once it became clear it was better placed there. So, thanks, I'm glad nothing's lost. You scared me for a minute. SimonTrew (talk) 05:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - sorry if the standard message seemed a bit bitey. I'll have a look at the template page and see if I can get it toned down a bit. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 06:28, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirection needed

Please redirect

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Route_66_song

To

(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Route_66_(song)

For some reason, the URL cannot be copied properly with european character sets, and we got the (1) instead, which has no content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.121.44.57 (talk) 21:34, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done - the trick is that redirects are internal links, not external links, so the code should read

#REDIRECT [[Route 66 (song)]]

See WP:REDIRECT for more information — Tivedshambo (t/c) 22:38, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Randy Norman

Hi there. Could you please outline to me why you think this article met A7? I was just editing to decline it when I realized you deleted it so I wondered why you think the sources in the article where not enough to fail A7. Regards So Why 20:02, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I felt there was no indication in the article itself that led to any evidence of notability - all it said was that he does his job, and who he's worked for. However feel free to revert if you think there's something in it worth salvaging. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 20:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would have thought that being mentioned here would be enough to indicate that he might be important or significant? So Why 20:17, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It says he's a recruiting director - that to my mind is just a job title. However I admit it's not my field of expertise. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 22:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops:FPCresult template

Thank you for implementing the category. However, I forgot to place a slash on the second <includeonly> tag. It should read </includeonly>. Can you fix that? Thanks, Zoo Fari 21:32, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should have spotted that myself - fixed now. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 21:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you much! Zoo Fari 21:42, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Bhadra River article.

Hi,

The below article was deleted with the following note.

Badhra River From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This page has been deleted. The deletion log for the page is provided below for reference.

Log removed due to spam blacklist - see [2]

But we own the website gdptemples.com and my email id is admin@gdptemples.com so there should not be any copyright issue for the articel. can you please undelete the same.

Thanks and Regards, Rajeev Hegde Secretary

For Sri Sharadha Industrialist Association, GDP Temples, Kalluru Mandali, Shimoga. 59.178.204.88 (talk) 06:40, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - your webpage states All rights reserved. Wikipedia requires that all content is freely available under the licence GFDL 1.2 or any later versions. This means that it can may be used on other websites as well, including commercially. If this is acceptable, could you consider changing the text at the bottom of that page, to release it as GFDL, or alternatively as public domain. Note that there may be other concerns to be addressed about the suitability of including the page on Wikipedia - for example conflict of interest and notability. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 07:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:DeLaughterDO

Hi there,

i notice that also placed a warning template on this users page for blanking out the page where i'd requested administrator intervention against him for removal of content! I was hoping for some help from the administrators on this, as he has gone through a number of articles i'm involved with, and others, and gone for mass removal of content, much of it cited, without explanation. I don't want to keep reverting in case i call foul of 3RR - do you have any advice or are you able to put a temporary block on the user? OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 08:56, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to think this is a good faith content dispute, rather than deliberate vandalism. The blanking of the vandlaism report is unwarranted, but could be duw to lack of knowledge. I suggest discussing the issue on the article's talk page. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 09:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your opinion. Would you just have a quick look at the revision history of emergency medical services as an example, if you have the time, as i think thats a good example of what looks to be simple vandalism (especially as his edit history says 'recategorisation', which is about the only section he hasn't changed!). If you still think this is good faith, then i'll happily take your opinion and keep trying to work through it, but he's not being very open to discussion - his talk page comment was (and i'm paraphrasing, but not much) 'i'm a doctor, and i know more about this than anyone else). OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 09:56, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've given them a short term block. Still trying to aassume good faith, but as they are repeatedly removing content from other similar articles as well, I'm beginning to wonder. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 10:16, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm grateful for your time in looking at this, and i can see why you want to assume good faith (of course in line with wikipedia policy). Do you think it's appropriate for me to restore the content from the affected articles? I'm thinking especially those i've reverted twice already, as i don't want to be in breach of 3RR. I am a little confused by this user, as their edit history is very short, but I didn't tell him (and i don't think there was a bot notification either) of his listing at the administrator page - he just knew to look there, which makes me suspicious (maybe its my overaactive imagination!). Thanks for your time OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 10:21, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

3RR Allows you to revert up to three times, it's the fourth time you need to worry about. Reverting vandalism does not count as a breach of 3RR anyway. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 10:27, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help - i was concerned in case i was mistaken and this was genuine content dispute rather than vandalism. However, with the ongoing sockpuppet issue, which i believe you've contributed to, these do seem to be bad faith edits after all. Thanks for your help OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 12:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hornby merge proposal

Hi Tivedshambo, I support your proposal. Not only for the reasons you mention, but also because Hornby's website says the company used to be called Hornby Railways and now "Hornby Group Plc", so that's the correct name (at least, the "previous" one!). Cheers, DPdH (talk) 05:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Block templates

Hey there! Just wondered if you you realised that if you pipe |sig=yes at the end of the template your signature will be included within the template rather than having to add it on after, so {{subst:uw-block1|time=whatever|sig=yes}}. Personally, I think it looks tidier, but it's not a big thing! --Ged UK 09:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't know that one - thanks! — Tivedshambo (t/c) 09:21, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NP :) --Ged UK 09:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you very much for archiving my talk page, Tivedshambo, you've been a great help! --Scoobycentric (talk) 07:36, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

btw i just noticed that you added different info into that archive that you created for me, which is understandable because i tried to make a subpage for my old discussions and therefore i typed archive:1 which re-directed all of my info to an allready existing archive page. My intention was to create a seperate subpage and add the current discussions of my talkpage in the archive, the current material is completely unrelated to me. --Scoobycentric (talk) 07:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for taking action in blocking My Bot. Sorry for the inconvenience. alphachimp 20:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for fixing the translation template on the Virunum and Teurnia talkpages. So simple and yet... Anyway, there'll be never an end for my 'life-long learning' -- Marschner (talk) 11:54, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem ;-) — Tivedshambo (t/c) 11:59, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 14 TFA

It looks like Raul ended up scheduling my article, street newspaper, instead of Talyllyn Railway. Sorry about that—since mine had some wiggle room, I had kind of hoped that the Railway article would get May 14 and mine could be bumped to the 15th or 16th. If you think he'd be willing to remove one of the queued items from the 15th and 16th, you're welcome to ask him if he could move my article back a day or two and replace it with yours (although it looks like there's only about a 10-hour window to get that done); otherwise, best of luck in getting yours featured on another day. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 13:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's unlikely to change now, as Raul's scheduled a couple of weeks ahead (including another UK railway article), and he states he doesn't like changing the queue. Not to worry - there are other dates I can request, and I'll get the one-year point soon. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 14:18, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Heritage Railway

The List of British heritage and private railways is irrelevant to heritage railways outside of Great Britain. Please see my remarks at Template talk:Infobox Heritage Railway#Adapt this infobox. Peter Horn 00:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This post needed tweeking. Peter Horn 00:17, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More tweeking. Peter Horn 00:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, I put an additional comment under the same section in the template talk page. Peter Horn 01:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello once more, thanks a million for your help, see my comments at Template talk:Infobox Heritage Railway#Adapt this infobox. Peter Horn 15:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LAZER helmet article deleted

Hello Admin. Recently i created an article here about lazer helmets. and this has been deleted.

Please, after reviewing shoei, Schuberth, Suomy ... and if you really want to help me, tell me :

what makes the above articles notable?
are these pages based on companies' official website ONLY for refference? they didnt use any other sources, isnt?
what makes all the above articles more important than article i tried to create?

To make my article based on reliable sources, i tried to add infos from sharp.gov.uk , which site many other articles here in mainspace use as reference,which is an official goverment UK site! But before i complete it, even i have added an {halt} tag, article deleted!

As you can see, nobody has written about shoei, Schuberth, Suomy,showing that outside of itself and Wikipedia, people have written about it extensively, showing that both above articles and companies are NOT notable, but these articles are here!!! Isnt?

I could add refferences that my lazer_helmet article is about a notable company, many more reference than other helmet manufacturers i mentioned, but article deleted!

Or dont you think sharp.gov.uk , goverment UK organization is notable?

Or even Motorcycle_News? As and admin, you can better than me find out how many articles point to this newspaper as a refference! just see this lazer helmets - MCN about lazer helmets

Does the above articles have external sources like mine?

Furhtermore, when i search for "lazer", wikipedia seems not to work, and guide us to use "laser" instead..Seems not to understand difference betweem 2 words, obvious cause there isnt such an article in its database, do you agree?

Please kindly after all of what i mentioned, if you still think article is about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subjectact, act in a way you think is most fair. Thanks. (talk) 15:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After reviewing, I've restored the article as it does make some claim of notability. However, it does still require independent references (a brief mention in MCN is not enough I'm afraid), and I've tagged it as such. I've also tagged the other article you mention in the same way. I've added a link from the Lazer disambiguation page to make it easier to find. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 17:11, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Everything perfect admin! I ll add what asked the following 3 days when i have more time. Thanks Tivedshambo! :) Psikxas (talk) 00:17, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism by a user you previously blocked

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/218.186.12.230 The user with the IP address 218.186.12.230 has repeatedly vandalized. He seems to be targeting someone. Please take care of this problem. - Cyborg Ninja 19:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pattern seems to be different to before, so I'll have to assume good faith and take the view that it may be a different user. I've warned them, and will monitor their edits. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 20:01, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They're not attacking anyhone in particular right now (looks at the dates more closely), but they vandalized pages all the time before that spat of harassment. - Cyborg Ninja 20:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Malvern station

Hi Voice of Clam/Archives/2009! An article you have been involved with has been tagged by its parent project as being in need of a little attention or further development. If you can help with these minor issues please see talk:Great Malvern railway station--Kudpung (talk) 14:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Reference this, thanks! That's exactly what I was looking for, though I can no longer remember why. :) I'm sure I'll have use for it in the future. Cheers! //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 16:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re File:Eritrean Railway - Tivedshambo 2008-11-04-edit1.jpg

Hey, yeah, no problem with me. As far as I'm concerned it's your photo, regardless of any edits I may have done, so in my books you can license it as you wish. Cheers, --jjron (talk) 12:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Boulton pix

Thanks for the offer. I will give it some thought. What the article needs most, I think, are pictures of stuff Boulton made, other than the coins and the steam engine. However, museums tend to look askance at taking photos of their exhibits. I'd be glad for any ideas though.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:37, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Independent Order of Vikings

Uh, sorry, but why exactly do you feel reluctant to speedy delete this? Its eligible under A7, and there aren't any sources to improve the article. Finger z 07:06, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If this was a new article, I'd have deleted it. But it's been around for six years (longer than most articles on Wikipedia), presumably from a time when the notability requirements weren't as stringent as they are now, and that makes me reluctant to delete it without at least some discussion. It's a borderline case, and other admins may have made an alternative decision, but my view is to be a little more lenient for cases of "grandfather rights". If it's been around for that length of time, another week won't hurt. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 07:15, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additional, if it makes you feel better, I don't think it was a bad call, and technically you're correct about it meeting A7. I see you're looking at admin coaching, so this disclaimer may help you if anyone queries any incorrect CSD nominations. Good luck! — Tivedshambo (t/c) 07:28, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've got no problem prodding it. It's not hurting the project, but I just don't see it being improved into anything useful to visitors. If the prod gives someone else time to find a source, then I suppose it's worth it. Thanks for the good luck wishes, Finger z 07:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'll afd it, there's obviously better chances for discussion there.Finger z 07:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Chrisbot

Yes I think that's a very good idea. I've had two people ask before so I think I'll start doing that now. Thanks. Chris DHDR 12:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ideate

I don't think you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ideate correctly. On Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2009 July 1, the article name appears outside the closed discussion. -WarthogDemon 23:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for spotting that - my fault. Fixed. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 05:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: CONT icons in other projects

Yes that has been taken into account; most wikis have few enough links that they can be removed by hand but at ca.wp, the only other place where the CONT icons have caught on, Crisbot is going thru the normal approval process. Chris DHDR 15:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pigion

Hi there. Your doing a good job looking after the Pigion on Wicipedia. One suggestion (after reading the pry lludw article - maybe we could select articles which dont have red links. Nearly every single one in some of them are non-existent links, which is really bad pr for Widci. Just a thought. Thanks again... a diolch. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 21:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - thanks for your comments. I think you're getting muddled between Pigion and Erthyglau newydd (new pages), which is generally updated by Deb. I wouldn't put pryf lludw on the main page as an article in it's current state - as you state it has a lot of red links, and it really isn't long enough. Ideally, I'd only put featured articles up front, but there are only two at present, and people will soon get tired of reading about slate and Tom Pryce! — Tivedshambo (t/c) 06:53, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talyllyn Railway

Hi,

Just wondering why you undid my changes adding youtube links to the Talyllyn railways page? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talyllyn_Railway) These were made with permission of the owners and I have just received permission to link a few more.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinjifuller (talk • contribs) 17:51, 27 July 2009

See the comments I left on the article's talk page — Tivedshambo (t/c) 06:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Northamptonshire

Hi Voice of Clam/Archives/2009! A Top Priority article you have been involved with has many issues and urgently needs improving. If you can help with these issues please see Talk:Northamptonshire, address the different points if you can, and leave any comments there. (This is a generic message. if it has been placed on your talk page inadvertantly, please ignore it.) --Kudpung --Kudpung (talk) 23:35, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eritrean railway photo

Hello I am an author from England, currently producing a historical railway atlas of Africa. I am looking for several suitable photographs, and wondered if I could use the wonderful photograph of steam loco with a single coach on the viaduct. I am looking to use this either on the book's front cover or on the first page. Hope you can help! Yours faithfully Neil RobinsonNeilrobinson543 (talk) 07:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome to use the photograph for any purpose, including commercially, provided it is clearly attributed to me. For printed material, I would prefer this to use my real name. I've tried to email you with more information - let me know if you don't get it. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 12:01, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Biagota & translation template

I just recently find that article on english wiki and I realised that it is nothing than a translation of czech article. I saw in a history you removed translation template. When I looked at the elder version, in the list of templates bellow was translation template was as "Template:S-ttl" which sounds me strange. At first I thought it was used some old and now don't using template so I looked for another translate template (and there is my mistake I did not look at the name and only on the syntax) which I used there (the article is just a translation, i worked on the original). Few seconds later I find some bot move it to a discussion page (then I finaly realised I used the same template which was there before). To tell the truth, I really don't understand what it means, why it was moved (by bot or you) to a discussion page (what meaning it has there)? Why it is deprecated template? And which one is the right one?
I am asking you, because you did year ago the same thing like that bot and I don't want to use discussion-page of some bot.
--Niusereset (talk) 15:35, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The {{translated page}} template should only be used on the talk page of articles, not on the articles themselves. Wikipedia cannot use itself as a reference. This was agreed during the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 December 11#Template:Translated. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 15:45, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I did not know that. On czech wiki it is normaly used on the article page and it is consideret as fairness to put it there. It is not mentioned as a reference but as info about the fact, that article is just a translation from other wiki. Czech wiki endeavour to not by just translation and by this is stated this article is not exactly what we want, what cs-wiki is about.
Thanks for explanation.
--Niusereset (talk) 16:25, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks.--VMAsNYC (talk) 19:57, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Troublesome user

Hi Tivedshambo, and thanks for ridding us of user Cumshotseverywhere. Could I alert you to the fact that a user who looks like a dead-ringer for that person has just popped up at the same article with a different, if less offensive name. The entry does contain worrying aspects ("Jew me,").

Would you mind keeping an eye on this issue? Thanks so much. TONY (talk) 14:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Already blocked ([3]) - but let me know if you spot similar vandalism. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 14:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! TONY (talk) 14:37, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POTD notification

Hi Tivedshambo,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Eritrean Railway - Tivedshambo 2008-11-04-edit1.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on September 15, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-09-15. howcheng {chat} 06:11, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've left a note for Jjron, as he did the digital tweaking necessary to bring this up to FP standard. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 07:22, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --jjron (talk) 07:35, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you

thank you for unblockeing me--Dcheagle (talk) 19:49, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy Bolwell

Hi,

I'd like to ask for some friendly advice. I have only recently happened upon the above user, through a series of overlinks made to the 'Kettering' article recently. Having reviewed Mr. Bolwell's talk page, it appears that this is not the first time this issue has come up, and I notice that you were embroiled in it previously. You therefore seemed like a good port of call for advice.

I have asked Mr Bolwell to stop overlinking (or at least have been baffled by why it continues), and I have had no real reply. Indeed, there seems to have been a spree of overlinking yesterday, including circular links (obsessive-compulsive personality disorder), and many other links which are of questionable value to say the least.

I don't want it to look like he's being bullied by me or anyone else (an accusation which seems to have been previously leveled against people), but I do feel this frantic overlinking is detrimental to the articles in question, and Mr Bolwell shows little sign of stopping. Of course, there are far worse things he could be doing, and I'm quite sure that his intentions are quite noble, but it does seem to be getting out of hand a little (if yesterday is anything to go by).

Your advice would be appreciated.

Cheers,

Fortnum (talk) 12:15, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest raising this at WP:ANI, to gain the general consensus of opinion from administrators. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 21:40, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help with the HTTP vandal

Is it best to keep undoing vandalism like that, and leaving messages on their talk page or just leave it and come back later to tidy up? --Alchemist Jack (talk) 12:13, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be inclined to revert and leave standard messages, then if they continue to vandalise they can be reported and blocked. If you leave it, they may go away with the impression they can get away with it, and go on to vandalise other pages. I've semi-protected the template for a couple of weeks - if vandalism returns after this let me know or request further protection at WP:RFPP. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 12:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And should I increase the warning level each time? --Alchemist Jack (talk) 12:30, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely. If the vandalism is particulatly blatant or offensive, you can go direct to a final warning with {{subst:uw-v4im}}. If they continue to vandalise after this, report it at WP:AIV. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 12:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion submissions

Thanks for pointing that out. Here's the place: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Opinion.--ragesoss (talk) 21:36, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About that IP user you just blocked...

I went to probe a bit further and noticed that User:66.76.66.195's hostname:vandal.van.sprnet.org, I wonder if this mean something? Correct me if I'm wrong. --Dave1185 (talk) 18:32, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the best person to ask. I use the internet, but don't claim to understand how it works. I don't trace IP's, I just block 'em :-) Seriously, you could try asking at WP:AN — Tivedshambo (t/c) 18:51, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, you could help me bring this matter up to the attention of them? IMO, your words carry more weight than mine. --Dave1185 (talk) 19:12, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done - see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Vandal hostname?. Please feel free to add your knowledge to the discussion. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 19:31, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and I've done the rest. --Dave1185 (talk) 20:51, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Polanski Article

There is a potentially serious problem with the Polanski article. It appears that a large section was lifted from the Honolulu Sun Times without correctly attributing it. Further, the two links that I checked do not reflect to the text, and the HST article appears to be the source of the information for many of the "current" links. I am concerned that the failure to attribute might actually cause Wiki harm. Please check the link I posted (and if I screwed that up, my apologies. I am a newbie). In fifteen minutes of fact checking, three significant errors have been identified, two of which concern the article itself, the other with erroneous information passed along in Talk.Oberonfitch (talk) 01:09, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 05:34, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

determining IP address of logged in users

Hello, and thanks for unblocking us here at the Bentley School. How do I determine what IP address a register user was connected to when he/she made a particular edit? History pages only show IP address for anonymous users. Thanks. Fredwerner (talk) 22:33, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

fyi - we're trying to determine whether the vandalism that resulted in our IP address being blocked was actually done on campus or by someone who was careless about sharing his login info with people off campus.Fredwerner (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC).[reply]

The simple answer is that you can't tell the IP of a registered user. This is hidden for privacy reasons. You could try requesting a CheckUser investigation, but I'm not sure if this is within their scope or not. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 05:36, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many Thanks!

Thanks for reverting the latest attack on my user talk page. Highly appreciate it!! Jusda fax 04:16, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Always happy to help :-) — Tivedshambo (t/c) 05:30, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Snowdude1492 appealed, please unblock.

Hello, again. Thanks for the IP exemption, but I'd really like to see the whole IP block removed, as well as the indefinite block on user:Snowdude1492. He has appealed his block, but no one has replied yet. On his contribs page, he's only edited on page other than his own user page: Oxyhydrogen. He basically tried to insert the same material several times. The first time, he cited a youtube video of a newscast. A bot undid that, and I explained to him why youtube videos aren't reliable sources. So he found a legitimate reliable source for the same info, re-inserted the text with the legit source, and THAT edit was tagged as vandalism by User:Arthur Rubin, who failed to AGF. That tag seems completely unjustified, as the edit was adding substantive, relevant, appropriate material, and properly citing a legitimate reliable source.

Please remove the blocks. Thanks.Fredwerner (talk) 19:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see the block has already been overturned. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 20:59, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User Airtran371

Hey - I saw that you blocked this user. His apparent socks AirTran660 and Editor800 have been up to the same thing. Could you take a look? Thanks. Jasepl (talk) 20:44, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest raising this at WP:SPI or WP:ANI - sorry, but I won't have a chance to look at it till tomorrow night at least. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 21:11, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User Prasanth4wiki (talk) 12:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Hiii- I am creating a page eyches about my company. I saw many companies have created their information pages on wikipedia. Please don't remove this page eyches--Prasanth4wiki (talk) 12:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the article does not meet out notability guidelines, and is written like an advertisement. Also, you appear to have a conflict of interest with the subject, which is very strongly discouraged. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 14:16, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Block Appeal

Thanks. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 16:45, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Thank you for granting my request. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 11:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Geva Alon post

Hi I wanted to know why you removed the Geva Alon post and if its ok if I would start a new one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.173.25.86 (talk) 15:32, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted it [4] as it was a copyright violation. You're free to create a new article in your own words, but be sure to explain why the subject is notable. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 18:05, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

I would very much appreciate if you would grant me rollback permission. I had thought about putting a new request in, but had put it off. Thanks! $Thatguyflint$ ^{Talk to me!} 16:46, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Tivedshambo (t/c) 17:10, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollbacker permission

You have to ask locally for this permission, since it is not active at the moment, you have the Rollback feature since you're in the administrator group. Please confirm again at meta RfP page, when and if you're ready to have your sysop bit removed. Thank you, M/ (talk) 22:43, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed on Meta. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 23:10, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have granted you rollback after seeing your post on meta. Cheers, NW (Talk) 23:31, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Heritage Railway

Can you add the following into Template:Infobox Heritage Railway: "Logo", "caption_logo" and "caption_map"? Peter Horn User talk 00:12, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Useful for the Peak Rail article. Peter Horn User talk 02:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to request it on the template's talk page - use {{editprotected}}, plus a detailed description of the change you require. I've recently relinquished my admin status to concentrate on article writing for a while, so I cannot make this change myself. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 06:39, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I posted Template talk:Infobox heritage railway#Helston Railway Preservation Company Peter Horn User talk 21:36, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

indie rock bands

Hey, a while ago you left me a message on my talk page about deleting a redirect page for List of indie rock bands. I don't remember what happened, but based on what you said, it sounds like I was acting nonsensically. Thanks! :P Mac Davis (talk) 18:39, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]