User talk:Pigsonthewing/Archive 31

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Pigsonthewing. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Op-ed: Ian Rose discusses article assessments

Hi Andy,

In the process of a long-overdue clearout of our table-of-contents templates, I quickly cooked up {{horizontaltoc}} to replace a lot of hard-coded compact TOCs. The code is trivial, but I reckon some additions to the site CSS would make it even better. something like

.hlist .tocnumber {
  display: none
}

for starters; horizontal TOCs typically don't use numbers. Any thoughts, or ideas on who else to ping? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 14:48, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Users have the option to disable tocnumbers in their preferences. Are you sure you want negate that option? — Edokter (talk) — 15:11, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Have a look at the output of {{horizontaltoc}}: the numbers have a tendency to obfuscate the actual content. I'm not sure it's the right approach, but it's an approach that has parity with {{compactTOC}}'s output and that of the templates I hope to replace with it. I'm open to other suggestions. (While you're here: I take it the reason that the TOC emits numbers within an unordered list by means of spans is to do with that preference option? The most elegant way would seem to be just using an ordered list.) Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 15:24, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, TOC uses unordered lists and just inserts the numbers as spans (according to user preference). This can only be changed in core. As for {{compactTOC}}, they only show single characters and does not use a generated TOC, so hiding the numbers is appropriate there. But for 'regular' horizontal TOCs, I think the numbers are appropriate and should follow user preference. — Edokter (talk) — 16:46, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

That needs separately, to be fixed; they're clearly ordered lists. The numbers could be suppressed by CSS based on user preference. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:37, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for asking; I see you've already found out who to talk to. Not sure I can add anything, but I'll take a longer look later. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:37, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I was just wondering if you think the template {{SSSI}} you created still serves a useful purpose? Seeing as it has now been superseded by {{Infobox SSSI}} in terms of displaying the link and isn't currently being used. Cheers, Zangar (talk) 17:19, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I've no problem with it being deleted. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits

No worries, would you be able to put a {{db-g7}} speedy deletion request on the page, to avoid the need for an unnecessary discussion, as it doesn't really fit any other speedy criteria? Thanks, Zangar (talk) 12:34, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

My pleasure; done Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:46, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Zangar (talk) 15:41, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:List of West Midlands railway stations borked.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. MGA73 (talk) 22:11, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Bernard Tucker Medallists, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Dilys Breese Medallists, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:03, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Percussion#Church bells. I have raised some points there. In particular, we'd like to know the meaning of bells hung and tenor bell.

Another non-percussion question... should similar parameters be added for pipe organs? Say the number of pipe organs, and the installation date and sizes (pipes, ranks) of the main organ in current use? Andrewa (talk) 18:33, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Regarding your bell questions; I have no idea, I made the edit at the request of another editor. I suggest you ask on the infobox's talk page. I'd support the addition of parameters for organs, but, again, you'd need to discuss the specifics there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Done. Thanks again! Andrewa (talk) 23:07, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Andy, I didn't intend to revert the whole thing. I was working on putting it back and building off of it when you posted earlier. The organization and navigability of the subsection of the template is much improved thanks to you. Thank you very much for your help there! CrazyPaco (talk) 23:48, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Andy, you giessed right Victuallers (talk) 07:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your copyediting help at the new article I created, François-Eudes Chanfrault. Much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 18:44, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Really appreciate the help. Didn't create it myself as I worried about it getting AfDed, as I have a bit of a bad track record with templates getting that. :( --LauraHale (talk) 20:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the use of language templates, I removed a number of them. I can see no instructions regarding use of that template that say we have to use it when it comes to place names and personal names. Text in non-English languages I understand should have this template, but not names. Just to add to it, many of the places the lang|no template was used it was used on Sami (not Norwegian) names and Danish (not Norwegian) text. I see the point of the template when it comes to "Ny Vise om Ole Pedersen Høilands sidste mærkelige Undvigelse fra Agerhuus Fæstning Natten til den 17de September 1839" (which is Danish, even though it's written in Norway, by Norwegians, about a Norwegian), but not when it comes to Sogndalsfjøra (a Norwegian place name). What's your view on the use of the template in regards to names? Manxruler (talk) 01:59, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Using the template on a name like "Sogndalsfjøra" ensures that it will be recognised as a Norwegian word by software which reads our content, for example to blind people. When treated as English (in the absence of the template) such software will have no guide as to how to pronounce it, and its rules for English will cause it to fail to do so correctly. You can hear this effect clearly if you paste the name into http://translate.google.com/ and play first the Norwegian, then the English versions. As for Sami and Danish text, you will note that I didn't add the templates, because I have no knowledge of such languages, but asked for someone else, with such knowledge, to do so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:01, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I see. You're absolutely right that Sogndalsfjøra sounds completely different when treated as a Norwegian or English word. Thank you for the information. Manxruler (talk) 23:13, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

My pleasure. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:20, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Corby Bridge, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Carlisle and Red sandstone (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Andy, regarding your contributions at Template talk:Infobox Townlands and related threads at Tfd and other infobox templates: Please treat other editors with more respect. As usual, there is a sound rationale to your underlying POV, but you do yourself no favours by presenting it in such an antagonistic way. I have no connection with the other editors, but it seems obviously discourteous (I assume not calculated) not to have notified Mabuska when you proposed the deletion of a template which Mabuska had created and put some effort into. Similarly, your partial quoting of the Tfd summary was bound to be inflammatory.

If you had from the outset instead made constructive suggestions on the template talk page, or Mabuska's talk page, I am sure that the two of you would quickly have reached consensus, or would at least have respected each other's point of view. None of us own any pages, but it is sensible to be tactful when suggesting major changes or deletions that would undo others' hard work. You are clearly more familiar with Wikipedia syntax and policies than Mabuska, which makes it even more unreasonable for you not to extend courtesy to someone evidently keen to learn and improve enwiki.

Elsewhere, the highways/KML discussions were almost derailed by your flamewars with Floydian. I think you both acted provocatively, but that is all the more reason for you to rise above provocation and put your knowledge and experience to good use by making constructive proposals instead of focusing on the behaviour of others (forgive my hypocrisy in criticising you, but I'm writing this here to be as constructive as possible and to avoid sidetracking discussions on template talkpages).

Of course there are formal resolution processes such as Tfd, but even these are made tedious or unpleasant for all involved if experienced good-faith editors do use good judgement in summarising and interpreting fairly and in applying policies with commonsense and sensitivity to the feelings of others.

I write as someone who at times agrees with your POV and at times disagrees with it; either way, I've seen discussions rapidly descend into ad hominem comments (and even if you perceive that others initiated these, there is no need to respond the same way). Please don't be your own worst enemy.

With best wishes

— Richardguk (talk) 17:53, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I suggest you look at the false accusations made in both of the cases you discuss. It's not me making them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:18, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. I'm sorry to be making negative comments here, but I hope you can see that they are well intentioned.

I haven't said that you made false accusations. But there is a massive grey area between an outright lie and a balanced statement. Your selective quotation of the Tfd outcome was provocative, and it ought to have been obvious that particular care needs to be taken when a discussion is summarised by one of its protagonists.

Nor have I implied that others are entirely blameless. But stooping to respond in kind is a certain route to mutually-assured destruction. You could have ignored Floydian's comments and focused on the practical issues with templating and KML. If you disagree with an editor's approach, set out a specific alternative and demonstrate it if they remain unclear as to how it might be implemented (I asked twice for a constructive demonstration of your alternative to the townlands template, and in the end it was Frietjes not you who attempted it).

You will win more support through being gracious than through telling opponents what obscure debating rules they are breaking. Being civil, and taking account of the feelings of other editors, is much better for you and for them if you want to influence their views. Your talents could be wielded more effectively to benefit enwiki and with much less stress for all.

— Richardguk (talk) 19:38, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

You apparently have no idea of what's gone before; I have been setting out specific alternatives to Floyidan's approach and demonstrating their benefits for literally many months. I refute your accusation that what you call "selective" quotation was provocative. You will note that I offered to provide a demonstration of my alternative to the townlands template (your supposed second request, though the first time you asked "please illustrate how you would broadly replicate the information conveyed" to which I replied with a text explanation), but indicated that I did not have time to do so immediately; and the TfD was closed (prematurely in my view, though that's another matter) before I had chance to do so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Andy, starting to push the Charles Rolls challenge - lots of adverts on non enlish wikis. We should have quite a few Monmouth DYKs on the front page tomorrow.! Could you sign up here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/MonmouthpediA/Charles_Rolls_Challenge/Points if only to encourage others :-) Victuallers (talk) 15:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I've made a start, but am not sure how you want to score the kind of things I've been doing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:10, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikignomes don't win! :-) Victuallers (talk) 17:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

On 1 March 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article St Peter's Church, Dixton, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that although St Peter's Church (pictured) in Monmouthshire is a Welsh church, in 1920 its congregation decided to join the Church of England? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/St Peter's Church, Dixton.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.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:52, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Would you review User:Gadget850/List TOC and comment? ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 11:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Pigsonthewing. You have new messages at Jeffwang's talk page.
Message added 12:45, 1 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

J (t) 12:45, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

We now have {{List TOC}}, it would be great if you could comment at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 March 1#Template:ColorTOC. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:34, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the news, I will make the Hungarian article soon. Üdv! - Orion 8 (talk) 16:24, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I want to use GeoGroup in an article and have been playing with it in my sandbox but cannot get it to work. Both Bing and Google show large scale maps and an error message. I can't figure out what I am doing wrong. Could you take a look please and see if you can help? Feel free to play in my sandbox:) Thanks. Derek Andrews (talk) 16:38, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

It is indeed doing something odd; though I can't fathom out why. I'd give it 24 hours in case it's a toolserver or caching glitch, then as on the template;s talk page Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:34, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not very good with templates, or indeed most wiki tools, so I'd be grateful if you could clarify what the deletion would mean for William Burges (architect), a page I am very interested in. Would it just mean moving the info., of which there's not a lot, into another template? Thanks and regards. KJP1 (talk) 18:31, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Simply, yes. I've made the change on that article; the only visible difference is a new label, "Notable work(s)" , on one field. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:43, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much. If anything, notable works is a somewhat better title. KJP1 (talk) 18:50, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Glad you like it; please make your views known at the TfD discussion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:10, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM – Volume II, Issue II, February 2012 Headlines USA report: GLAMcamp DC, Princeton Edit-a-Thon, new social media UK report: British Library seek Wikipedian in Residence; Black Country Museum Backstage Pass France report: Continuation of the GLAM projects, GLAM Conference in Belgrade Germany report: Cultural Partnerships coordinator for Germany Italy report: Wiki Loves Monuments, Gruppo Archeologico Ambrosiano and Wikipedian in Residence Course in Milan Czech Republic report: Second Czech GLAM meeting; Current state of Czech GLAM; Serbian Conference; Czech Republic to join Wiki Loves Monuments Netherlands report: The Teylers Challenge Australia and New Zealand report: Australian GLAM efforts: Sports, Libraries and other cultural institutions Israel report: GLAM:NLI Project Report, New GLAM-IL Collaborations, GLAM-IL Mailing List Africa report: Wikimedia Kenya and New Institutions Contributing to African Knowledge on Wikipedia Russia report: GLAM in Russia: RIA Novosti Sweden report: GLAM in Sweden; white paper starte Denmark report: Wikipedian-in-Residence at Nationalmuseet, Copenhagen India report: Collaboration with Crafts Museum Wiki Loves Monuments report: Wiki Loves Monuments: worldwide in 2012 Tool testing report: BaGLAMa now with timelines; Linkypedia is back; AmalGLAMate; Xmas bug; Toolserver problems Open Access report: Ten years "Open Access"; chameleons, bees, copyright Calendar: March's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Template:Smallcaps all has been nominated for merging with Template:Smallcaps. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. This template Template:Smallcaps all is effectively the same as Template:Sc, the merge debate of which you voted on last month. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 19:31, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Forever Statue of Liberty Stamp, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Las Vegas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

FYI, the script is telling you something [1]. Frietjes (talk) 20:45, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Good renaming of "Infobox bus transit" to "Infobox bus company". Much clearer title and describes the usage rather than being restricted only to transit services. It was overdue. Thanks Andy. Secondarywaltz (talk) 17:08, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

How do you feel about starting an essay explaining the benefits of merging similar infoboxes? I think it's gotten to the point where it would be better to point people at a proper essay on the subject rather than having to reiterate the reasons in every new TfD, as happened with WP:NENAN. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 14:50, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes; I was about to suggest the same thing! Perhaps in the form of a FAQ? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:40, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Here's a very rough start. Please boldly edit it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:31, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Great start. Cheers! Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 14:36, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I really love and like what you're doing at the moment, but just curious: can you stop nominating that many templates every day? XD It is getting hard to recheck this stuff and follow that many discussions. We have no deadline, yk. ;-) mabdul 03:54, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Like I saw that {{Infobox criminal}} was at TfD, but after the fact; sorry. Of course it should have been made in to a redirect. I recurring issue in this sort of discussion is that most editors don't have any idea of the issues under the hood. Perhaps this will help. In many cases, TfD should probably be skipped in favour of simply boldly editing the templates. Alarbus (talk) 05:29, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I do mean it when I say I am interested in your suggestions. I do more than enough featured content to know how important accessibility is. Unfortunately, Alarbus seems intent on disrupting things with a "my way or my way" attitude. I am hoping we can simply continue from the point of your input. Resolute 23:09, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Andy, nice biscuits here aren't there? Wonder when next coffee break is.Prunella pumpkin (talk) 11:14, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

This is something I had not thought of doing. LinsLadbroke (talk) 11:14, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

What a wonderful course! HelenHM (talk) 11:14, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

An interesting course Madbeen (talk) 11:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

great to have u here Michaeladane (talk) 11:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hiya Andy I'm enjoying this Mughes41 (talk) 11:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

This is a great way to learn Wikipedia. Mdowarks (talk) 11:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Andy, no idea if I'm doing this right! Can you check the citations I have put into the Southam's Cardall Collection page? I'm trying to make sure the content is verifiable. Many thanks for the excellent workshop today, Pam Prunella pumpkin (talk) 22:58, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

They're fine, and you're doing great. It would be good to have some additional references which are independent, third-party sources, such as newspapers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:17, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Henry Lilley Smith, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 45th Regiment (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:27, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't quite see how the comment about the template is relevent. Yes I said it's annoying to experienced editors but where was I challenging it? Besides, I think that the standing consensus cleared my name and I'm sure that those who discussed it keep the same views so I still think that this is Much Ado About Nothing. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:50, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Template:Infobox Youth Olympics. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Why you redirect? Because it is affected those parameters which not working properly. --180.183.138.71 (talk) 09:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

“Welcome?” Andy registered on 2003-10-16. Get real. Alarbus (talk) 10:22, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I popped by here to post pretty much that too! -- Trevj (talk) 21:28, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

It is worth noting that the complete lack of communication in the edit summaries did result in (yet another) mini edit war. This is something that could easily have been prevented with a simple edit summary of "Merged into Template:Infobox games. Resolute 22:22, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

My initial edit summary was "#REDIRECT Template:Infobox games". Not sure Why you describe that as a "complete lack of communication". The reverting edit summaries, on the other hand, were "rv blanking" (there was no blanking), "STOP!" and "Well merging the template has caused problems" (with no explanation as to what or where those problems were). Now that's a complete lack of communication. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:29, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I guess you missed the point of my edit to Wolves. Yes, Wolf (disambiguation) does disambiguate meanings of "Wolves". That has nothing to do, however, with whether there is a primary topic. Most people searching for "wolves" probably expect to find an article about the animal. There is a hatnote to help those searching for other meanings. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:58, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

No, I didn't miss your point; I just disagree with it. And there is no hatnote on Grey Wolf for "Wolves".Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:40, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, your edit summary misled me, since it didn't address WP:PRIMARYTOPIC at all. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 14:59, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Since you are working to improve templates here are some you might want to check out deleting Category:Universities and colleges infobox templates there are many universities that for some reason have created their own templates rather using the general Template:Infobox university or ones that have no purpose boxes Pwojdacz (talk) 01:49, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Unless it's not working (and I think it is) I think I'm done at the sandbox. If not, we'll be sure to work something out. Don't hesitate to use the sandbox. JIMp _talk·cont 15:39, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Was this move really necessary and beneficial to the project when it is not intended for the general postage stamps but only for rare or notable stamps? ww2censor (talk) 01:04, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 01:06, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the useless answer for an unjustified move. ww2censor (talk) 16:31, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for wasting my time. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:34, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Likewise, because, even though you have improved the template itself and I thank you for that, but you have made an unjustified and unnecessary template move with for good reason. ww2censor (talk) 23:08, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requested moves. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:12, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Your reply in unclear. What is that supposed to mean? Was this template move discussed at Wikipedia:Requested moves without any notice being given to the project that uses the template or are you suggesting that I should request a reversion of your unnecessary and unjustified move at that page. Why don't you just give a clear explanation rather than obtuse, terse replies? It would be significantly easier for both of us. ww2censor (talk) 23:23, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

For what reason is this infobox only intended for "rare" stamps? Why don't "common" stamps get an infobox? That sounds like an arbitrary and unnecessary distinction, one which Andy has helpfully eliminated. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 14:39, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

@Chris Because common stamps are not notable enough to have their own articles, they don't need their own template, while rare stamps are significantly notable and do have their own articles. I don't see one common stamp using the template nor do I ever see it being useful to an common stamps. Common stamps may be included in the general country articles, such as, Postage stamps of Ireland, Postage stamps and postal history of Great Britain or any of the many country article found in Category:Philately by country and its subcategories, and these stamps don't require an infobox template. The template is only useful for rare notable stamps which only goes to show that a "common stamp template" is entirely unnecessary and therefore the move was unjustified. ww2censor (talk) 16:02, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

This smacks of attempting to use technical measures (naming the infobox differently) to enforce social policy (only having articles on notable stamps). Not every person is notable, but we don't have an {{infobox famous person}}. I guess I'm just failing to understand why this is a problem at all: do you expect that there will now be a mad rush to add new articles on common stamps because the infobox was renamed? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 16:27, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments Chris but there is no attempt to "to enforce social policy" its just a practical use of a template for its normal and necessary use. As already mentioned the template has no use for common stamps and your example of notable people is spurious at best because all people articles can use a person template while only rare stamps will use of the template while common stamps are included in regular stamp articles. If you can suggest a use for the template for common stamps I am prepared to listen but I can't think of any. Can you?. If a stamp becomes notable for some reason, which is most often rarity, it will merit its own article and will then use the {{Infobox rare stamps}} template. ww2censor (talk) 05:40, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

What I'm asking is this: what problem has been created by this page move? Why is it essential to codify that this template be used only for "rare" stamps, where "rare" appears to be a subjective quality? The template appears to be perfectly adequate for any kind of stamp, and it is not at all clear why generalising it has a negative impact on the encyclopedia. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

"The template is only useful for rare notable stamps "; "The Penny Black is not a rare stamp". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:01, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Well ok, maybe the Penny Black could be termed notable but it is certainly not really common. The Penny Red could be termed common. However we have quite a problem with editors uploading non-free stamps to use in subject articles which fails WP:NFCC and I would hate to see a slippery slope develop if the newly named template started being used for such normal but possibly unfree stamps. Perhaps it would be better to rename the template {{Infobox notable stamps}} to define its use more accurately. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 19:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

This smacks of attempting to use technical measures (naming the infobox differently) to enforce social policy (only having articles on notable stamps). Not every person is notable, but we don't have an {{infobox famous person}}. Oh, wait, Chris already said that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:42, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

No social policy is intended and your argument about people templates is completely spurious and a red herring that just does not apply. All people who pass the notability threshold can use {{infobox person}} or one its subset templates, in their article which is why there is no {{infobox famous person}} but individual stamp articles are only created for stamps that are notable in some way, most often due to rarity, while common stamps can be included in the "Postage stamps and postal history of country" articles, so don't they require a template of their own but notable stamps do. But wait, I already said that. ww2censor (talk) 18:30, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

The fact that you've said it more than once doesn't make it true. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:38, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

But, it is true whether I tell you once or more but you just don't understand the issue involved especially when you keep trying to compare it to an entirely different and non-comparative type of situation. ww2censor (talk) 18:47, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

The fact that I - like Chris - don't agree with you does not mean that I cannot understand you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:55, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Infobox composer. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Infobox composer redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Magioladitis (talk) 17:52, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Infobox classical composer. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Infobox classical composer redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Magioladitis (talk) 17:52, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm assuming you didn't mean to create a self redirect? 202.161.31.234 (talk) 06:30, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Indeed not, thank you. It's fixed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:57, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Op-ed: Hawkeye on Wikipedia collaborating with the AWM

Would you believe two people told me about this (in Monmouth) before I saw you'd baggsyd another site. Is there a pic of the QRpedia code in place? I'm hoping to post a pic of the ceramic MonmouthpediA ones this weekend. Guess you may be at Hack on the Record. If not ... have a beer from me Victuallers (talk) 08:11, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Lots of pics on commons. Not at the hack event, but I look forward to collecting the beer next time we meet ;-) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:29, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Can we talk you into doing it the other way around too? I recently added a photo request here. So if someone has a mobile phone with a camera, and could just take a photo and pop it into commons automatically, that would have been nice. Once the photo has been visually checked by an editor on commons, a bot could then add the image to the article. Click, press and article has a picture. History2007 (talk) 13:29, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

There's already an Android app for uploading pictures directly to Commons; probably for iPhone too. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:43, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. History2007 (talk) 13:52, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Can you please read the comments on Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion#Template:Infobox_amateur_wrestler Ariesk47 (talk) 22:34, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

What leads you to erroneously suppose I have not done so already? Have you? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:05, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

This edit appears to have caused the 2011 winners not to display. You seem to know your way around templates better than I--do you know offhand how to fix this? Cheers, Khazar2 (talk) 21:06, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

That's the 21st group; I'm guessing there's a 20-group limit; I'll ask on the talk page of {{Navbox}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:25, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Khazar2 (talk) 21:29, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

The TfD on Template:Smallcaps all was closed as "no consensus to merge, but consensus to fix improper transclusions, and to make improvements to make the template closer to complying with accessibility guidelines". At Template talk:Smallcaps all#Changes needed from results of TfD, there's now a discussion to fix the accessibility problems. I've added my opinion (which is that the template is wholesale incompatible with those guidelines), but you may wish to add yours there, along with any suggestions, too. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 22:46, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker#Template changes. 134.253.26.12 (talk) 17:50, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Wifi sucks. Hangieenguyen (talk) 19:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Could you please check my sandbox at my entry for Joan Woollard. I was wondering whether my referencing was ok. It's only the one text. Also, would a letter written by Woollard class as a reference or a note? Hangieenguyen (talk) 20:47, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your help on the referencing. Is the citation alright? Just want to make sure before I go referencing incorrectly! Thank you :) Hangieenguyen (talk) 21:42, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Andy! I'm hoping that everything in my sandbox for the Woollard entry is ok but could you check it for me please? Wanna get it perfect before I put it up! Thank you!! Will seriously be the last thing I ask of you now :) many thanks Hangieenguyen (talk) 15:09, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

thanks for the traininggg! Chloe Lund (talk) 19:20, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Oooo, I think I can add stuff to other people's messages! --Connie Wan (talk) 19:21, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello! --Connie Wan (talk) 19:21, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I like bourbon biscuits HannahCarroll (talk) 19:21, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm more a custard cream girl myself --Connie Wan (talk) 19:22, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello enjoying learning about Wiki!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olive Middlemarch (talk • contribs) 19:26, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the trianing! Monikafrise (talk) 19:28, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the training! Olive Middlemarch (talk) 19:29, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

The article Wye weather station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable. Not worth merging as the place no longer exists - it was last mentioned by the Met Office in 2000, but there are no sources on when it ceased existing. Possibly when the College was vacated.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 22:07, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Pigsonthewing. You have new messages at Northamerica1000's talk page.
Message added 11:25, 2 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wye weather station is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wye weather station until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 13:27, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Mjroots (talk) 09:34, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Andy, please excuse the intrusion from the safe (but not always cynical) sidelines. Some rhetorical questions sprang to mind. Firstly, regarding date of birth, i.e. “As we don't have a reliable source for that, it's out of the article now.” Surely a reliable source for this is very easy to obtain? I had thought that BMD data was the one thing that anyone (born in the UK at least) could never escape. But unless someone else has already posted it on the internet I guess that would be WP:OR? I see plenty of references to FreeBMD and the Birth Register in other BLP articles. Secondly, how far can an individual now go, legally, to prevent personal information being posted on the web – could Mr Hawkins reasonably expect (in obviously a worse and very unlikey scenario) to obtain a legal injunction preventing Wikipedia from publishing his age? his date of birth? his home address? One wonders how many threatening emails JW will ever get, from the legal executives of the rich and famous, even after full adherence with the intricacies of BLP. I honestly think JW is doing his best here to accommodate all parties and to avoid confrontation. He should be congratulated for not rising to the kind if pathetic bait that you have mentioned above. I wonder what the outcome of the DRV will be. It does seem to be a very unusual case. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:43, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM – Volume II, Issue III, March 2012 Headlines USA report: Latest Wikipedian in Residence at Smithsonian; paid Wikipedian in Residence positions listed UK report: QRpedia goes to Church; edit-a-thon at Herbert Art Gallery and Museum, Coventry Spain report: Figueres Edit-a-thon; GLAM workshop for museum professionals and educators France report: New partnerships and progress of many projects Germany report: Leipzig Book Fair; More on the Long Nights Russia report: GLAM in Russia Bulgaria report: GLAM in Bulgaria Serbia report: Open Wiki GLAM of Serbia Conference, The internal meeting Chile report: First Latin American GLAM-WIKI conference hosted in Santiago Mexico report: Edit-a-thon at Museo de Arte Popular Africa report: 55 GLAMs contributes to African contents on Wikipedia Australia and New Zealand report: Australian and New Zealand GLAM efforts Open Access report: Scholarly journal goes wiki; Open Access Media Importer takes shape Calendar: April's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of banks of the United States of America. Since you had some involvement with the List of banks of the United States of America redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:48, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

a brand new fork for you. Frietjes (talk) 21:59, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Pigsonthewing. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 11:41, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

User:Pigsonthewing/Rachel Khoo. Good to see that the indef block for fighting censorship was removed. Nyttend (talk) 17:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Now that you've moved the page back, would you like me to delete the userspace page? Nyttend (talk) 02:01, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Please. And thank you for your help; and kind words. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:59, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Nicholas Conyngham Tindal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Solicitor General (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 7 April 2012 (UTC)