User talk:Chienlit

Help:Wiki markup

^{[when?][needs update]}

• USERBOXES!
• How to edit a page
• Wikipedia help forum
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Wikimedia
• Images & other
• More editing help

Wikipedia:Obtaining geographic coordinates User:Teslaton/Tools/GeoLocator

User:80.229.29.19

		The Original Barnstar
		Excellent work on Bowerchalke SuzanneKn 21:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am really flattered to be asked to look at this geology work. I am though really a geographer rather than a geologist but I have written a few pieces on geology in wikipedia. At first glance, I do query the glacial erosion point. Salisbury is too far south to have experienced glacial erosion; however it would have experience fluvio-glacial erosion. The article also mentions sub-glacial erosion. I'm not sure what this means - does it mean solifluction where the defrosted top layers flow off the permananently frozen underlayers? Overall I think the work is excellent, hence the barnstar. I will return though to have a further look and think later but I've got to give my son the laptop now! SuzanneKn 21:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still thinking about your 60my question. In the meantime I gave your page an info box. Hope you like it. Plse remember to sign your messages with the four tildes. SuzanneKn 18:57, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Autodidactyl

Hi, I'm impressed by the article about the Klasies River Caves, which you wrote. However, it claims that the caves are a "a designated Unesco World Heritage Site", even though they aren't on this list, so I've removed the claim for now. Please re-add it, if you are certain the claim is true and have sources to back it up.

Happy editing,

--Carabinieri 13:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've found the source you were probably referring to. But that only says that the South African government submitted the site to be added to the World Heritage list. I've changed the text accordingly. I've also added inline citations and added {{fact}} tags to information I was not able to find in the Guide to Klasies River. I'm assuming you got this information from the book by Ronald Singer and John Wymer. Could add inline citations referencing these claims as I did?

--Carabinieri 13:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great work on that article. It looks really good now IMHO. By the way, I've nominated it at DYK, so it may be featured on the main page within the next few days.--Carabinieri 19:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, That article would be suitable for DYK, but it wasn't created or expanded from a stub within the last five days, so it's not eligible. The DYK criteria are here, in case you want to know more about what is and isn't suitable for that section of the main page.--Carabinieri 15:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Klasies River Caves , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thank you for your contributions! — ERcheck (talk) 06:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't the main page need to be updated to fix the error? Shouldn't it be Omo? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Abelani (talk • contribs) 12:02, 7 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I was delighted with your flattery; it's nice to know that my work is appreciated. I was also very pleased to find out what a lovely page Place de la Bastille is. It was easily remedied - if you click on the date of the entry you want to look at, this entry will appear. Then you edit that page, saving it and putting in a suitable note. The page did look dire at the beginning, so it was quite a revelation to see how good it had been. Anyway, pleased to help. SuzanneKn 21:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS You may want to just put a little note on your user page, then when people see your edits, they will know that you are not a newbie. At the moment, your user name comes up in red. When I look at the recent changes, it's the red ones I home in on as often they're the dodgy ones. SuzanneKn 21:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh, you've worked out I am a teacher. This is worrying. But worse still it'd be great if you did give me a proper barnstar. I haven't received a real one yet. Which county are you? I'll move onto there next. SuzanneKn 22:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the past several days you've applied the ' * List of fossil sites (with link directory) " category to (at least) two archaeological sites that are definitely not fossil sites (La Venta and Calico Early Man Site). Please be careful, Madman 03:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:SuzanneKn and Surrey, check the edit history, then check the facts about the proposed Slyfield incinerator that was NEVER BUILT. 86.16.117.32 18:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In reply to your comments on my talk page:

"So in my case you jumped to a completely wrong conclusion and immediately started hurling insults."

Hurling Insults? Where? Kindly point me to any insults I hurled at anyone. I've certainly made a forthright expression of annoyance, which I consider to be justified. A simple mistake reading the edit diff would be a perfectly innocuous by itself, but she clearly indicated that her decision to revert was based on a previous negative comment on my talk page. If she wants to use that as a standard, what goes around comes around. 86.16.117.32 20:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your great work on the Prime Minister's spouses! I think it was the only list when I complied it, I didn't know about Walpoles two wives, as these people are rarely found in their biographies, which annoys me :) Gareth E Kegg 09:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your clarifiying edit on Larrys Creek on October 19. I appreciate your help keeping the article presentable while it was Today's Featured Article very much, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see someone new interpreted in this. I'm not sure how prominent to make the caveat. Do you know of any later work discussing their theory? DGG (talk) 23:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 27 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Folke Heybroek, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cheers, Daniel 01:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea about the Pinnacles Desert but I will do some research and improve the article. It's 160 km from where I am, and I was holidaying for the past week surprisingly close to them. I didn't go to see them, but I think I'll go have a look if I can find time to take a day off or on a weekend. James086^{Talk | Email} 11:20, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Folke Heybroek - Oyster-catcher.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot 19:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I like the image, which is credited as your own work, but I have a worry about the content. The base-map looks like a tracing of the 2nd Series Landranger map (ie not earlier than 1983) at full scale. Is this allowed? Also is the geology based on your own survey (original research) or from a BGS map (copyright unless very old?). I think more detail is required on the image details. Pterre (talk) 15:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For info I've raised this on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions as I'd like to do similar on other geology-related articles but am not confident about the copyright. Pterre (talk) 23:18, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your reply. I'm not trying to cause trouble here - I'd like to see more of this and contribute myself, if allowed by copyright. I'm pretty sure the image details ought to credit the sources used - was hoping someone on the Copyright questions page would provide an authoritative opinion. Streetmap is based on the OS 1:50,000 map with permission (and no doubt a massive licence fee), so whether it comes from Streetmap or directly from OS it is still covered by Crown Copyright. How much redrawing of an OS map is needed before it ceases to be copyright? In this case the basemap is at full scale. The first 1:50,000 sheet of this area with metric contours (Landranger 2nd Ed) was 1983, still well within copyright; there are older 1:25,000 and 1:63,630 sheets with 25ft or 50ft contours now out of copyright. Although the geology in your map is not a straight copy of the current BGS maps its source is not credited on the image description. It presumably either comes from a map (which ought to be credited even if out of copyright?) or from local knowledge which sadly in Wikipedia counts as Original Research. Pterre (talk) 14:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your query about image software; I'd recommend Inkscape, which can produce the highly desirable SVGs; GIMP is also a handy alternative to Photoshop. Verisimilus T 16:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for correcting the link on this page. It was previously a simple redirect to Jane Porter (formerly Jane Parker), of Tarzan. However, Jane Boleyn, viscountess Rochford, is as often referred to by her maiden name, Jane Parker, as by her married name, Jane Boleyn. Therefore, I was confused when I looked her up and thought it would be clearer, especially as there is a lot of interest in Jane Parker Boleyn at the moment. I hope this makes it clear why I felt the change was helpful. Boleyn (talk) 19:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, good work on the hinchcliffe article, but many of the sources seem to be blogs and forums, which rarely qualify under our guidelines on reliable sourcing, which worries me slightly. David Underdown (talk) 12:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Gazette where he was placed on the unemployed list RAF lists him only as DFC, so he cetainly wasn't give the AFC in 1918. It is just posible he was given it some time post-war if he still officially held his RAF commission - I've not managed to find a record of him actually leavign the RAF. David Underdown (talk) 15:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well the gazette containing his DFC does not credit him with any previous decorations (and the book says he got the AFC first) (and nor is he one of the AFCs named in that Gazette), and I've already mentioned the later one. Now I have seen errors made (and corrections published later) in the Gazette, but for them to make the same mistake twice stretches credibility. The London Gazette is the definitive source where British decorations are recorded, so I feel we should go with that. David Underdown (talk) 15:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't look like I can lay hands on that easily, thought I migth have found a lead in The National Archives research guides, but that came to nothing. David Underdown (talk) 08:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Elsie Mackay, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford ^Pray 03:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 23 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pierre Lacau, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 18:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was. I was wrong. Sorry and thanks!

Philip —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.168.15 (talk) 23:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted my changes for no apparent reason, especially when it came to the image sizes with no apparent reason. May I ask why? WP:MoS states otherwise. — BQZip01 — ^talk 21:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose I could have {{fact}} tagged them too (done). I did a quick google search and couldn't find anything to state the current location of the skull. As for the image resizing, please don't undo everything if you disagree with only part of the edit. Simply change the part that needs changing. — BQZip01 — ^talk 01:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

M'aider I assume i am the innocent victim of an overzealous or misguided or dynamic ip related block. If any administrator glances at my edit history they will find no reason for the block. please remove it asap. Autodidactyl 22:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Better now? Should be passing through it. MBisanz ^talk 01:17, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Western Air Express - Pinetos Peak crash, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Daniel Case (talk) 03:18, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Bosley Ziegler, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--–Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 23:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This was sensible. Punkmorten (talk) 10:35, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I posted an idea on the talk page for Mauro Gianetti. I don't know if that will help, but it might. While I would not delete the sections you have been restoring, I would object to the bulk of that information being in the lead-in section. Too much detail, too much controversy. While it is a fact that the opinions were as stated, do those opinions really belong in a current biographical article? I decline to hold an opinion, I only wonder. In any event, all the best, and happy editing! :) sinneed (talk) 05:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have become more concerned about the inclusion of the spoken statements of the "Dr." cited there and at the drugging article. Unless there is a much stronger source than a spoken statement by an opposing team's doctor, who also stated that "98-99%" of cyclists dope, I am now convinced the references do not belong on Wikipedia. sinneed (talk) 13:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Learning is good! I hope to carry on learning new things every day for the rest of my life. :-) -- JediLofty ^{Talk to me}_{Follow me} 09:22, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is good to see your defense of the verifiable, factual information on page of Joseph M. Papp, who I have heard is also considering a comeback to racing, though not at professional or UCI Elite level. Supposedly his wife - though still in Cuba - intends to resume training as well once she exits that country.Azx2 (talk) 11:53, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you keep an eye on page for Joseph M. Papp, which is being polluted with content inappropriate for wikipedia article? Ciclismoaldia (talk) 00:56, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thanks for that. Very kind of you. I'll gladly send it to Did You Know if you think it's worth it, but I'll have to find out how. I still have trouble setting mouse traps.

Another thing I have tried many times is to submit photos. I have a load and I'd willingly share them. Every time I try, though, I get bogged down in endless technical stuff and I get nowhere. Shame. I'm sure these things could be simpler!

happy days

les Les woodland (talk) 05:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

The rivalry with Sheridan doubtless wasn't bitter but Sheridan was a professional, with loads of publicity and glamour that Atkins didn't have. They both did things differently but above all they came from the same city. If you think I suggest that they were at loggerheads or for ever trying to outdo each other, I'd be happy for you to change it. Please do.

I haven't got any pictures of Edie, although I used to. Maybe I can bother you later with other pics. Thanks for the offer.

happy days

lesLes woodland (talk) 05:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

On 23 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Edith Atkins, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 08:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thx4thx ... I wondered if I was being a bit too decisive, but I'm pleased it worked out and I shall try and look for your refs in the lead of your next dyk. Oh and I raced (in a pack far behind) and met John Atkins ... very talented bloke. cheers Victuallers (talk) 12:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC) oops.. misunderstood... maybe Les will find it ok too Victuallers (talk) 13:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC) Why thank you .... I remember getting my copy of "Cycling" mag with Alf Engers and his sub 50 minute 25 mile time trial! Victuallers (talk) 16:33, 23 September 2008 (UTC) You're right I thought the copyright argument is clever ... then ?I realised it was too clever. The words have no known author - but I bet someone knows the calligrapher. So I had to remove it. The Margarite ones are interesting ... you did well to find them but unless you can find the owner then I think we're stuck. 1939 is not even 70 years old. pity Victuallers (talk) 17:27, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi A ... some advice. If you intend to go for va DYK nom then you need 1500 chars of text. Strictly this excludes "lists" so most of the "golden book" could be seen as a list... and quotes. So Wilson could be seen as mostly a quote. Suggest that you paraphrase the Wilson quote to make it text and move it up the article. Then your hook can be "did you know Marguerite Wilson .... something ...in the Golden book?" Hope that make sense. You only get one DYK but at least it sees the front page. Vic aka Victuallers (talk) 14:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Marguerite Wilson, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 08:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Golden Book of Cycling, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 08:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have copied this picture from French Wikipedia. Is that what you wanted? If so, it is in the article now. Regards, SpinningSpark 17:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was more than the capitals, you have to download the picture from French Wikipedia and then upload the picture to English Wikipedia first. Or upload from French Wiki to Commons and then use it as a Commons picture is another way of doing it. SpinningSpark 19:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

(Am I supposed to reply here or on my own talk page?)

Thanks. And thanks, too, for the Barnstar. I'm not quite sure if it's the equivalent of a peerage - you'll have to explain - but any reward is flattering!

Interesting man, Raman Minovi. Sadly, I know nothing about him and the "original research" rules rule out ringing him to find out. Odd sort of ruling, that, since it appears to mean that I can't write something I know unless it is published somewhere else.

Do you have a real name and an interesting life? Who and where are you, and what's your interest in cycling.

happy days

lesLes woodland (talk) 18:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

An alarming message has popped up on my new Eddie Borysewicz page. Do you know what it means? I don't understand the point about the references all leading back to themselves. Is it something I can sort out? Can you? I'm mystified.

Many thanks.

lesLes woodland (talk) 07:12, 12 October 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

, Its now a moot point as it has been deleted. But to answer your question, the speedy deletion process does not require you to do anything at all after placing the appropriate template on the article, which I saw that you had done. The act of placing the template automatically places the article in a category:candidates for speedy deletion and that will attract the attention of an administrator pretty fast (sometimes it is only minutes). The speedy might fail, either because the editor challenges it, or because the administrator does not agree that it is a suitable candidate for speedy (speedies are only meant for cases that are absolutely clear and uncontroversial). So you should go back and check after a while (maybe the next day) to see if it did actually get deleted. If the article survives the speedy, it might still be a candidate for deletion. But now there must be a proper discussion as speedies are only for clear-cut cases where an administrator can make the deletion without consultation. If you still think that the article should be deleted you can nominate it at WP:AfD. A debate will then be set up to decide the issue. It is good manners (but not actually a requirement) to inform the author that you have taken the article to AfD so they can take part in the debate. SpinningSpark 17:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You really are keen on self-flagellation if you went searching out old radio programmes! I was surprised how much interest that piece caused. I had calls for some time afterwards. I'll see what I can do about Alfonsina. Thanks again for your interest. Les woodland (talk) 05:08, 24 October 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

On 24 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alfonsina Strada, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 16:11, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peter

That's fine. I wondered which way round to do it. I thought the Mabuse name would be better known than the real one, but if it gets redirected anyway, that's fine.

happy days

lesLes woodland (talk) 12:29, 28 October 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Do not ever, ever, revert to readd unsourced negative material about a living person under the guise of "doing research" or "adding a citation needed template". This behaviour is strictly prohibited by Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, and if necessary will be enforced by blocking as provided for here. Daniel (talk) 13:33, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does that help? I wanted to say that Sainz was suspected of drugging the horse but I hadn't wanted to suggest that he actually had. I think it now makes clear what the suspicions were and that tests proved them unfounded. Do let me know. By the way, what did you mean the other day about cycling in the Portuguese sun? And have you got an e-mail address where I can reach you? Les woodland (talk) 15:56, 29 October 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

I have internet probs ... but MOVEing a page is possible Victuallers (talk) 16:19, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine! I'm flaterred. Thanks. Les woodland (talk) 17:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Far from upset, I stand in admiration at your talents and that you're interested enough to use them for me. Thanks for that, and thanks for your news about the Pépin DYK. Les woodland (talk) 14:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

On 4 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bernard Sainz, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 19:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jean Robic, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 14:34, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think WP:Vandalism says most of it. The place to report vandals is WP:AIV, but a report won't be accepted unless the vandal is recently active, has had a final (level 4) warning, and has vandalised since that. So friend Baaryiscool doesn't get reported now because he seems to have stopped after a level 3 warning. (Sometimes that makes me feel like a hunter balked of his prey, and I have to remind myself that, if he stops, that's what we wanted to happen!) It's worth checking again, as I just did, in case the vandal has restarted after a pause; to do that, go back to his talk page and click "User contributions" in the column on the left, third item under "toolbox".

When adding a warning to a user talk page, look to see what (recent) warnings are already there and add the next one up. IPs need different treatment from usernames: you have to reckon that anything over an hour or so ago may be a different person, though if it's the same page being vandalised it's probably the same vandal. Even with a username, if there has been a long gap (days) I wouldn't necessarily step the warning up. If there is already a recent level 4 warning, and the vandalism you have spotted is at least a minute or so later (so that he has had time to read the Level4), then it's time for AIV.

If there are no warnings yet, start at level 1 or 2. Level 1 "assumes good faith", so if (e.g.) the vandal has written "Poop" everywhere you can go straight to L2.

An awkward but not uncommon case is where there is a L4 warning for a username a day or two old. Although the warning says "next time you will be blocked" I have known AIV refuse a report in those circumstances - probably best to give an L3 or another L4.

Full list of warnings at WP:WARN - the usual ones are uw-delete (if it's only removal of content) or uw-vandalism. They can be abbreviated to uw-v and uw-del, e.g. {{subst:uw-v3|Annie Besant}} . Once you have placed a warning, click "User contributions" to see what else he has been up to that may need correcting and, if recent, a further warning.

Good hunting; ask me if you have any more questions. JohnCD (talk) 21:23, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for letting me know. I hadn't considered that "mercery" would be such a mystery word, but maybe using one or two now and then isn't that bad a thing! My e-mail, should you want it: lanternerouge (at) ifrance (dot) com

On 9 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Daniel Mangeas, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 11:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, wow, that was a surprise! Thank you as well for your efforts to clean up that article! —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 14:57, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Vin Denson, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 06:40, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Peter... following me into new territories, are you?! Thanks for your work. I think it may have been you who added the comment that one of the links didn't mention Trébuchon. But when I clicked it, to be sure, that is just who the article was about. Are we thinking of different things? happy days - les Les woodland (talk) 16:08, 12 November 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Thanks once more for taking an interest! I, too, don't think "(French soldier)" is needed. But the Great Machine tells me there is already an "Augustin Trébuchon" story. There's isn't; what there is is a mention of him in another article. If you have a large enough hammer to put it right, that'd be great.

Two other things I tried to correct but either couldn't or didn't know how... there are two articles about Freddie Grubb, one headed "Frederick Grubb" and the other "F. H. Grubb"... and the machine won't let me change the entry for "LOOK" to "Look". Just because it's printed in capitals on frames doesn't mean it's the name of the company in real life.

If you were in Agen (pronounced Agennngg locally), you were 30km due east from where we live. I'm a member of the ASPTT Agen. happy days - les Les woodland (talk) 05:22, 13 November 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

(In case you didn't know, a "pépin" in French is "a spot of bother"...)

I think, as you say, it's a studio pic. Still out of copyright but not from the mag. happy days, les Les woodland (talk) 17:42, 18 November 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Hi. It's all one quote from Comte. Within it, he quotes Grappe. Make sense? Les woodland (talk) 14:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

On 23 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Les West, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

07:02, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Fine to use ... see [here] ... public domain! Victuallers (talk) 16:52, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 27 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lady Constance Lytton, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 14:31, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your work on Bobet. Something's gone wrong with the "On The Wheel" references, though. happy days - les Les woodland (talk) 08:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Happy to help. If you have a qualifying UK library card you have free access to the ODNB using your library number as login. Here is temp copy of the ODNB Howlett biog - please delete when finished.--mervyn (talk) 14:30, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Howlett, Robert (1830–1858), photographer, was the son of the Revd Robert Howlett, Church of England clergyman, of Longham, Norfolk. He only comes to notice three years before his premature death in 1858; nothing is known of his mother, early life, education, or training. During his brief career he produced some of the most significant photographs of the period, most notably his portrait, Isambard Kingdom Brunel and the Launching Chains of the Great Eastern, made during the closing months of 1857.

Although he is known to have taken photographs as early as 1852, Howlett first came to notice working as a photographer for the Photographic Institution in New Bond Street, London. Established by Joseph Cundall and Phillip Delamotte in 1853, the Photographic Institution quickly became the leading establishment for the commercial promotion of photography through exhibitions, publications, and commissions. It may be presumed that Howlett joined the company after Delamotte left to take up his appointment as professor of drawing at King's College, London.

1856—the year in which Howlett is first mentioned in the photographic press—was extremely busy for him: during the course of the year he sent prints to the annual exhibitions of photographic societies in London, Manchester, and Norwich. Among the work he submitted were two landscape studies, In the Valley of the Mole, Mickleham and Box Hill, Surrey, which are likely to have been taken the previous year. In the same year he undertook the first of a number of commissions for Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, who regularly called upon the services of the Photographic Institution. Apart from copying the works of Raphael for Prince Albert's comprehensive art historical study, Howlett also made a series of notable portraits of soldiers who had distinguished themselves during the Crimean War. These were exhibited the following year at the Photographic Society of London's annual exhibition under the title Crimean Heroes and are now frequently confused with the series taken by Joseph Cundall. Despite the ascendancy of photography there were growing fears about the stability and permanence of prints, many of which were showing signs of premature fading. It is within this context that Howlett published On the various methods of printing photographic pictures upon paper with suggestions for their preservation (1856).

In common with many other London establishments the Photographic Institution also operated a studio where Howlett made a significant number of portraits. Doubtless through Cundall's intimate connections within the world of publishing and fine art, a number of the most eminent artists of the day came to be photographed. Howlett's portraits of W. P. Frith, F. R. Pickersgill, J. C. Horsley, and Thomas Webster were among a larger group exhibited at the Art Treasures Exhibition in Manchester in 1857. It was Frith who commissioned Howlett to photograph crowd scenes at the 1856 Derby from the roof of a cab for use as preliminary studies for his 1858 painting Derby Day.

Howlett's most memorable series of photographs, and ones which are now regarded as epitomizing the spirit of Victorian engineering and endeavour, are those he made of the steamship the Great Eastern. The vessel was designed by Isambard Kingdom Brunel and built by Messrs Scott, Russell & Co. at Millwall, on the banks of the Thames. The single largest engineering enterprise of the period, its protracted launch nearly defeated everyone involved, including Brunel, whose posture, gaze, and muddied clothes transmit the sense of difficulty and impending failure in Howlett's portrait. Paradoxically, this portrait has since assumed iconic status, standing as it now does for all that was heroic and noble during the Victorian period.

Robert Howlett died, unmarried, of a fever on 2 December 1858 at his lodgings at 10 Bedford Place, Campden Hill, Kensington, London. It was thought by colleagues that his untimely death had been brought about by the fatal combination of overwork and his imprudent use of poisonous photographical chemicals.

Roger Taylor Sources

G. Seiberling and C. Bloor, Amateurs, photography, and the mid-Victorian imagination (1986) · Mr Hardwick, Journal of the Photographic Society, 5 (1858–9), 111–12 · A. Hamber, A higher branch of the arts (1996) · R. Taylor, ‘Critical moments: British photographic exhibitions, 1839–1865’, data base, priv. coll. · d. cert. · CGPLA Eng. & Wales (1859) Likenesses

photograph, V&A Wealth at death

under £1500: administration, 22 Jan 1859, CGPLA Eng. & Wales © Oxford University Press 2004–8 All rights reserved: see legal notice Oxford University Press

Roger Taylor, ‘Howlett, Robert (1830–1858)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004 accessed 2 Dec 2008

Robert Howlett (1830–1858): doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/58919

++ENDS++

On 3 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Robert Howlett, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Good to hear from you again. It was getting lonely without you! No, not at all sure about the euro conversion. I didn't write it, in fact. It comes from the 1903 Tour de France page and I took it on trust, especially with a citation. I know he won a whopping amount but I couldn't have said how much. I suppose three old francs to the euro could be right. It was six and a half new francs, and there were 100 old francs to a new franc. But my head is spinning already! Les woodland (talk) 19:36, 9 December 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

The francs he won were gold francs. Does that complicate matters? - les Les woodland (talk) 21:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Hmmm... It's certainly not uncommon to refer to women by their maiden names in formal situations. But it doesn't quite ring true, does it? Would it be too vague just to say what's on the stone and not attempt to explain whom they might be? Or better just to delete it? What do you think?

By the way, is there any routine for suggesting pages that might not be worthy of being there? There aren't many but there are some which are close to yoof nonsense and not a few which are so insignificant that they can only be advertising in purpose. happy days Les woodland (talk) 15:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

I would not recommend edit summaries like this: "mistaken or idiotic reversal that reimplemented vandalism - proof read carefully" when you are making a revert like this [1] which succeeded in making the lede to the page nonsensical by removing undeniably idiotic text that was actually embedded in necessary text. Proof read carefully indeed! Paul B (talk) 09:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{flag|Italy|old}} gives  Italy. See Template:Country_data_Italy for more information. --EdgeNavidad (talk) 22:57, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did not upload this, it was already there. Not only for Italy, also for other countries. For Germany for example, Template:Country data Germany. --EdgeNavidad (talk) 08:05, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 14 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Maurice Garin, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 22:15, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By popular acclaim, I've added the Amis section. If you have more patience and talent than I have, you could introduce pictures from the Les Amis web page. If you follow the link and then go to the press dossier, there are pictures of work being carried out which are offered free of copyright. I find uploading pictures taxes my remaining hair. The instructions, and above all the explanation of subsequent problems, must be written for geeks by other geeks. To tell you a photo needs tagging and then not explaining how to do it is hardly in the spirit of an encyclopaedia, n'est-ce pas?! What is your e-mail address? Les woodland (talk) 06:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

A tag has been placed on Pra Loup, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. ~~ [ジャム]^[t - c] 14:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi... I see you've added that Old Fred is curator of the Oudenaarde museum. Are you sure? I thought he was at Roeselare. Les woodland (talk) 06:30, 21 December 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Hi... Enjoy Portugal. It beats being here at my mother-in-law's in Britain! I've taken out the 'clarification needed' for Old Fred. His own Wiki entry says he's now at Oudenaarde, so I assume that's so. The tourist site for Roeselare, however, says he's still there. I don't think it was I who wrote he was at Oudenaarde, though.

I agree with you about the guy who took out the par about Cavendish and Maertens. For me, it rounded out character and perspective and showed that even heroes have heroes. But Wikipedia is a collaborative venture and I didn't want to get into an edit war and seem a pretentious twit fighting for his own golden prose! I'll have a look when I get back to France. If you want to reinstate the words, you'll have no objection from me! I'll settle down to finish the Ronde as well.Les woodland (talk) 06:02, 23 December 2008 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:18th century introductions, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:18th century introductions has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:18th century introductions, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 06:10, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Paris-Roubaix - Secteur pavé de Orchies - chemin des prières - (mars 2008).jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I hadn't seen your changes to the Gaul piece. I may have unwittingly undone them all, for which I can't apologise enough. I have been updating the text in a WP program, then pasting in the article all over again. I suspect that has undone all your good work. A thorough whipping is what I deserve, of course. Sorry. les Les woodland (talk) 06:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Various changes made to Mr Vienna, as asked. I think you're right that he ought to have his full name in the title but when I tried it, the Great Machine declined. I've done the P-R para you mentioned as well, and you've seen the e-mail I sent about the start venues. Thanks for all your help and enthusiasm. Don't make a bad team between us, do we?! By the way, do you know what nationality Drunt is? I asked but he didn't answer. He said English wasn't his first language. happy days, les Les woodland (talk) 16:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

So, I'm blind as well as confused. Not much hope for me, is there?! Les woodland (talk) 17:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Hi... I hadn't noticed the races had vanished. Did I somehow do that by mistake? Are you clever enough to restore them? By the way, I wasn't sure what you meant by the "current comeuppance"? Qu'est que tu veux dire, mon pôte? - happy days, les Les woodland (talk) 08:48, 14 January 2009 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

You're quite right. I was thinking of "controversies", but they're still all there. If you're happy to delete "epic races", do go ahead. I'm still puzzled. - les Les woodland (talk) 09:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Could work, of course. But I see there's a note at the top of the page that says "Enough, already!" so it may be unwise to invite more, especially given your kindness of recommending GA status. Make sense? - les Les woodland (talk) 16:54, 14 January 2009 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Your wish on Dicky V and his name has been granted... Les woodland (talk) 16:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)les woodland[reply]

Sorry not much room for "spin" here. An image given to wikipedia is an image given to the world. The only thing your mate can hope for is attribution. The only argument is a) charity b) loss leader. If he makes his money from the copyright of these images then he has to be in a generous mood. Victuallers (talk) 19:35, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possible solution - try Flickr! In Flickr there are already 264 pictures that are properly tagged at the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, some of which perhaps might work.

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=Paris-Roubaix&l=5

There is another 1500 +/- available if you were to ask them (by sending Flickr mail) to lower their copyright tags to either "Attribution License" -or- "Attribution-ShareAlike License". There is a 3/4 chance they will! --Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Doug, Looks most hopeful. I will give it a try. Regards User:Autodidactyl 00:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

It works for me. Here is an article, most of which I obtained the pictures by just asking them to lower their copyright tags. Check out how I uploaded them to Commons to give you examples on how to do it.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 00:17, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On January 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Théodore Vienne, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 18:30, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On January 31, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Andrew Ritchie (Brompton), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 02:33, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thaf, good detective work on AM. Is the 1845 record visible online? How did you find it? I searched but found nothing. Regards User:Autodidactyl 23:31, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Ps. Charles Holland (cyclist) and George Mount could do with your assessment skills.

Transcriptions of the Birth, Death & Marriage Indexes are available on Ancestry.co.uk - you have to register but that is free. Thaf (talk) 13:44, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Annie Bonar Law, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Fails WP:N. Being wife of a (minor) British politician doesn't constitute notability. A Google search, '-wikipedia', for her name brings up only 228 results.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Computerjoe's talk 22:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Robert Howlett, 'self-portrait', circa 1852-8.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

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

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 19:05, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ruth Padel, smilingsmall.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:38, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Ruth Padel, smilingsmall.JPG. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ViperSnake151  Talk  12:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]