User talk:Stephen Turner
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Old discussions: Nov 2004 – Jun 2005, Jul – Aug 2005, Sep – Nov 2005, Dec 2005, Jan – Feb 2006, Mar – Apr 2006, May – Aug 2006, Sep – Dec 2006
Contents |
[edit] Category:Fast bowlers
I knew I should've inquired first. Thanks for the link to the actual discussion on the matter -- it was an interesting read - Maajid 13:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Stuart Clark
Thanks for that. I've just warned one of the contributors (socks?) for that and vandalism at Brian Lara and I'm pleased an experienced editor concurs it's junk. --Dweller 13:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please visit this ([1]). Ta --Dweller 13:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, Dweller. I've added two more suspected socks there. Stephen Turner (Talk) 14:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Admin
I can't tell... erm, are you an admin? --Dweller 15:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
- No, I'm not. Stephen Turner (Talk) 16:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Would you like to be? --Dweller 16:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- No, I don't want to be at the moment. Thank you for asking, but I've got far too little time at the moment to do a good job of it, and also I don't need any excuses for spending any more time on Wikipedia! Stephen Turner (Talk) 16:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] Can you add Brian Lara Images
Please, can you or your contacts put a picture/s of this great man that does not violate copyright issues? Brian Lara Wikipedia page requires pictures of him -- a portrait image and some cricketing images. Thanks 130.194.5.130 00:45, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'd love to, but it's difficult to get hold of freely-licensed images. Usually it needs someone to take a photo at a match. Stephen Turner (Talk) 05:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Motmot pix
Nice pix, with the added bonus that they're from home! Guettarda 19:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! Glad you like them! Stephen Turner (Talk) 22:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Webalizer
Hi, you have rv'd my addition to the Webalizer page with comment "not related nor similar". If you look one more time you will see, that the program is BASED on the Webalizer and it is VERY similar in functionality (but analyzes different things).
Martin (martin(at)hinner(dot)info). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.160.37.52 (talk) 10:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC).
- Martin: Thanks for your note. I apologise, it does say that it is derived from Webalizer. However, I'm afraid I still don't think that a program which says
- Please note that the code is one-night hack, it's a very very poor quality! It is not recommended to run seolizer on a production server
- on its home page really deserves a place in the Webalizer article.
- I'd also like to draw your attention to WP:COI and WP:AUTO, which describe how you shouldn't write about yourself or your own works.
- Stephen Turner (Talk) 17:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- I understand what you wrote, but basically the program WILL be finished to stage so as it can safely run on any server. This is it's first version, I published it because I wanted some feedback from people. And there is no feedback unless I promote it. I don't see any problem related to WP:COI and WP:AUTO as I am not writing about myself and the product is FREE (GPL). I have no benefit from publishing the link. So I kindly ask you to consider adding the link back to the page or other pages. If the program lasts unstable for month or more, it's fair to remove the link (unstable means in this case that it doesn't parse logs incrementally and it can eat quite a lot of memory, but it basically works - I am using it for my own purposes for over month without any problem). Thanks ...
-
- Martin (martin(at)hinner(dot)info). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.160.27.57 (talk) 17:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC).
-
-
- Thanks for your reply, Marting. But I think there's something you haven't understood about WP:COI and WP:AUTO. They're not only there because people might have a financial benefit in writing: they're primarily because it's almost impossible to write in a neutral and objective way about things you are deeply involved in, even if there is no financial benefit.
- I understand the point about promoting your program — I am a freeware author myself — but Wikipedia is not the place for that. Wikipedia is for writing about topics that are already notable.
- Stephen Turner (Talk) 21:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] Talk:Hit the ball twice#John King
I think I have got a plausible explanation for John King's dismissal at Talk:Hit the ball twice#John King. Not sure if that should be incorporated into the article, though, as I might be wrong, or the reasoning might be unverifiable. -- Paddu 00:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your note, Paddu, because I didn't have this article on my watchlist any more. I've made some more comments there. Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:21, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cambridge City Council
Hi Stephen
I saw you edited the Cambridge City Council page earlier, removing some content I had added to the page, and I wanted to explain to you why I had put the content there in the first place.
The page as it stands suggests that all the Council is about is local councillors, which is not a fair representation at all. I work for the Council and have been asked to have a go at adding more content to the page, beginning with linking to the other websites run by the Council. These sites are not necessarily even known as Council websites to the public, and this is one way of making our link to them apparent.
This is what you saw as copyright violation, and while I see your point I don't believe it is because the content has been put there at the Council's request. While I see what you mean that a link to the homepage is enough, the way the different sites are manages is such that they are not all immediately advertised on the main City Council website, hence linking to them individually here.
Basically what this comes down to is we want to make our services and content available to as wide a range of people as possible - much as any company does - and this is one way of doing it.
Regards,
Tris Lambert —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Trislambert (talk • contribs) 15:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC).
- Thanks for the explanation, Tris. I realise your edits were in good faith, but I'm afraid have to direct you to WP:COI which explains our conflict-of-interest policies. The whole page is relevant, but in particular the part that says:
-
- "If [...] you are receiving monetary or other benefits or considerations to edit Wikipedia as a representative of an organization (whether directly as an employee or contractor of that organization, or indirectly as an employee or contractor of a firm hired by that organization for public relations purposes) [...] then we very strongly encourage you to avoid editing Wikipedia in areas in which you appear to have a conflict of interest. Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy states that all articles must represent views fairly and without bias, and conflicts of interest do significantly and negatively affect Wikipedia's ability to fulfill this requirement."
- Edits in such subject areas, beyond simple, uncontroversial, factual corrections, are almost always reverted immediately. Remember, the page is trying to be an encyclopaedia article, not a publicity platform for the council.
- Having said this, I agree that the page is weak at the moment. Why don't you send me a list of the things that the council does that are distinctive (i.e., not things that lots of councils do), and I'll try and work them into the article in a more encyclopaedic way?
- Stephen Turner (Talk) 15:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] MoS
Don't know if you watchlisted me, so just a courtesy note that I've replied to you at User talk:SMcCandlish#Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 17:54, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 12 | 20 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
| WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream" | News and notes: Bad sin, milestones |
| Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 13 | 26 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
