User talk:Stevage

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User talk:Stevage/archive1 (dummy edit)

Contents 1 Curious about your Lyon pics 2 {-} vs {clear} 3 DYK 4 DYK 5 Featured picture promotion 6 Template:User new message 7 Requested pictures 8 (Ecclesiastical) history of Lyon 9 TOC compression 10 Re: Taking photos of Flinders St Station 11 Arc de Triomphe pic 12 Diet & French FA's 13 User talk:ShortJason/Publicity 14 Breastfeeding FARC 15 Gloves and mitts 16 Rhône-Alpes flag 17 French Phonology 18 Your vote on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Snail-WA 19 French prefectures 20 Lower Antelope Canyon 2 FPC vote 21 DYK 22 Fête des Lumières images 23 French featured articles 24 Cricket fielding positions diagram 25 Sigs etc 26 FPC Promotion 27 Ecclesiastical history 28 Re: talk page question 29 your change to WP:DYK 30 Paris Eengleesh 31 Your vote on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bruno Senna 32 TfD nomination of Template:-- 33 WP:BEATLES 34 A favour to ask relating to WP:Beatles 35 Proposed Georgia Move 36 Rivers in France 37 Guinness Storehouse 38 Uncat tags 39 Vote on Fir0002 FPC set 40 Régions of France 41 Captain scarlet's new template 42 Reply re CatherineYronwode 43 DYK 44 And this too 45 Changes in Paris article 46 FPC Candidate (Siberian tiger) 47 Melbourne 48 Coca-Cola 49 Vote on Fir0002 FPC set 50 Athletic fielding 51 Tallest structures - "Paris area" 52 Try to improve this sentence 53 Childhood obesity image 54 Your comment at Notability (numbers) 55 Image:Interrobang-big.png listed for deletion 56 Y'en a qu'on du temps à perdre 57 Vote on Fir0002 FPC set 58 About Charaxes kahruba 59 Sparrow on FPC 60 "Espionnage" 61 Robert M. Pagan 62 Signpost updated for November 20th. 63 DYK 64 WikiProject France 65 Vote on Fir FPC set 66 Fractals 67 Signpost updated for November 27th. 68 Signpost updated for December 4th. 69 Signpost updated for December 11th. 70 Cocktail Stubs 71 Signpost updated for December 18th. 72 Claudio Gonzalez 73 Signpost updated for December 26th. 74 Vote on a Fir0002 FPC set 75 Signpost updated for January 2nd, 2007. 76 WikiProject Cocktails 77 Signpost updated for January 8th, 2007. 78 Vote on peacock Fir0002 FPC set 79 Template:References-small (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) 80 Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007. 81 I Heart Huckabees 82 English vs. French spelling 83 Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007. 84 Category deletion in nordic skiing 85 Idigenous Australians 86 DYK 87 Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007. 88 Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007. 89 Victoria 90 f-number 91 Requests for arbitration#Anglicisation of French administrative terms 92 Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007. 93 Ned Kelly 94 Signpost updated for February 19th, 2007. 95 Featured Picture 96 Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007. 97 Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007. 98 See also 99 URLs 100 Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007. 101 Enhance history 102 Brittany 103 Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007. 104 Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007. 105 Killer whale FPC

[edit] Curious about your Lyon pics

Hi Stevage. I do a lot of travelling (business and pleasure), and whenever I can I take my camera along, with Wikipedia (Commons) in mind (hence no relatives/friends in the pictures). Sort of a hobby of mine, and I have also noticed that my pictures get better with experience. Happy editing -- Chris 73 | Talk 12:19, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

BTW, Why did you add the same bridge picture twice in Lyon? Once is enough, and too large looks not good. -- Chris 73 | Talk 15:09, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] {-} vs {clear}

Actually, thereason I originally replace them was that I confused {{-}} with the wikicode ---- for a <hr>, and <hr> are not normally used in article space. Circeus 14:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Couesnon, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 18:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Carnac stones, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 13:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Featured picture promotion

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Chambord pano.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.

~ Veledan • Talk 09:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

...and renamed to Chambord_pano.jpg too :) --Yummifruitbat 09:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:User new message

I saw that you commented that the colour of the box was confusing. FYI, you can change the colour of the box to any that you want, by using the following code: {{user new message|color=COLOR OF BOX|name=USERNAME}} --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 15:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested pictures

Glad to see we are thinking alike :-) Do you find the categorization by location scheme useful? Can you think of ways it could be improved? I am trying to make useful "search for free images" templates to help (see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in the United Kingdom and Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in the United States) but am struggling for other countries and sources. It would be good to know what you think about it all - I've had quite a lot of positive responses and a few complaints about "talk page clutter" or even "disruption" (because it messed up people's watchlists, I guess, when adding a photo request to a page...). Also, if you didn't spot this new scheme, should I take it that it wasn't advertised very well and that should be made clearer? TheGrappler 17:49, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, here are a couple of ideas:

• Totally deprecate the old system as much as possible. It's silly having both systems when the superior system (categories) exists.
• Make the template for requested photo smaller. It doesn't have to be that eye catching, because the idea is to attract people *to* the page, not *from* the page. If you get me - we want bridge photographers in Lyon to go out there and take a photo, not people who happen to be interested in La Passerelle du Collège or whatever.
• Ignore the people who complain about their watchlists.
• Formalise a way to add more info about your request. "A photo showing X, Y and Z would be great."
• Come up with a way to conveniently add photos to several categories at once. Create templates that fuse several categories: Template:Reqphoto-bridge-france could add requests both to the fictional "wanted bridge photos" and "wanted France photos" for example.
• For that matter, create billions of templates. Allowing free text for {reqphotoin} is a little dangerous - misspellings, differences in scale etc could make duplicate categories.
• Get a *lot* more of these templates in use. Get the message out there that every article should have a photo, and if it doesn't, it needs the template. We should have a page where thousands of requested images in a given location can be seen. Every French commune should have a reqphoto template on it - unless it already has enough photos :)
• Improve the ways of contacting photographers. There isn't even a userbox for Wikipedia photographers. I created a provisional one (see my user page) but I didn't even put a category on it. We want to ramp up the number of requsets, the number of people fulfilling them, and the ease in which the two halves can meet.

That do you? :) Stevage 18:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I prefer to use parameterized templates because of the flexibility of the category system - saves creating loads of templates that may only be used once.

Is a combination possible - paramaterize them, but create templates for common one? No, probably doesn't make sense.

I agree that some people really "don't get" the idea of requested photos templates (I have had requests stripped from one city and one university that had no images at all, because it was "disruptive" to their barely used talk pages :-/) but I'll see what I can do.

A link explaning what the template is all about? Yes, a Wikiproject is sounding like a good idea...

You are probably right that including details of a request is a good idea. Do you think it is worth setting up a WikiProject to try to tag the entire 'pedia? And there also should be better communication with photographers - a project may be the best way to do that too. Even if it's just a question of personally messaging particularly active or good photographers, that would be a start! It's hard to make the template smaller (I'm still thinking about ways to do this, losing the image is probably a good start) but may be feasible.

Something vaguely like the shortcut template? That is, top right hand corner of talk page, with an icon and "Photo needed in New Orleans!" or something?

And I am trying to ramp up alternative sources that wikiphotographers (see {{US image sources}}). What do you reckon about a wikiproject? Feasible? TheGrappler 01:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

It sounds good, and creating a userboxes that people could use ("This user can take photos of food") etc would be good. I'm picturing a page that connects all the people who need photos with those that can find/make them. The question is, how to make a good hierarchy. How to have a page that groups all requests in France, but also allows graceful subdivision into cities if and when that's needed? I'll have to have a closer look at the existing categories/templates to see how that works. Stevage 08:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, let's think about otherwise of dividing up the photospace - geographical location is obvious, but there are themes too. Architecture, cars, food, people, natural features - these appeal to different types of photographers.

[edit] (Ecclesiastical) history of Lyon

If this contribution happens to double the history, then the problem is the secular history is (still? maybe you care to remediate that) far to stubbish, which is not my doing but apparently results from a lack of volunteers (I thought the French were ever so proud of their history, but apparently not enough to contribute about it in English) - in the Roman era Ludunum Lugdunesis was thé major centre of Gaul, as a mint rivalled only by Rome and Carthage, hence its unusally hight ecclesiastical rank (working trough in feudal days, well reflected in the primacy titulature) ... In these secularised times there's a definite tendency to neglect the major role of the church, at least in the Ancien régime (for good and for bad) even in academical history teaching; though not literally every day, I've already added ecclesiastical history sections to many (arch)episcopal sees (and often other information elsewhere in the process), usually without anyone challenging the idea Fastifex 09:51, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TOC compression

BTW, the Contents compression is a brilliant idea - in fact, would it not be normal that all infobox/table/contents/reference texts have a uniform 'smaller' style of their own, making them instantly discernable from 'main body' content? This would greatly ease readability and (text) navigation, and save much space. THEPROMENADER 10:08, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Taking photos of Flinders St Station

Hi Stevage,
Yeah that sound like an interesting idea, I might try it, but I'm not sure when - I don't actually live anywhere near Melbourne. It certainly sounds possible, and it will, as you mentioned give an interesting result. --Fir0002 www 09:22, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arc de Triomphe pic

It's corrected as you asked, but you have yet to comment. Make it or break it, man : ) THEPROMENADER 21:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

LOL - thanks, adequately : ) THEPROMENADER 22:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome :) Like I said, they're not bad photos by any stretch of the imagination. But FP is a combination of beauty and intelligence. Stevage 22:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Er, the former, yes, but... intelligence? True that it takes some of that to discern what people on Wiki will vote for. But should this be the goal? THEPROMENADER 22:22, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

By "intelligence" I mean that the image has to be informative, encyclopaedic etc. The Mona Lisa has no place on Wikipedia outside articles about Italian art. Anyway, don't be discouraged - it's really, really hard to take photos that are good enough for FP. I only have one, and that was no reflection on me - anyone can take a panorama of Chambord and get a nice result. Stevage 08:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. And perhaps next time I should be 'intelligent' enough to give a pic a peer review before tossing it into the FP bin : ) THEPROMENADER 09:44, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Diet & French FA's

Thanks. I've been getting fed by User:Aldux who appears to be hunting down featury Greek History articles, which I rather enjoy. He may know of others. there's also sometimes good stuff to be found on Wikipedia:Translation_into_English/French (there's a 'Featured Articles" section, but sometimes the FAs seem to be misplaced. One of my stunts on the NL: wiki has been just to hunt through their FA's, & see if there's no correspondin EN:... tag. Bridesmill 00:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:ShortJason/Publicity

I posted a new proposal at User talk:ShortJason/Publicity that would allow users to opt-in to RfA alerts, and specify the nominees they would be interested in. Given your previous message on the topic, I wondered if you would like to comment, or even sign up? TheGrappler 03:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Breastfeeding FARC

So you know, I've now taken Breastfeeding to WP:FARC: Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates/Breastfeeding. violet/riga (t) 09:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gloves and mitts

Re: Comparison between cricket and baseball. Catchers and first basemen wear mitts, other fielders wear gloves. Gloves have fingers. Since the rules of baseball forbid mitts to any players other than the pitcher and first baseman, this is an important distinction, and I didn't think mentioning it in the article would create any confusion. Obviously it did, though, so maybe I'll try re-inserting it in a clearer form. John FitzGerald 19:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Forgot to mention that I liked your other changes – the article is still a bit redundant as a result of being written by multiple contributors. I think I'll propose some changes later on the Talk page. John FitzGerald 19:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I hadn't thought about it that way before, but how right you are about the tone of the article. When I first came across it it contained a statement about baseball being to cricket as cricket is to chess. I may have contributed a lot to this tone, simply because the article has been constructed as part of a debate. The main point I wanted to introduce is that cricket is a batting game while baseball is a fielding game, and the difference is due in part to the equipment used. A related point is that far from making the game easy, the flat bats and big gloves actually make it more difficult because they permit the development of skill.

Anyway, I'll try some revisions to shape the article up. I like both sports and think their popularity is a credit to the sporting public. But I won't be making any tonight, since at the moment I'm missing the finals of the Stanley Cup. John FitzGerald 00:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rhône-Alpes flag

In answer to your question, the new flag of Rhône-Alpes was introduced in 2005. If you click here, you can see a picture showing the new flag in front of the regional council of Rhône-Alpes.

I've also noticed that you created some templates about regional and departmental prefectures. Are these really needed? I think they add very little information. In particular in the Paris article, where there are already many templates at the bottom, I think they should be removed. Prefectures in Île-de-France don't mean much really, the Paris Metropolitan Area infobox is more interesting because it gives the names of the most populated communes in the metro area. Hardouin 09:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] French Phonology

Actually, that is what I meant. The line in the article that I modified was ambiguous, and from my own experience, what I added is correct. Someone who's more knowledgeable can fix it, but I know that at least in some places in Québec, that's totally standard (e.g. montagne = /mɔ̄taŋ/ etc.). ̀—Firespeaker 04:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Given the evidence (including your anecdote) and what was there before, I think /ŋ/ and /ɲ/ have generally merged in Québec French, and I suppose there's variation on which sound people produce for the merged phoneme, but they oughta do it consistently. This seems right given first-hand experience too, but I'd like it verified, ideally by a native-speaker linguist. —Firespeaker 10:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your vote on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Snail-WA

Hi Stevage!
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Snail-WA seems to be getting into a bit of a bog. Could you please specify which version your vote goes for? This will help to reach a consensus on which version to promote. Thanks! --Fir0002 10:09, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] French prefectures

Well, as you have pointed out yourself, prefectures are not always a good measure of what's an important city. A good example is Châlon-en-Champagne, which you have mentioned. It makes sense to nobody that the government didn't choose Reims as the capital of Champagne. The reason why they chose Châlon has to do with the French Revolution: during the French Revolution Châlon was chosen as the prefecture of the Marne département instead of the natural choice which should have been Reims, because Reims was too associated with the monarchy (French kings were crowned in Reims). In the 1960s when they set up regions they would have had to move the prefecture from Châlon to Reims in order to make Reims the capital of Champagne, but they didn't do it probably because of conservatism and because people in Châlon would have made a big fuss about it. In the 1990s the city of Châlon-sur-Marne changed its name into Châlon-en-Champagne to stress that they are the capital of Champagne, in case people had forgotten. This is not the only silly example. In the Tarn département, the Revolutionaries punished Castres (the largest city) by moving the prefecture to Albi, where it is still today. In Guadeloupe, the prefecture is Basse-Terre, a small town, whereas the biggest city is Pointe-à-Pitre. Anyway, leave the infoboxes in the other articles if you feel like, but at any rate I suggest you remove them from the Paris article which is already infobox-laden, and because in Paris metro area the prefectures don't mean much anyway... (obviously the subprefecture of Saint-Denis is much more important than the prefecture of Bobigny, and so on...). Hardouin 19:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lower Antelope Canyon 2 FPC vote

Stevage -- I hope you didn't feel obligated to vote for my image after my responses to your questions. I am not going to take it personally if the image is voted down for FP status. My verbose responses are typical; I'm more interested in being understood than anything else, and spend a lot of text making sure I get my point across.

I think with that particular image it's sometimes hard for people to grasp the scale, since it lacks a human being in the frame for reference. Maybe that makes it a tougher sell here. Cheers -- moondigger 22:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Gosh no. I have no idea what Lower Antelope Canyon is, and that image didn't help me understand that much - hence, not encyclopaedic. But if you're telling me that that's sandstone, then the image helps me understand a lot - and it's a lovely image to boot. Encyclopaedic + pretty = FP. Stevage 22:20, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Aha... thanks. Your explanation makes sense. I'll keep that in mind for the next time I nominate a picture. Just because a photo was taken in a certain place doesn't mean that's the best article to attach it to on Wikipedia... -- moondigger 22:54, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

On June 9, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fête des lumières, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

[edit] Fête des Lumières images

It's a combination of many factors, really.

• I tend to disagree with using images larger than the default thumb size unless the image really calls for it (such as animations, graphics, maps and such that do no scale well). There is a reason thumb size can be set in user preferences.
• Whenever possible, I think it is to be avoided to start a section with a left-aligned images.
• Image:Fete des lumieres candles.jpg is rather on the low-quality end of the spectrum, and looks better scaled down more than it was.
• It looked weird to have just an image on the left,so I switched it to the right.

feel absolutely free to revert my changes. They are, in the end, personal opisions on what looks better in wikipedia. Circeus 03:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] French featured articles

Hi Stevage. I've just noted you asked Bridesmill about a list of featured articles in the French language, which have no English correspondent article. With absolutely no correspondent there are fr:Calmin, fr:Article 49 de la Constitution de la cinquième République française, fr:Hippias majeur, fr:Temple de Sûrya (Konârak), fr:Phare de la Vieille, fr:Nom de règne des papes, fr:Violences urbaines. With the English article only at meagre stub level there are fr:Naumachie (English Naumachia), fr:Diacritiques de l'alphabet grec (Eng. Diacritics (Greek alphabet)), fr:Sampi (Eng. Sampi), fr:Ivoire Barberini (Eng. Barberini ivory), fr:Missorium de Théodose (Eng. Missorium of Theodosius I). Hope this list is of some help. Bye, Aldux 15:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm happy you liked it :-) Regards fr:Violences urbaines, there doesn't seem to be, surprisingly, a similar English article; with the possible exception of Civil disorder, which doesn't really appear to be exactly the same ground.--Aldux 20:01, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cricket fielding positions diagram

Hi, I've just voted on the FPC page for this. I like the diagram, and is the best I've seen. However there is a problem with it, as I mentioned with my vote. The position of the runner is incorrect. It would be easiest to simply delete it from the diagram, as to correct it will look too messy. You'd have to show the Striker's End umpire in two different positions, and show an Injured striker at Square Leg.

I've just noticed another problem, you shouldn't refer to the Striker's End Umpire as the Square Leg Umpire, and so that should be changed as well.

Apart from that very good diagram. --Wisden17 18:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

One other really pedantic thing, the width of the pitch (the brown rectangle) should be wider than the crease markings. The pitch is 10 feet wide, whilst the distance bewteen the return creases is 8' 8. I'd be surprised if other people notice that! --Wisden17 18:09, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, yeah I realised that it wasn't your original diagram but saw you'd done a few edits to the original so was just suggesting a few more. The term square-leg umpire is indeed an unofficial term, and will not be found in the Laws of Cricket. The reason why it is not an ideal term is this, to quote Law 3 The umpire at the striker's end may elect to stand on the off side instead of the on side of the pitch meaning that the striker's end umpire need not be at square leg, and indeed with the stuff about the runner above you can see that he needs to be at point with the runner at square leg. Hope that helps. --Wisden17 19:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sigs etc

cyde has some very strong opinions on sig files and in the never ending debate over whether people should edit other user's sig files, he is firmly in the edit camp. there have been several wikipedians who have questioned this activity in the past and there has been a lot of heated debate that has generated, in my opinion, a lot of bad will and division. you should check out the rfc on tony_sidaway to get an idea of the heaviness that surrounds this issue. in any event, my advice is not to engage cyde on this topic. it will most likelyonly result in a lot of frustration, and your sig will never be safe from edits in any event. -- frymaster 19:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FPC Promotion

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Cricket_fielding_positions2.svg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.

Stevage, there is a slight problem with the diagram. When I go to its page to add the featured picture tag, the page loads but the Image tab at the top is red, indicating that the file doesn't exist. So I can't edit the page to add the tag.  ???? -- moondigger 02:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Problem fixed. Thanks... -- moondigger 14:20, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ecclesiastical history

Please help with an annoying editor. user:Fastifex is adding everywhere stupid, out of date and unrelevant text copied abruplty from Catholic Encyclopedia in articles for Italian communes. When I deleted them, he reverted. When I moved them to separate articles, he also reverted the thing without debating at all. I think he's searching for an edit war to have an excuse to impose his stupid chunk of bad written stuff. Please help me. The article involved are: Camerino, Otranto, Gaeta and Adria (for the moment). I think the separate entry for ecclesiastical histories is fairly reasaonable, but I seem he's sticking to his view without listening any reason. Let me know and good work. --Attilios 08:09, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. It's a pleasure to see that I'm not the stupid one in this quarrel... As for you, 1) Thanks for your opinion. 2) Nothin' special. I'd like you could give me some support in the event of Fastifex should start an edit war. I'll let you know, if you want to help me. Ciao and thanks very much again! --Attilios 17:02, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I gave a glance. You could see:

• Ecclesiastical history of Adria
• Ecclesiastical history of Camerino
• Ecclesiastical history of Gaeta
• Ecclesiastical history of Otranto

It seems that intelligence and good taste are not Fastifex' main qualities. Further, he sticks with stupid info about 1911 data (nr. of parishes, nr. of feminine school, etc.) without nothing provided for today's situation. Cannot really understand how his neurons work. Thanks for help and attention. Bye. (P.S.: something similar happened when a dispute arose about the presence of prayers in saints articles. Of course all the Christian guys here revolted against their suppression...) --Attilios 17:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: talk page question

I was short for time on the rv's...otherwise I would have had more time to explain. That particular anon is recurring(albeit with a slightly different IP each time) and has a bit of "English pride". The pride part is fine(like you I have no opinion either way)...but the user tends to rm to semi-accurate "Brit" link and replace it with the disambig English language (as opposed to a England|English) link. The user has been rv'd and been given the corrected link before but doesn't appear to care. If I had the time I would have pasted a corrected link myself. Last evening I was having to "one button it" for awhile. Hope that explains things. Cheers and take care! Anger22 12:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] your change to WP:DYK

Hi... saw this change [1]... thanks for tightening that. It was wordy because the change is the subject of some discussion on WPT:DYK. I think it would be great if you'd pop by and give your input... it's the tail end of the discussion page at current, starting with Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Selecting_one.27s_own_articles thanks! 18:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paris Eengleesh

Stevage,

How about coming to the Paris article for a spin? The page has just recieved another language complaint, and as far as I know this sort of problem is in your ballpark. Everything present is quite factual, so no worries about adding or cutting anything - just about cleaning it up!

I'm doing my best to finish a last 'Education' section before it goes to peer review - but I'm overworked these days, and have little time for anything else besides monitoring and dabbling. If you could lend a hand there too that would be cool - it's in my sandbox.

Thanks and take care,

THEPROMENADER 21:27, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't that be "Shanks, but no shanks?"  ? : ) THEPROMENADER 17:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your vote on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bruno Senna

Hi Stevage,
Sorry to bother you, but I've updated the captions on the edits to make it perfectly clear which version you support. Please update your vote and state which version you support. Please use the naming located under the main caption in bold, large text. Thanks, --Fir0002 09:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:--

Template:-- has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. ais523 14:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:BEATLES

Hi! I've seen you around on Beatles articles... Would you consider becoming a member of WikiProject The Beatles, a WikiProject which aims to expand and improve coverage of The Beatles on Wikipedia? Please feel free to join us. (If you're already a member, forgive me. It's a hot day!) --kingboyk 17:00, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Abbey Road... You're not in this picture... yet! Todo: Open tasks for WikiProject The Beatles. Edit or discuss these tasks. As the project is currently just starting, our more experienced editors are working on the project infrastructure, classifying articles, and listing/assessing red links. Your assistance is welcome. If you would prefer to just edit - and why wouldn't you? - we have a choice selection of red links to turn blue and articles to clean! Now let's get busy. To Expand: Apple Records See also: Adopt an article To Clean up: Apple Records discography (wikify). The Beatles' 1965 USA Tour. To Merge: To Create: Phil McDonald (engineer). Lennon/McCartney songs: I'll Keep You Satisfied (produced by George Martin), From A Window. George Martin produced Billy J. Kramer song: Magic Carpet (song). Songs covered by The Beatles: Hippy Hippy Shake. The Big Three. Bag o'Nails, where Paul met Linda. Macca single: My Brave Face. Articles on each Beatle tour (Category:The Beatles tours). Full list & instructions. Lists to complete: Wanted Pics/Graphics: Mal Evans, Flying (song), Astrid Kirchherr, Jimmy Nicol, Cynthia Powell, Alistair Taylor, Ivan Vaughan, Tittenhurst Park, Tony Barrow. We need a better open-licenced photo for the project, to replace the Abbey Road crossing. If you provide a photo, please remove the ReqPhoto tag from the article's talk page and remove the article from this list. Project Discussions: The Beatles history, Individual songs vs longer album articles, Beatle wives, Merge/split proposals Project: Add {{WPBeatles}} to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members, and coordinate tasks. Enter articles classed as stubs into this list (under To Expand) and also list articles needing cleaning and other work here. If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log.

[edit] A favour to ask relating to WP:Beatles

Would you consider helping out with an important task? We need the comments made earlier migrated. See: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_The_Beatles#Help_wanted which discusses the instructions for the task given here: Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles/Article Classification/Migrating. It would really help the project out a lot. Feedback on the instructions themselves gratefully received as well. Feel free to ask others for help. Thanks! ++Lar: t/c 18:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed Georgia Move

As a past participant in the discussion on how to handle the Georgia pages, I thought you might be interested to know that there's a new attempt to reach consensus on the matter being addressed at Talk:Georgia (country)#Requested_Move_-_July_2006. Please come by and share your thoughts to help form a consensus. --Vengeful Cynic 03:40, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rivers in France

You've been moving some French river articles lately, referring to consistency and a discussion on the WikiProject French départements. I think this discussion refers to rivers where disambiguation is necessary, because there is a département with the same name. In other cases, where disambiguation is not necessary, because there is nothing else with the same name (or only very insignificant places/objects), I prefer the name without "River". See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Rivers#Naming, that clearly states that names without "River" are allowed. Markussep 13:58, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

My main objection against "River" is that it implies that "River" is part of the name, which it isn't, for most European (and African, Asian etc.) rivers. See the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers/Naming. Of the 130 French river articles, 61 need disambiguation. In other countries, that don't have départements named after rivers, the disambiguation ratio is even lower (e.g. Germany, Belgium, Italy). Markussep 09:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it makes sense to move all French rivers to "X River". Markussep 20:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

If ever River is to be included in the article's name it is to be placed in front, not behind the river's name, regardless of consistency. French river naming places rivière in front of the name, as it in English. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 09:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Guinness Storehouse

Hi Stevage. Just to let you know, I've merged the content of the article into the brewery page (St. James's Gate Brewery), where the exhibition was already mentioned, and put a redirect in place. The information you added is fine - and might go back later to being a separate article - but at the moment it is more appropriate to keep related information in the same place. If you like beer (which I suspect you do, if you have visited the Guinness brewery), you might consider joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer. Cheers! SilkTork 08:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Uncat tags

• My practice is to remove the uncat tag when there's even one category (other than birth and death years). Otherwise, it's too hard to know which items on the uncat list need work. NawlinWiki 23:25, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vote on Fir0002 FPC set

Hi Stevage!
Hope you can stop by here and leave your much appreciated thoughts. Thanks! --Fir0002 12:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Régions of France

There are only 22 régions in France, of which the DOMs or TOMs are not part of. ROMS are not régions but Région d'outre-mer which is different. See Région d'outre-mer. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 09:30, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, put them in a separate line in the template. I think it would be amiss to leave them out altogether, because you'd have the question "well, what région *do* these départements belong to?" Stevage 09:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I removed them from the régions template because they aren't régions and do not literally belong to one as they have special status. Not all French territories are part of régions. Secondly, DOMs are included in Template:Préfectures of départements of France along with the other 95 départements and was hoping to remove a double presence. Cheers, Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 09:38, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Captain scarlet's new template

I agree with you that the new Template:Préfectures of départements of France is way too large, and absolutely unnecessary. I left a note on the talk page there. Have a look. I must warn you that this user, Captain scarlet, has weird ideas about classifying French things (from railway lines, to tallest buildings, etc.). He has already started quite a few edit wars, and he has this tendency to act unilaterally, on a rash, such as he's done today by creating his template and uploading it to the 100 prefecture articles of France without consulting anyone. Two weeks ago his account was blocked for a week because he tried to move unilaterally List of tallest buildings and structures in Paris to "List of tallest buildings and structures in Île-de-France". If you want to revert to your regional template and if Captain scarlet opposes it (which is probable), then we'll have to refer this to some admins. Hardouin 18:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Third opinion? Yes, you could leave your opinion at Talk:List of tallest buildings and structures in Paris, if you can bother to read the very many messages there. It has been decided that there is no consensus to move the article, but if you also oppose the move you can express your opinion anyway, it won't hurt. Also, you could express yourself at Talk:Paris#What is this?, where User:ThePromenader is, as usual, accusing me of all sorts of villainies, like distorting reality, writing theories and POV, being at the center of a conspiracy (whose goal is still quite unclear to me, the guy at the center of it; lol), and so forth. As you can see, nothing has changed much since you left the article last January. Promenader is still tirelessly arguing over each and every edit I make. This time it's an edit I made a few days ago about administration in Paris and the legal history of the municipality. You can find the content of my edit here: Paris#Municipal offices. If you want to make a brief comeback to express yourself on this particular point, then allow me to soliciter officiellement ton avis. Lol. Hardouin 18:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reply re CatherineYronwode

But 1) it wasn't done by mistake, she simply changed her mind, and 2) other people worked on it. -999 (Talk) 19:30, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

On 10 August 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kate McTell, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

[edit] And this too

Oh, yesterday I forgot to tell you the article where your "avis" is most "solicité". It's Île-de-France (région). You DO have to leave your word on the talk page there. A few weeks ago, ThePromenader deleted this sentence from the introduction of the article, despite User:Metropolitan and myself being in favor of keeping that sentence: " Its territory corresponds for the most part to the metropolitan area of Paris." I still don't understand what is so monstruously conspirational about that sentence that it had to be removed from the article. In any case, despite two users in favor of keeping the sentence, and only Promenader in favor of deleting it, if I dare to put the sentence back in the article, you know Promenader, he won't hesitate to wage a revert war to delete it again. So a third-opinion is much needed on the talk page. Should you also be in favor of keeping that sentence, then I think we can safely put it back (I don't believe that Promenader would delete it again in the face of three people in favor of keeping it, but who knows...). Hardouin 13:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Tell me, how long has this battle over "metropolitan area" vs "aire urbaine" vs "région parisienne" vs "ile-de-france" etc being going on? I would like to know so I can list it at Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars :) It's just bizarre. Whether the sentence is there or not doesn't seem to make much difference to me. If it's true, I'd tend to put it there, but...????? Stevage 14:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

It has been going on for as long as Promenader has been on Wikipedia really, which is since last November. Back then he was known as Josefu, but he later changed his sceenname. Before that, I have been on Wikipedia for more than three years, there was never any edit war about Paris-related things. Apparently, Promenader believes that User:Metropolitan, myself, and God knows who else are conspiring to present Paris as something it is not. Apparently we are presenting Paris as a large world city when actually it's a small city that cannot withstand comparison with the likes of NYC or Chicago. We are evil conspirators you know... Thanks God, ThePromenader has assigned himself the mission to restore truth to Wikipedia and foil our evil plot. Hardouin 16:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

The conspiracy theory is amusing : ) What it about amounts to is a couple suburban kids doctoring a few low-traffic high-ignorance pages with the goal of making a city seem big enough so they can pretend they live there. The funniest of all this is that French (Paris) administration is so backwards that the Île-de-France as a body has by far outgrown in importance even the city of Paris itself - yet the same actor(s) are hell-bent on having the whole thing called 'Paris' over any other name, even when this goes against every reference, administration and usage in existence - not to mention trying to con the ignorant bystander if it serves the same end.

Open a book, look at a map, link to a government website and fact is there for you. Look at the reams of talk pages, and discern who is asking for/providing references and who has only comparitive theories as 'proof'. It is only a matter of time (and traffic) that pages such as these find order thanks to a domination of those interested in sharing information, rather than those with other more personal interests and viewpoints. Sorry that once again you're involved in all this silliness. thepromenader 22:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Promenader, for hijacking Stevage's talk page. He'll probably appreciate that. It only shows that you're tracking all my edits, even when I send messages to other Wikipedians. And for your information, I am not a "kid", and I don't live in the suburbs of Paris. As for the other users, I don't know where they live, but calling them "kids" only show your profound disrespect for people who disagree with you. What do you think Stevage, should we file a complaint on the noticeboard? I am sick and tired of Promenader's attitude. Hardouin 23:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Any argument but fact as usual. Stevage and I have conversed many times before, so it is only natural that he is on my watchlist. By all means, please complain. thepromenader 23:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, yes, and for the IDF 'comparison' phrase: Did you know that Mumbai with its official suburban district are about the same size as the Mumbai metropolitan area? What informative value does this phrase have for you if you know the size of neither? That is why it is gone, and for no reason more. Hardouin also neglected to mention that others on the same talk page were quite kind enough to point the truth of the matter out to him. thepromenader 23:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Question, for my own sanity, would it be possible to have a one sentence summary of the position you each take wrt this Paris/metropolitan area thing? Perhaps we can format it like this:

• Hardouin: ThePromenader believes that...
• Hardouin: I believe that...
• ThePromenader: I believe that...Only the city of Paris is called only 'Paris', and this is a fact reflected in every map, reference and government documentation in existence, and reflected especially in local usage; only the very ignorant (those having no idea where Paris' borders are) or extremely offhanded could ever place to anything bigger under the same title.
• ThePromenader: Hardouin believes that...

One sentence, only! Thanks :) Stevage 08:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm - It's kind of you to offer to play referee (once again), but your allergy to verifying the fact of allegations would mean another endless circle argument should it persist. But the cause of the conflict in once sentence? Here goes:

<snip, moved above> Stevage 10:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Whew. thepromenader 09:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, well that makes things easy. Your position is flawed. It's not a question of being ignorant. It's a question of context and what's useful to the reader. "Paris has a population of 10 million." "The city of Paris has a population of 2 million." "2 million people live in Paris." - these statements don't necessarily conflict.

You don't seem to accept that it's ok to use terms in imprecise ways, or that we can redefine a term for the sake of an article. Every article topic has an imprecise scope. It's up to us to decide what's in and what's out, in terms of what best serves our readers. The scope of a city is necessarily imprecise. Do we stop at the administrative borders? Do we stop at a statistical border? Do we do a bit of both, but include things that are *near* the city, because they are relevant? Do we exclude things that *are* in the city, because for some reason they don't seem to fit the topic? If someone wants to find the height of a building at la Défense, do we serve their needs by refusing to include it in a list of "buildings in Paris"? Of course not. Do we serve anyone's interests by wasting paragraph after paragraph splitting hairs over fine differences in definition? No.

As far as our articles should be concerned, Paris is whatever most people say it is. If we're trying to give a population to the nearest person, then we're going to have to be precise for that figure: The 1999 census of the city of Paris counted xxxxxxx people. But then we can go right back to talking about La Défense, Versailles, Clichy-sous-bois, Orly, and Eurodisney, because all those places have some "relevance" to Paris.

TP: Fighting for "truth" on Wikipedia is a really, really, bad idea. Stevage 10:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

For both our sanity, I suggest you stay out of this. When a situation is already black and white, why make things grey? I don't "believe" anything, and there is no "quest for truth" in anything I do: Reality backed by reference says one thing, Wiki says another. That's it!

It's okay to use imprecise terms under certain contexts within articles - and that only when it's clear what we're talking about - but in article titles ? Is our role here to introduce ambiguity? Why do this when the references we are obliged to cite do not? What is the big deal in changing "Paris" to "Paris region" if it would make the article concord with fact? It's the resistance and reverting to what should be a minor correction that fills talk pages with unreferencable crap. If you really care about the reader in all this, master your misgivings, get out an encyclopaedia and have a look into the fact of the matter so that he can find the same fact elsewhere, and help put an end to these "only on Wiki" articles. thepromenader 11:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The reality is that Paris is a city comparable with London and Berlin, and a hell of a lot bigger than Sydney. Claiming that only the "Paris region" is bigger than Sydney, for instance, is just attempting to confuse things.

As for article titles - well, look at wikipedia:naming conventions. From one of the first paragraphs:

Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature.

Another way to summarize the overall principle of Wikipedia's naming conventions:

Names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists.

There is not even the briefest mention there of "concording with reality", the word "accuracy" does not rate a mention, and I don't see the word "imprecision". Read it! Really! The key words used are "recognize", "minimum of ambiguity", and "general audience". You could argue that "Paris" is ambiguous, but not many would agree with you. We all agree that it's centered on Ile de la cité, and it spreads out it roughly a circular shape. Attempting to cram information about how big that circle is into the title is *not* helping readers.

I really ought to have a look at Paris now compared to a year ago, and see what's changed. Stevage 11:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Now we're back to interpretation, and this is a zone I always try to avoid. Rather, where is the need to alter fact for comprehensibility when fact as it is is already perfectly comprehensible to all? What is there not to understand in "in the Paris region"? Where are we "cramming information" in all that? Although I'm working elsewhere, I'm going to stop answering you for a while as it seems that you've got some personal feelings in this.

As for the Paris article, your language skills there would be a help for sure. Cheers. thepromenader 12:12, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Personal feelings, heh. Stevage 12:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure I'd piss myself off too if I wasn't 100% sure where was coming from. I also take a break from me, not just for you. Cheers. thepromenader 14:40, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Changes in Paris article

Stevage, about the Paris article, there were lots of fights and edits wars since you left, but thanks God I was seconded by User:Metropolitan (who has now left Wikipedia due to ThePromenader's tiresome attitude, read Metropolitan's good-bye here: [2]), so anyway, with the help of this guy who is now gone we were able to save as much metro area-related information as we could from the article. For example, at some point, in the demographics section, Promenader wanted to remove all population information concerning the 11 million people metro area, leaving only information concerning the 2 million people administrative city proper, but in the end common sense prevailed and we managed to save it (the word "save" is not too strong, after the pitted edit war it took).

Unfortunately, bits of metro area information have disappeared here and there. It's not possible to monitor everything, and it's very tiresome to fight over every little detail with Promenader. For example, the article mentioned that the highest elevation in the City of Paris proper is Montmartre at 130m above sea-level, but in the whole urban area the highest elevation is in the Forest of Montmorency at 195m above sea-level. A few weeks ago, Promenader deleted the mention of the Forest of Montmorency (see: [3]), again because for him the article should be limited only to the administrative city proper. Should I put the Forest of Montmorency's altitude back in the article, you can bet he'll start a new edit war (just for this little detail !). Another example is this: about 4 weeks ago, Promenader engaged in a nasty edit war because I had written that there are 17 public universities in the metropolitan area of Paris, but he contended that we should write "there are 17 public universities in the Paris region", and that's what the article states now because I gave up on that edit war. I don't understand why the concept of Paris metropolitan area irks him so much. It's beyond me...

Then, probably the most important change to the article is the infobox at the beginning of the article. Promenader decided that the infobox, which I had designed about 2 years ago, and which I had uploaded to several other large French cities, was crap because it gave too much importance to the metropolitan areas (again!). So he created new infoboxes and deleted all my infoboxes in all the large French cities articles. Check his new infobox at the beginning of the Paris article (or Lyon article if you prefer), it puts the metro area population at the very bottom of the infobox. You really have to look for it! He separated it from the rest of the infobox by creating a category called "urban spread". Metropolitan and I tried to tell him that the metro area population should appear immediately below the city population figure, such as is the case in all other city infoboxes (check NYC or Berlin), but.... NO, out of question, he's persuaded that he's right with his "urban spread" section. Sigh...

If you want to intervene on any of the points I mentioned, in particular the infobox, don't hesitate. We shouldn't let ourselves be detered by Promenader's uncompromising and tiresome attitude. If we are the majority, we can change things even against his will. List of tallest buildings and structures in Paris is a good example where he was checked by a majority of other users who opposed his ideas. Like I told you already last January, I thought, and still think, that it's a bad idea that you left the Paris article just because of his uncompromising and tiring attitude. We're only rewarding his bad attitude by giving in to his relentless behavior and leaving the article. Hardouin 13:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

What can I say when I see the above. Not one mention of those who helped improve the article, not one mention of what actually was improved, no mention either of the efforts to rally contributors to the article, and certainly not any mention of those who did their best to make one Wikepiedian provide references for his quite original affirmations: just a single-person selective accusatory self-supporting diatribe saying "This is how I did it before, so help me put it back!"

If the article is so bad, why is there only one complainer? Wait, I answered that above. Yet now that the article has passed a Peer Review, why can it not pass to WP:FA status? Largely because a single Wikipedian refuses to provide sources for his affirmations, at least those that can be sourced - I for one do not have time to verify them all. On the same subject, it is strange to see the same complaining about the removal of his false source: statistics taken in the IDF cannot be labelled as being taken over another 'preferred area'. Finally, just a reminder that consensus was for the complete removal of MA info from the infobox, and it was actually myself who campaigned for its preservation. How 'petite' to skip this little factoid.

It is only normal that one peddling fiction cannot hold out forever in a place publishing fact - yet, thanks to the use of every available tactic save fact, User:Hardouin has held out remarkably. Stevage, with all due respect, most likely for your proven reluctance to verify anything, you're being played for a potential lackey. thepromenader 15:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FPC Candidate (Siberian tiger)

A comment was recently posted by Samsara on the Siberian tiger FPC. It concerned placing the image in another article (see the subpage for the exact comment). I have now added the image to the stretching article, so you may or may not consider changing your vote (this is just to inform you of the change). Thanks. --Tewy 00:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Melbourne

I'd really like to know how Australia defines its cities, as it is not the first time they have been brought up in our *cough* many discussions.

By looking at the Melbourne article I see that it has a fixed population (3,689,700 inh.) and a fixed land area (7,694 km²), but no clearly defined unifying government or anything ... it's odd that there's no clear map. The populations numbers seem to come from a Melbourne Statistical area: the Australian census bureau does have this map (attn: 6.5m to load) showing this "Melbourne statistical area". Perhaps this is commonly called "Melbourne" there - but in Wiki common usage should only apply to name forms (borough, shire, etc) and not as reference to an offhand areas - this would not be factual. Thus I don't get the Melbourne article designation either. Much is vague around that one, but hey, Paris is already big enough for me (jk).

Yet coming back to your article, if it is indeed common local practice to call greater Melbourne just "Melbourne", the journalist was probably applying the same local standards to Paris for better local understanding. I don't know where he got the figures though - a Google would be enough to find the right ones! It was interesting to look into, anyway. thepromenader 16:26, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Promenader, check City of Melbourne and you'll understand. I've already proposed the City of Paris/Paris article pair thousands of times. Hardouin 16:59, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

It's probably not an exact parallel, because the city of Paris has much more salience for both French people and foreigners alike. There's a prestige associated with living in department 75 that even being a few hundred metres away just wouldn't have. In Melbourne, the "city of Melbourne" concept just seems very artificial. They seem to have recently renamed a bunch of these "cities" and did weird things - somehow I ended up in the amusingly named City of Boorondara - a coherent, logical "city" in the same sense that the région of Centre is a coherent, logical grouping of départements.

All of which is to say: The concept of "Paris" for the vast majority of people does not stop once one tippy toes down into Kremlin-Bicêtre (if I'm not confused), but many people probably recognise that there is an "official Paris" which has a certain amount of significance. Wikipedia should go with whatever naming is clearest and most easily understood, as long as there is no ambiguity over what the scope of any given article or factoid is.Stevage 17:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

We also have the pair City of Brussels/Brussels, although I believe (to use your language) that the city of Brussels has much more salience for both Belgian people and foreigners. There's also prestige associated with living in the City of Bruxelles (or "Bruxelles-Ville", as the locals call it). It's certainly more prestigious than living, say, in Saint-Josse-ten-Noode. Yet we have the article pair... Hardouin 17:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll look into the "obnoxiousness" later - I'm on a mac. I saw the "City of Melbourne", and I also agree that there is little comparison. I'm sure Paris' snobbisme is a major reason why it is so isolated administratively, but well-defined it is. Yet even this is of no consequence, as all that counts is that that anyone on Wiki can get the same meaning of what they read anywhere else in any other reference - this is the whole purpose of verifiability, finding a common factual base. Imagine a conversation or paper between two people with two different concepts of what "X place" is - there's bound to be confusion; our Melbourne exchange is a perfect example. thepromenader 17:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Dude, your understanding of verifiability is really warped. Verifiability gives absolutely no guidance on naming, article structure, article division etc. It simply defines what content can and can't appear within any article. A statement is either verifible or it's not. So keep WP:V out of this, it didn't do anything to deserve this. Stevage 10:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Not at all. Don't mix conventions and fact. Naming conventions are not fact - Wiki says that name form has to be understandable to English people, and that's it. What that name describes is a complete other subject entirely in the domain of fact - オレンジ and orange should follow their respective language naming conventions, but both rely on reference for their definition. The fact that X is X (or is in X) should be verifiable. This shouldn't seem so complicated. thepromenader 12:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Odd. The mac single-se arrow shows up as a double-direction nw-se arrow in PC. Rather pointless - gone now. Thanks for the heads-up. thepromenader 21:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Coca-Cola

Please see the proposal to merge in Criticism of Coca-Cola at Talk:Coca-Cola.72.60.227.118 17:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vote on Fir0002 FPC set

Hi Stevage!
Hope you can spare the time to put your thoughts on this set. Thanks! --Fir0002 11:43, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Athletic fielding

Hi, Stevage – I just noticed your old comment at Talk:Comparison between cricket and baseball about the description of baseball fielding as athletic. I don't see athletic as a complimentary term, so I wasn't trying to imply anything by descxribing baseball fielding that way. Hockey players skate better than either cricketers or baseball players, but that isn't what makes hockey a superior sport. They just have more scope for skating. I have seen athletic fielding in cricket. Saw an amazing catch in the slips at Lord's once. I also saw, back when Christ was a cowboy, Doug Walters hit two mighty sixes there which have impressed me more than any home run I've ever seen hit, but on the whole there is (unfortunately) more power hitting in baseball because of the composition of the ball. John FitzGerald 02:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, still not quite following what you mean by "athletic" then. Since the ball is generally hit further/harder, it follows logically that the fielders return the ball more "athletically"? Anyway, it's just a word...:) Stevage 19:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll check the wording in the article. I think the idea I wanted to convey is that the game offers more opportunity for athletic fielding and provides more instances of it, not that it baseball fielding is inherently more athletic. John FitzGerald

I made a couple of changes which I hope clarify the issue. I believe the article already notes that in some aspects (fielding in the slips or at mid-on or mid-off, for example) cricket offers more scope for athletic fielding. Maybe the real differences between the games are the big flat bats and baserunning, then. John FitzGerald 13:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tallest structures - "Paris area"

A few of us have managed to come into agreement over an "in the Paris area" title - as a former participant in the discussion, your views and vote on the matter would much be welcome at Talk:List of tallest buildings and structures in Paris. Thank you. THEPROMENADER 18:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Try to improve this sentence

Hi there. ThePromenader is yet again moving Heaven and Earth to change one of my edits in the Paris article. Business as usual as you see. Anyway, he's basically proposing to delete a sentence I wrote some time ago, and replace it with his new "proposition". If I may try a joke, Promenader's "propositions" are a bit like Louis XIV's propositions, you can't really refuse them. Lol.

Anyway, his "proposition" is a bit awkwardly written, so I thought you could have a look and improve it. In the past when you have improved Promenader's long-winded prose, he was quite happy about it, so have a try. If I try myself, he will get all huffy-puffy and accuse me of evil actions and whatnot. With you it seems it's ok.

Your mission, should you accept it, consists in improving the "proposition" found at Talk:Paris#Proposition and import it in this section: Paris#Municipal offices, in replacement of this awefully wrong and inadequate sentence of mine: "The provost of the merchants was shot by the crowd on July 14, 1789 (Storming of the Bastille) and the next day a municipal council was elected with a mayor of Paris at its head." Hardouin 11:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Childhood obesity image

Good bold move. I'm 100% in favour of demonstrating the results of this condition but wish to remove controversy over the identity of the child. Rest assured you'll be in for an assault by the "hippie" brigade, but I'm just writing to say good move...! Budgiekiller 18:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your edit summary in the new (obscured) childhood obesity image... May I please remind you to WP:AGF and be WP:CIVIL? Perhaps it seems to you that I didn't use "common sense" in linking the original image. However, I felt that we needed link back to that image at least until the discussion was closed. I'm pleased to see that the 'obscured' image seems to have placated both sides of this issue -- I had halfway expected the obscured image to either be removed outright, or reverted back to the unobscured one almost immediately, due to the level of controversy. Anyway, I didn't much like your accusation of not using common sense. I had reasons for doing things the way I did. I'm not sure if they were done properly, but they were done in good faith, and I would have happily agreed with your change if the cutting remark would have been ommitted. --Rehcsif 21:33, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm assuming good faith, just poor judgment. It's a bit silly to obscure an image to protect someone's identity, then to link back to the unobscured image, don't you think? So yeah - good faith, but not too sensible. Sorry if my tone was a bit harsh, I'm just amazed that this issue needs as much discussion as it does. Stevage 22:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

The point was to obscure the identity in the article, not make it so that nobody would ever see the child's picture again. You can easilly do that by going back through the history... Frankly I don't care whether her identity is obscured or not, so perhaps your view on this issue is what's making my judgement seem so "poor"? --Rehcsif 23:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your comment at Notability (numbers)

Hi, I've responded to your comment at Wikipedia talk:Notability (numbers), and I'd appreciate comment (on the section below it as well). Thanks! Fresheneesz 20:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Interrobang-big.png listed for deletion

[edit] Y'en a qu'on du temps à perdre

You haven't read Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-09-10 List of Tallest buildings and structures in Paris yet. You've missed something. By all means, do list this controversy at Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars as you suggested earlier. It must have now become the "trivialest" argument ever on Wikipedia (or should I say the most serious argument about the trivialest point ever on Wikipedia?). Hardouin 20:09, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I see that your French is improving by the day. It's unfortunate that there are so many people on Wikipedia whose only contributions seem to consist in moving commas, changing American English into British English, and arguing over words or names, when there are actually so many articles that need either to be created from scratch or "de-stubbed". But then that needs researching information and painfully crafting decent prose, which is of course a much harder work than moving commas or arguing over words. Personally, I find it more interesting to research information and create new articles or expand stubs, and I rarely engage in comma moving, which I find both boring and petty. The only reason why I'm still taking part in this mediation process is because of the level of insults and offensive insinuations from some people, as well as the narrow-mindedness of some comments. Je me fais l'avocat du pauvre, comme tu vois. Let's see if your French has really improved. Lol. Hardouin 11:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Heh. J'y jeterai un coup d'oeil des mon retour en australie. Mais franchement....bon, ce que j'aimerais faire, c'est traduire quelques-uns des featured articles du wikipedia francais qui n'existent pas dans la version anglaise. C'est dommage que tout ce qui est Paris reste dans cet etat assez bizzare, mais comme tu l'as dit, il y a d'autre travail a faire. Coucou de Vienne, pour savoir...Stevage 16:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

You're leaving France for good? It's weird but you're the editor that I felt the most confident working with. In the few instances when we disagreed, we always reached compromise. You're the most reasonable editor I've seen in the Paris articles I must say, and you don't make big fuss like some people. Anyway, I feel embarassed making compliments. It's not in my culture. Plus ThePromenader, who reads all my messages (and often adds comments to them, as you've seen in the past), is gonna say that I'm being a sycophant or something.

Do you know there has been a major edit war at the La Défense article? In the end, all the lead of the article was changed and re-written by ThePromenader. Here is the lead before, and the lead now. Forget it's Promenader, forget it's me asking, just look at it impartially. Honestly, which one do you prefer, and do you see language problems or awkwardness somewhere? Are there points that you prefer more in one version or the other? Are there points that are more precise in one version than in the other? I'm just curious.

Lead before (PS: I didn't write it):

La Défense is one of Paris' major business districts, located west of the city proper in the heart of the département of the Hauts-de-Seine. The district marks the endpoint of the Historical Axis, which commences at the Louvre and crosses the Champs-Élysées and the Arc de Triomphe. The district is spread across three municipalities: Nanterre, Courbevoie and Puteaux. La Défense consists mainly of business highrises built along a central esplanade (le Parvis). With 3.5 million m² of offices, it is today the largest district in Europe specifically developped for business. Moreover, La Défense is one of the major financial centers in the world and it wields a considerable clout in the world economy.

Lead now:

La Défense is a major business district of Paris, located in the suburbs just to the west of the city. It is centred on an ovular loop of roadway straddling the Hauts-de-Seine département municipalities of Nanterre, Courbevoie and Puteaux, at the westernmost extremity of Paris' historical axis that, in passing the Champs Élysées and the Arc de Triomphe, originates at the Louvre in the Paris city centre.

Centred around a Grande Arche and central esplanade ("le Parvis"), this district holds many of the Paris urban area's tallest high-rises: with its 3.5 million m² of office space, La Défense is the largest purpose-built business districts in Europe, and one of the world's major centres of international finance.

Hardouin 20:37, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, yes I'leaving France "for good", but will be spending 3 days in Paris around the 19th to 22nd of Oct. I'd love to meet up for a drink or something if you like.

There's no question here, the first version is much better. The second one focuses so much on "objective fact" it fails to inform the reader. You barely have the impression its even connnected to Paris, rather than being the focal endpoint of Paris' most famous street! Overall the new English is very clunky - though honestly the old version was only slightly better. "Ovular loop of roadway straddling..." sounds totally bizarre to me. I would simply say "Oval-shaped road passing though...". As for "this district holds many of the Paris urban area's tallest high-rises" I would have said "almost all of Paris's skyscrapers are found here, with the notable exception of the Tour Montparnasse".

If I didn't know better I would be convinced that TP was deliberately trying to use obfuscated language. I think in fact he simply can't express himself clearly. Pity in that case that he takes it upon himself to rewrite so much! --Stevage 16:49, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

It's been rewritten since, but by all means have a go at it. I was not in that edit war as the language insinuates - actually I rewrote that at as an end compromise between two edit-warring contributors: one wanted "overly-pointed" fact and the other wanted things to remain vague. If Hardouin were honest he would have told you that and presented you with the third version too. I didn't instigate the rewriting, and as long as the phrase doesn't say anything that's untrue, I really don't care one way or the other. Cheers. THEPROMENADER 17:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vote on Fir0002 FPC set

Hi Stevage,
I was wondering if you could spare the time to have a look at these. Thanks! --Fir0002 10:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to ask again so soon, but I've got another small set, with really minor differences, but differences I can't choose b/w! Thanks. --Fir0002 08:43, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Added two edits from people's comments. I'd appreciate if you could make a final choice between them. Thanks! --Fir0002 09:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About Charaxes kahruba

Hi Stevage, Sorry, they were placeholders at a very early stage of my wikipedia life. I'll get down to tracking and removing them. Some more of them are around. We got diverted from stub writing to getting the taxonomy right first. I'm on Lycaenids now. Will get to Nymphalids next. Thanks for the reminder. Regards, AshLin 12:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sparrow on FPC

Hi Stevage!
I've put up version 2 of the sparrow set I asked you about before (on User:Fir0002/FPCandidates) and it's currently got the majority by one vote.
Now I want to make clear that you are of course under no obligation to go vote (and I certainly don't want it to seem like "hey come and support this pic") but just for the sake of determining consensus (and since you liked it when I put it up on my FPC subpage), I was wondering if you could vote here: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/House Sparrow2? Thanks, --Fir0002 06:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Espionnage"

I answered your query on the talk:Sabotage page. 138.217.219.88 10:12, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Robert M. Pagan

Dear Stevage, Before you refer to an article as a "hoax", you should get your information straight. The article as written is in fact true. It was written by my daughter, who in her zeal and youth, combined my side of the story with the wording on the citation, to make a factual article. She is a child, trying to impress her father. As far as you not being able to find anything to substantiate the article, as she said, many things at that time were, and still are classified. Do you have a security clearance high enough to access government information? I can show you the medal, the citation, and even a photograph of the presentation ceremony, if you like. The fact is, she put me on the list of notable recipients because she thought I should be on it. There was no malice or hoax intended. I saw the list of notable recipients, and I agree that I should not be on it. Feel free to remove my name and the article from Wikipedia if you like. But keep in mind, that just because you couldn't find something, doesn't mean it's not true. There are thousands of veterans who are not given the slightest bit of recognition for their sacrifices. She just thought she could give me a little bit of praise. But to be honest, I don't care for or require any slap on the back. Like everyone else over there, I just did my job.

                                       Robert M. Pagan

[edit] Signpost updated for November 20th.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 47	20 November 2006	About the Signpost

One week later, Wikipedia reblocked in mainland China	Military history dominates writing contest
News and notes: Wikibooks donation, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
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 06:50, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

On November 21, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phare de la vieille, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for taking the painstaking effort in translation mate. You've earnt top billing for this update.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 23:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject France

A proposal has been made for the above WikiProject at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#France. Would you be interested in contributing to it? STTW (talk) 20:42, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vote on Fir FPC set

Hi Stevage!
I was wondering if you could vote here? Thanks! --Fir0002 21:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fractals

Hi Stevage. Following your comment on the Mandelbrot FPC, I would like to ask if you had something more specific in mind, concerning a kind of rendering or color choice that would be better? I am sure that it is possible to make many more attractive renderings, but I am afraid it would hurt "enc". I would like to see more quality image fractals on Wikipedia, and am thinking of uploading a few of mines. Apart from flooding Fractal art, perhaps an article like Fractal rendering methods could be a good place to add examples of more elaborate renderings. What do you think? --Bernard 15:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for November 27th.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 48	27 November 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections: Candidate profiles	Steward elections begin
Group apologizes for using Wikipedia name in online arts fundraiser	News and notes: 1.5 million articles, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	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 01:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for December 4th.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 49	4 December 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections open	The Seigenthaler incident: One year later
Wikimedia celebrates Commons milestone, plans fundraiser	Wikipedia wins award in one country, reported blocked in another
News and notes: Steward elections continue, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	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 05:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for December 11th.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 50	11 December 2006	About the Signpost

From the editor: New feature
Board of Trustees expanded as three new members are appointed	Wikimedia Foundation releases financial audit
Arbitration Committee elections continue, extra seat available	Female-only wiki mailing list draws fire
Trolling organization's article deleted	WikiWorld comic: "Redshirt"
News and notes: Fundraiser plans, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
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 05:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cocktail Stubs

Hello. I reverted the change from cocktail-stub to drink-stub on Amaro (drink). I agree with you that Amaro is an alcoholic drink, not a cocktail (not that it can't be used in a cocktail), and it really should be flagged with a drink-stub instead of a cocktail one. However, since the Wikipedia:WikiProject Cocktail is actively seeking and improving stubs and poor articles (tagged with cocktail-expand), it seems to me that it would be best to leave it with the Cocktail tag for now. After March 1st when our Cleanup Project is finished, we can switch it back along with other spririts that have been Cocktail-tagged. Either way, they show up in the main stubs page, so people can and will find them. It just helps the Project memembers locate ones now while we are actively engaged in cleanup. If you feel it must be reverted back to drink-stub immediatel, I will not get into an edit war. I am just trying to give the article as much help as possible to avoid having it deleted just for being a stub. If you are interested, it would be great having your help in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Cocktail. Have a good day! --Willscrlt 02:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for December 18th.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 51	18 December 2006	About the Signpost

From the editor: Holiday publication
Elections conclude, arbitrators to be chosen	Wikimedia Foundation fundraiser opens
WikiWorld comic: "Dr. Seuss"	News and notes: Fundraiser plans, 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 06:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Claudio Gonzalez

Hi Stevage. I've tagged Claudio Gonzalez, which you created back in August 2006, with {{db-bio}}, because there's no assertion of notability. Oh, and for the record, his country is Chile with an e, not Chili! Picaroon 06:09, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for December 26th.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 52	26 December 2006	About the Signpost

Seven arbitrators chosen	Wikipedia classroom assignments on the rise
WikiWorld comic: "Molasses"	News and notes: Stewards appointed, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	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 07:31, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vote on a Fir0002 FPC set

Hi Stevage!
Hope you can drop by here and leave your comments! Thanks, --Fir0002 06:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to ask again so soon, but could you please add your comments here? Thanks a lot --Fir0002 03:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for January 2nd, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 1	2 January 2007	About the Signpost

Effort to modify fair use policy aborted	Esperanza organization disbanded after deletion discussion
WikiWorld comic: "Thagomizer"	News and notes: Fundraiser continues, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	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 07:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Cocktails

Hello. As a person interested in cocktails and/or the WikiProject Cocktails, you may be interested to know that a name change is being considered for the WikiProject from Cocktails to Mixed Drinks. Please add your opinions to the discussion and vote. Also, check out the recent changes to the WikiProject area. Consider becoming an active Participant. Thanks! --Willscrlt 09:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for January 8th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 2	8 January 2007	About the Signpost

Special: 2006 in Review	Another newspaper columnist found to have plagiarized Wikipedia
Blogs track attempts to manipulate articles	Nutritional beef cooks PR editor
WikiWorld comic: "Facial Hair"	News and notes: Fundraiser continues, 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 07:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vote on peacock Fir0002 FPC set

Hi Steve,
Hope you don't mind me asking, but could you please take a look at these? Thanks a lot --Fir0002 05:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:References-small (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Just to let you know that I have nominated the template you created, Template:References-small (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs), for deletion since it is superseded by {{Reflist}}. --Frodet 23:38, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 3	15 January 2007	About the Signpost

Special: 2006 in Review, Part II	New arbitrators interviewed
Cascading protection feature added	WikiWorld comic: "Apples and Oranges"
News and notes: Fundraiser breaks $1,000,000, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
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 06:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I Heart Huckabees

There is a new debate on the name change at Talk:I ♥ Huckabees. Bssc81 19:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English vs. French spelling

Because of your past work on the Wikiprojects for French "régions", "départements" or "communes", I thought you might be interested in contributing to the current discussion over French vs. English spelling of those very words taking place at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_France#Anglicisation. Cheers. --NYArtsnWords 23:50, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello Stevage - there's been an RfC opened on the above - could we have a word there from you too? Thanks if you can. THEPROMENADER 17:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 4	22 January 2007	About the Signpost

Wikipedia modifies handling of "nofollow" tag	WikiWorld comic: "Truthiness"
News and notes: Talk page template, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	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 06:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category deletion in nordic skiing

I noticed that you have been deleting from the individual championships of the FIS Nordic World Ski Championships. May I ask why? I think this category should be in the ones that are already in there (1925-95) and the ones that you have removed (1980, 1997-2011) should be returned. Can you please respond on this. I would greatly appreciate it. Chris 02:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with your category, but I do need to remind you that Nordic skiing consists of cross country skiing, ski jumping, and nordic combined. The FIS Nordic World Ski Championships consists of events for all three disciplines. Unless you want to put the championships on equal footings as the disciplines. It is just a thought. Chris 14:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I agree with your suggestion. I look forward to working with on future endeavours. Chris 15:12, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Idigenous Australians

Hi Stevage. With regard to your edit: While the percentile is significant, it is not one the few facts that will inform the reader about this topic. The populations are to the right of the lead article and this leads the reader to census data. What do you think? Fred 04:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that infoboxes should not substitute for text in the article. I didn't read the infobox, and I suspect many people don't. By all means have it - but in addition to the text. And as for a key fact, well, when I've travelled overseas, it's one of the first questions people ask me about Australia - how many aboriginal people are there (strangely enough). I know it doesn't necessarily have a simple straightforward answer, but it's definitely important enough to address in the first paragraph. Stevage 02:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

We definitely have to find a consensus. I don't know how many people you talked to, but it is probably not a reference we can use. I will put this all on the talk page, if ok with you? Regards, Fred 14:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure. Don't get me wrong, I don't know anything about the issue: I'm just saying that the first paragraph should answer the question "How many Australians are of indigenous descent?" I don't know if the answer is 2.4% or not. Stevage 03:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

On 30 January 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Female urination device, 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.

--Yomangani^talk 10:04, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 5	29 January 2007	About the Signpost

Foundation names advisory board, new hires	Court decisions citing Wikipedia proliferate
Microsoft approach to improving articles opens can of worms	WikiWorld comic: "Hyperthymesia"
News and notes: Investigation board deprecated, 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 18:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 6	5 February 2007	About the Signpost

Foundation organizational changes enacted	Group of arbitrators makes public statement about IRC
AstroTurf PR firm discovered astroturfing	WikiWorld comic: "Clabbers"
News and notes: More legal citations, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
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 05:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Victoria

I intended to revert this - I'm going to a) blame my tool b) not use it that way in the future Josh Parris 05:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] f-number

In F-number&oldid=55724782 you write

sharpness is best at medium f-numbers is that the sharpness at high f-number is constrained by diffraction, whereas at low f-numbers limitations of the lens design known as aberrations will dominate

Do you have a reference for the diffraction part? As I understand it, diffraction effects are only significant when the pupil size approaches the wavelength. TomViza 23:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requests for arbitration#Anglicisation of French administrative terms

I have initiated a Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Anglicisation of French administrative terms. Please leave your comments. -- NYArtsnWords 23:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 7	12 February 2007	About the Signpost

US government agencies discovered editing	Comment prompts discussion of Wikimedia's financial situation
Board recapitulates licensing policy principles	WikiWorld comic: "Extreme ironing"
News and notes: Picture of the Year, 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 05:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ned Kelly

That a criminal who maintained a 2 year spree of murder and robbery can be one of the most important figures is certainly POV. To give but one example, Redmond Barry, the judge who sentenced him to hang, is far more important, as the founder of institutions such as Melbourne University and the State Library. What about John Batman, John Fawkner, Charles LaTrobe, Peter Lawler, Alfred Deakin, to just give a handful of examples. To say that Ned Kelly is as "important" as any of these beggers belief.

He is certainly a well-known folk hero, and the article states that. And of course crime and criminals are interesting to a lot of people, so they are important to people who like to read crime histories. But that does not make them "important" in the broad sense of the word.

But of course the above is my POV. More importantly you did not source your statement. If you think it should be included please find a relevent, reputable source that supports the statement, and reference it in the article.

--Michael Johnson 01:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Guys can I assist with the POV. Ned Kelly did appear in an early book, '100 Great Lives' (Australian edition). Also Supt Hare who was one of his police pursuers described him as 'the greatest man in the world' cited in J.J. Kenneally, "The inner history of the Kelly Gang" (1929) p. 4. Tonyob 03:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Kelly is *more* important than those figures in the sense that he is well known. Your average Autsralian has not heard of all of the above examples. But even primary school kids learn about Ned Kelly. To ignore his place in history (after Captain Cook, who in pre-20th century Australian history is more well known?) in the intro is what "beggars belief". If you prefer "well known", "renowned" or "famous" to "important", then you should go ahead and change the wording. But reverting my entire edit (including the fact that he was hanged at Melbourne Gaol) for being "pov" is blatantly rude, and poor wiki etiquette. Stevage 03:56, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

"Important" means have some effect on the future. Anna Nicole Smith is no doubt better known in many quarters than Condoleezza Rice. No doubt now many thousands of words will be written about Anna Nicole Smith, but thst does not make her in any way important. Rice of course is the third most powerful person in the world, which makes her very important. "Well known" does describe it, but the paragraph already mentions that he is Australia's most famous bushranger, and s folk hero to many, so anything more sounds to me like a peacock term. As for your mention of popular culture and being hanged in the Melbourne Gaol, both are covered in detail later in the article, but if you wish to add them to the introduction, I would have no objection. I'm sorry you feel I was being rude in reverting your edit on POV grounds, I could also have written that it was irrelevent and unsourced, if that assists you. --Michael Johnson 04:33, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

BTW if you want to reply, please do on my talk page. It is only by accident that I came back here. --Michael Johnson 04:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Irrelevant, heh. Pointing out that Kelly is one of the most famous *people* (not just bushrangers) in Australia's history is "irrelevant". And that his life ended by hanging, irrelevant? What on earth do you mean? Stevage 06:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for February 19th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 8	19 February 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor
Arbitrator Dmcdevit resigns; replacements to be appointed	Essay questions Wikipedia's success: Abort, Retry, Fail?
In US, half of Wikipedia traffic comes from Google	WikiWorld comic: "Tony Clifton"
News and notes: Brief outage, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
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 07:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Featured Picture

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Luna Park Melbourne scenic railway.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Raven4x4x 08:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, and thanks for nominating it. Raven4x4x 08:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 9	26 February 2007	About the Signpost

Three users temporarily desysopped after wheel war	Peppers article stays deleted
Pro golfer sues over libelous statements	Report from the Norwegian (Bokmål) Wikipedia
WikiWorld comic: "Pet skunk"	News and notes: New arbitrators appointed, 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 08:37, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 10	5 March 2007	About the Signpost

New Yorker correction dogs arbitrator into departure	WikiWorld comic: "The Rutles"
News and notes: Picture of the Year, 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 06:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] See also

Well, I take "see also" to mean "see also". Wikipedia:Guide to layout#See also:

"The 'See also' section provides an additional list of internal links to other articles in the Wikipedia that are related to this one as a navigational aid, and it should ideally not repeat links already present in the article." (emphasis in original). --Mel Etitis (Talk) 14:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] URLs

Hi Stevage, when we only have a URL, it's best just to leave it as an embedded link (in square brackets) in the text, which is allowed by WP:CITE. Otherwise, the reader has to click twice but gets no additional information, whereas clicking on a footnote gives the citation. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 15:46, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, yeah. Good point. Stevage 16:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 11	12 March 2007	About the Signpost

Report of diploma mill offering pay for edits	Essay tries to clarify misconceptions about Wikipedia
Blog aggregator launched for Wikimedia-related posts	WikiWorld comic: "Cartoon Physics"
News and notes: Wikimania 2007, 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 05:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Enhance history

Im trying to install your js but Im having no luck. Could you explain? Ive also made a comment at User talk:Stevage/EnhanceHistory.user.js. Regards, -Stevertigo 02:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I installed it, but it doesnt seem to be running. Any manual? -Stevertigo 02:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brittany

Sorry about that. I was in a rush. Thanks for pointing it out though.--Ryan ¾ 19:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

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 07:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 13	26 March 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Tardiness, volunteers, RSS
Patrick and Wool resign in office shakeup	WikiWorld comic: "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
News and notes: Board resolutions, milestones	Features and admins
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 14:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Killer whale FPC

Hello. A Featured Picture Candidate you commented on, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Killer whale mother and calf, is now in the section for "Older nominations requiring additional input from voters." Contributors have tried to improve it after you commented, and your opinion is welcome as to which, if any, of the available versions deserves promotion. I am sending this message to everyone who participated in the FPC. Thanks! Kla'quot 06:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)