User talk:Majabl

Welcome to the Wikipedia[edit]

Here are some links I thought useful:

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. Wikipedia:About, Wikipedia:Help desk, and Wikipedia:Village pump are also a place to go for answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be Bold!

Sam_Spade (talk · contribs) 15:45, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hi![edit]

Would be glad to cooperate with you.--Planemo 22:57, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Northampton Tunnels[edit]

Unfortunately there is not a lot of written material availalbe - even here in Northampton. They could make a good feature for tourists if they were developed! Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! ^(Whisper...) 15:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dudley[edit]

Cheers for comments on infobox, unsure as to why postcodes didnt show up, feel free to correct any info. --Greenfinch100 13:23, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Manchester[edit]

With regards to this, you are quite right. Please accept my apologies as I'm normally much more accurate...

I had actually copied this text from another article and had not checked the details. However, I suspect that the article may paraphrase the EU guidelines mentioned and I'll try to take a look in the next few days as, like you say, the statement itself isn't likely to be disputable.

Thanks however, keep up the good work, Jhamez84 02:30, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help - what else is peer review for! :-)

I've created a Geography and administration section on Manchester as (per the format being rolled out on other articles - Oldham etc) it will be able not only to tell us what and where Manchester is before going on to its history, but it was also allow for what I believe you intend as an early "scope" section.

I've made some other changes to the lead, which are broadly cosmetic. Hope the new section (which may need a little work now) is what you had in mind. Jhamez84 00:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Skeptic[edit]

Thanks for pointing out that someone changed the sceptic template and the alcoholic templace Jooler 13:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see sceptic's gone back to the 'proper' spelling, but the drinking one didn't like my amendment about menstrual blood. Fancy drinking periods! Matthew 23:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Edgbaston Hall; Long Buckby railway station; Soho House; Green Men of Birmingham; Althorp; Metropolitan Borough of Bolton; Dave Mason; National Indoor Arena; Toxication; William Withering; Urban Dubz Records; Lickey Hills; Sparkbrook; Five Ways railway station; Diss; Mac (Birmingham); Nechells; British Steel; Ladywood

Cleanup: Lincoln, Lincolnshire; Nuclear energy policy; Brummagem
Merge: Liverpool Salvage Corps; Pogus Caesar; Kåldolmar
Add Sources: Farther Common; Alsager; Murray Walker
Wikify: Oba; Macanese people; Corporate Fraud Task Force
Expand: Alexander Thomson; Industrial action; German Revolution

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 17:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:British Isles[edit]

Unfortunately your last edit to Talk:British Isles deleted earlier posts – I appreciate it's the sort of thing that can happen accidentally, so trust you'll try to check changes in future to avoid this problem. .. dave souza, talk 14:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mea culpa! Thanks for noticing and fixing. Matthew 14:08, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ta, .. dave souza, talk 15:25, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject West Midlands is active![edit]

Hey, as you expressed your interest in participating in the West Midlands Wikiproject, I thought I should now tell you that is now active: Wikipedia:WikiProject West Midlands. If you are still interested, please add your name to the list of Participants.

I will be doing some tasks to get the project going such as created user templates and templates for articles as well as seeing if any more users and editors would be interested in participating. Thanks! - Erebus555 12:55, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done! And I've even got the talk page going. Matthew 13:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Location Maps[edit]

On the WikiProject Countries talk page, you had either explictly declared a general interest in the project, or had participated at a discussion that appears related to Location Maps for European countries.
New maps had been created by David Liuzzo, and are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.
As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions), and also which new version should be applied for which countries.
Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. The subsections on the talk page that had shown David Liuzzo's original maps, now show his most recent design.
Please read the discussion (also in other sections α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η, θ) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the presentation of the currently open survey. You are invited to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option.
There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 7 Feb 2007 20:24 (UTC)

Thanks, but I don't like any of the alternatives as none of them address my overriding concerns. So I think I am best not to vote at all to make this as clear as possible. Matthew 20:42, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most certainly respecting your decision, and appreciating your several contributions regarding the forementioned topic. — SomeHuman 8 Feb 2007 21:11 (UTC)

Happy to have been of use! Matthew 21:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Euro statements in UK history section[edit]

Thanks for the revert, please see Talk:United Kingdom#The public generally favours keeping the Pound Sterling.... Thanks/wangi 00:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No probs - I can just about buy the last claim from the source (biggest growth of major EU economies), given that major EU economies equates to the UK, France, and Germany. The rest of it does not at all follow from the source, though. Matthew 00:31, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warning about edit warring[edit]

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in United Kingdom. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Heimstern Läufer 02:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sufficient detail was provided in my edit remarks; unfortunately, it is the case that with some users discussion is unproductive and they'll just keep pushing their edits, resorting to sockpuppets if needed. Matthew 09:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UK MOS?[edit]

I just had a glance back at the UK talk page and noticed you thought my suggestion for a UK-Manual of style was a good idea (re: billion vs thousand million). I was wondering if you'd made any movement toward creating a page for it or not - part of the UK Portal maybe..? Cheers. --Mal 06:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I haven't done anything since making that comment. Do you plan to advance with the plans for a UK MoS? Matthew 09:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

West Midlands Improvement Drive[edit]

Well as you know, Dudley was selected for the improvement drive in the West Midlands WikiProject. One thing that the article needs is images and as your user page says you are from Dudley, would it be possible for you to get images of Dudley? This is if you have a digital camera. If not, then I'll try and sort something out but I felt it could be easier to ask you first.

Plus, the improvement drive nominations page has got very quiet since the latest nomination process began! Maybe you could add a nomination or support/objection to the current nomination. Thanks and happy editting! - Erebus555 21:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Due to other commitments I won't be able to do anything in the immediate future, but I should be able to get something done in a month or so's time. Matthew 12:45, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested?[edit]

Would you be interested in posting here? It may be of interest to you. Jhamez84 20:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not fight![edit]

Hello Matthew/ Majabi - as your old sparring partner I note your recent addition to economy of Manchester. I agree that your slight amendment reads better and is more appropriate than my initial update. A good example of wikipedia working well! My initial update was placed in good faith and was in no way meant to exaggerate nor to overstate the point that I was making. Despite our spat last week I do hope that you will recognise that my edits are in good faith. If you feel my edits need altering continue to feel free to change them but I hope we can work more effectively together henceforth. Regards GRB1972 (talk) 20:08, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good man! And apologies for my excitable rhetoric last week, it was the first edit war I have ever been involved in! In my defence, and this is a rather lame excuse, I had just become a father last Wednesday so I blame it all on fatigue! Looking back, it was silly stuff which I don't intend to get involved in again. Happy sniping! RegardsGRB1972 (talk) 20:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Busses from Northampton[edit]

Oxford may well be connected by a local bus service but so is Milton Keynes, Bedford, Peterborough, Leicester and others. Without wanting to be seen as petty, do we list local destinations or list all destinations?Trevor Marron (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added on 21:39, 25 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Worcestershierre, Warwickshierre, and Everyshierre[edit]

Hello Majabl! A non-British user seems to be attempting to suggest that the Brits are not pronouncing their own British place names correctly, and appears to believe that it is a policy of Wikipedia to instruct the Brits, through the use of the IPA, how British English should be pronounced. He/she also seems to be of the opinion that it is Wikipedia policy to regard British English by default as a rhotic language, which it is not. Some British Wikipedians are trying to avoid an edit conflict and have requested my support. I have added my comments to the debate the non-British user has has started in defence of his/her multiple, WP:BOLD? changes to IPA pronunciations of British place names. As a professional linguist I accord every version of English its own particular merits and my position here strictly concerns the way in which the IPA is interpreted and applied in the Wikipedia, and how the current policy may need to be changed through a truly representative consensus. If you would like to help resolve this issue, please see User talk:Kudpung#IPA, RP, etc. and User talk:Lfh#Warwickshire to get the background. Maybe you could then chime in with your views on the subject at Wikipedia talk:IPA for English#Rhoticity in place names. Thanks. --Kudpung (talk) 18:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP Northamptonshire[edit]

Hi Majabl just to let you know some Northamptonshire articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release (which I never herd of until today). It can be seen here. It just advises to make some Northants articles better and I'm currently working on Northamptonshire/Kettering which is coming along nicely, but help would be appreciated, best Likelife (talk) 16:10, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Atletico Madrid revenue[edit]

I was thinking the same - whether Real Madrid with Atletico have a higher combined revenue than City and United? Certainly London does, both Manchester club's beat Milan's revenue from their two clubs. I'll see if I can route out some financial figures for Atletico. Also, just beware I'm re-doing the Economy of Manchester so that's why its a bit of a mess at the moment so please don't undo edits for the time being. Regards. Stevo1000 (talk) 12:50, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Response (as per http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Stevo1000&oldid=393689843):

Comments noted! Deloitte's figures aren't detailed enough to give Atletico's revenue so at the moment, but I'd guess they're enough to give Madrid second spot after London. I've just thought that Barcelona could also be a bigger footballing city than Manchester by revenue, if Espanyol turns over more than €62m a year, but again there are no figures for that.

I spotted another thing that'll need changing in the Economy of Manchester article too, about education. The part about students/universities is a little ambiguous and I can't really work out what it means.... What doesn't seem at all controversial is that according to List of UK universities by size, Manchester has the UK's largest and second-largest universities at which students can attend for their studies, and the third-largest body of students after London and Birmingham (unless there more than two universities in Manchester, because I used only the figures for the University of Manchester and MMU). Matthew (talk) 22:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference[edit]

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 19:23, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]