User talk:Noisy/Archive01

Abington School District v. Schempp

Thanks :) I've got heaps to do still, but if you can start the cleanup process that would be great. I was going to comment on it, then start cleanup (if it's possible). I suspect vast chunks of information will be carved out of the article before it's up to scratch!

Ta bu shi da yu 14:35, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Ladies

Dictdefs are not grounds for speedy deletion. And if you'll read the bottom of the VfD page, you'll see there are two ways to do it. RickK 04:26, Jul 13, 2004 (UTC)

No I will not revert all my changes. Thats not the way it works. The category needs to be depopulated first. The category page deletion itself can be reversed, but there needs to be a more active consensus, to deal with it. See my post on the WP:VP. Thanks. -Stevertigo 17:43, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Your User page is distinctly useful

Such a short time after you signed up, too! Thanks for the recent note. Plimmerton, on the north shore of the Porirua Harbour, is a picturesque half-hour train ride (including New Zealand's fourth-longest tunnel) out of central Wellington. I work in the latter; 4709542 is likely to find me between 7.50 and 6 most weekdays. Are you a Kiwi? - Robin Patterson 01:24, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hayford Peirce

• • Hi Noisy, Thanks for your kind note to me at my user page. And thanks for the really nice tweaking you did at the Pro Tennis page. I just looked at it and the settings now seem very simple and very clear. If I'd had a template like that to start with it would have been a cinch to set up the article in the first place.
    • I did think about the "Championship[s]" business before I got started but I decided to go with the plural anyway because I'm going to list two different Championship tournaments at this site, the Wembley one, which I'm working on, and the U.S. championships as soon as I get the info. So I think that the plural is indicated in this case. But, as you say, I can always go back and change it here and there later. Or some nit-picking WPian can do it for me, hehe....
    • Thanks for the tip about where to respond to someone like you. I've only had a dialogue a couple of times with anyone, and I was baffled about where exactly I should be sending my replies....All the best,Hayford Peirce 16:51, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

delete empty category with no history

You seem to have created a large number of categories that previously did not exist, just to put the CFD message on those category pages. Don't Do That!! --ssd 12:00, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Just figured out that they disappear if the last item that uses that category is removed. Sorry. Noisy 12:06, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

S'okay, as long as you figgure it out.  :) BTW, Category:Air Force was still listed on Special:categories for a while even though it was empty and had no article, I don't know if it is still there. Bugs. *sigh* WP:CFD can't really delete the category, just discuss moving everything out of the category and deleting its description page, which usually deletes it. --ssd 14:52, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Your vote needed at George_W._Bush

Please go here, ASAP and vote.

Rex071404 07:11, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

New Bush vote now under way - please vote

Here [1]

Rex071404 15:59, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

==Rationality vs rationalism== (moved to Talk page Noisy 23:11, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)) Rationality describing economic behavior refers to a set of behavioral principles such as maximization, minimization, non-deterministic choice subject to constraints (e.g avoidance of pain, bounded rationality). In practical terms these behavioral principles supply a set of assumptions which simplify the analysis of (human, consumer, investor) behavior. This has nothing to with rationalism as a worldview.CSTAR 19:13, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Sorry I responded on the wrong page to your question CSTAR 19:44, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

AstraZeneca plc

I agree with mushing "Astra Zeneca" together, but the "plc" seems pretty fishy. I don't think most company articles include the "inc", "ltd". Maybe list AstraZeneca on Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion? Mackerm 07:40, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I did have a bit of a crisis of confidence halfway through resolving all the redirects. but I'd started, so I finished. I specifically checked on the global website, and, although the copyright statement on each page just said AstraZeneca, evidence seemed to point to it being AstraZeneca plc. See at the foot of this legal notice where it says: "References to "AstraZeneca", "Group", "we", "us" and "our" are references to AstraZeneca PLC and its affiliates." My opinion is that the entity should be listed under its formal name (although that leaves the question of whether it should be plc or PLC ;-) (see public limited company, where all the company entries are listed with the lower case version)).

I am also of the opinion that all redirects should be left in place to stop someone coming along and creating a new article when one already exists.

If your feelings are strong on this matter, then get back to me and we can work something out. Alternatively, if you can find a Wikipedia policy statement on usage of Inc., Ltd., plc, AB etc. then I'll abide by what it says there, or contribute to a discussion. Noisy | Talk 09:08, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Astra Zeneca

Hi Noisy, I didn't notice that you had made a statement on the talk page before moving the article, and thank you for pointing it out. However, I do not agree that it needed to be moved. See the talk page for further discussion on this. Cheers. -- Mic 21:07, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Redirects

Hi - I had specifically chosen those redirects because they were what Maxwell-Fyfe was called at the time (ordinary name when he became a PC and was Home Secretary, Viscount Kilmuir when he was Lord Chancellor, Earl of Kilmuir when he retired). I think it is a bit misleading to have all links go directly to Earl of Kilmuir. 172.186.77.192

I have left the text in the article itself alone (i.e. what the person was called at the time of the event in question); it is only the redirect that has been changed. It is standard practice to elide redirects (Wikipedia:How to edit a page#Links and URLs), and (although I'm not part of the community that decided on the convention) the way of naming the main article should follow a standard rule. Your creation of the redirect at David Maxwell-Fyfe was the correct thing to do, but that is primarily to support searching, rather than for general usage in article space.

I left a welcome message for you at the talk page of the IP you were using. Please take the trouble to create an account. It's the work of a few seconds, and you get additional whizzy features, such as the capability to move pages. Cheers, Noisy | Talk 07:56, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Well, I went for a search for more detailed policy direction on elision of redirects. I haven't found any, to date, other than that under Wikipedia:Redirect — and that isn't explicit at all. In general, when you click 'What links here', you would expect to see everything pointing directly at the page you're on, rather than via redirects. I don't know, but I presume that this is to reduce server load (by reducing the additional code executed each time you click on a link that gets redirected). Noisy | Talk 08:56, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Clarification has been requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Noisy | Talk 09:14, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Language name order

Hi - I see you changed the order of a few of the languages of the Winston Churchill article. The usual order languages appear in is the order of the names of each language, not language-code order. Hence Hebrew appears collated as "Ivrit", Japanese as "Nihongo", and Chinese as "Zhonguen". -- Arwel 11:44, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

So Albanian (SQ) comes before Dutch (NL), which comes before French (FR), which comes before German (DE), which comes before Welsh (CY)?. Err, no you misunderstand that. For those languages the order would be Cymraeg, Deutsch, Francais, Nederlands, Shqip. In most cases the order is the same as the language code, it's just the non-Western alphabet languages that cause some confusion. On most languages homepages the "Wikipedia in other languages" section is in this order -- the en: homepage used to be in this order too, until some months ago someone changed them to the alphabetical order of the English language-name, which caused considerable confusion as people couldn't find the links in the place they expected; eventually it got reorganised based on the size of the Wikipedia in that language, which was at least a bit more logical from the multilingual point of view. -- Arwel 12:40, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The 100 (book)

Hi,

On the talk page of The 100 (book) you wrote: Boy, that guy Hart has a big problem with reality. Could you possibly elaborate why do you think so? I really liked this book, but perhaps I missed something about it. I'd like to know your opinion. Przepla 21:44, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Steve Jones

Hi there; I've replied to your query at User talk:Hadal#S Jones is not a prominent evolutionary biologist. (Normally I'd put my reply to you on your talk page, but I thought it best not to fragment the thread since it's a few days old already.) Cheers, -- Hadal 09:13, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Owen Jones

No, I'm afraid I have never worked in a bank in Manchester. Thanks for the tips though, and it's nice to hear from someone. Owen Jones 20:19, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

Inappropriate CSD

Hello, Noisy. You nominated Joan of Arc (cross-dressing) as a CSD, which was not in line with consensus decisions and Wikipedia policy. Please read Talk:Joan of Arc (cross-dressing), Wikipedia:Candidates for speedy deletion and Wikipedia:Deletion policy if you are confused about the policy. —siroχo 11:52, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. You're probably thinking of the CSD case for "Reposted content that was deleted according to Wikipedia deletion policy.", which is not quite the case here. Certainly the merge should be performed and the article changed to a redirect, but there is no deletion involved in merging and redireecting. If this article was deleted and re-instated by a method other than undeletion, then it would be a CSD. Anyways, if you do complete the merge, it should be redirected. The main purpose of the redirect in a case like this is to preserve the history of the article, since a history merge isn't really an option here. —siroχo 12:08, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it can be speedy deleted just because the original author wanted it to be, it still doesn't apply to any CSD case. Probably would need to be put up for WP:RFD. —siroχo 22:57, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

Poll

I have created a preliminary version of Wikipedia:VfD decisions not backed by current policies/poll. Your comments would be much appreciated. - SimonP 17:09, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

Ordering

Ordering of interwiki links and categories was switched ON SPECIFIC REQUEST FROM PEOPLE ON THIS WIKIPEDIA. It's easy enough to switch that around - it does it the way you want on all other Wikipedias. But on English I was told it was wanted the other way around. Apparently it's not. Bless me! - Andre Engels 07:11, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I hereby demand apologies for your remarks. I also promise to use the order requested by you in the future. - Andre Engels 07:34, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Cats and interwiki

See what I wrote on User talk:Robbot under the "Cats go below interwiki?" heading. —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 21:10, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)

Mediation

Hello Noisy. Andre Engels has requested mediation at Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation#Andre_Engels_and_Noisy. Would you be willing to take part? Please let me know on that page. Thanks -- sannse (talk) 17:50, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

How to stop line breaks

That's what   is for. Underscores look ugly. -- Tim Starling 09:50, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for saying hello

Noisy,

I am gratefull for your visit to my talk page. I have been having maddening dificulties with the comunity portal and have been unable to contact other members here. Its good to know theres somebody out there :) My first task as a ananymous user (my spelling is horribble but i usually spelcheck my article and edidts) Was to add a article to a link that lead to nowhere (id never come across a link that did not have a article at the end) Fraser magnolia Since its a obscure little plant, no ones seen it to edidt it for problems (it must have problems; it was my first action on this site)

I still do not know how to put my signature on my article. With or without help, i am going to Create articles for magnolia page links that lead to nowhere, and include unlisted species.

Thanks again!

Fledgeling

Redirect you created at "Wolverhampton & Dudley Breweries plc"

Hi, you created a redirect from Wolverhampton & Dudley Breweries plc to Wolverhampton & Dudley Breweries PLC, but there is currently no article at Wolverhampton & Dudley Breweries PLC. (It may have been deleted since the redirect was created.) Wikipedia policy is to get rid of redirects to non-existent pages, and someone listed Wolverhampton & Dudley Breweries plc on WP:RfD If you want the redirect to stay, you will need to create something at Wolverhampton & Dudley Breweries PLC (even a stub will do), or else the redirect will go away. If you do create the target, you don't have to do anything on WP:RfD (we'll eventually notice the target is there), but if you do, just delete the entry for Wolverhampton & Dudley Breweries plc. Thanks! Noel (talk) 03:59, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Great, thanks! I'll delete the RfD entry. Noel (talk) 19:05, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Archive 01 - 2H2005

London WikiMeet

Just a note to say that it was a real pleasure meeting up with you last night. I look forward to another opportunity to meet sometime in the future. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 08:28, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

shed meaning

Yeah, i agree with how you handled shed. Infact, i ended up in the shed page from aacne page. That is how i noticed the link dont make sense as the way the word shed was used in the acne page was not present. Not sure whether my last sentence is free of ambiguity, but hopes you will get what i am trying to say

Elona Bojaxhi is not a Copy Violation

Hi Noisy, I checked the link that was added and the site New York Models copied a version of the April 12, 2004 article from Wikipedia! I did not get my info from that website! They are the ones that have taken in formation and photos of this model from various places including Wikipedia. The article does not have to be re-written as far as I'm concerned since New York City Models took their info from an article that I started.

Wikipedia claims that the information on it is free to use I believe and so someone took the article from it. I'm not making this up, I don't think there was even a listing on New York Models when I wrote the article in April for I did an internet search on her before I started the article. Ebbpeg