User talk:Doktorbuk/Archive

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

• • • See User talk:Doktorbuk for main talk page. Please do NOT create or modify conversations on this page; this is merely an archive for long gone history.***

Has been moved from

10:02, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Railway station articles

Hi. Thanks for the new articles. Would you consider putting the following links in, with data being drawn from the two columns in the

UK railway stations - B

articles.

==External links==

{{stn art lnk|BRX|SW98JW}}

thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)

Thanks. It's good to see the station articles you're adding; I appreciate your work. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Yup; I've found rail ines on Wikipedia to be an addiction; once i've started a line, its impossible to leave it and not have the entire line in Wikipedia! Been a bit of a gap in my contributions recently though, as I've been away for four days. I think I might try and get the West Coast Main Line filled with stubs at least; and I need to tidy up some of my previous creations too! Robdurbar 14:11, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

For your wonderful work on UK related articles, especially the stations, I award you the Exceptional Newcomer Award! Keep it up! :) the wub "?/!" 15:50, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I saw your message on the Village Pump. Have you considered setting up your own personal sandbox? You could start a page at User:Doktorbuk/sandbox and practice making tables until you're happy with your work. Joyous (talk) 22:07, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Since resolved, but here for record

The IP in question does have a history of vandalizing articles. [1] However, I have unblocked it for now, as it may be shared by multiple users. --Ixfd64 18:48, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

It was not me who removed it, but here's the reason;

Serbia and Montenegro are not a debuting team. They qualified in 1998 as Yugoslavia (politically the same nation), however since they are the direct successors of the

, their debut started in the very first world cup. One could also use the same reasoning for Croatia and the other former Yugoslav republics, but they prefer independence and chose to be counted as separate.

Please sign your comments on talk pages. I have put my reasoning on the Football World Cup article talk page doktorb 07:08, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for that contribution! Andjam 07:00, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Doc! Sorry about the collateral damage from the AOL block. I'll go back through the block log and unblock you. Believe me, any good, registered user such as yourself is anything but a vandal and I hate like hell seeing a good user get fouled up over someone else's shenanigans. Again, I am so terribly sorry for the inconvenience. - Lucky 6.9 07:12, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Very much for your kind support of my adminship. I'll do my best to live up to your and my other supporters' expectations. If you have any comments or concerns on my actions as an administrator, please let me know. Thank you! — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 14:42, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Just to let you know, an article you've voted for, has became this fortnight's UKCOTW -

19:31, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Please put the Eddie Guerrero story back on the news page

When I last checked, professional wrestling as we now know it is scripted entertainemt, NOT a legitimate sport. The Eddie Guerrero story belonged on the news page beacuse of that. NoseNuggets 1:42 US EST Nov 14 2005.

I already did. And I added the original WWE link along with the ABC News link. NoseNuggets 1:47 AM US EST Nov 14 2005.

With regards to the deletion policy, I can't tell whether you're querying the deletion policy, or whether you're querying the process of nominating an article for deletion.

• Deletion policy regards what gets deleted and what doesn't:
  WP:DEL
• Deletion/AFD process is how to nominate or vote for deletion when the appropriate action is to nominate an article (etc) for deletion:
  WP:AFD

If what you are having trouble with is the three-step process required to nominate an article, there are a couple of

09:14, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Unblocked

You should be unblocked now. David | Talk 12:18, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Oops, sorry about that. I've unblocked you, since I highly doubt the vandal is using that IP address now. Johnleemk | Talk 15:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

IP address 195.93.21.73 has been unblocked, thank you for notifying me. Hall Monitor 20:09, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstar, much appreciated. It didn't take too long to categorise the stations once I got into the routine of copy and pasting the categories etc - it was just that there was a lot of articles to work through. Now that they are all sorted nicely, I think I will make a start on creating articles for a few local stations (in the Highlands and the Edinburgh area). Thanks, Vclaw 01:00, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem; I saw the entries in advance of the event and being a fan - became hooked. Still a bit more to do to bring all the tables into a consistent form and also to allow the input of "times/score/points". Kevinalewis 09:32, 22 December 2005 (UTC) thought I had sorry

[above un-signed comment from Kevinalewis]

Hi, Just to comment on this and specifically on Gateman1997's question how is a giant list of streets useful I agree it's not very useful. What I do think is useful is the structure of a master list and sublists and I feel it would be a pity to remove that. If any editor wants to go into these lists and remove all the red links that's fine - people can then create the blue ones from scratch for any streets that are notable enough. Alternatively, we can leave the red links as an encouragement for people to turn the important ones blue - I have a mild preference for that but it doesn't really matter. There seem to be only about 20 live street links which is too few for a major city like Paris - I imagine there could usefully be articles on up to 100 or so and we should try to encourage their creation. Hope that explains my anorak tendency a bit more clearly :-) Dlyons493 Talk 02:40, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I resolved the issues in the AFD. And I left a more detailed summary in the article's entry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gabriels_Fallen Can you let me know when I can remove the thing that says "This article is being considered for deletion" from our page? Thanks Again - Chris

Just noticed your comment here and I wanted to say my remark was not addressed to you personally. It's just that rapid tagging of borderline articles is one of my pet peeves and I tend to point it out. Otherwise, it's fine with me if people want to nom schools or other types of articles all day long (although they are rarely deleted). Cheers-- JJay 03:22, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Greetings. I've made a new

for arbcom candidates to show on their userpages so that visiters will know they're running.

{{

User arbcom nom

}}

If you'd like to place it on your userpage, feel free. Regards, – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 02:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I'm just letting you know that I was the author of that page, and I've left you a message on its request for deletion page. Waynem|talk 18:05, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I feel that the articles about the new constituencies would be better if they didn't have the maps of the old constituencies on them - particularly as the maps are automatically labelled as "X constituency within Y". Therefore I've twiddled with a few articles to remove not-relevant maps. Morwen - Talk 19:43, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, for example, with York Outer (UK Parliament constituency) it was showing the map for the old Vale of York (UK Parliament constituency) seat. I've changed this so it shows a non-existant map for York Outer. This means when User:Keith_Edkins uploads the map for the new set it will automatically display in place.

However, in the long term we might want to have a different naming convention for such maps, incorporating the year - otherwise it could get really hard to tell whether a constituency that hadn't been renamed had the new map. Morwen - Talk 19:50, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. That's one where the "Borough Qualifier" falls down - "Outer York" would be better, even though it sounds rather like it should be near Outer Space. Morwen - Talk 19:57, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi! You said: Can't find the link, but Wikipedia is not for something school kids made up during a bored moment.

22:08, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

GB railway stations

Hi. I’ve just posted a request for comments at Talk:Nottingham station regarding the “service information boxes” in GB railway station articles. I’m not sure who the first begetter of these boxes was, but as I noticed you are a frequent contributor on rail-related topics I thought you might care to take a look. --Picapica 22:46, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

This is not the case. A majority of the constituencies have the suffix because that was the most convenient way to create them rapidly and semi-automatically before the election, but not "nearly all" of them. Wikipedia policy is not to disambiguate when no disambiguation is neccesary, WikiProjects do not get to overrule this policy. This has been discussed several times before, on the project talk pages and on a failed page move request. Joe D (t) 13:16, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I have deleted your link on Llandudno Junction railway station to the Welsh version for two reasons. Firstly the link is to Llandudno Junction township page rather than to the station that gives the township its name. Secondly, the Welsh site linked to does not exist. Please write the Welsh version (with reasonable fulness) and then place the link - that is the only sensible way. NoelWalley 19:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the autoblock that has been affecting you. Sorry for the inconvenience. —Wayward ^Talk 23:51, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm very glad the records show you're ok with editing now. I lost all connection from home and so couldn't reply until I decided to give up there and use the connection at work. --Alf ^melmac 11:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Copied from Tvaughn05's Talk Page
Of no interest to me at all, but I noticed the "complete rewrite" on Recent Changes. Really good decision to go in there, scrap the drivel and write a good enough article with just the important stuff. Had to drop you a line to say it had been noticed =) doktorb | words 21:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

• Thank you very much for noticing! I saw it on one of the cleanup templates, so I thought, better get to work. =) Tvaughn05 21:44, 22 January 2006 (UTC)