User talk:Nurg/Archive 1

Rialto Towers

Nurg, regarding Rialto Towers, I think it is the tallest building in the southern hemisphere; I'm not aware of it's being surpassed. What I'm referring to however, is the tallest skyscraper, not including observation towers, such as Sydney Tower, which is taller. Prehaps what I had was ambiguous in that way, however, as far as I know, the Rialto is still the hemisphere's tallest skyscraper. Hypernovean 10:57, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Kakapo

Hello! I like what you've done with Kakapo. Sorry I beat you to it, I didn't mean to steal your thunder or anything. I haven't noticed any errors, and the additions are nice. Thanks! Eudyptes 09:10 UTC 18 July 2004

I've responded to your comments on Kakapo. Thanks for your sharp eye, it's hard for me to be completely precise over such large volumes of material. Eudyptes 15:47 UTC 19 July 2004

New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board

Great work on the Wikipedia:New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board, Nurg! I hope we keep you in the team. Robin Patterson 10:07, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Cetaceans

Hi, I see you've been doing lots of excellent work tidying up many of the cetaceans articles. If there is anything that should be done to improve all cetacean articles in general please do add it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Cetaceans. Pcb21| Pete 08:20, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Aupouri Peninsula

Hi Nurg - thanks for fixing up the mess I made with the Aupouri Peninsula (In my defence I can spell but had looked at a misspelled source of the name - other typos were caused by mild arthritis). I've been meaning to contact you anyway and say thanks for the good work on NZ related articles. Keep up the good work! [[User:Grutness|Grutness ^talk ]] 09:55, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Kiwis

I am wondering why you had chosen to remove my entry, as to the origins of the kiwi bird. The comment next to your edit was unclear and probably did not nessessitate the removal of an entire entry. The source I provided for my information is an authentic news website, as well as Oxford University being well credited. This means that the information I have provided is as valid as any other source within the article. Thanks and I hope you understand my position.

Aotearoa (the word)

I have responded to your comments on Aotearoa (the word) at my talk page.

NevilleDNZ 10:03, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

North Island Volcanic Plateau

Hi Nurg - you wrote: I'm wondering where you got the info for the extent of this plateau, because I'm sure it's not right. You give the synonym Waimarino Plateau, which is not a common term or one that I'm familiar with. I wonder whether the scope of the article actually represents the Waimarino Plateau. I'm sure the VP extends to the north of the Rotorua lakes, ending where it dips down to the Bay of Plenty coastal region.

Ooo. Good question - that was several thousand edits ago! A lot of the articles I was doing back then I was using the Wise's Guide as a major reference, but it isn't in there, so I probably got it from an on-line source. Unfortunately, I can't find that source. Now that you mention it, it doesn't seem quite right - feel free to change it to something better! Grutness...wha? 11:59, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Tom Iredale

Fine job copyediting this biography. JoJan 12:57, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Removal of an image from New Zealand general election, 2005

Regarding the removal of an image from New Zealand general election, 2005: From http://www.elections.org.nz/elections/election-day-rules.html "On election day, candidates, political parties and others must: .. Not post any new material on websites. Existing website material does not have to be removed, as long as the website is not proactively promoted to voters." Since this is a international site i do not think NZ's laws would apply. --2mcm^Gespräch 01:53, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Image:NewZealandElectorates2005-Labeled.png

Thank you very much for pointing out the misspellings --2mcm^Gespräch 03:39, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Auckland edit comment

Thanks for the comments. They are always useful. And it was a bonus to see your hard to find links above.

I'm afraid my minor edit grew like Topsy and I forgot to untick the flag. It is my habit to ensure I put an Edit Summary and tick the appropriate boxes first. Too often I have forgotten to change this after many previews but it does prevent the opposite condition (minors unmarked). I don't think the sectio I worked on is close to finished yet either as I still find it a little empty. L-Bit 07:53, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Feshbach resonances etc...

Thank you for copyediting these articles. These were some of my first on WP. I hope you enjoyed reading them. Vb 11:52, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Richmal Oates-Whitehead

Hi, just saw your addition to the article by way of a link. Thanks for the same, especially since the article has not seen much action of late and I had been itching to look at some NZ sources about her. I had also placed a request on the NZ discussion board some time back. --Gurubrahma 08:50, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Blues

You are right. I changed the meaning because I think the previous paragraph didn't make sense here. The first sentence was about rock. The second was about blues. I think there must have been here some misunderstanding of the original editors. Do you think I have make an error? If yes please edit me back but try to make the sense of this paragraph clearer Vb alias 131.220.68.177 12:13, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Hongi Hika

Thanks for your comments on my user page. I don't really care about changing 'te reo' to 'maori language', but feel strongly that ruling out the word myth disrupts the sense of the scentence. This is not to imply that Maori oral history/traditions were any more or less historically accurate than anyone elses. There is a gradual progression in accessibility and verifiability of information from myth to oral tradition to written history. I think, moving outside the politically charged arena of Pakeha/Maori views of history, that would be undisputed; the longer something remains in oral tradition the more corrupted and mythologised it becomes - this is illustrated in any society by the tendancy for events in the more distant past to be more fantastic, and also by the increasing errors in oral traditions which develop without knowledge of separate written records of the same events (the Alexander Romance, the Song of Roland). Part of Hongi Hika's importance is that his life lies across the end of this transition in New Zealand - birth date, date of the seagulls feast? Only a vague idea. Events of trip to England? Well documented. By his contribution to developing written Maori langauge, Hongi Hika contributed to this improvement in knowledge - and I hoped to subtly reinforce one of the article's themes - that his legacy is not only that of a warrior. USER:Winstonwolfe

Edward II

Thanks for your message. It seems you are correct. Adam 11:33, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

1981 Springbok tour

Your comment that protestors included some rugby fans is of course completely correct. I feel adding it in to the middle of an already lengthy scentence not really on topic has made it rather clumsy. How would you feel about that statement being made in a separate scentence? WW

Sure. Go ahead. (but only if you promise to sign your comments using the 4 tildes in future  :-) Nurg 05:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry :-) P.S. you mentioned renaming the article - what did you have in mind? Winston Wolfe

"Evolution of organisms."

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparative_anatomy&diff=35570450&oldid=25627112

It looks like you are the one who wrote that organisms evolve. They most certainly do not. If I am mistaken that it was not you who wrote it, my apologies. -- 24.153.226.112 18:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Cussonia spicata

Thanks for fixing the stub Cussonia spicata. It looks much better now. James084 13:33, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Auckland meetup

Just to let you know that a meetup is planned in Auckland for the 25th of June (see Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland for more details), and that you are cordially invited. GeorgeStepanek\^talk 00:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Continent

Hi. I just noticed you reverted back to the usage of Oceania (instead of Australia) a few days ago. I don't really understand the reason for it, though -- Australia is a continent, and Oceania is not. Could you please explain? Thanks. -- bcasterline • talk 23:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, happy to explain. I do not object to your intent, but things got a bit muddled in the execution. When you changed Oceania to Australia in the table it created duplicate lines, eg,

7 continents:	Antarctica	South America	North America		Europe	Asia	Africa	Australia
7 continents:	Antarctica	South America	North America		Europe	Asia	Africa	Australia

To achieve what you wanted, without creating duplicates, you would need to delete some of the lines containing Oceania, and to make the word change in some others. I would support you doing this. Why then, you might ask, did I not do this myself instead of reverting most of it. I took what I considered (from one point of view at least) to be the most conservative approach. If you consider I made a poor choice or that I was too timid, I have little defence. However, I did so as an interim measure, as I plan to revisit this article myself after further reading. Please accept my apologies if I made a poor interim decision. Nurg 00:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem; I just didn't understand the reasoning. I didn't see that I had created duplicate lines, which was pretty sloppy.

Instead of just listing a number of different models, I'd say the article should provide explanations for the differences -- at the very least, distinguishing between models structured around geologic continents and those structured around geographic continents/regions (if the latter should be included at all). That seems to account for the differences between models, although it's unclear. I might do this myself if you don't get to it first. Thanks for explaining. -- bcasterline • talk 00:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't much like the table of models, at least in its current state, and think I would prefer explanations too. I'm working up to a number of changes to the article but no need to wait for me. The more I read the more complexity I see, in that as well as the geologic and geographic views, the latter subdivides into phys geog (physiographic) and human geog views, which is where the cultural construct of the pseudocontinent of Oceania pops its head up. Despite our leaning to the geo side, I think there will still have to be a mention of Oceania somewhere, couched appropriately. Nurg 01:26, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

2006 Kapa O Pango controversy

• Sorry about using the incorrect name. Shouldn't the page be moved to the 2006 Kapa o Pango controversy?--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 00:49, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Well it really more recent, because the media and John Connoly only made a deal of it this year--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 06:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Haka articles

Thanks for telling me about your proposal. I have entered an 'oppose' but that is only to some of the details. I appreciate your efforts to rationalise these articles and would like to support you in that. Kahuroa 09:47, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I've now changed to support after a minor expansion of Haka with a little material copied from Ka mate. Kahuroa 05:49, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Nurg - just wanted to let you know I changed "posture dance" to "war dance" in the article about Ka Mate. I don't think - in the context of the all Black haka - that this is controversial, but as it was originally your edit wanted to bring it to your attention. Regards ElectricRay 00:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

SH 1

Thanks for your comment: I've changed the article accordingly. My source is the Transit NZ website. Birdhurst 03:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Continent

Thanks for your notification regarding Continent. I agree, that it would not make sense to do work in parallel. I had a look at your current version and it looks very promising, i am waiting curiously for the "final" version, which i understand can take some time still, it is a very extensive (and very interesting) topic. Let me know if i can be of help anywhere. My immediate suggestions (most of it you may have considered all ready): Australia is the continent (Australasia and oceania should be mentioned as more geopolitical alternatives), the table of continent models could be shortened to the 3..5 main models. I planned to start my work with translating nice parts of the german and and french continent articles and merging it into the english article. I copied this parts to my User:Ma xyz/Continent page, if you think they might be useful, let me know and i will still translate them (the definitions part is a good explication of the different possible continent definitions: gelogical, geophysical and geopolitical, the etymology part does explain the roots of the continents names, from the french wp i took the models part with the colored referencing, i like it), unfortunately i have currently no other useful sources for this parts than the respective wp articles. Ma xyz 18:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Transcontinental nation move request...

...at Talk:Transcontinental nation -  AjaxSmack  08:39, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

It was your deletion, after all...

Please reply to my comments at Talk:Use of the word American or else I am reverting your rather sudden deletion of my edits in a few days. If you're going to delete that much content, you're supposed to post a warning on the talk page first! --Coolcaesar 01:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Haka

I have created an article Haka in popular culture for the uses of the haka in non-traditional spheres. Part of my ongoing attempt to keep the article Haka to the subject. Hoperfully this will work, as did a similar on Moai in popular culture about gaming and entertainment use of the Easter Is. Moai statues. Cheers Kahuroa 05:37, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Hugh Kawharu - bolding of titles

I don't have a definitive answer, despite looking through Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles). However, it is clear that Sir Kawharu's article should be (and is) at Hugh Kawharu. Sorry to be of limited help - I just went with my instinct on de-highlighting the honorific. Cheers, Sliggy 16:01, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Southern Cross

I've answered your question on the Asterism (astronomy) discussion page. I hope it's both clear and satisfactory. If not, tell me, and I'll try again. B00P 10:10, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

re: solar system, stellar system

I may have added a later mention of the distinction between "stellar system" and "planetary system", to keep this article consistent with other articles, but I didn't introduce it. I don't know who did, but I'm fairly certain it was a user named E. Plurbius Anthony. A while back he went on a massive re-organising push to rigidly define concepts like "stellar system" and "planetary system" according to what he considered the correct diffrentiation. Since I was unable to find any conclusive evidence either way, I let the matter stand, rather than get involved in further arguments. Serendipodous 07:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

RE: Continent

Hello again; thanks for your praise. I also commend you for efforts to enhance the 'continent' article. Time permitting, I wish I could revamp the article as such (and I thought about revising the article lead as you have done): there seems to be a common misbelief, for instance, that plates delineate continents. I thought it important, at least given varied interpretations, to add citations/sources for the models etc. of note. As for the reference style I'm using, that's a good question: I think it somewhat resembles the name-date method used by the APA (not necessarily the Harvard method advocated by the Wp Manual of Style) but rendered in a format straight from memory (given my work in the sciences and the need to source everything), so please use authoritative style guides. :)

One comment regarding your 'revised' article lead: various definitions clearly indicate that a continent is a large continuous landmass (generally extending to the continental shelf); yet, the McGraw-Hill Concise Encyclopedia of Earth Science also indicates that (maps imply that) coastlines demarcate continents. As well, continents also generally include islands on the shelf/nearby. Your present lead implies that original reckonings exclude islands -- on its face, I wonder if this is incorrect. Anyhow, I wanted to point out the inclusion or not of islands is a matter of interpretation, not necessarily of propriety (e.g., British Isles).

Similarly, I also thank you for indulging me -- for lack of better phrasing -- regarding notations in the 'star system' article et al., which you may think I'm approaching in a manner contrary to the above! Even though sourcing seems to support your perspective, I truly believe that the current content is supportable (given usage, particularly in science fiction) and correct. Anyhow, let me know if you've any more questions. Cogito ergo sumo 03:28, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi

Thanks for your edits in Tochal and Alborz articles. --Neshatian 07:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

thanks for your input on dating methodology

cheers for you input. If you have a look at the Category:Methods and principles in archaeology you will a lot more where that came from . most in need of a better writing style than mine. Boris 12:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Australia (continent)

Whenever I inject a scholarly reference into an argument previously consisting of nothing but opinion and google, I consider the matter closed until someone provides a superior scholarly reference. Sadly, it almost never happens.

But it certainly has in this case. Thanks for your excellent position statement; it would have to be one of the most thoroughly researched and best written arguments I've seen on Wikipedia. I suspect I learned more from reading it than from reading the article.

Hesperian 11:53, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Australia-New_Guinea

Please explain why you have cloned Australia (continent) into two identical articles. Please explain why Australia (continent) and what you call Australia-New Guinea, are so different as to require separate articles.58.107.15.245 17:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I didn't clone it into two identical articles - I split it into 2 articles on different topics but someone else reverted my change to Australia (continent), which is how we currently have two near-identical articles. To see what I intend, look at the draft at User:Nurg/Australia_(continent), cf. User:Nurg/Australia-New_Guinea. There is discussion happening at Talk:Australia_(continent) which will give you more info. Nurg 04:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Auckland Meetup 2 Scheduled - Feb 10 2007

You are all invited to Auckland Meetup 2 on the afternoon of Saturday February 10th 2007 at Galbraith's Ale House in Mt Eden. Please see Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland 2 for details. You can also bookmark Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland to be informed of future NZ meetups. - SimonLyall 05:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Tectonic plates

Hello, I've taken the liberty of changing the image of tectonic plates you have in your article-in-creation to Image:Plates tect2 en.svg per recommendations on the earlier image's page. Hope you don't mind. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 20:06, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Dashes

The characters are n dashes.

--

Leandro GFC Dutra (talk) 15:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Dashes

If you look at your reference, you will see that I haven’t changed, to the best of my knowledge, any real hyphen — only hyphens incorrectly used in place of dashes.

Your computer does have a problem, please check why.

--

Leandro GFC Dutra (talk) 01:55, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

RE; whitelist request

I appologise. Ive had to reverse your white listing request[1] per WP:COPYRIGHT. My error for not spotting this previously. --Hu12 (talk) 07:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. That alerted me to the fact that it was not the original source and I managed to track down the orig. Nurg (talk) 09:38, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:AUK

This is an invitation to WikiProject Auckland, a WikiProject which aims to develop and expand Wikipedia's articles on Auckland. Please feel free to join us.

Taifarious1 09:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

ANZAC

I've moved ANZAC as requested, and done a bit of clean-up afterwards (avoiding double redirects, and added a see-also). Hope this covers everything, but let me know, or another admin, if there's anything else that needs doing. —  Tivedshambo  _(t/c) 23:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Minor edit

Hi - the copyediting is great but I don't think you should be using the minor edit tag for your edits when you are making quite a few changes. See Help:Minor edit - I realise the edits do sort of fit within the scope but to me the tag is for when you just make one little change not a whole series of little changes. Nothing wrong with the changes you are making in my view though! Regards--Matilda ^talk 05:49, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Matilda. Reviewing my most recent edits, I see one that I agree I should not have flagged as minor. Others are in a grey area. Unfortunately Help:Minor edit omits to address copy editing that involves substantial rewording without changing the facts. I'll take your thoughts on board and perhaps be more conservative about using the minor flag. Nurg (talk) 06:25, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Notice

Hi there Nurg!
	Please accept this invite to join the Good Article Collaboration Center, a project aimed at improving articles to GA status while working with other users. We hope to see you there!

SmackBot

Thanks. It's absolutely right to stop the bot when this sort of stuff happens. I can restart any time, but fixing errors can be tedious. Rich Farmbrough, 03:48 25 October 2008 (UTC).

Fixed. Rich Farmbrough, 03:58 25 October 2008 (UTC).

LMS

When your edit summary says you're reformatting, but you sneak in an unsupported item at the same time, that's obnoxiously misleading. Don't do that. Dicklyon (talk) 05:33, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

My apologies. I wasn't intending to be sneaky or misleading but it was very sloppy and careless of me and I accept the reprimand. Thanks for pulling me up. Nurg (talk) 07:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

COM

I'd like to know why you deleted my post under Component_Object_Model on the basis of Spam, I offered a free guide on COM marshaling to the community. Barakw (talk) 18:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

• Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a collection of links to guides.
• The purpose of the link appeared to be to draw traffic to the Komodia Inc website.
• The link was not to a guide on COM marshalling, but a menu-type page at the Komodia Inc website.
• See External links#Links normally to be avoided, especially points 4 and 5.
• See Spam#External link spamming re promoting a website or a product.
• You have made edits to nine Wikipedia articles. Every contribution was merely a link to the Komodia Inc website. This suggests that your main aim is to draw traffic to the Komodia site.
• User EncMstr posted a message to your Discussion page offering links to Help pages, inviting you to ask questions if you needed help and advising that the links you added did not comply with the guidelines. You added links to seven more articles after that message. I suggest you read the Help pages that EncMstr provided to get a better understanding of what is appropriate for Wikipedia.
• If you would a second opinion, I suggest you contact EncMstr.

Regards, Nurg (talk) 08:39, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I went over the rules about links and the only fault I found is indeed a link to a top level menu and not the actual content, this is my mistake, and I'll fix it, however I don't find any difference between my Guide to the other six tutorials on this page, am I missing something?

Thanks, Barakw (talk) 15:22, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Fair comment about the other tutorials. The External links section of that article was flagged as needing attention so I have now cleaned it up, removing all the tutorials and other poor links. Nurg (talk) 10:53, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Brain Slaves

Thanks for the massive clean-up on Brain Slaves. I found some sources after the AfD conversation was almost over. I appreciate all the work you did to get the article up to snuff. I was feeling guilty for nominating it for a CSD, although at creation the article did not assert notability properly. Thanks again! --OliverTwisted (Talk) 12:06, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Paleognathae

Hey, Nurg, thanks for the note. I would assume that you are right about my mistake on dromaiidae. Unfortunately I left my copy of Houde (1988) at the office. I'll be happy to check and fix that on Monday. I guess maybe some author made the emus their own order, but then the clade should have an order name, not a family name. Thanks.Jbrougham (talk) 15:10, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Verification failed (MySQL)?

With this edit you indicated that verification of the use of lexer failed. If you visit the cited source and use search you will find that the third result says "Hand written lexer" and the first correctly identifies which source code file contains the lexer. Please remove the incorrect failed verification indicator or say more about what you think is failing verification. Jamesday (talk) 07:39, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

The reference in the article links to http://dev.mysql.com/doc/internals/en/index.html. This page is merely a table of contents and does not contain information about the parser, and so does not support the sentence in the article. If you can provide an adequate replacement reference, without relying on original research or original synthesis, well and good. Nurg (talk) 09:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Barbara Gilmour

Hi. I did some digging the other night & failed to find the ref. I have a 'visual memory' of the page & I will search some more. I did some digging on the web and it is odd that Bantry Bay was suggested - hardly the 'Protestant' North. Remove the ref if you wish or I will in a few weeks if I fail to track it down. 92.9.156.168 (talk) 07:11, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Lincoln

Check MOS:DAB#Break_rules also in a way MOS:DAB#Linking to a primary topic. The intro shows where the Name originates. Wikipedia is meant to provide information and without Lincoln, Lincolnshire, none of the other names would exist, this was what was being made clear to the reader. If we can agree on this I will put it back or yourself, but I am not intending to get into a pointless edit war, nor am I being funny with you, just pointing out an important point. Wikipedia is for knowledge, information and helping people understand. --BSTemple (talk) 17:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for leaving a note. The information is good but it belongs in articles such as Lindum Colonia and Lincoln, Lincolnshire. It does not belong in a disambiguation page, which is not an article. I don't agree that either of the sections of MOS:DAB you refer to apply in this case. The intro to MOS:DAB is clear about the purpose of dab pages. Sorry, I'm sure you're keen to promote Lincs but I don't agree this is a right way to do it. Nurg (talk) 21:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes I see what you mean, and I’m not arguing with you, but I do feel it should be mentioned on the page. Now I believe in working together and I do believe in the main body of editors agreeing on a certain route or plan, so I propose if we cannot agree on a compromise together, to place our opinions on the Lincoln Talk Page for others to voice a view. Fair?

A compromise I suggest is by saying on at least the Lincoln, Lincolnshire link the following:

• Lincoln, Lincolnshire, England, the county town of Lincolnshire and originator of the name Lincoln

I think that is the best solution. What do you think? --BSTemple (talk) 17:24, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't agree with adding that phrase. It is unnecessary for disambiguation purposes and therefore is just "distracting information". I have no objection though to you raising the matter on the Talk page. Nurg (talk) 01:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay, will do at some point. Thank you. You naturally can also reply on the Talk Page as well. Cheers.--BSTemple (talk) 08:01, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Lincoln header

If the current header of Lincoln is okay, why not now mention the City of Lincoln? --BSTemple (talk) 07:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't agree that the current header is the best and I have added my thoughts to the Lincoln talk page. Nurg (talk) 11:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Traffic

Hi. You once expressed an opinion re the proper topic of Traffic; that now is the subject of a requested move. See Talk:Traffic#Move. --Una Smith (talk) 18:22, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

New Zealand corporal punishment referendum, 2009

Hi. You did some good work in this change [5] but I am curious as to why you removed some citation templates. I don't want to be working at cross-purposes with you with respect to citation formatting. Cheers Nurg (talk) 04:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I think I was just trying to standardise the presentation of footnotes so they are consistent within that article. I actually don't greatly care for the style produced by those citation templates (as far as references to newspaper articles are concerned), but of course I would not alter them if they were all consistent within any one article. Apologies if I cut across what you were doing. Alarics (talk) 07:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Your request for assessment

I've handled your request to reassess subnetwork. As there are only 4 references, I have no doubt it is C class. See here. Regards, Airplaneman ^talk 05:15, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Apollonius Institute

I think you are right that this is best deleted. I think the Institute in theory still exists, but it is not active. Graemedavis (talk) 15:56, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Mississippi Alluvial Plain

Hello, can you verify that the bright green area on the map is actually identified as "delta" - that land formation seems to have no relation to any "deltas" that I have known about. Thanks! Active Banana (talk) 21:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind! clicking the right links shows me that it is an odd usage of the term. Active Banana (talk) 21:15, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Namir Noor-Eldeen#Airstrike and death

Hi Nurg,
I put a 'hatnote' here directing readers to the "July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike controversy", which has been re-named to July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike. Could you please correct this?, ie. remove controversy. (It's protected now so I can't). Good edits by the way, about time the dates were put next to the name as per MOS. Thanks! --220.101.28.25 (talk) 11:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I think I got that done 10 minutes before your msg. But let me know if I'm missed something. cheers Nurg (talk) 11:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

You're right! (We must think alike!) I was leaving a note about it on the article talk, thought maybe there is an 'active' editor and saw you were currently working on the article. Copied my note to your talk, edited it to make sense, saved @ 11:23, had another look at your edits, saw "Saeed Chmagh ‎(update wikilink)" @ 11:23, that it had been fixed and thought "that was real quick". (Getting confused cause you did the same fix on both articles!) I need to work on my typing speed! (Look how long my reply has taken!)
BTW if you care about such things, edit counter says you're @ 9,999 and thats about 10 hours out of date! Congrats!--220.101.28.25 (talk) 12:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

9,999 edits! You're kidding me. Where do you see that? Nurg (talk) 05:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

New notability guideline proposal: Periodicals

I noticed you had created a similar proposal. Please come participate in the discussion of this newly proposed notability guideline. Wikipedia:Notability (periodicals) (talk). Thanks! ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:33, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Buffalo Bill Cody

Don't follow the logic for your recent edit of Buffalo Bill. Are you saying he isn't of French descent? If that isn't your reasoning, please inform me. Breschard (talk) 15:43, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Nothing in the article says he is of French descent. WP:CAT says, "It should be clear from verifiable information in the article why it was placed in each of its categories." More importantly, your edit make a terrible mess of the interlanguage links. Nurg (talk) 23:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Nothing in the article mentions he is of Irish descent either, but you chose not to edit those three or four categories. This appears most odd to me. Perhaps you've noticed something I've missed. Breschard (talk) 00:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I've removed them now. Nurg (talk) 00:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

edit tools links

hi Nurg, hope it's okay - i cut and pasted editing tools' links from your page. it is very helpful! Teine Savaii (talk) 03:57, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:04, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Invitation

Schwede66 wants you to join WikiProject NZ politics.

To join the New Zealand politics taskforce, please place the following on your user page:
{{User WikiProject New Zealand/politics}}

And given your obvious interest in pages on mayors, I've got the list for Napier in my userspace. And I'm struggling with anything newer than 1905. If you have time and feel so inclined, feel free to chip in. Schwede66 05:15, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, my Napier struggle is over; not sure how this page managed to not show up earlier in any of my searches. Schwede66 08:15, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

A Question about files

Hello Nurg, I looked through a good amount of the help pages hoping to find out the answer to my question, but came up dry so far and I saw that you were the most recent editor of Help:Files, so maybe you can address the trouble I'm having. I am a newly registered user without yet achieving autoconfirmed status and so I am unable to upload files. I have a number of edits which I think would be worthwhile to make, however uploading files would be an integral part of these edits. Is there a way for a newly registered user to be given uploading privileges without going through the autoconfirm process? Thank you for your consideration and I will also post this question inverted so that it may be more convenient for you to read it ʇı pɐǝɹ oʇ noʎ ɹoɟ ʇuǝıuǝʌuoɔ ǝɹoɯ ǝq ʎɐɯ ʇı ʇɐɥʇ os pǝʇɹǝʌuı uoıʇsǝnb sıɥʇ ʇsod osןɐ ןןıʍ ı puɐ uoıʇɐɹǝpısuoɔ ɹnoʎ ɹoɟ noʎ ʞuɐɥʇ ¿ssǝɔoɹd ɯɹıɟuoɔoʇnɐ ǝɥʇ ɥbnoɹɥʇ buıob ʇnoɥʇıʍ sǝbǝןıʌıɹd buıpɐoןdn uǝʌıb ǝq oʇ ɹǝsn pǝɹǝʇsıbǝɹ ʎןʍǝu ɐ ɹoɟ ʎɐʍ ɐ ǝɹǝɥʇ sı ˙sʇıpǝ ǝsǝɥʇ ɟo ʇɹɐd ןɐɹbǝʇuı uɐ ǝq pןnoʍ sǝןıɟ buıpɐoןdn ɹǝʌǝʍoɥ 'ǝʞɐɯ oʇ ǝןıɥʍɥʇɹoʍ ǝq pןnoʍ ʞuıɥʇ ı ɥɔıɥʍ sʇıpǝ ɟo ɹǝqɯnu ɐ ǝʌɐɥ ı ˙sǝןıɟ pɐoןdn oʇ ǝןqɐun ɯɐ ı os puɐ snʇɐʇs pǝɯɹıɟuoɔoʇnɐ buıʌǝıɥɔɐ ʇǝʎ ʇnoɥʇıʍ ɹǝsn pǝɹǝʇsıbǝɹ ʎןʍǝu ɐ ɯɐ ı .buıʌɐɥ ɯ,ı ǝןqnoɹʇ ǝɥʇ ssǝɹppɐ uɐɔ noʎ ǝqʎɐɯ os 'sǝןıɟ:dןǝɥ ɟo ɹoʇıpǝ ʇuǝɔǝɹ ʇsoɯ ǝɥʇ ǝɹǝʍ noʎ ʇɐɥʇ ʍɐs ı puɐ ɹɐɟ os ʎɹp dn ǝɯɐɔ ʇnq 'uoıʇsǝnb ʎɯ oʇ ɹǝʍsuɐ ǝɥʇ ʇno puıɟ oʇ buıdoɥ sǝbɐd dןǝɥ ǝɥʇ ɟo ʇunoɯɐ poob ɐ ɥbnoɹɥʇ pǝʞooן ı 'bɹnu oןןǝɥ Piscruel (talk) 07:47, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

˙ɟןǝsʎɯ ǝןıɟ ɐ pǝpɐoןdn ɹǝʌǝu ǝʌɐɥ ı ˙ʍouʞ ʇ,uop ı 'ʎɹɹos ɯ,ı Nurg (talk) 11:00, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for replying so swiftly, I will continue my search for information on this topic and post it here if I come across anything pertinentPiscruel (talk) 00:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: Deletions that went undetected

I have found a lot of these as well. Has anyone hunted them down with a bot? Viriditas (talk) 09:33, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

The nearest thing I know of is the tags that appear in edit summaries and were introduced two years ago. Nurg (talk) 10:39, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Social welfare in New Zealand

Section title - Superannuation or New Zealand Superannuation?

The correct title of this benefit is New Zealand Superannuation rather than Superannuation. However, most people will just call it Superannuation or Super. I changed the section title to its correct title by you changed it back to Superannuation.

The title can be verified by looking at the legislation, the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Act 2001 - http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2001/0084/latest/DLM113924.html, and on the the Work and Income website (who administer this benefit) - http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/individuals/a-z-benefits/nz-superannuation.html.

Do we go with the formal title or the popular title? I'm a new editor so advice is welcome.

Dooglefeedback (talk) 03:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Dooglefeedback. Welcome to editing Wikipedia and thanks for dropping by. The Superannuation section of Social welfare in New Zealand deals with the whole history of pensions/superannuation from the year dot. In that time it has been known by a number of names including Old Age Pension, National Superannuation, Guaranteed Retirement Income and now New Zealand Superannuation. So the section heading should be a general term that covers the whole topic, regardless of the various official names the pension has had over the decades. Nurg (talk) 09:09, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Nurg. I see your point. In that case I think the section should be called Pensions as Superannuation is a made up word that probably means nothing to anyone outside of New Zealand. I will look at coming up with some text for the last paragraph about Superannuation as it's not correct at present. I also think that if we are talking about pensions in general then Veteran's and other pensions should be mentioned. Also thanks for your suggested reading. I'll go thorugh that.I'm still unsure about where to raise discussions and etiquette etc. I suspect I should create a talk page for the Social welfare in New Zealand page and open any discussions to everyone. Thanks for your help, it's appreciated. Dooglefeedback (talk) 21:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

"Superannuation" is not really a made-up word, but "pensions" may be as good or better, so I have no objection to that. Using the article's Talk page is good. Sometimes it is easier to get a relevant editor's attention by using their personal Talk page, but an article's Talk page is good for keeping the related discussions together. Nurg (talk) 09:01, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Exchequer of Pleas

I've reverted your edit here; redlinks are A Good Thing, providing an active prompt for people to get involved in writing the wiki - see the academic paper referenced here. Ironholds (talk) 13:12, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. But I did not remove a redlink and you have not restored a redlink, so I'm confused by your comment. The link in question is a blue redirect that links to the same article as the next link, six words on. If you want a redlink, I think you will have to delete the redirect. Or maybe there is another way to make it a redlink. Nurg (talk) 01:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Argh, sorry; my stupid. I saw the ES of "non-existent article" and assumed, and everyone knows what assuming makes you ;). Feel free to edit to revert my revert of your edit :P. Ironholds (talk) 13:11, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Rino Tirikatene

Gatoclass (talk) 00:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Tidying up iwi and hapū links

Thanks for this. I did quite a bit of work based on the DNZB and creating iwi and hapū categories, but as you noticed there are some rough edges in some places and it's going to take a while to fix them. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:53, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for tidying up DNZB articles

I see from my watchlist what you've tweaked quite a few DNZB stubs. Thanks for that, and sorry that the odd one (i.e. Moetara Motu Tongaporutu) was broken. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:33, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for all your work on Māori biographies. I created a whole lot of stubs based on the DNZB some time ago and it is great to see them getting some of the TLC they deserve. Ngā mihi.

Stuartyeates (talk) 19:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Ordering of sections

We have a guideline here WP:MEDMOS that outlines our usually ordering. Thus moved stuff around again at melanoma Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 16:21, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Graeme Burton

Hi Nurg, I think you approved creation of the article on Graeme Burton. At the moment it redirects from my sandbox. If I empty/delete my sandbox I presume that will delete the article. Can you re-create this article without it coming from my sandbox...please? Offender9000 18:23, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cabinet (government), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Council of Ministers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:04, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

The disambiguation page was barely recognised as such, because it was poorly formatted. I have improved that and removed the link. Nurg (talk) 20:53, 10 November 2012 (UTC)