User talk:Martinvl/2012

Hindhead Tunnel

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Hindhead Tunnel". Thank you. --Mixsynth (talk) 11:56, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Civility issue

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would ask that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Discussion (Units in specialist topics). Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

In particular, please refrain from nonsense ad hominen attacks, such as the unhelpful hostility you displayed toward User:de Facto. No one is required to provide any personal background information on their user pages here, and whether they have or have not to the satisfaction of your personal curiosity has no bearing on whether an opinion they express on an issue has merit. Your talk page displays a long history of other editors raising civility and disruptive editing issues with you, yet you do not appear to be participating much differently based on this quite unusually high level of negative feedback. Please think more carefully about how you approach such discussions in the future.

PS: Given that you are in formal mediation about editing related to the UK and metrics, you probably should not be engaging in flamey debate on this topic at MOS anyway, pending the outcome of your mediation. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 04:31, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi SMcCandlish

I read your posting and appreicate your concern. Things between DeFacto and myself go back quite far. I don't know where to put them down to nievety, stupidity, pig-headedness or a combination of these. A few months ago DeFacto accused me of beign uncivil towards him. You can read about it [here]. He also has a track record of being very pushy about his own ideas - two quick examples are User talk:DeFacto#Repeated removal of road casualty data from Speed limit article here and User talk:DeFacto#POV pushing. Much of my own dealing with him can be found in his accusation of incivilty against me. Martinvl (talk) 08:04, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Active Resistance to Metrication

An article that you have been involved in editing, Active Resistance to Metrication, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Hoary (talk) 01:16, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

2012 Elfstedentocht

It's now looking as though there won't be a race this year. Per the discussion on the talk page, I moved the 2012 stuff to my userspace. If you wish to make use of the material so show the build-up to the race, it is available. I'll delete the page in my userspace in a week or so. Mjroots (talk) 10:14, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited List of primary destinations on the United Kingdom road network, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Antrim and Belfast Airport (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) 10:41, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Yet another civility issue

Martinvl, please retract the unfounded intimidatory ultimatum and threat that you left on my talkpage. If you believe that the banners I added to the poorly referenced sections of "Metrication in the United Kingdom" are unfounded, please explain your reasoning on the article's talkpage and I will review it there. By the way, I'm not sure that it would be wise to carry out your threat and add another attempt to get me blocked to your record, especially so soon after this recent failed, apparently malicious one and after the advice given to you by SMcCandlish in this message on your talkpage. -- de Facto (talk). 11:52, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Given your recent behaviour on the MOSNUM and Hindhead Tunnel articles, I believe that these banners were added in bad faith, so please remove them - at least one of them is totally unfounded. Martinvl (talk) 12:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

1. What recent "behaviour" are you alluding to? Please characterise it in your own words.
2. Which one (of the four) banners do you claim was "totally unfounded"?
3. You appear to accept that three of the banners were founded then - do you?

-- de Facto (talk). 12:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Beste Martin,

Wil jij een beetje op het artikel van Friso letten? Ik ben hier niet zo actief. En nu krijg je allerlei geruchten. Dat zij een ambassadeur van de orgaandonatie is is compete nonsens. Ze had alleen een twitterberichtje geplaats over een televisie programma waarin een vriendin voorkwam die een niertransplantatie gehad had. Dezelfde kolder heb ik al twee keer van Wikipedia NL verwijdert.

(Ik denk dat je dit wel kunt lezen in het Nederlands....;). Vriendelijke groet, Sir Statler (talk) 10:42, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Sir Salter,

You are right, I can read Dutch, but having learnt Afrikaans at school destroyed my chances of writing in Dutch (see my Talk Page). I have bookmarked the artcile and I will keep an eye on what is happening.

Vriendelijke groet Martinvl (talk) 11:14, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Ik begrijp dat Martin. Dat moet uiterst verwarrend zijn. De talen lijken erg op elkaar maar verschillen ook erg.

Als je hier kijkt zie je dat er enorm veel hits zijn. (40.000!) Het is dus bijzonder gevaarlijk dit soort roddel die zich vooral via de sociale media zich verspreid heeft als waarheid neer te zetten. Ik vermoed dat in de wereld (het is internationaal nieuws) heel wat kranten Wikipedia als bron gebruiken.. En voor je het weet is dit een waarheid. nu circuleerd er weer een roddel over een lege accu. Het beste is denk ik hier te kijken, wij houden de boel scherp in de gaten en spreken tenminste Nederlands... Vriendelijke groet, Sir Statler (talk) 13:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Metric Martyrs

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Metric Martyrs. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Particulary your recent edits in the 'Pardon campaign' section which gave the impression of a greater scope than actually exists for the regulations. More discussion can be found on the article's talkpage. Thank you. -- de Facto (talk). 12:06, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism, such as the edit at Metrication in the United Kingdom, are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage newer editors. Please read Wikipedia:NOTVAND for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. Thank you. Pontificalibus (talk) 21:57, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Pontificalibus

I have noted your comments. I have had a long run-in with Defacto - he is cetainly not a new editor and has had a contraversial past - for example User talk:DeFacto/Archive 3#Repeated removal of road casualty data from Speed limit article (with which I had no invovlement),

Vandalism is defined as "deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia". In his summary of the "Legal Requirements" DeFactio has deliberately watered down what the law actually says. I have drawn his attention to it, but he has refused to discuiss the matter, but threw insults at me. This is compromising the integrity of Wikipedia. Given his past conduct, it is difficult to give him the benefit of the doubt.

BTW, I notice that you removed a large part of the description of the lede photograph of teh artcile in question. May I draw to your attention:

• Electrical units have always been based on metric units.
• It is virtually impossible to buy a metric-only set of domestic scales on the high street - I have tried. Dial models have dual scales and the few balances that are sold (eg at Argos) have imperial weights only (metric available for an additional cost).
• On the other hand, go to your local garden centre and look at the thermometers there - a significant number (over half the models in my local garden centre) are in degrees Celsius only.

Martinvl (talk) 07:08, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Martinvl, please do not misrepresent my actions. In Metrication in the UK, as in the case of the other discussion you mention above (which as you weren't involved in, you know nothing about) - but noticed that there has been controversy in (so appear to hope that a bit of mud from there might stick and help your campaign here), I had been removing one-sided POVy OR/SYNTH to try to achieve a more neutral and reliably supported article. -- de Facto (talk). 09:55, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

DeFacto, you have made four changes in the space of 15 minutes. Please use your sandbox. Martinvl (talk) 10:16, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Changes where? -- de Facto (talk). 10:19, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Here, today, at 09:55, 09:56, 10:07 and 10:11. Martinvl (talk) 10:27, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Clarifications. There had been no replies, so what's the problem? -- de Facto (talk). 17:34, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Warning: March 2012

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

To whoever initiated this message - I have now formally asked for assistance regarding incivility by User:DeFacto. The page inquestion formed the basis of my request. Martinvl (talk) 13:16, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

As if you didn't know who had placed the message. Do you know how the 'history' function works? I tried to get your attack page speedy deleted. Unfortunately the admin who dealt with it didn't realise how misleading the content was or your malicious intent, so let it stay. -- de Facto (talk). 17:44, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Metric Martyrs (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Crown and King John

Metrication in the United Kingdom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Press

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Notification of DRN submission

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Metrication in the United Kingdom". Thank you. -- de Facto (talk). 19:44, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

ANI discussion

There is a discussion on ANI about a topic you have been involved in relating to DeFacto. You are welcome to bring your experience to that discussion. Toddst1 (talk) 15:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. When you recently edited Hindhead Tunnel, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Devils Punchbowl and Digger (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) 10:48, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Courtesy note to you!

I don't mind you re-indenting my comment: you've got good reason, unlike some people recently... I have however probably re-broken it by posting some new musing that overlapped with your most recent post. Go see! Steve Hosgood (talk) 13:17, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - I am currently drafting a response. Martinvl (talk) 13:29, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Now, there's interesting. Why would an anonymous user called 212.183.128.124 suddenly pop up and fiddle with the white-space in the article? Who do we know (who's currently banned off wikipedia in general) who would persistently rearrange the commas, and move other people's posts around? :-) Steve Hosgood (talk) 14:56, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Steve whoever fiddled the white space did so from an IP address registered with Vodaphone, London. Martinvl (talk) 15:02, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

If he suddenly (out of the blue) turns up on "Hindhead Tunnel" you'll know who he is! Steve Hosgood (talk) 15:07, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

There are about 20 postings from this IP address - all but one of them vandalism, though the vandalism in question was not DeFacto's style. Martinvl (talk) 15:14, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

It would seem deFacto has managed to win himself an indefinite ban - for sockpuppetting now. Last week he was still arguing with the admins about his "unfair block". He certainly pissed off a few of them in epic style! Steve Hosgood (talk) 23:43, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

On the subject of Hindhead Tunnel BTW, I see that some of deFacto's arguments centred on his insistence that UK articles should be imperial-first, (mis)citing WP:MOSNUM and other "sources" for backup on that. In case you're interested, last summer a "featured article" on the front page of Wikipedia was River Parrett. I read it (because it was there) and immediately opened a thread on its talk page to complain about the pedantic imperial-first (even imperial only) style of the page. I was firmly rebuked off by the page's authors who claimed that in order to get "featured page" status, an article has to be one set of units or the other, and since the early records of the river used imperial (or Queen Anne) units, then the rest had to be like that too. I disagreed, but couldn't sway them, even though WP:MOSNUM doesn't seem to say any such thing. I concluded that left the way it was, the article looked like it belonged in Steampunkopedia! Go read - it looks like it was copied as-is from Encyclopedia Brittanica 1911 despite actually being up-to-date! Truly awful - deFacto would have loved it. My final comment on the subject is still only the penultimate comment on the talk page if you look at its history. Steve Hosgood (talk) 23:59, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Steve,

Thank you for your note. If you look at MOSNUM, you will see a note about changing the units of measure for changes' sake, but if you are doing a major overhaul, then it is appropriate to change units. His argument about the original units being in non-metric is ill-founded, moreover it is likely that certain flows etc have changed since the original readings were taken which might give rise for a major overhaul.Martinvl (talk) 06:43, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

You didn't...

...honestly call the ISP/technical people at NAS, did you? Please please tell me you didn't (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:22, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I am still awaiting a response to this question (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:33, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I did, I said so in my initial posting. I have not persued the matter any further though. Martinvl (talk) 11:57, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

You know that by doing so, you should be indefinitely blocked, right? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:09, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Please point me to the reference that says so - my line with their technical people was "There is a problem - how can I get our technical people to sort the matter without impacting any legitimate use that you might have?". This is a special case because the perpetrators of the trouble were autistic. BTW, I telephoned them - a local call for me, but an international call from Canada. Martinvl (talk) 12:56, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Are you a formal representative of Wikipedia? Are you as a minimum an administrator? Have you even checked back on ANI for the results of your actions? Any attempts to contact an employer, etc are regularly met with indef blocks (see for example User:Ecoleetage) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:19, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I acknowledge that I am not a formal represenatative of Wikipedia which is why the tone of my discussion with the National Autistic Society was one of "What information can I pass back to the adminstrators?" The approach that I took is nothing more than I would do in real life.

On rereading the ANI, I see that User:NebY wrote <<As far as I can tell, the National Autistic (sic) Society doesn't have "patients" and would not use such terms as "suffering from autism".>> Their IT department told me that patients do have access to their network. This negates a good deal of the discussion that followed. Martinvl (talk) 13:46, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

The issues at hand here have to do with a lot more than simply whether the exact term "patients" is applicable. The fact is that your actions are tantamount to believing that an entire class of people are not worthy of editing Wikipedia, and actively taking unilateral action to ensure that they cannot (despite having no warrant for doing so based on Wikipedia policy). Kansan (talk) 00:25, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

That's a bit unfair - in the original thread, Martinvl only investigated an active vandal and proposed a block for that vandal. It was User:Hersfold who (prematurely, in my opinion) suggested soft-blocking the entire NAS. Nobody proposed blocking autistic people from editing Wikipedia, and I should hope no one seriously ever would. I was however disturbed by Martinvl's characterisation of autistic people as people who "will not respond to normal reasoning," which is absurd. I've known many people with high-functioning autism who are better at reasoning than the average person. Dcoetzee 05:28, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I worded it overly strongly as well; so striking my comments accordingly. Kansan (talk) 05:52, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

In describing autistic people I was referring in particular to those undergoing treatment at the centre one of whom was vandalising the articles M11 motorway, M25 motorway, A1(M) motorway, M20 motorway and M23 motorway articles. I did indeed leave a request on the user talk page User talk:217.204.11.194#Motorway Junction Lists and made a comment in one of the changes. Both were ignored. As I mentioned earlier to Penyulap, I should have left a few more comments when reverting changes as the changes were not obvious vandalism.

May I request that there be a standard notice on IP type users pages that are linked to specific corportions which give guidance to editors (and not just admins) on how to deal with vandalism. Martinvl (talk) 07:44, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Now we're beyond the original problem with you contacting an ISP. Now you're getting into something even more distasteful: the suggestion that someone on the Autism Spectrum edits differently than a "neurotypical" person. That's pretty horrific (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:03, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Could we please stop this discussion. I have contacted Bwilkins privately. Martinvl (talk) 10:58, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Hopefully final point: Wikipedia takes seriously its responsibility towards editors to ensure that random people are not calling their service providers/employers/etc. Doing so is a serious invasion of their privacy, and we must protect those editors from such action, as has happened many times in the past. At this point, you should have been indefinitely blocked until the project saw that future situations would not recur. However, I'll take the opposite tack: please confirm that you will not take such action on your own ever again, or else I will have no choice but to protect those editors via a block (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:40, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Having seen that my actions are viewed differently to what I would have expected in the real life workplace, I undertake not to make such an action on my own again.

In order to prevent anybody else doing this, may I suggest that the last sentence on the "Attention" box on the Talk Page be amended from:

"In the event of vandalism from this address, efforts will be made to contact the National Autistic Society to report abuse."

to

"In the event of on-going vandalism from this address, please contact an administrator via WP:ANI and they will contact the National Autistic Society to report abuse."

Martinvl (talk) 14:20, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 13

Hi. When you recently edited Metric system, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Are (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) 11:21, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 20

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

New SI definitions (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Dalton and National Physical Laboratory

Schwalbach am Taunus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Juno and Mercury

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Kelvin

I note that you corrected an IP in Kelvin. I don't think there is any inconsistency in the definition, but it needs to be read carefully. I tried to explain it to the IP at User talk:96.32.245.124. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi David, the point that I was making to the user was that Wikipedia was not in error. Maybe we coudllook at rewording thingds so that the asmbiguity falls away. Martinvl (talk) 17:18, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

It's been discussed a few times over the years at Talk:Kelvin#273.15_vs._273.16, and from time to time errors have been introduced by confused editors, and then removed. I can't think off-hand of any rewording that would make it clearer, but any suggestions would be welcome. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:14, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I have reworded it. Throw it out if you think it rubbish or OTT. Martinvl (talk) 18:25, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Looks good. Well done! - David Biddulph (talk) 18:38, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Martinvl (talk) 18:40, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

3RR warning

Caution: you risk breaking the WP:3RR rule at Metrication of British transport. 94.197.146.76 (talk) 18:01, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

You were warned; you did it again; I have now reported you to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. 94.197.100.97 (talk) 08:27, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 94.197.n1.n2 (talk) 13:25, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

• Martinvl, WP:BOOMERANG struck again. Drmies (talk) 15:08, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Please stop it, or attempt to justify it

You are going around making false accusations about me, associating me with another, apparently banned, editor. Please stop it. Or do you think that you have some evidence to support that claim? If you do think that, please state that so-called "evidence" here so that I can defend myself. Thank you. 94.197.49.214 (talk) 16:01, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

May 2012

Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of sock-puppets. However, one or more edits you labeled as sock-puppetry, such as the edit at Talk:Metrication of British transport, are not considered such under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a strict definition of the word "sock-puppet", and mislabeling edits as sock-puppetry is offensive. Please read Wikipedia:sockpuppet for more information on what is and is not considered sock-puppetry. Thank you. 94.197.49.214 (talk) 16:43, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

S-ttl/claim

Thanks for your patience with the extra lap here. Hope it won't get in your way too much. Cheers, --joe decker^{talk to me} 07:09, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Joe

No problem - I have taken the liberty of copying a discussion that I had elewhere onto the Project Page. Martinvl (talk) 07:15, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! I'm off to sleep here, but will try and check back, don't hesitate to give me a poke if this for any reason slides off my radar. --joe decker^{talk to me} 07:20, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Strawberries and sockpuppetry

I see you had to revert User:Jilllipede's attempt to re-add the Asda strawberries. Note the number of L's in that user name and their lack of edit history - a certain somebody's idea of a joke, I reckon! Jillipede (talk) 13:25, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I am 99% sure that we are dealing with our friend DeFacto (who is now banned from Wikipedia). Martinvl (talk) 13:27, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tree start/Documentation

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 18:02, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I am happy for you to delete this page. It will make my life easuier as I was picking up where another editor left off. I will notify him. Martinvl (talk) 18:04, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Before I saw your note above, I had encountered this page in the list of speedy deletion candidates and decided that, as it was clearly not an encyclopedia article, you had probably placed it in the main encyclopedia space by mistake. I therefore "userfied" it - moved into a sub-page in your user space - at User:Martinvl/Tree start/Documentation. If you don't want it, just put {{db-user}} at the top, and someone will delete it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:12, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Work done in vain?

Looks like someone is trying to undo the progress we were making with the templates:

Nomination for deletion of Template:TreeList end

Template:TreeList end has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. UnQuébécois (talk) 18:21, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

TreeView Implementation

Hello, It appears that this has been implemented, so we can now move forward. Did we come to some agreement with the template naming? I wasn't sure if my slight sarcasm came through on the discussion page! Do you need/want help with the documentation? --UnQuébécois (talk) 15:09, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Looks like we have another interested party, with some naming ideas. Template talk:Tree view--UnQuébécois (talk) 15:28, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi

I have just noticed that. It looks like the templates that I had in my user space were moved (which explains why I could nto find them). I have an replacement elsewhere in my user space (needs a bit of tidying up) to replace the French royalty - I have chosen to show the descendants of Henry VII up to James VI/I. Needs a bit of tidying up which I will do over the weekend (if I can find time).

Regards Martinvl (talk) 15:36, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it looks like we didn't need to do anything as another user decided to come in and implement it his way.--UnQuébécois (talk) 15:40, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I have started adding the Tudor example. Martinvl (talk) 15:43, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

You might like to do some tidying up -real life is getting in the way.

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. When you recently edited George I of Great Britain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elizabeth Stuart (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) 14:38, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Your repeated unjustified mass reversions must stop

Martin, have you become the owner of Wikipedia? Or otherwise, why are you going around and removing wholesale, the valid and fully summarised contributions made by other editors and reverting content to your own last favored version, and without the courtesy of a reasoned summary of your actions? Shufflee (talk) 19:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Metrication of British transport for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Metrication of British transport is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Metrication of British transport until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Kahastok talk 11:08, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Kilometres per hour". Thank you. --Ornaith (talk) 19:28, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Greetings from Livermore, CA

Hello, Martinvl. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

GaramondLethe 19:53, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Future changes to km/h

Hi Martinvl,

I'm keeping a list of changes I'd like to make to km/h in my sandbox. You might want to start thinking about changes or additions you'd like to see. While I'd certainly welcome comments, it might be best to put those off until we finish up with the dispute resolution. Just wanted to give you a "heads up".

Thanks,

GaramondLethe 09:07, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thank you for your patience and perseverance so far with km/h. I do think this process will ultimately result in a better article, but for now, enjoy your beer and, at your leisure, drop by talk:kilometres per hour and contribute as the spirit[s] move[s] you. GaramondLethe 03:03, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Metrication of British Transport

Hello Martinvl, I am sure that you are editing the above article in good faith, but please be careful not to undo the work of other editors attempting to clean this article. As you can see from the discussion on its talk page, much of the content has been criticised as infringing many of the Wikipedia policies. Please help to put thing right by offering new material for discussion before adding it, and certainly don't blanket-revert the changes already made without firest reaching agreement on the talk page. Please be careful as disruption of this cleanup exercise, or continued edit-warring might get you into hot water! Best, Pother (talk) 15:43, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

On the contrary you are removing a large amount of good material by your over-zealous interpretation of WP: PRIMARY. Removing large chunks of material as you have been doing makes it impossible to discuss each item. Moreover, since you have requested that this article be merged with Metrication in the United Kingdom, it is the height of bad faith to start stripping out material before there is a consensus. Also, remember, if there is a lack of consensus, the status quo remains.

Also, you were so fast to undo the last bout of changes I do not believe that you actually read them. Martinvl (talk) 15:50, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

If the material is that good, where are the secondary sources supporting it? You can add each item to a section on the talk page, and we can discuss its merits there. This constant edit-warring will get you nowhere. Pother (talk) 20:08, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

That will be Hell's own job to administer. We need a top-down approach - what does the article as a whole look like and then narrow down to specifics. Furthermore, I have never seen your suggested approach being done before on Wikipedia (or anywhere else).

I don't know what you do outside Wikipedia - I have had a career in software engineering - one of the most important aspects of any engineering design is to start with an outline of what you want to build and to refine it in a stepwise manner. In this respect, building a Wikipedia article is no different to designing a piece of engineering. Martinvl (talk) 20:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not convinced a top-down approach is optimal for distributed, volunteer efforts (the linux kernel being largest example). Top-down works really well when you know where you're going and you're paying people to get there. Making that model work in this environment might be possible, but you're setting yourself up to have to persuade people to accept fewer large changes rather than many small changes (and more surface area means more drag). Yes, there's a greater administrative cost for managing lots of small changes. But there's also an administrative cost for having edits reverted and having to spend time in DRN. GaramondLethe 07:46, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

What I am saying is that rathern than keeping hoards of stuff in limbo, the normal way in Wikipedia is to discuss what is in the artcile otherwise, in the absence of a chairman, nothing will ever get done. 08:01, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

<grin> Well, I have "hoards of stuff in limbo" at km/h that's staying in limbo until you say otherwise, and I'd much rather dump it in to the article and discuss it piecemeal there. (Yes, I understand the two situations are not entirely alike.) GaramondLethe 08:17, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

And look at the amount of discussion we are having over one section. Now multiply that by half a dozen sections. We would never get anywhere. Martinvl (talk) 08:26, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

A careless edit, or another dishonest edit summary

Hello Martinvl. Myself and User:Kahastok have just been editing the Metrication of British Transport article. Here are diffs of our most recent work:

• me
• Kahastok
• me
• Kahastok

You then came along with this edit, and reverted all the above edits in one go, with the edit summary: "Reinstated material removed by Ornaith - See Talk Page".

There are serious problems with that edit summary:

• You didn't mention in the edit summary that you also reverted all the edits of Kahastok
• You haven't mentioned on the talk page why you reverted my edit to the shipping section

Please revert your own edit, and go to the talk page and engage in the discussion about the article content. If you don't, I will report you for disruption of the BRD process. With your track-record, you would probably be in serious trouble. Ornaith (talk) 19:51, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

@Ornaith - If you hadn't just removed large amount of data, then I woudl have left Kahastok's changes where they were. You had better applogise to Kahastok and arrange with him how to restore his changes. Meanwhile DON'T DELETE LARGE AMOUNT OF MATERIAL. Martinvl (talk) 19:59, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments in South Africa

Dear WikiProject South Africa Wikipedians

This is an urgent call from Wikimedia South Africa. We are currently working hard on the South African side of the exciting international photographic competition, Wiki Loves Monuments [1]. We have been planning to make this national competition really take off, but to do so, we need your help! The competition starts on the 1st September, and we need your help now! If you are interested in being part of or can help the Wiki Loves Monuments national organising team, then please join here [ http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2012_in_South_Africa]. If you have limited time, but want to help out at an upload marathon at a heritage site near you, please then contact either Lourie [louriepieterse@yahoo.com] or Isla [islahf@africacentre.net]. We look forward to hearing from you!"

Kind regards, Lourie

Sent by Lucia Bot in 14:03, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

August 2012

In case you didn't see my reply to you on my talkpage, I'll reiterate the main points of it here for you.

Your abuse of the {{BLP unsourced}} template in the Michael Shrimpton article certainly counts towards your 3RR tally, and your covert removal of references from the "References" section in the same article may indeed lead to more serious charges. Perhaps you should review your own actions before throwing your weight around, and before you get a WP:3RR or even a WP:ANI filed against you for them. Canepa (talk) 10:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Martinvl, the proper tag would be the {refimproveblp} - there is one legit source that mentions the subject.

Canepa, self posted resumes are not suitable general sources/references nor appropriate external links.

You two should stop bickering like an old married couple and maybe consider a voluntary interaction ban before one gets placed on you. Wikipedia is a big place, you dont need to follow each other around poking at each other. -- The Red Pen of Doom 12:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit-warring

Martin, just in case you didn't notice my comment at WP:3RRNB, it bears repeating. Be very careful of your own edits to the article. Technically, any change to the article constitutes a revert. I counted three on your part in the last 24 hours. Admins may cut you some slack if it appears you are editing collaboratively, but you have to be conscious of what you're doing and the risks you take. Also, don't shout in edit summaries. If you can't keep your cool, then don't do anything - always safer and usually better. Take care.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:35, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Bbb23,

I see your point. However there is another matter - the page view statistics of this article show between 3.5k and 4k hits per day on weekdays and about 1k hits per day on weekends. Moreover if you load the opening paragraph into the Google search box and do a search, you will see that over a hundred sites that have that exact text. In other words, in the reader community this is a high-profile article. We cannot afford to have it plastered with unneccessary "citation needed" flags and various banners. Please check these statistics out yourself and you will see what I mean. Also check out which users are copying it. In view of this I think that you will understand that I was trying to keep a stable high-profile article stable. Maybe we need to have some mechanism to do this, or if WP:ANI is the appropriate way to do it, then to regularise how this should be done without users seeing any in-fighting. Martinvl (talk) 22:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

if you feel so badly about the tags destroying the pristine appearance article and its clones, then provide sources so that there is nothing to tag. but you cannot make someone else do the work that you are not willing to do. -- The Red Pen of Doom 23:00, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

If a tag is needed, it is needed. If a banner template tag is need, it is needed. We can't tailor our policies based on the possible reactions by readers. One solution is, as RedPen says, find sources for the material. Another is if the material is unsourced and challenged, you can remove it, although you should exercise care in doing so, particularly if it's been in place for some time and never tagged as being unsourced. You can only remove tags if you give a valid reason for doing so, and saying it doesn't look good isn't a valid reason. Finally, just because Triomio was blocked doesn't mean you have carte blanche to revert his edits. There's already been a complaint about that at the noticeboard.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:09, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

For what little it's worth, I looked at a couple of the requests to provide citations in the lede and found them adequately cited in the body of the article. The kindest construction I could come up with was that Triomio had not understood the citations (which are relatively technical). I expect in a couple of days I'll get a chance to ask Triomio again if this is the case. GaramondLethe 04:00, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. 82.132.249.199 (talk) 17:29, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

User page bug?

Hi Martin, I'm a bit a bit surprised about you hunting bugs on Triomio's user page. Would you mind telling me the purpose? De728631 (talk) 17:56, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I kinda wondered about that as well.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:01, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I mentioned Triomio in a posting and when I checked the Wikilink I had a strange page. However, when I went to his talk page and then moved onto his userpage, I had the normal blank page. Since I have an IT background, it looked like a startup problem (page creation aborted?), so I created a page in a clean manner. Martinvl (talk) 19:02, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Maybe that makes sense to De, but I can't follow it. What do you mean by a "strange page"? What exactly was the wikilink? My view is it would have been more appropriate to report it as a problem rather than for you to create someone else's user page. I'll wait for De to chime in.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't make sense to me either although sometimes we do get the occasional server overload with strange-looking message pages. Do you have a diff of the posting where you mentioned Triomio? And yes, actually we're not supposed to create pages in another editor's userspace at all, so I suggest you leave Triomio a talk page message to explain this. De728631 (talk) 19:31, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

It depended on whether I entered the page from the search box or from the Talk page. I have expanded the explantation. Martinvl (talk) 22:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, you expanded the explanation on his user page but you didn't leave a message on his Talk page. Here's what I'm going to do. I'm going to leave a message on Triomio's Talk page pointing him here and asking whether he wants to edit his user page or if he would like me to delete it.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Goods from bulk

Hi Ehrenkater,

I have added a picture to the article to answer your questions regarding the "sale of loose goods or goods from bulk". Woudl you be happy if I removed your example about the cheese in the lede paragraph. Maybe we could change the wording of the picture caption. Martinvl (talk) 17:32, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

The cheese example was your example, not mine. I was and am concerned that the expression "sale of goods from bulk" is not clear. If you feel you have a better explanation or example of this than the cheese, please do substitute it. ---Ehrenkater (talk) 17:47, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Court Moor School

Hello, Martinvl you have new messages on Court Moor School's Talk page. Unita01 (talk) 18:09, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2012 Olympic Marathon Course, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages T46, T12 and T54 (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) 09:36, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Notice of dispute resolution discussion on Pendulum

Hi. I've started a Dispute resolution discussion about the big Equation Controversy on Pendulum. Feel free to join in. Cheers --Chetvorno^TALK 19:27, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

km/h turned out pretty well, actually.

Hello, Martinvl. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added GaramondLethe 04:48, 19 September 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

A failed experiment?

Regarding your reversing of a See Also link to the Hex River tunnels in the Cape Gauge article, please clarify "failed experiment".
I added it there since the Hex River pass was THE reason why the Cape Government converted from Standard to Cape Gauge. The fact that most railways in Africa still use Cape Cauge can therefore be directly attributed to this Pass.
André Kritzinger 11:51, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi André

Please look at the result of your changes - to make it easy, click here. You will see that the changes you made did not have the desired effect. Martinvl (talk) 11:59, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

It certainly didn't! Late night editing can be risky, it seems....
André Kritzinger 12:35, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Maybe a few too many Castles? (or was it Lion?) Martinvl (talk) 12:36, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

More like Cape Red at my age. Besides, Lion was taken off the market when SAB went international big-time.
I think it was a server issue. The Seacom cable down West Africa is probably busted again since the Interwebs have been extremely slow the past few weeks. A page will appear loaded and I'd click on it, and then it suddenly loads further and the click ends up in the wrong spot. Must have hit the <<nowiki>Insert non-formatted text here</nowiki>> button that way just before I saved my preview.
André Kritzinger 21:24, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Trying to save this reply for the FIFTH time now! André Kritzinger 21:24, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

André, I often cut and paste the required paragraph into WORD or Notepad, work on it there, paste it in my sanbox to check it out and then paste it onto the original article. This minimises the number of edit operation that need to use the West African cable and also gives you an on-going back-up. Regards Martinvl (talk) 08:35, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I always work in Word. But I still need the cable to preview. Even in the sandbox. André Kritzinger 11:42, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Square kilometre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Westgate (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) 12:16, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Image for Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute

I noticed that the image was for the USS Lexington from 1776 not from 1825, so I updated the images and the files to be consistent. I could not find an image of the USS Lexington from 1825. --Zeete (talk) 14:44, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Zeete,

I checked the records - you are quite right, the USS Lexington (1776) was in fact decommissioned and replaced another vessel of teh same name in 1825. I will undo my reversion . Martinvl (talk) 14:57, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Martinvl. You have new messages at Stefan2's talk page.
Message added 15:00, 12 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Stefan2 (talk) 15:00, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry to inform you, but I have deleted File:UniversityOfNatal CoatOfArms.jpg because it failed our criteria for fair use. Essentially, coats of arms can always be created under a free license since their description is not copyrighted. See the use of blazons in heraldry. Any individual depiction of arms is however copyrightable by the artist unless they waive such rights. I suggest you have a look at Commons and check the regular contributors of coats of arms over there. They may be willing to create an svg image of this particular coat of arms with a free license. And that would also be immune against opacity. De728631 (talk) 15:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Outline of the metric system (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Acceleration due to gravity and Power

East Falkland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mount Pleasant

Kilometres per hour (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to League

Metre Convention (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to National Physical Laboratory

Metric system (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Acceleration due to gravity

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Invitation for a Wikimedia UK training event 27-28 October

Hope you are well. Because of your great involvement with Wikipedia training so far and outreach I believe it would be worth sending you a direct invitation to the next training session that Wikimedia UK is organising for our volunteers. Please have a look here. As a thank you we would of course pay all the expenses and organise your accommodation. It's a very highly valued training and a great opportunity to develop your skills! Let me know if you are able to attend - would be great to see you there. Daria Cybulska (WMUK) (talk) 13:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC) (daria.cybulskawikimedia.org.uk)

Test 86.148.106.137 (talk) 19:05, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Pendulum and Pendulum (mathematics) talk

Hello, Martinvl. You have new messages at Maurice Carbonaro's talk page.
Message added 08:17, 6 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Gallon

Why did you insert the statement "legally defined" if you don't have the legal definition to support this and you know you don't have the citation?

"(Undid revision 522241853 by Cantaloupe2 (talk) The US gallon is legally defined as 231 cu in - just the citation is not there.)" Please prove it with relevant US statute or remove it. You restored it and it is challenged, therefore the burden of proof is on you WP:PROVEITCantaloupe2 (talk) 23:06, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

It is in the cited document. Please read the section called "introduction". Martinvl (talk) 08:25, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited International System of Units, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stilb (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) 12:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Lady Bullock

Hi! You might want to check the article about Pippa Middleton. The IP keeps inserting that trivia there as well. I truly wonder what that person's thinking. A second cousin of a grandmother? I have yet to meet all my own second cousins, let alone those of my parents and grandparents. Surtsicna (talk) 02:07, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

M48

Good morning Martinvl,
I was delighted to switch on this morning and find someone else with common sense.
Sincerely, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 08:28, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Gareth. Although most of Chris Marshall's stuff was pretty good (his site is now frozen), I think that this one needed a review. Martinvl (talk) 22:07, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Cheers! Have a good week! -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 22:25, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Mark Bristow (businessman)

Thanks for adding his school information. I thought I'd heard of Martinvl somewhere - we were both at the Wikimedia London training weekend last month! Edwardx (talk) 09:32, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

It was a very good school - I went there! Martinvl (talk) 10:13, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Just the thing this time of the morning. Or coffee, if you prefer. Edwardx (User talktalk) 09:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Hello, Martinvl. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Road Junction Lists

Hello! I seem to be back from the dead I guess! :-) Could you possibly bring me up to speed on where we stand with the Road Junction Lists these days? Are we using km/miles, or just miles? Are we using coords, or not? I've tried reading the discussions while I've been away, but it's a nightmare trying to work anything out! Ta :-) Jeni ^(talk) 16:08, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jeni

Welcome back

Coords - I have not been involved, someone else has. The Americans allowed our junction lists to be used as a trial which then petered out. I am indifferent to them, except that they clutter things up.

Distances - WP:RJL says that we use both miles and kilometres. Kilometres are, in my view, mandatory because that driver location signs and distance marker posts are in kilometres and since the Department of Transport is not willing publish things on the internet etc, but by putting the posts in place, they are effectively publishing their data. (The Welsh Departmernt of Transport did in fact publish the coordinates of all the driver location signs on their motorways and trunk roads,m but they havd since removed them from the internet, possibly when I cited them on the A55 article. I have collated a large number of kilometre markers. I personally know the location of many motorway exits that I use in terms of their associated driver location signs. I have not added any miles to the road junction lists because I believe it to be counter-productive. How do we know that the numbers on the driver location signs are really kilometres? I have heard that on some roads, the distances have been fudged to avoid discontinuities, so doing mile convesions are counter-productive. However, given that the WP:RJL says that both should be used, I will not stop anybody else from including them.

In both cases, the use of coordinates and of miles column will cramp things up, so in my view both are optional extras.

The lists in the US, at least those using the templates, display both miles and kilometers. Our templates are set up to display the miles to the left and convert the input into kilometers in a column to the right. There are exceptions: California uses postmiles which can't be converted into a meaningful metric equivalent, and some roads like Interstate 19 and those in Puerto Rico are marked in km. The extra column takes up very little width in the tables.

We still aren't using coordinates at all, preferring to use KML files, which when used with {{Attached KML}} provide a line on a map, instead of disconnected dots. The line from the KML can be seen in the WikiMiniAtlas in the upper right corner, or displayed on Google or Bing Maps. If/when other mapping services support KML display, they'll be added, and Google already is using our KMLs to display summary information about American roads in their search results. Imzadi 1979 → 21:39, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

What are you playing at?

Please stop following me around and please stop undoing almost every damn edit that I make. Dainful (talk) 22:19, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, it is not Brains' bitter.

The United Kingdom is now looking much better, thanks to your input.  –  – Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 10:45, 13 December 2012 (UTC) Cheers! and if it is a full litre, Gezuntheit! Martinvl (talk) 10:47, 13 December 2012 (UTC) Croeso! –  – Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 10:51, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Which I assume is Welsh (I don't know why :-) ) Martinvl (talk) 10:53, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Outstanding questions

Hello Martinvl,

In case you haven't seen them there, here are four questions I asked you about the comments you left on my talk page. Perhaps you could help me improve my familiarity of Wikipedia protocol by answering them for me please:

• What shouldn't I be touching?
• Why shouldn't I be touching whatever it is?
• Why would you be using words of one syllable?
• Is there a Wikipedia test or exam that I need to take to see if I have the appropriate artistic skills required to be allowed to apply WP:IMAGE? Curatrice (talk) 19:41, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Curatrice,

When I wrote these lines, you were moiving from article to article making the same change - in particulare reducing ther size of the image in the lede. I saw from your contributuon history that you did not have much experience of Wikipeida and I was following you reinstating, in particular, image sizes.

There is an old saying "If it ain't broke, don't mend it". You need to be a little more discerning in trying to mend things that are not broken - in particular, don't apply recommendations unless you are actually mending something - an unfortunate by-proiduct of applying changes for the sake of it is that in "fixing" something, one can inadvertently introduce an error elsewhere. It is unfortunate that when people make a "quick fix", they only make a "quick check" that it worked.

There is no Wikpeida test regarding artisitic skills - just be aware that unless you have skills regarding proportions etc, it is best not to mess around with other people's layouts, espcially if you are blindly applying recommednations.

I am not decrying the recommendations - firstly, they are a good starting point when you are laying out a page, but ther are inconsistencies and sometimmes contradictions in various recommendations, so be careful.

Finally, don't leap into something too quickly - be cautious, see what the reaction is - if you have misunderstood something and repeat teh same changes too many times, you will piss off whoever sorts out the mess. Martinvl (talk) 20:01, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

And the one syllable remark? Curatrice (talk) 20:11, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Firstly, happy new year - perhaps we can enjoy a more productive and congenial relationship this year! Secondly, are you going to get the new year off to a good start by answering the one about the one syllable please? Curatrice (talk) 10:07, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

A request

I just noticed the SVG map you created for the comparison of the UK and the Falklands. It looks really good, and is much better than the PNG I compiled from OpenStreetMap.

Is it possible for you to do an image like this with all of the overseas territories on the same scale, like the ones already created for France and The Netherlands? This map, I feel would be very useful in the British Overseas Territories article.

Many thanks

--RaviC (talk) 19:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

I can give it a try, but after Christmas. Martinvl (talk) 20:20, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi RaviC,

First of all, compliments of the season.

I have done a preliminary chaeck to see how fasiuble it would be to do a .svg diagram as requested by you. The main problem is that Wikimedia COmmons only has .svg maps for 6 of the 14 territoroes in question. Ideally, all maps should be of the same format and the absence of the raw materials makes things difficult. All that I can do really is to suggest that you continue with your .png map.

Regards Martinvl (talk) 13:02, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, hope you had a good holiday.

Would this svg file work? The territories are all in the same format, but not in the same size ratio.

If not, don't worry about it, I will continue with the .png that I have made a start on.

Kind regards

--RaviC (talk) 14:38, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi RaviC,

Thanks for the message.

I had a look as the file that you delievered and it is perfect starting material. I have given the matter some thought and I think that it might well be appropriate to have three different scales - the main one being the UK and the larger BoTs, the second, at a scale of 20% the first showing the British Antarctic Territory andionlgside the UK. I will position this in the "Noth Sea" of the first map. The third, probably at 500% the scale of the first would show the smallest territories against the Isle of Wight. All would have a scale.

Any comments?

Regards Martinvl (talk) 14:56, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, that seems like a great idea. Placing the smaller ones alongside the Isle of Wight is a great way to compare them to the UK without them being almost invisible. --RaviC (talk) 16:41, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

OK - I will work on it over the next week or two. Martinvl (talk) 16:46, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

3RR Warning (Lists of British inventions)

This is a formal WP:3RR warning.

You have now made 3 reversions ([2], [3], [4]) to that article within 24 hours. There is a discussion about that claim on the talk page, please participate in it. MeasureIT (talk) 15:59, 31 December 2012 (UTC)