Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 7

message: Another event in London (sorry), first weekend of October (1st and 2nd). Talking about free wireless networking, free of copyright mapping and open hardware. See http://www.okfn.org/wsfii/ for more details. I'm going, just wondered if anybody else is. Edward 20:23, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not something I can attend, sadly - but please let us know if anything interesting comes up! Shimgray | talk | 21:57, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: WSFII - World Summit on Free Information Infrastructures - London 2005

message: There is a lot to be done, but the bid looks promising: see m:Wikimania_2006/London
LoopZilla 22:24, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Can anyone think of any sponsorship opportunities? Expenses might be high - particularly food and accommodation. Cormaggio @ 08:08, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'll think. The GLA maybe? British Council? Secretlondon 08:50, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  East London bid for Wikimania 2006! 

message: OK people. New mid-2004 population estimates have been released. Time to get updating those articles. josh 21:47, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Population Estimates 

message: Does anyone have any experience of programs that draw family trees?  I thought I'd be helpful and draw one for a page I'm updating but got extremely frustrated when it refused outright to do what I wanted it to do.  Bloody computers... -- Francs2000  00:46, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Family tree drawing programs

message: There's a discussion on Talk:Public school (UK) on the usage of the term "public school" in Scotland, which is getting highly entangled with the page-move debate on same.  Informed Scots, public/private school alumni, and whomever else might want to chime in there.  (Especially if you happen to favour a sensible solution like moving the whole shebang to their preferred self-descriptor, "independent school", or at least a decent caveat.)  Alai 17:34, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scottish "public schools" 

message: I added the fact the Dick Van Dyke's cockney accent in Mary Poppins "was ridiculed and is still frequently parodied." to the Mary Poppins article, but someone keeps reverting it, claiming I need to provide a citation. I've given a link an article in which such ridicule is mentioned but the other guy claims that it is too weak. Can you believe it?. Does anyone want to pop over to talk:Mary Poppins and confirm it.  I suspect that he's dug his heals in over this and I can't be bothered to waste my time searching for specific examples, but I hope confirmation from a fellow Brit might help. Jooler 06:11, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added my bit. I don't like all this "if it's not on the internet, it isn't true" Mrsteviec 06:35, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

text: It's infamous. Secretlondon 07:10, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely, I knew of the name "Dick Van Dyke" to mean a bad cockney accent well before I knew who the actual person was, definately warrrants a mention. Indeed to this day I rarely hear mention of him without it being a reference to that performance. Ayfeternowon Merry Pawpins! MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 10:14, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm starting to get the feeling he is much more revered in the US than in the UK! Mrsteviec 10:23, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I dunno. I liked Dick van Dyke in Mary Poppins, accent and all! It may not have been Cockney but it was funny! Don't see why anyone would want to remove what you put in the Mary Poppins article though. -- Derek Ross |  Talk 02:20, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Dick Van Dyke

message: Someone is trying to turn Windsor in to a disambig page. Please oppose this on Talk:Windsor. Mrsteviec 14:33, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This page isn't Wikipedia:Wikiproject Pro-uk bias, is it?  The Canadian Windsor seems to be just as notable as the English one, so a dab page is the right thing.  Just as some Americians sometimes need to be reminded they're not on us.wikipedia.org, so do some Brits need to remember that it's not uk.wikipedia.org either.  -- AJR 02:09, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Agreed. A dab page is the solution which we used for the very similar case of Perth and it's worked well there. Why not do the same for Windsor ? -- Derek Ross |  Talk 02:15, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Royal Windsor

message: This page goes into some detail about the pronouncement of the word "harrassed" and the phrase "I'm being harrassed" - and claims that it was one of Frank Spencer's catch-phrases. Now I have no memory of him ever using this phrase and certainly no memory of it being a catch-phrase. Is my memory faulty on this one? Jooler 07:49, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I don't known about the pronunciation but the spelling is "harassed". Frank often used to use the word but I can't remember a special catchphrase using it. Mind you I always found the program mildly irritating so I'm probably not the best person to remember. -- Derek Ross |  Talk 02:29, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I think he just mispronounced his r's as w's. I think this occured in more than this phrase. However I also found him irritating ;) Secretlondon 06:34, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Some Mothers Do 'Ave 'Em]]

message: As you may already know, London's bid to host Wikimania 2006 was unsuccessful - mainly because it was considered too expensive as well as the potential problem of the JANET internet access issue. It is still planned to roll this bid forward to 2007, as well as any other bids in the UK that look feasible (see m:Wikimania 2006/UK bid). I've now set up m:Wikimania 2007/UK bid so we can get ideas and make contacts early - please add any info you think might be appropriate. Thanks. Cormaggio @ 11:52, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikimania 2007 

message: There will be a meeting on IRC (#wikimedia-uk) at 18:00 BST this Sunday 16th October for anyone interested in the setting up of the local chapter Wikimedia UK. Also, Jimbo Wales will be coming to London on the 27th of November to discuss progress - it could be an interesting month. Again, please add ideas to that page for funding, possible projects etc. or just to add your name to the list. Cormaggio @ 11:52, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikimedia UK meeting on IRC

message: There is a debate going on over the position of the articles Manchester, City of Manchester and Greater Manchester, which  UK Wikipedians may wish to make their opinions known on. the wub  "?!" 13:05, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Could somebody please, please help to sort out this mess User:EarlyBird is creating utter havoc. With his moving Manchester pages around. I have tried to get him to take it through official channels to get some consensus, but to no avail. He now keps cutting and pasting and creating numerous redirects everywhere. I'm totally exasperated and have got to go away for a while to calm my nerves. G-Man 19:42, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The issue is being put to a vote at Talk:City of Manchester#Straw poll if any of you would like to participate. G-Man 20:37, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manchester 

message: I'm a big fan of the wikipedia but I've been reading the views of some critics of the project after coming across an item on this blog http://www.philb.com/blog/blogger.html and am now a bit concerned.
I decided to pick a subject at random - Michael Moore - and, sure enough, it contained some absolute shite.  How about this howler 'That same year, he ran for and won a seat on the Davison school board under a platform.... '  OK, I know that many contributors aren't fully conversant with the English language, but shite like this could bring the whole project into disrepute.  I can and will correct the offending article, of course, but I have a nasty feeling that there's a lot of sloppy stuff out there and that the sloppiness isn't limited to mangling our mother tongue.
What do you think folks?  Is inevitable that any collective project will eventually be neutered by mediocrity and sloppy thinking? 
Look forward to hearing from you.
Jerry
: I suggest reposting this on Wikipedia:Village pump - it's a more appropriate place and more likely to get you some replies! Talrias (t | e | c) 22:27, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No no you dont understand. Dont read wikipedia, write it. It s much more fun. If you dont like the Michael Moore article fix it. There are loads of articles I like. Justinc 23:19, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is wikipedia shite? 

message: A persistent person is trying to change this article to put the palace in Surrey. Even the traditionalists would agree it is not and I'm getting bored of reverting the change. Please vote at Talk:Hampton Court Palace that the palace is in LB Richmond. Thanks. Mrsteviec 22:08, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Hampton Court Palace]]

message: In Bullseye, for those who remember it - You may recall that the star prize was often a speedboat, (which was dead handy for those who lived on the 15th floor of a tower block in Wolverhampton or similar). I'm sure I heard on one of those TV nostaligia programmes that the producers of the show had some kind of a deal with the manufacturers of the boat and that they would wheel out the boat if they team won, and if they lost and Jim Bowen had to say the immortal words "Come and have a look and what you would have won" - that they would whip out the car instead. - I was going to add this to the article but I can't find a reference to this to check out the story. Jooler 23:23, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This sounds like a good story. I think we'd need a really good source to say that the prizes were fixed (if that's what you are saying..) Secretlondon 12:11, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Bullseye]]

message: A large number of Canadian government-related images (portraits of political figures, etc.) have been deleted under an apparent conflict between the provisions of Crown copyright and the provisions of GFDL, and I know the same has happened to at least a few British government images as well. I have requested clarification on the extent to which fair use can be applied. (Wikipedia is governed solely by American copyright law, because that's where the servers are located, so fair dealing isn't applicable.)
Consequently, I'm hereby asking for some UK participation at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Crown copyright. Thanks. Bearcat 00:51, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Crown copyright]]

message: Dispute going on as to whether he is categorised Scot or British, SqueakBox 19:45, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Ronnie Corbett]] 

message: Can someone with some knowledge please have a look at the Nick Baker (disputed conviction) article. There are a whole load of edits recently by new/anonymous accounts, all lacking edit notes or Talk page activity. The material seems to have been mucked about an awful lot and I am a bit concerned that a party (or parties) closely associated with the legal case is getting WAY too involved in the editing of this article.--Mais oui! 09:30, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comment: [[Nick Baker (disputed conviction)]] 

message: Just to let you know Education in the United Kingdom has became this fortnight's UKCOTW. Come and help out! Thanks, Francs2000  19:34, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:UKCOTW|UK COTW]]: [[Education in the United Kingdom]] 

message: Our article was created on 9 November 2005 by Tim Paterson. Today on the help desk e-mail I replied to an email of 25 October from a timP of britlist.com asking about the fate of an earlier article he created. I assume that timp and Tim Patterson are one and the same. So far, there have been no other edits to the page and no pages link to the page. The article certainly could do with a cleanup.
On the other hand, there are 109,000 Google results for Britlist see (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Britlist%22&tab=nw&ie=UTF-8&sa=N). I am looking for advice as to whether it should be listed on Articles for deletion or whether it is notable enough in Britain to warrant a cleaned up article. Thanks in anticipation of your advice. Capitalistroadster 02:18, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I would list it tbh.  There are literally hundreds of websites and free papers along these lines in the UK, I fail to see what makes this one notable. -- Francs2000  02:42, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Re the 109,000 google results, it may be worth noting that for the search linked above, Google only gives 41 results before truncating the results ("In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 41 already displayed.")  A search for "britlist" (without quotes) gets to 58 before stopping.  Both are somewhat less than the "about 109,000" mentioned at the top of the search results page... AJR | Talk 13:48, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I tided it up, removing the inline external links and unsourced speculation. Though it still reads like an advert. Over 99% of the Google hits seem to be link farms with only 39 being unique, and an Alexa rank of over 409k would seem to indicate that it fails the proposed standards at WP:WEB. I'm going to leave it for now, but I will probably AfD it later. --GraemeL (talk) 14:13, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I'm inclined to think it should be deleted, and it's obvious that others think so as well, so what's the harm on listing it on AFD?  At least it'll get a proper debate and resolve it one way or the other  Maccoinnich 16:03, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Britlist]]

message: Its a tricky article naming issue, but there is an open question as to whether Cat flap should be moved to Pet door following a recent VfD on Doggie door. I'm not really sure whether it is in part a British English / American English thing, but I've never really heard of a 'Pet door' and it feels like an Americanism. UK Wikipedians may like to comment. -- Solipsist 19:16, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If Isaac Newton really invented it, what was its Latin name? Charles Matthews 19:20, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Research indicates the naming Newton used for it is hideously complex, but Leibniz (who independently invented a similar device some years later) called it a katzeklappe and this became the preferred notation... Shimgray | talk | 19:33, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

text:  :) -- Solipsist 19:41, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

text: The apparently sincere argument that the "current name is not NPOV toward dogs" is easily the best thing I've read this week ;-) — Matt Crypto 19:54, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The comment that if we call it a "pet door" people may think of goldfish is pretty amusing too. Tree&Leaf 18:13, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure the word Pet door is seriously used by many, so I doubt the wisdom of this. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 08:24, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Cat flap

message: Could some British people provide insight as to the possible effects of this murder as discussed by Matthew Brown. - Mgm|(talk) 09:50, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Thomas Marshall Child Murder of 1997]] 

message: The "natives" are getting restless again. Could do with a bit of support/balance before the article gets trashed again. Wiki-Ed 00:58, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Aluminium]] spelling 

message: The helpdesk was advised that this page has been vandalised. I have removed the most obvious bits but would be grateful if someone with local knowledge could have a look and see what I missed. Capitalistroadster 06:20, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[University of Kent Students' Union]]

message: Is there a copy of the source for these floating around somewhere?  Vector format preferable, high(ish)-resolution raster images would be good too.  Chris talk back 18:14, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Speak to Morwen - she knows about those. -- Francs2000  02:18, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you want? There are a few at Wikipedia:Blank maps, I can fish others out.  No vectors, I'm afraid, but I worked at high res and scaled down.  Morwen - Talk 13:02, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, those are handy, 3x2 kpx will be more than enough :-)   Any for the rest of the UK and Ireland though?  I've found some of the Scotland ones, but they're all pre-highlighted with specific areas and (more importantly) low-res.  I might just pinch one of the existing ones for Wales and recolor whichever county is highlighted, since while they're still low-res, the scale is rather more favourable. Chris talk back 18:11, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: which ones exactly?  Do you mean the ones of the current council areas?  Just point me at the numbered versions and I'll find and upload my source - it's a big tricky though (as machine with them on doesn't have a NIC I can use, so I have to shuffle them by iRiver.)   Curious as to what you are doing, also.  Morwen - Talk 19:48, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: So far, I've got the English ceremonial counties blank stitched next to the Welsh current unitaries (with numbers patched over).  Could do with Scottish current councils or pre-1974 administratives, unnumbered (as I see patching over those numbers may be a little more complex with the flyouts), and Irish counties unnumbered (can happily use either 6 or 26 divisions for NI).  It's for a small private reference, where I could do with some sense of where county boundaries are.  Date consistency across the country is not particularly important for this.  I have about half a dozen RTL8139-based NICs kicking around if you want me to send one up.  Chris talk back 20:10, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  County maps and such like 

message: A range registered to the UK Internet for Learning and containing no less than 512 IPs was indefinitely blocked yesterday; please see this thread on WP:ANI for all details. Apparently the range constitutes a network which will eventually to go to all primary schools in the UK. The old cynic User:Kim Bruning has suggested that Wikipedia might seize this moment to try to establish a positive educational collaboration—by no means concerned with vandalism alone—with the UK Internet for Learning. In fact, not to put too fine a point on it, to get some servers out of them. ;-) Please compare the Dutch kennisnet example. I herewith lob this idea into your collective laps, dear limeys. Best, Bishonen | talk 22:43, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The primary schools of the UK have been blocked (well, almost)

message: The subject of this article has sent an e-mail to the help desk requesting its deletion claiming that it is inaccurate. I have cleaned up the article. The article was created by an anonymous editor who I suspect was Southgate himself.
It seems to me that he is at best marginally notable and that listing on Articles for Deletion may well be warranted.  However, I would welcome the opinions of British Wikipedians to see if he is more important than he seems. 
Capitalistroadster 23:14, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Troy Southgate]]

message: Hi. Today User:Bessarion has systematically gone through and renamed each article about a  CofE bishop. What formerly was, for example, Bishop of Ely is now Bishop of Ely, England (Anglican). This is needless complication; there's no other bishop of Ely nor can there be any confusion as to which Ely is meant. Article titles should be as simple as possible. Now of course there are cases where some disambig is needed; Liverpool, for example, has both an  RC bishop and a CofE one; and in other cases it is possible that an English bishop would need to be disambiguated from one elsewhere in the world. But most articles need neither the denominational nor the geographic disambig.
If this were all, I would suspect that Bessarion (a fairly new user) has just developed an inordinant fondness for superficial consistency. But I see also that he/she has spun off separate articles for pre-reformation and post-reformation bishops, e.g. Bishop of Ely, England (Anglican) and Bishop of Ely, England (Catholic). Besides creating a false dichotomy — it's a temporal distinction but it looks like two simultaneous sets of rival bishops — it's also got a whiff of POV about it, since it seems to deny the CofE's worldview, that they are a continuation of the mediaeval church. Furthermore, highlighting the inexeperience of this editor (as well as of User:Xramsey who appears to be collaborating on the project, there aren't even links between the Anglican and Catholic articles!! (Actually, at present no pages at all link to the new catholic article.)
Basically, the situation should just go back to that of a week ago, when there was a simple and simply-named article at Bishop of Ely which covered office down to the present. However, I don't have the patience to move all those articles, nor the stomach for the fights and acrimony which would undoubtedly ensue. So I'm just kvetching about it here. Doops |  talk 01:23, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Other gripes with these editors: lots and lots of uncommented edits, and (so far as I can tell) no talk page discussion of these quite weighty changes. Doops |  talk 01:31, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If responses talk pages are not forthcomming, try RfC. Thryduulf 07:51, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I gotta be honest with you; I haven't even brought it up on any of the talk pages. There's something like 44 articles involved; and I don't know where to start. Plus, as I said, I don't have the stomach for so sprawling a fight. Doops |  talk 08:01, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  bishop article renaming 

message: There is a Requested move discussion on-going at Talk:Anglo-Norman language.--Mais oui! 06:27, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was Anglo-Norman a language or a dialect?