User talk:Adam mugliston/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Speedy deletion of Gustav Elfving

Adam, please don't put a speedy deletion tag on the first day that an article appears, especially when the Swedish WP (available through google scholar) indicates the fellow was a foreign member of the Swedish Academy of Sciences.

Particularly, when the user is new to Wikipedia, you should not template him but write a nice personal note, and I hope you do so asap.

You can also consider contributing to the article, simply by reading the article provided yesterday or the articles I've added: Two are freely available on Project Euclid.

Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

This looks like a misunderstanding - Adam didn't try to CSD Gustav Elfving, he tried to CSD the redirect from Erik Gustav Elfing (a mistake in the name).

That explains it. I was puzzled why I couldn't find this in the page history.

Anyway CSD criterion A3 doesn't apply to redirects. It could be argued that mis-spellings are unnecessary as redirects unless they are likely to be very common, however in this case the typo looks plausible enough (and definitely happened at least once) so the redirect probably serves a useful purpose.

Unfortunately, a very large proportion of new users begin by creating new articles, and a very large proportion of those new articles are unsuitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Hand-crafting responses to all of them would be too time-consuming. A better solution is to think long and hard (or at least reasonably hard) when CSDing anything. I think that is something Adam and his mentor are still working on.

I agree that we cannot write all of them individually. But this seemed like a very good faith edit, and a templating is not the way to introduce ourselves to new and potentially very useful contributors.

The templating is automated, and there's nothing rude about it, although it can be confusing. For example, there's a template on my talk page right now about the recently closed AfD of The Center for Rural Entrepreneurial Studies, not because I created it, but because I'd previously CSD'd it. People can also receive templates for articles they didn't create if they are involved in setting up disambiguation pages, I believe.

The general practice is to avoid templating the regulars, not avoid templating potentially valuable newcomers. A great many valued contributors got a few deletion-related templates on their talk pages in their early days - image copyright is one of the trickiest parts, for example. It's nothing to be ashamed of. The templates are supposed to be written to be clear, informative and polite, but if you can suggest improved wording, go for it! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 04:14, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

There are a number of circumstances, although this wasn't one of them, where it's necessary to tag an article for speedy deletion in its first day of existence... or indeed its first minute. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:27, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

That's definitely true.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 03:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

All I tagged was Gustav Elfing, not Gustav Elfving, which was a page with just a redirect on it. Now, I read the message from Worm, I realised I tagged it under the wrong criteria, but still according to CSD R2, it should be speedy deleted.  Adam mugliston  Talk  15:15, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Adam, imho your worst act was templating the new editor; your warning referred to the article (not the picture, which I've delinked from the article).  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

As Adam said, he tagged the redirect page; he did not tag the article. When he tagged the redirect page, Twinkle automatically informed its creator (who also happens to be the author of the Gustav Elfving article) that he had done so. This is standard practice, and is not something that can sensibly be described as "your worst act" under any stretch of the imagination. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The template had a link to the article not to the picture (09:42, 2 May 2011 (UTC)) redirect, as I wrote before (at least once). I am unaware of Adam's having a worse act; I did not write that the act was a capital offense or a mortal sin, only that of a few unfortunate acts it was the worst. I am glad that he deleted the template and wrote another note, as you noted.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:40, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea why you keep mentioning pictures, pictures are nothing to do with this. Adam's only mistake in this was that he thought a redirect needed deleting when it didn't. That is in fact his "worst act" but it's rather trivial, since, after all, you still don't appear to understand redirects either, judging by your difficulty in following this! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 08:42, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

No, it doesn't meet R2 because it is not a cross-namespace redirect.

Redirects for mis-typings of people's names are a curious thing. Hidden in the talkpage history of a certain user who is banned from Wikipedia for reasons that can't be discussed on-wiki, there is a lengthy account of how he spent weeks creating hundreds of redirects to living people's articles from absurd titles like a little-known use of their middle name and other strange titles. (Coincidentally for our discussion, he also tried creating a cross-namespace redirect of his username in mainspace to his user page in user space - completely unacceptable of course.) An administrator spent weeks trying to explain to him that for English names, this was pointless and disruptive (they had to use blocks to emphasise their explanations). Just as the administrator was apparently succeeding in making the editor understand this, an arbitrator arrived to inform the editor that they were indefinitely banned from Wikipedia and could only appeal or even ask about the ban by email, for reasons that could not be given publicly. The administrator was more than a little surprised to be interrupted this way :) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:24, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I've tracked down the problem. It was a double redirect - hence why it stopped at a page which looked just like a link. Adam, I expect this is the first time you've come across a double redirect. The trick is to change the redirect so that it points to the right place, not delete it. It's very rare that you should delete a redirect (I know I pointed you the redirect speedy criteria, I should have been more clear when I did). Anyway, I've now fixed the problem. Worm^TT · (talk) 17:48, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

No, actually slightly more complicated than that (or less complicated?) - I think it wasn't actually a double redirect when Adam CSD'd it, but it was made into one later. Anyway, new page patrol does give links with the noredirect option, so it takes you to the redirect page not the target article. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:55, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

You're right. It became a double redirect after Adam tagged it. My mistake. Worm^TT · (talk) 18:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Let me clarify the history of my (mis) understanding. This repetition is for Demiurge1000, who has a hobby of half-constructive, half-malevolent commentary.

I saw a template about PROD on the Gustav Elfving author's page, and this PROD linked to the Gustav Elfving. Since the article lacked a PROD, I assumed that somebody had declined the PROD (and my interest in deletion-policy is minimal).

There was a notice on Elfving's picture, questioning its free use, which is why I have referred to it (rather than a redirect, which I didn't find). I understand that the picture is another matter, unrelated to Adam.

Finally, my basic point was about a rude welcome to a new editor, who had made some constructive edits. I am glad that Adam and WTT responded to the substantive concern, rather than becoming fixated on minutiae.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:42, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Attention to detail is important. If you struggle to understand the mechanics of what has happened in a given situation and why, it's best to focus your efforts in other areas rather than looking for disagreements in this way. The PROD template - still on the other editor's talk page, but now struck - did not link Gustav Elfving, it linked Gustav Elfing. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 10:03, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Demiurge, I am not looking for a disagreement, but have commended Adam's intentions to the new editor, and believe reached understanding with the others. Adam at least has acted upon my suggestion, and written a gracious note. Here is another demonstration that youth and virtue have advantages over a trolling administrator.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:56, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, Adam shows himself well able to follow advice given with positive intentions, and that's a very positive quality as a Wikipedia editor. I'm not sure what you mean by "a trolling administrator", but perhaps that's just more minutiae :-) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:49, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Slow down

I see that a lot of others have cautioned you about improper actions. My belief is that you should stop trying to behave like an administrator, for a while, okay? Try to get some more experience by contributing to the articles, and watching experienced editors like Demiurge1000 in action. (My football/soccer coach told us to watch professionals play our positions, and that advice was good.) Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:44, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Kiefer. Just to let you know that I'm mentoring Adam, so would appreciate any feedback on areas that need attention. At the moment, I've just about finished teaching him the basics of wikipedia, and I have to say he's picked it up very quickly. Whilst trying new areas - areas that any editor can work in - he has made a few mistakes. I've taken up the anti-vandalism errors with him above, and I do believe he's learnt from that. I'll discuss CSD further with him next.

I'm unhappy with your edit summary, "a lot of others have cautioned you about improper actions. My belief is that you should concentrate on your schoolwork and stop trying to behave like an administrator" - besides being patronising, Adam is learning and improving. What's more, I've seen nothing to say he's trying to act like an administrator, nor that he has any plans to become one. I'll be taking your feedback on board, but please do try to keep your comments (and edit summaries) constructive and accurate. Worm^TT · (talk) 07:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

He left a rude template on a new editor's talk page, biting a valuable newcomer. He has made enough bad edits that you (Worm) have received a statement-of-concern recently on your own talk page, which should strike you as evidence of a nontrivial problem.

The edit-summary you quoted belonged to an earlier edit, which I improved, following DemiUrge1000 helpful comment; I am sorry about the now irrelevant aside in the summary (to which you raise a objection). However, he has made so many errors that he needs guidance, preferably without patronizing.

If he needs mentoring, that may be a signal that he should exercise extreme caution. This is not the Boy Scouts. (The growing number of administrator-wannabe schools may be a sign of a problem, I suspect.)

However, "acting like an administrator" has been a problem, which you should not deny. He is trying to enforce policies with improper understanding of policy and manifestly a lack of the intellectual maturity to be able to interpret policy, at the most basic level of distinguishing constructive edits from vandalism. Some experience and patient work will do wonders with development, as I tried to explain kindly, by referring to the soccer/football coach: When I took my referee's license, the head of refereeing told us that we were too young to referee games for older children and men, and we just had to wait. (Life is unfair, we learned.)  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Since my message of concern to Worm has been mentioned, I feel I should comment. After a series of AfDs about Adam's articles which I was involved in earlier in the year and further messages between Adam and another user whose talkpage is on my watchlist. I started watching Adam's talkpage as well Messages on his page such as the one about the list of Bus routes in Hampshire are very concerning so it was good to see Worm mentoring him. I initially checked his edits after the monetary socialism message above and found lots of problems - I also realized from those contributions that he had been set the anti-vandalism task by Worm as part of his adoption. So it was Worm and not Adam that I informed. That said, whilst his hit/miss ratio has improved since that time edits such as this make me think that perhaps he should take a voluntary break from using twinkle and revert any vandalism manually to ensure he is only reverting where essential. The alternative is that his mistakes will eventually land him at ANI where his twinkle privileges will likely be forcefully withdrawn. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 13:53, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid my normal level of attentiveness has been lower with Adam, for which I apologise, these bank holiday weekends have thrown me, and I'm not online nearly as much as I have been. Please both remember that Adam is learning, and as Stuart points out he has improved. I should also point out that the revert mentioned was not a "vandalism revert" in any way, he didn't press the rollback vandalism button, he didn't leave an edit summary that was regarding vandalism. What's more, the revert wasn't actually wrong - single sentence paragraphs should be avoided per WP:Layout#Paragraphs. As long as Adam is careful, I do not think he'll need to voluntarily drop Twinkle just yet.

Kiefer, the idea that a new editor needs mentoring is not a new one. There have been a number of schemes for just that. Call it adoption if you like. Adam came to me when it was suggested, completely of his own volition, which I believe shows a fair amount of maturity. He's hardly the first editor to wander into anti-vandalism or CSD brazenly, and I am sure he'll learn from these mistakes. Working in those areas is not "trying to be an administrator", and I really do think using such terms is tantamount to putting words in his mouth.

Thanks for the reply, WTT, which I should have acknowledged earlier. Unless we quote one another verbatim, there is a danger of putting words in each other's mouths, but you know it's what comes out that defiles you.... ;) I think that "trying to be an administrator" is less harsh than your "wander into anti-vandalism ... brazenly" but my phrase was certainly less accurate. I have only recently heard about WP schools, which seem worthwhile, particularly for editors without experience in the various bulletin boards. You should be commended for helping the new editors. Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:18, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I do appreciate your concerns and if you feel there is anything I'm missing in the mentoring, I would gladly discuss my methods with you, however comparing wikipedia to your experiences in football coaching is not an useful analogy. There is no consensus that younger editors cannot edit wikipedia, no consensus that they cannot work in areas such as anti-vandalism or CSD, there's not even any age limit on being an administrator. Worm^TT · (talk) 17:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

WormTT, whilst Adam did not revert as Vandalism, he did revert as "Removal of text" which it wasn't; and whilst WP:Paragraph asks that we minimise the use of single sentence paragraphs it does not disallow them. I can think of many reasons why a single sentence paragraph may be formed temporarily particularly if an editor is about to initiate an expansion, and I would like to think that patrollers would give more than the 1 minute that Adam did to establish the reason for such an edit before reverting. It's also odd that the revision his summary claims to be reverting 426184416 was actually a reversion of actual vandalism 426182362 and it wasn't that edit that got reverted. Finally if the revert was for a reason like layout, then I would hope that Adam would point IP users to the BRD cycle or the talkpage so their proposed change could be discussed. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 20:24, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

You're absolutely right on all points there. All I can ask is a little patience, I'm sure Adam will take these comments on board. Worm^TT · (talk) 20:43, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the reply WTT and the helpful comment Stuart. I am satisfied that you two experienced editors are considering the issue, and have provided feedback to Adam. I'd still like Adam to remove the template and add a welcome to the editor of Gustav Elfving. My best to all of you. Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Adam has struck the template on the other editor's page and apologised for the mistake. As has been repeatedly explained here and elsewhere, Adam did not tag Gustav Elfving for deletion, he merely tagged a redirect page for deletion. The template to notify the creator of that page of the tagging is a standard courtesy - after all, most people would want to know that a page they created has been tagged for deletion. If you feel the wording of the template is rude, by all means suggest improvements. Adam is still doing some new page patrol work as part of his mentoring, so he will be continuing with that for the time being. As Worm has already said, Adam has made no suggestion that he's planning on becoming an administrator, or that he considers himself to be "acting like one". New page patrol and anti-vandalism work can be carried out by any user, and it has significant value in maintaining the quality of the encyclopedia. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

As I mentioned before and again (responding to a similar comment by Demiurge1000), Adam's template linked via the formerly PRODded redirect (15:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)) to the article Gustav Elfving (not the picture).  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 07:50, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry Kiefer, I'm unsure where a picture came into this. Adam attempted to delete a redirect. He also posted a template regarding the redirect. When you clicked on the link in Adam's template, you would have been redirected to the article. Adam never tagged the page for deletion, although it may have looked that way due to the redirect. I hope that clarifies the matter for you. Worm^TT · (talk) 08:01, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

It was difficult for me to read the redirect from Gustav Elf____ing to Gustav Elfving, because of my poor vision, my familiarity with Elfving(s), and my being immediately redirected.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, WTT. I understand that Adam prodded a misdirect, which is no problem, apart from the template's cold rudeness, which was not Adam's doing. (There was a picture whose copyright status was tagged as uncertain, which I've delinked from the article, btw.) Thanks for your attention and help. Best of luck to all of you!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Bus routes

I tried to fix the underline problem, i am not sure what the problem is for you but it works for me so i decided to keep the underline and add something else to identify color. Check me to make sure you approve. Hope it helps, Adwiii  Talk  23:35, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Mail.

Hello, Adam mugliston. 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.

DO NOT REPLY

Rcsprinter^{Gimme a message} 07:23, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bus routes in Central Suffolk for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Central Suffolk 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/List of bus routes in Central Suffolk (2nd nomination) 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 good 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. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:09, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at User talk:Charlesdrakew, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. What you just did, correcting someone else's contribution, is bad form. Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 18:26, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Wilbysuffolk is fine with me correcting his mistakes, he asked me to correct them as a matter of fact.  Adam mugliston  Talk  19:21, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

PDFs as references

In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bus routes in Central Suffolk (2nd nomination), you indicated that you had a question about using PDFs as references. Basically, you can treat them like any other web page with regard to their being references. However, if you are using the {{cite web}} template, you should include the parameter format=pdf to indicate that it is a PDF. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:44, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but the problem is that the PDFs haven't got links, they're downloads from a website.  Adam mugliston  Talk  16:44, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Point me at the website and I'll see if it's possible to ref them for you and then show you how to do it. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:47, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

[1] Thanks.  Adam mugliston  Talk  16:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, tis simples - click on the number and then when your browser gives you an option you click to open (it may not give you an option I guess, it depends what browser you're using sometimes...) The pdf should then open in the browser window - and in the address bar you should have the direct url for the pdf file. You then reference it, prolly something like this:

<ref name="suff1a mar11">[http://www.suffolkonboard.com/content/download/21383/316235/1%2C%201A.pdf 'First Eastern Counties route 1, 1a, from 27 March 2011'], ''Timetable by service number'', Suffolk County Council passenger transport, 2011-04-04. Retrieved 2011-05-12.</ref>

There may be better ways of referencing a timetable but that sort of makes sense to me re: standard referencing practice. The space between the url and the caption you want to give it in the references is important fwiw Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:33, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Just one more thing. How did you get the numbers for the link, because all I get is Acrobat opening.  Adam mugliston  Talk  17:36, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I used Opera which will always give me the address bar because it'll open it in a browser window. Assuming you're using IE (oh dear...) go Right click and then Copy shortcut and then paste into wiki and it should give you the url. It worked for me in IE anyway - you realise I actually opened IE for this yes? The things I'll do for wikipedia... **:-)** Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:42, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, currently I use Firefox, but I can always switch to IE. Thanks  Adam mugliston  Talk  17:48, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Works the same way in the Fox - it's just Copy link location. Or you can choose to open the link in a new tab - the pdf will still open in Acrobat but the new tab (which will be blank) will have the url in the address bar. There's prolly a different way again to do it in Chrome. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:05, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, everything's working fine now.  Adam mugliston  Talk  18:22, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Well done

Adam, congratulations on completing the course. You've just passed the exam. I'll be sticking around to help you out for a little while yet (given the borderline result), but I'm happy that you have the knowledge to edit wikipedia. I'll let you know if I manage to get any advanced courses together, which you can feel free to have a go at. For now, here's the barnstar. Worm^TT · (talk) 11:48, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

		The Worm That Turned Adoption Course Barnstar
		Adam, very well done on completing the course, you have the makings of a great editor. We're not quite out of the woods yet, you've still got much to learn, but from now on it'll be learning by doing. For now, feel free to display these barnstars proudly. WormTT · (talk) 11:45, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! I was very borderline! Shame about that, would you mind going over the one where I did the worst in?  Adam mugliston  Talk  21:06, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry too much, you'll do well if you carry on as you are. I think you're largest issue is that you are quite so keen and maybe rushed a little bit. You got through all the modules without difficulty. As for the test, have a look - I've left comments by each - let me know your thoughts, and I'd be happy to discuss. Worm^TT · (talk) 21:11, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The clean up one didn't go too well... You're absolutely right about me not removing the tag, I wasn't sure the cleanup was enough. The second one, that company name confused me, I didn't realise it was a branch, I thought it was a let's call it abbreviation. I didn't get a third one, because too many of them were large projects or articles where I couldn't see where the cleanup should be. Oh and by the way, I'll send you an e-mail in a couple of minutes.  Adam mugliston  Talk  21:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll look forward to it, and have a think about suggestions on how to improve cleanup. Worm^TT · (talk) 21:21, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Sent it and CC'd to Demiurge.  Adam mugliston  Talk  21:40, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Okładki

Tak rozumiem. Polski jest twoim ojczystym językiem? Eurohunter (talk) 20:08, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• Brzmi to trochę jak z Tłumacza Google, mam nadzieję, że Cię nie uraziłem. Eurohunter (talk) 20:39, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Jestem z Bydgoszczy, więcej informacji o mnie znajdziesz na moim koncie na polskiej edycji Wikipedii. Eurohunter (talk) 07:51, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Adam mugliston. You have new messages at User talk:Adam mugliston/Rcsprinter123.
Message added 20:02, 23 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Adam mugliston. 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.

B roads

Regarding your page B roads in London, I feel this subject has already been covered in B roads in Zone 2 of the Great Britain numbering scheme. I hereby urge you strongly not to create that article. Rcsprinter (talk) 15:37, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

No, it has not. Roads in London are in zones 1,2,3,4 and 5, not just 2 and therefore I will continue to create this article.  Adam mugliston [[User

talk:Adam mugliston| Talk ]] 16:36, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the cookie!

Adwiii has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

April 2011

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to User:Rcsprinter123/List of bus routes in Suffolk, List of bus routes in Colchester, and User talk:Worm That Turned/Adopt/Adam mugliston. Thank you

New Message

Hello, Adam mugliston. You have new messages at Adwiii's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mail

Hello, Adam mugliston. 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.

July 2011

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Bus routes in Winchester, Hampshire. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Please use reliable secondary sources. Charles (talk) 06:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bus routes in Peterborough for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Peterborough 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/List of bus routes in Peterborough(2nd nomination) 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 good 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. Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 16:22, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Bus routes in Winchester, Hampshire for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bus routes in Winchester, Hampshire 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/Bus routes in Winchester, Hampshire 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 good 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. Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 11:20, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bus routes in Portsmouth area for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Portsmouth area 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/List of bus routes in Portsmouth area 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 good 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. Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 11:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bus routes in Southampton for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Southampton 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/List of bus routes in Southampton 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 good 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. Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 11:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bus routes in Petersfield & Bishop's Waltham for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Petersfield & Bishop's Waltham 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/List of bus routes in Petersfield & Bishop's Waltham 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 good 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. Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 11:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bus routes in Farnborough & Fleet area for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Farnborough & Fleet area 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/List of bus routes in Farnborough & Fleet area 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 good 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. Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 11:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bus routes in Eastleigh & Romsey for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Eastleigh & Romsey 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/List of bus routes in Eastleigh & Romsey 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 good 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. Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 11:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bus routes in Eastleigh for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Eastleigh 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/List of bus routes in Eastleigh 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 good 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. Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 11:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bus routes in Basingstoke for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Basingstoke 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/List of bus routes in Basingstoke 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 good 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. Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 11:22, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bus routes in Alton, Bordon and Tadley area for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Alton, Bordon and Tadley area 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/List of bus routes in Alton, Bordon and Tadley area 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 good 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. Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 11:22, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bus routes in Aldershot for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Aldershot 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/List of bus routes in Aldershot 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 good 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. Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 11:22, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Adam mugliston/Southampton

sorry if i have deleted your page , but i was new so i didn't know what to do, sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexabraham22da (talk • contribs) 14:48, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

i recently created a page and someone deleted it, so it's same here. and thank you for offering your help, but i'm fine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexabraham22da (talk • contribs) 14:54, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

sorry about what i have done but i will focus into details of the contents that i suggest for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexabraham22da (talk • contribs) 17:19, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bus routes in Basingstoke. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Charles (talk) 21:02, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Bus articles

I've put all the content from the AfD'd articles in one of my Sandboxes for safekeeping, should the articles be deleted. It's here: User:Arriva436/Sandbox4. Personally I think a List of bus routes in Hampshire article, to the same style as the other List of bus routes in England, would be preferable to individual area lists as it would cut down on duplication of routes, be more notable probably, and match all the others. Hope that helps. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 21:10, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Cheers, so have I. They're all under User:Adam mugliston/Lists of bus routes/(name of town). Thanks anyway though! I tried to make sure I duplicate as little as possible, yet still I think that they are still notable enough on their own.  Adam mugliston  Talk  21:19, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I hope you two realise that there are rules about keeping deleted material in user space on a long term basis. It is only allowed if it is being actively improved.--Charles (talk) 21:30, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

And this is any of your business, because? I can keep what I want in my userspace.  Adam mugliston  Talk  21:36, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually you can't. There are rules. Deleted material can only be kept while it is actively being edited in line with WP policies and guidelines.--Charles (talk) 08:52, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

You seem very sure that they're going to get deleted. I don't think they will, so for know there's no problem in us keeping them and if they get deleted, then they will be "actively improved".  Adam mugliston  Talk  08:59, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure they will be deleted. Just pointing out the rules.--Charles (talk) 09:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, you said "deleted material", meaning you assumed that the lists will be deleted.  Adam mugliston  Talk  09:42, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

No you assumed that. I was writing about deleted material in general. You should read and analyse comments more carefully.--Charles (talk) 21:41, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

We were talking about the lists and then you related to them as 'deleted material'. Charles, the comments you make on my talk page seem to lead to arguments more often than to improvement of the encyclopedia. Please don't post on my talk page again, except for notifications that are required by Wikipedia process or policy.  Adam mugliston  Talk  07:02, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Adam, I must say I'm impressed, that you recognised the destructive qualities of these conversations and that you put forward a reasonable request in such a manner. It demonstrates many of the qualities I like to see in a wikipedian and I would be very disappointed to see such a reasonable request not adhered to. In fact, I intend to post something similar at Charles' page. Worm^TT · (talk) 07:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Charles, I'd like to see a "policy" that states that - the closest thing is WP:NOTWEBHOST, but as long as Adam is keeping it work on it and he is an active user, I don't see the problem. Remember, WP:Userfication is an essay. Not that the lists are necessarily going to be deleted in any case. Worm^TT · (talk) 09:52, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Really, there's rules about this? What a joke. Show them to me please. If so, it makes Wikipedia even more of a joke in my mind, how the hell can keeping stuff in your own user space be against the rules? Arriva436/talk/contribs 10:48, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

There are certainly rules about what can be in userspace. No free images, nothing that violates copyright, nothing that violates BLP, attack pages etc. And userspace shouldn't be used just as an archive of deleted material. However there's a few steps before that point, firstly the material has to be deleted and userfied and then consensus has to show that it's just being maintained as an archive, not for future improvement. I'd certainly prefer that Charles didn't imply that it was policy that it should be deleted if not "actively being edited". Worm^TT · (talk) 10:59, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, that's what I thought. Obviously no copy vios etc etc, but keeping stuff that's been deleted is obviously for future improvement. Why would anyone keep a list of bus routes as an archive. I thought my initial message, with an intention of merging the lists into a county-wide version, made it pretty clear that the material was going to be used for improvements. Arriva436/talk/contribs 11:15, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Graduation

Hi Adam. I've been watching you over the past few weeks and I think you're actually about ready for this. What, I hear you ask? Well this big fluffy graduation certificate. The one that caught your eye before you read this text. Oh, and it's not fluffy - I just wanted to know if you'd read this.

		The Adoptee Graduation Barnstar
		Adam, you've made fantastic progress since we started working together. You've still got a way to go, but I think that I've taught you all I can and so you can consider yourself graduated from my mentee status. You're always welcome to come back to me to discuss anything, but for now - Congratulations! WormTT · (talk) 19:43, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

So well done! You do need to work a little on your debating skills, read a bit of WP:ANI you'll soon see which arguments have the most weight on WP... also, make sure you read WP:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Good luck for the future and you know where I am if you need me. Worm^TT · (talk) 19:43, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Worm! It was a good idea to get a mentor...  Adam mugliston  Talk  21:29, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Station categories

Hi Adam; re these edits - what source are you going by? --Redrose64 (talk) 15:18, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

First of all, I hate when people follow me round, so please stop. Two, common sense? I read the categories and its rather obvious, there's no question about it. Please don't say OR, Common sense is not OR. I found plenty of articles with sections that aren't sourced and no one bothers about them.  Adam mugliston  Talk  15:20, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

What makes you think I'm following? The page is on my watchlist (and has been since this edit) - I notice three changes come up in quick succession today, so I check them them. Having found that they are not verifiable, I query them. And yes, it is WP:OR unless you are going by some published document, such as this one, which doesn't list either Amersham, Greenford or Harrow-on-the-Hill (category C stations are on pp. 100-101; cat D on pp. 102-103; and cat E on pp. 104-107. As for articles with unreferenced sections, please feel free to apply the policy described at WP:V - there are several courses available to you, including, but not limited to: (i) obtain suitable sources and add references; (ii) add either or both of {{citation needed}} and {{refimprove}}; (iii) delete the offending material. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:52, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Happy Xmas

Rcsprinter is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Rcsprinter (talk to me) 20:49, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bus routes in Huntingdon, St Ives and St Neots for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bus routes in Huntingdon, St Ives and St Neots 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/List of bus routes in Huntingdon, St Ives and St Neots 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. Charles (talk) 21:40, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Welcome back and...

Hi Adam! It's been a long time since we've seen you about. Hope the last 6 months have been good for you. It's great to see you back!

Looks like you've run right back into a lot of difficulties though. Firstly, Bentpaperclip - you may know the guy, but that's no way to treat people on wikipedia. Yes, he shouldn't have removed your barnstars and put them on his page, but he hasn't attacked you, he's allowed to copy your signature (you've agreed to all your contributions to be shared under CC-BY-SA, so he's allowed to create derivatives based on it) and going round asking people to not work with him and saying you want him banned is not on. This is the encyclopedia which anyone can edit, even people who you have had a fight with. If he's just here to vandalise, then it won't take long for him to be blocked. He may turn out to be a great editor one day, given the chance.

Secondly though, and more importantly, you need to WP:AGF with Charlesdrakew. Charles is a very helpful, very hard working editor who knows the policies on the encyclopedia. He may interpret them differently to you, on subjects such as bus routes, but personalising issues, suggesting he hates bus routes, or he should leave them along is very problematic. They're commonly closed as "no consensus", that means the community is undecided on whether they should be kept - not that they definitely should be kept.

The community's view shifts over time, as I'm sure you're seeing, so perhaps if you want to keep these sorts of articles you should show why they should be kept - you know, by sourcing them? Prove that they are notable, not that you think they're notable.

Either way, if you need any help/advice, feel free to wander over to my page. Chat soon! Worm^TT · (talk) 07:54, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I must disagree with you about BentPaperClip:. He has attacked me, by blanking my user page. This was blatantly an attack, because of what he wrote on Charels' talk page. He created an account, as he was desperate to stop Charles deleting the pages I created. Now you must know, I have never asked him to do so, I did my best to stop him. Because we fell out yesterday afternoon, because of a call it friendship confusion incident, he got upset at me and changed his mind to Charles, telling him that if he wants he can bother me, although he has never mentioned my name. I realised later, after I left you the message about the copyright thingy. I think I have sorted him out know and he won't be bothering anyone again.  Adam mugliston  Talk  09:08, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Blanking a page isn't an attack though, it's just a ... well, a thing. Maybe a little rude, maybe close enough to vandalism that I didn't disagree with that message, but it's not an "attack" - it's not insulting, it's rectifiable, nothing needs to be removed from the history. In any case, hopefully it's all sorted now, so we won't have to worry more. Worm^TT · (talk) 09:25, 5 May 2012 (UTC)