User talk:Andrwsc/Archive 13

Ireland cricket flag

Hi, this is no doubt too late but I was only just pointed towards Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/2009/July#Irish cricket flag. I work with one of Cricket Ireland's PR staff at the CricketEurope website, and can confirm that the Cricket Ireland flag is not actually copyrighted. Can you point me in the direction of someone who can help sort this out to get the file back? Thanks. Andrew nixon (talk) 17:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I think WP:Deletion review might be the most appropriate place. We will probably need an email from Cricket Ireland to WP:OTRS to verify their lack of copyright claim on the image. Hope this helps — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Flagicon (?)

I was wondering how do you get the flag with the Question Mark (Shown Here) in a bigger size.
♪♫ Mr. Unknown (talk/My Barnstars) ♪♫

Using {{flagicon}} with no parameters is an error condition, which is why you get that non-flag image. Just use normal MediaWiki image syntax (i.e. [[Image:Flag of None.svg|40px]] if you want that image at a different size. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:51, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much for being helpful.

♪♫ Mr. Unknown (talk/My Barnstars) ♪♫

template test

Does Template:Flag data 1896 Summer Olympics still serve any purpose ? Otherwise you might want to db-author it. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 20:36, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Template:FlagO and this one. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 20:37, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

That's still a work in progress. Does it matter that they're still live pages? I've deleted for now, but will likely re-create them later. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:47, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh, if you still want to use them, that's no problem, i'm just going through some unlinked templates and deleting edit tests and stuff. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 20:49, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Myanmar

Hi, Please Change "link alias-volleyball = Burma" to "Myanmar". --Mohsen1248 (talk) 17:35, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I split the template back into distinct Country data Burma and Country data Myanmar templates, so none of those "link alias" overrides are needed anymore. {{vb|MYA}} will do as you expect now. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 19:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks --Mohsen1248 (talk) 08:54, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Template:Country data Distrito Federal

I've moved Template:Country data Distrito Federal to Template:Country data Brazilian Federal District, because there are two Distrito Federal: Distrito Federal (Brazil) and Distrito Federal (Mexico). I've dabbed all templates, so can you delete the redirect from Template:Country data Distrito Federal to Template:Country data Brazilian Federal District? Thanks. Chanheigeorge (talk) 10:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:09, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

List of micronations status review

I have nominated List of micronations for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. With regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 01:07, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Hungary at the 1988 Winter Olympics

A tag has been placed on Hungary at the 1988 Winter Olympics requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Ccrashh (talk) 00:57, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Table of elevation extremes by country

I apologize for inadvertently doing a bulk overwrite of your change to the Elevation Extremes table. I am still making some last minute additions to the table.

The final row of the Elevation Extremes table is a sortbottom row used as a summary. I used the globe to distinguish this immobile summary row from the rest of the rows. I could rename the "Flags" column to something generic like "Images", but I think the globe is quite clearly not a flag. Please let me know what you think.

I concur with your request to delete Template:Country data Spratly Islands.

Yours aye, Buaidh (talk) 18:40, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, ok, thanks! My objection to the animated icon is not exclusively that it is not a flag, but that it is distracting and unnecessary. The Earth row is in bold, and doesn't sort, so there are already enough indicators to show that it is a summary row. An animated graphic just seems, well, rather unencyclopedic. I would presume that the editors who abide by WP:MOSICON would agree. Thanks for your consideration.

PS - I had also put a note on the talk page. I know you disagree with the seeming "authority" of the list of sovereign states articles with respect to what is a country and what is not, but in my mind, some of the entries you've included on this list seem rather out of place. The highest point in Alaska or Hawaii, for example, would be far more interesting than the highest point on Navassa Island, but your inclusion criteria for this list excludes exclave U.S. states while including French overseas regions, U.S. uninhabited territories, etc. That inconsistency across Wikipedia lists is awkward at best. Thanks — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:50, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

My initial criteria for inclusion in the Elevation Extremes table was merely based upon the availability of reliable data. I'm looking at some possible schemes for selecting dependent territories. --Buaidh (talk) 21:53, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Your welcome! --Buaidh (talk) 22:16, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Commonwealth naval variants

Would it be possible to add the 'naval-[year]' variants listed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template#Naval ensigns for Canada, Australia, and New Zealand? I've been working on updating ship navbox templates and infobox flags when I encounter them. An example of where these variants would be useful is in Template:British E class submarine. The use of Template:Navy there brings up the current (i.e. post-1967) Royal Australian Navy ensign, which is anachronistic for submarines in service during World War I. The same thing applies to using Template:Shipboxflag in infoboxes, like for HMAS AE1. I know that it would be just as easy to use {{shipboxflag|UK|naval}} to generate the correct flag, but my concern is that a future, good-intentioned editor might come in and change it to Australia resulting in an incorrect flag; being able to use {{shipboxflag|Australia|naval-1913}} might alleviate that. Many thanks in advance. — Bellhalla (talk) 21:52, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done but I'm not sure its all correct. For {{shipboxflag}}, I had thought that a comment in the wiki text could certainly explain the need for the UK ensign for these countries before they adopted their own, so I didn't think these variants were necessary for use with that template, but now I can see how they are necessary for use with {{navy}}. However, there is a problem with Canada. We have two articles for their navy, at Royal Canadian Navy for the pre-1968 unit and at Canadian Forces Maritime Command for the current unit. That led to the creation of the special-purpose {{navy RCN}} template. But if you want to use something like {{navy|Canada|naval-1911}}, you're going to end up with the wrong wikilink. I'll try to figure out how to fix that, but in the meantime, you should have all you need for shipboxflag. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:02, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It looks like {{navy|Canada|1911}} and the other variants are working properly with the changes you made to the country data for Canada. I replaced the only two remaining uses of Template:Navy RCN and requested its speedy deletion. — Bellhalla (talk) 11:54, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Great! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 14:26, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I've got another pair of commonwealth flags for you to add to Template:Country data India. If you could add File:Naval Ensign of the United Kingdom.svg as "naval-1928" and File:Flag of Imperial India.svg as "naval-1879", that would be fantastic. Thanks in advance. (You can take a look at Template:Bangor class minesweeper to see if the first one has worked.) — Bellhalla (talk) 22:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Older Soviet naval flags

Would it be possible to add the "naval-1924" and "naval-1935" variants listed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template#Naval ensigns to Template:Country data Soviet Union? I have a submarine, Soviet submarine S-2 (sunk in 1940) that needs the 1935 flavor. Thanks! — Bellhalla (talk) 17:39, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done— Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:49, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! — Bellhalla (talk) 20:20, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

How about an update for Template:Country data Syria so that {{navy|Syria}} show "Syrian Navy" rather than "Syria Navy"? (The naval ensign, as far as I can determine, is the same as the national flag.) — Bellhalla (talk) 20:58, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Another flag request: Can you add File:Civil Ensign of the Republic of China.svg as the "civil" variant of Template:Country data Republic of China? The article HMS Archer (D78) needs to display the proper flag for when the ship was registered in Taipei. Many thanks in advance. — Bellhalla (talk) 21:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done— Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:09, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Another flag/country data request: Can you add File:Naval Ensign of Oman.svg and a link to Royal Navy of Oman to Template:Country data Oman? Omani corvette Qahir Al Amwaj will benefit by the addition. As usual, I offer my many thanks in advance. :) — Bellhalla (talk) 18:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Dang! That was fast! — Bellhalla (talk) 18:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, I am online and got the message banner, so yeah, no problem! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

NATO flag

Is the NATO flag itself copyrighted, or only the picture Flag-of-Nato.svg? If the latter, aren't there any non-copyrighted pictures that can be uploaded on Wikipedia Commons? - Many articles would benefit from a mini NATO flag, in the same way many articles use a mini UN flag. 76.173.196.41 (talk) 17:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

The NATO logo itself is a copyright held by them, regardless of how it is rendered. The SVG file hosted on en.wiki still is a copyright owned by NATO, subject to their terms at http://www.nato.int/services/hints.html. The key phrase is "allowed for non-commercial purposes", which is not "free", which is why the image cannot be hosted on Commons, and can only be used in a very limited manner on this Wikipedia per WP:Non-free content criteria. Right now the image is seen only in three articles, for which a valid fair-use criteria applies, and that's it. Usage as a tiny icon on other articles does not meet the criteria for fair-use on this wiki. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Whoops

Sorry didn't see your edit there. Perhaps you can see why Natalie Darwitz isn't working.-DJSasso (talk) 19:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

That was what I fixed. The parameter in her article is ntl_team_women but {{Infobox ice hockey player}} was looking at ntl_team for the input to {{ihw}}, so my fix changed that. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:01, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

You are right...forgot about the job queue. It hadn't updated for me yet even when I refreshed so I thought it was still broken. -DJSasso (talk) 20:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

List of Olympic Games host cities

how do I reply to your message. I don't see how that is done. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellisond (talk • contribs) 15:52, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

You click on "edit this page" at the top of your talk page, just as you did to leave this message here. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

International Logo?

Hello, I would like you to tell me how in the heck, I am going to do the navboxes on User:bluedogtn/Sandbox I, and if I cannot use the logo these are useless that I am going to create. Because it needs a logo at the side to match the Ryder Cup and Presidents cup ones? I would like to know what I am suppose to do? If you cannot come up with a solution, I will have to have you delete the sandbox page and the image itself? BLUE_DOG^TN 22:53, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Just don't use the logo. Not every navbox needs one. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

It does not meet the consensus of the others' so I will refrain from creating the other International navboxes! You have to have a logo to make it uniform!BLUE_DOG^TN 23:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead, and delete the logo file!

Maybe use country = World for use with {{National squad}}. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Navy names

I really hate to bother you again but it seems that navy links in a couple of country data templates are pointing to redirects at present:

• Template:Country data Azerbaijan points to Azerbaijan Navy, which is a redirect to Azerbaijani Navy (navy article moved in June 2009)
• Template:Country data Vietnam points to Vietnam People's Navy, which is a redirect to Vietnamese People's Navy (navy article moved in September 2008)

Do with these what you will, but I would imagine that the Vietnam article probably has a lot more eyes on it and an uncontested move from over a year ago is pretty stable. — Bellhalla (talk) 19:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Have you considered my offer to nominate you as an admin so you can make these sorts of edits yourself?  ;) — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 19:06, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I am considering it. I know it would make your life easier ;) But while I'm here, Template:Country data Belgium should point to Belgian Naval Component rather than Belgian Navy. (I know, I know, just tell me to go away… LOL ) — Bellhalla (talk) 22:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done. As for "the bit", I know that the RfA process appears daunting these days, especially since there is excessive drama surrounding some admins, and we all seem to be tarred with the same brush. But I truly believe in WP:NOBIGDEAL. I think RfA should be nothing more than a review of the editor in question to see how trustworthy they are with the tools and activities they plan to pursue. Based on your editing history, that should be a slam dunk. Having the ability to edit protected templates, delete unused categories, etc. is very useful for the gnomish work you often do. And you shouldn't have to be an expert on AfD policy and guidelines if you never plan to close them yourself. So the only trick would be to write a nomination that captured this idea—of a highly trusted editor who plans to use a subset of the admin tools to be more effective in their everyday work. Who wouldn't think that's a good idea? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, two more for you. Template:Country data Lithuania and Template:Country data South Vietnam need the navy names updated to Lithuanian Naval Force (with a singular Force) and Republic of Vietnam Navy, respectively.

As far as the RfA, I'm willing to undergo the ordeal process if you'd be willing to nominate me. — Bellhalla (talk) 22:20, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done and "will do". It will take me a few days to put together a compelling nomination. I'll let you know. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:26, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you on both counts (and certainly no rush on the latter). I came back to post another one: Template:Country data Ceylon needs the naval ensign, File:Naval Ensign of the Royal Ceylon Navy.svg and a link to Royal Ceylon Navy. Thanks again. — Bellhalla (talk) 22:52, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Template

Hi there again, Would you mind if I changed one of the variants of Ireland letter code in this template {{rugby squad player}}, as we have players whose nationality is actually Irish, and doesn't come under who they've played for and requires just the tricolor. I would suggest making Ireland the flag one. Cheers ^Khukri 07:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, sure, fine by me. I'd also bounce this off the rugby WikiProject, though. Since "IRL" is the standard ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 country code for the Republic of Ireland, and is also used by the IOC, FIFA, and pretty much every other sporting organization as the country code for that nation, the tricolour ought to be attached to the "IRL" code. For the all-Ireland instances, we've been using "IRE" as an alternate country code. So for that template, it looks like you just need to remove the two lines for IRL (and one pair of closing braces), so that it falls through to the default call to {{flagicon}}. Hope this helps — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 07:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and will do later on. I've been on a semi-wiki hiatus for a while, just pottering around but looking to come back a bit. I've started working on some Swiss rugby articles, and will do French and Ivory coast as areas I know and have access to the information. I'm going to stub all the Swiss first division teams and go from there, but was thinking of helping out with WP:RU, I'm not a great one for wiki politics, and shun high drama magnet areas, so wouldn't mind someone elses impressions of the project before I start giving input. ^Khukri 08:30, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm not a regular WP:RU participant, but I have done some rugby-related edits and I keep the project talk page on my watchlist, so I am vaguely aware of the work done there. My impression is that it is not very high on the drama-meter, so I wouldn't worry about that! I think they'd be happy to have someone else helping, especially in areas that don't get frequent work done already. Happy editing — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 15:16, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Image use policy clarification

If you have the time I'd like your input on my proposed clarification of WP:Image use policy concerning fair-use/copyright versus public-domain/trademark image use. The proposal is contained here. Thanks. BillTunell (talk) 21:37, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Northern Ireland

Your 'footnote' proposal is acceptable. GoodDay (talk) 20:21, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

MOS Icons

Hi could you explain this please you say that section 2.1.1.2 already says don't use a flag for birth/death locations but the way the text is now it states then the eligibility rule that is most apt should be applied; most often it is the place of birth so is it a conflict? On one hand you cant use the place of birth and further down you can, which is correct thanks. BigDunc 08:57, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, that whole document needs cleanup (and the talk page comments over the past year would indicate several editors agree with that!) so I'm not surprised at apparent discontinuities within the page... — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:53, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Royal Fleet Auxiliary ensign

Hey, there. I've got several ships for which I'd like to use {{Shipboxflag}} that were/are in the UK's Royal Fleet Auxiliary. The Royal Fleet Auxiliary ensign is here: File:British-Royal-Fleet-Auxiliary-Ensign.svg. I don't know what to suggest for a variation in Template:Country data United Kingdom: "royal fleet auxiliary" is awfully long, but "rfa" seems a bit too concise. Any thoughts? — Bellhalla (talk) 21:29, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, if we use something like naval-aux, then it would be possible to make {{navy|United Kingdom|aux}} produce that flag, plus a wikilink to Royal Fleet Auxiliary, using the same kind of hack we used to make {{navy|Canada|1921}} link to Royal Canadian Navy. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I hadn't thought about the link, but, yeah, that sounds like it would work. — Bellhalla (talk) 22:17, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Before I implement this, is it likely that we'll also need File:British Royal Maritime Auxiliary Ensign.svg and a link to Royal Maritime Auxiliary Service? In that case, perhaps naval-aux is an insufficient qualifier and we should use something like naval-RFA and naval-RMAS. What do you think? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:01, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

That's a good question. I haven't come across any ships for the RMAS yet, but that doesn't mean there aren't any out there. I'd say go ahead and do both. (Why do the British have to be so complicated?)

In the meantime, the country data templates for Angola, Somalia, and Eritrea need to be updated to respectively link to Angolan Navy, Somali Navy, and Eritrean Navy. — Bellhalla (talk) 14:08, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done all. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:47, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Ships and flags

I had noticed your edit to MS St. Louis. The problem with using a separate infobox for each name is that it makes the infobox excessively long. Which is why I use a single infobox with each change on a separate line. Have a look at the TS Leda article, and then see the talk page and compare the two infoboxes. The infobox on the talk page needs a little more work before it can go into the article but you get the general idea. As far as I know, the shipflag is used for Naval vessels, not civil, at least that's how consensus seems to have gone over the last year or so. See also HMS Archer (D78) and SS Norhauk for examples of ships with multiple identities and ownership. Mjroots (talk) 18:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I think I'm out of my league here! I'm not a WP:SHIPS editor, but I have been helping User:Bellhalla with some flag edits along those lines (including civil ensigns). I'm not really aware of what the project consensus is, but I had thought it was to use separate sections for each nationality, which is not cumbersome when that number is 2 or 3 total. Feel free to revert if you wish, but I suppose it needs to be a project discussion. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I've reverted your edit to SS Uhenfels. Thanks for trying to improve the article though. Re St. Louis, the infobox needs to show all four (I think) flags that the ship served under so I'll add them. Mjroots (talk) 18:43, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

To jump in here, I think the consensus is to have separate sections for each country of service for naval ships; to have a single section for non-naval ships; and to separate civilian and military uses for ships that had both types of service. — Bellhalla (talk) 16:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Heyyyyy

[1] I should have wrote "beat-the-nom support" in my rationale. :P —Ed (talk • contribs) 17:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Well I had an edit conflict on the page as I was updating the header, so I started to edit before you did! Feel free to swap them if you want; it's all good. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:21, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Haha, no it's not a big deal at all. :-) Many thanks for nominating him! —Ed (talk • contribs) 18:45, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Belhalla's RfA

Excellent nomination statement — you say that's your first? It is a very persuasive statement and highlights Belhalla's strengths (which would have spoke for themselves anyways). Admins who do "under the hood" work are as much of a necessity as the admins who do site maintenance (ANI, UAA, AIV, etc). Master&Expert (Talk) 02:18, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I have been bothered by the negative stigma that seems to be associated with adminship these days (from the drama), so hopefully this kind of nomination will help people consider adminship in a different light, if only a little bit. It helps to have such an obvious candidate as Bellhalla for this type of nomination! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 02:32, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Autoreplace

Please, put Template:LIT on autoreplacement with a bot.--Andrey! 18:46, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Olympics navboxes

Did you have some specific concerns? Geraldk (talk) 22:29, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, as I listed in my reply on the project talk page. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:30, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't see your response there. Jumped to conclusions, as when I've posted questions there in the recent past, they've largely gone unanswered. Geraldk (talk) 22:35, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Template:Country data South Africa

Thought my successful RFA would make me go away, right? Well, I'm back to bug you again… ;) I've made an edit to Template:Country data South Africa to add another naval variant. Can you ensure that I've made the addition correctly? Also, is there something else that needs to be done to make the new flag show up on the template page? (I did click on the "purge the cache" link, but it seemed to have no effect.) — Bellhalla (talk) 18:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, it helps to have the correct capitalization of the file name and the correct file extension. But can you still check it out to make sure that what I've done is right? — Bellhalla (talk) 18:35, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

No worries!! You need to add something to the <noinclude>...</noinclude> section to document the new variant, which you might have seen in this edit. With your change to the image name, it looks good to me! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:37, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I hadn't seen your edit in there and thought the typo correction was what did it. LOL. Thanks for helping! — Bellhalla (talk) 18:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

NI

That's fair enough, but we cannot live in fear of recrimination for every item we add. We need to step back from the idea that these are issues impossibly crouched in conflict that we constantly need to balance rather that simply going about the work of writing an encyclopedia. Stepping away from a world of suspicions in the motives of other people is the first step, I believe, in doing that. Most of us are grown ups here. We need to start acting like that and focus on the project not ours or others POVs. (Not an attack on you BTW - or really anyone in particular.) --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 23:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I do agree with you. I wasn't necessarily looking for a compromise simply to keep the peace (and possibly at the expense of a better encyclopedia), but I suppose I was hoping that the best reference we could find (clearly, Dickson, since he popularized the "demonym" word in the first place) would simply state "Northern Irish" as the most logical and only choice, and we could all move on. Your edit is certainly sound. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:12, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Inadvertent Flag Template

This was not technically "inadvertent," in that I was just experimenting on this page (it's in my user area, so I assume I'm allowed to experiment). What I am actually looking for is a template that will give me the name of the language of the article in which the template is located -- preferably in that language and not in English. Barring that, a template where I can specify the language would be a "second best." Mayabe this just won't work across the entire spectrum of languages, in which case I will just need to do it manually (not as good). Donlammers (talk) 02:13, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Never mind. I figured out the magic word combination. Now I just need to figure out how to call a template from inside my English user page, from a non-english Wikipedia user page. One step at a time. Sorry, just learning here.Donlammers (talk) 03:04, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Never mind again. According to meta:User:Happy-melon/Templates, what I want to do can't be done ("It is not possible to transclude pages across projects"). Bummer. Donlammers (talk) 10:18, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Imbris

Howdy Andrwsc. Considering the way Imbris 'treated' others on his talkpage, I wouldn't mind seeing postings there by aggrieved editors. Having said all that, perhaps his user-page should be locked, as there's no telling how many of us have been peeved off by him (with his 'don't talk to me' attitude). GoodDay (talk) 16:22, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

So you're ok with editors "dancing on the grave" of Imbris, but not for Vintagekits? Nice. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:06, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Again, perhaps Imbris userpage should be 'locked'. GoodDay (talk) 15:12, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Template:Country data Austria-Hungary

I don't want to break anything in Template:Country data Austria-Hungary, so I thought I'd ask your help. The main link right now goes to Austria-Hungary (with a hyphen) which is a redirect to Austria–Hungary (with an en-dash). What needs to be changed in the country data template to fix that? Is it just the alias parameter? (Since the navy uses a partial abbreviation, the hyphen is correct and the naval parts of the country data template don't need changing.) Thanks. — Bellhalla (talk) 16:50, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

The template also needs the templatename specified inside a <noinclude>...</noinclude> section in order to properly "self-document" itself, for cases where the country data template name doesn't match the alias value. Check out the edit I just made. Another solution would be to rename the country data template to use the en-dash name, leaving behind a redirect for all the instances with the hyphen. Hope this helps — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:03, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. I'd already created a redirect from the en-dash version to the hyphenated version to catch any uses like that. — Bellhalla (talk) 17:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Another question, this one regarding Template:Country data United Kingdom. Ships of the British Army flew this ensign. Obviously it can't be added as army since that's in use for the British Army service flag. Adding a variant name of naval-army seems silly, though. What variant name would you recommend to add this to the template? (It's already in use in some ship infoboxes.) — Bellhalla (talk) 20:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Did you ever have a chance to think about this question? (I added it at the same time as another section below, so you may have missed it.) Also, can you take a look at Template:Country data England and the naval alias I added. I think I added it correctly and the ensign shows up on the template page, but on WP:SHIPFLAGS only the English flag shows and not the ensign. (Probably some silly mistake by me somewhere.) — Bellhalla (talk) 14:49, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Any thoughts? — Bellhalla (talk) 11:06, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I did miss these messages! I've fixed England; you need to pass through the variant parameter for any template that has 2 or more flags. As for the UK army ensign, perhaps army-ensign...? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:17, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Speed Skater

Hello, I was wondering if you could help solve an issue that has come up during a peer review on how to add an alt tag parameter to the image in the infobox at Apolo Anton Ohno. Adding one directly to the article itself doesn't work, so I was wondering if adding it to Template:Infobox Speed Skater itself would make it functional? I don't know how to edit the infobox template, so any help would be appreciated. Cheers, oncamera^(t) 18:11, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

 Done — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:23, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Questions raised by rework of WP:SHIPS ensign page

I've been working on a more editor-friendly arrangement for the ensigns listed at the WP:SHIPS Ensigns page. My draft splits them into naval/coast guard ensigns (i.e., the type that should be in the Ship flag field in the infobox) and the other (civil, government, etc.) ensigns that should be used in the body of the infobox (like the Ship registry field). For each type, I've got infobox "code" that can be copied and pasted so that the right type, size, etc. of ensign will appear in the appropriate place. Two questions I have for you:

• For ship registries where only the country is known, {{flag}} suits this purpose perfectly. For ship registries known to the city level, is there a comparable template to use that will allow a link to the city instead of the country? Using, for example, {{flagicon|USA|1912}} [[New Orleans]] is not particularly onerous, but if one could type something like {{[TemplateName]|USA|1912|link=New Orleans}} it would tend to make it more foolproof.
• For more obscure ensigns that are not in the respective country data templates, what would you think of a new hybrid template that could combine the functionality of Template:Flagicon image with Template:Flag-like output? So instead of listing "code" like |Ship registry=<span class="flagicon">[[File:Civil Ensign of Ghana.svg|22x20px]]&nbsp;</span>[[Ghana]], it could be shortened to something like |Ship registry={{[TemplateName]|Civil Ensign of Ghana.svg|Ghana}}

I welcome your thoughts. — Bellhalla (talk) 20:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

For the first item, there is no commonly used template that I know of. I think the standard wikicode might actually be better, since {{flagicon}} will have a link to the corresponding country article, and for WP:ALT reasons, we also want the country name to be spoken by screen readers. With your proposed template (working like {{flag}}), the image would be "purely decorative" and only "New Orleans" would be spoken, instead of "United States New Orleans", which is closer to the original intent I think. For the second time, use {{flagicon image}} (e.g. |Ship registry={{flagicon image|Civil Ensign of Ghana.svg}} [[Ghana]]). Hope this helps — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:43, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Olympic medalists in equestrian/archive1

Hi, and thanks for your comments at the above FLC. I wasn't sure if your comments had been resolved, so if you could briefly revisit and cap/strikethrough your resolved comments, that would be great. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 15:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, could you check one more time? (sorry for bothering you, but I don't want to misrepresent consensus) Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 15:36, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and promote this one, since it looks like the two problems were fixed. If you see anything else, feel free to bring it up on the talk page. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:40, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Countries at the 2010 Winter Olympics

Just dropping by. I wanted to thank you for your work on those articles. With the Winter Olympics fast approaching in a couple of months and the Olympic teams and procedures well under way, I wanted to establish some infrastructure for other editors who might have been discouraged into contributing new content since the pages were not there for them. Often I find that these articles might get deleted if only a one liner tidbit of information is added when it's likely they will expand rapidly over the next short while. I also wanted to thank you for catching a few of those articles like Malta that seem to have somehow sneaked in there. I was very focused on created the articles that I didn't have a chance to verify all their details; the next step. Unfortunately I've been bogged down by other things so thank you for taking that up. All the best, Mkdw^talk 01:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Sure, no worries! I certainly realize that you created those articles in good faith, so I hope you are not annoyed at my AfD nominations. While we're on the topic of participating nations, there may be some other changes. First, there are quite a few more nations that show up on the FIS quota list, so you might want to be pre-emptive and create those if you choose. There may be some last minute dropouts (esp. for the NOCs with only 1 entry), but we could delete again. Here are the NOCs that are currently missing: ALG, AND, ARG, ARM, AZE, BER, BIH, CHI, COL, CRO, CYP, IRL, ISL, KGZ, LUX, MAR, MEX, MKD, MNE, NEP, POR, PUR, RSA, SMR, SRB, TJK. But on the other hand, we have articles for BAH, TPE, and VEN that I think might not be needed (in addition to the GAB, MLT, and ALB articles up already at AfD). For BAH, we have a newspaper article that says Kory Wright has qualified in snowboard, but BAH doesn't show up on the FIS list, so that is inconsistent. For TPE and VEN, they both had lugers in 2006 and we don't know if they will qualify again. We don't yet know that they won't either, so I am holding back an AfD nomination for them. Hope this helps and thanks for your efforts in the Olympics WikiProject! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 01:15, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Subnational flag icons for US lower leagues

originally posted to (User talk:JonBroxton) I'm not sure why you think they are necessary on those articles. The clubs do not represent their associated state or province; they are simply decorations to identify their home location. In other words, is being used to identify (obliquely) that a club is located in Sacramento, Fresno, etc. That is why I assert they are superfluous to the topic of those articles. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 01:28, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your message. I completely understand why you think removing these flags is a useful thing, and having read the guideline I agree that on the single-division leagues (USL1, USL2 etc), the flags serve no purpose as the leagues are nation-wide and the state of each team is immaterial. However, the PDL, NPSL, WPSL and W-League are different; the states in which each team is located is very important because each division within the league covers a specific geographical area. Having the flags and names indicating the states in which teams are located gives readers an at-a-glance overview of the makeup of each division, and provides a geographical context that allows the span of the league to be quickly conveyed without going into detailed prose that could otherwise confuse readers. I know you may think it is "just for decoration", but it's really not; it's valuable information which followers of the league need to know. Cheers! --JonBroxton (talk) 01:39, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't really agree with that rationale. I'm not sure how PDL divisions and conferences are any different from most other leagues. MLS has Eastern and Western Conferences, the NFL has North/South/Central/West divisions in each conference, etc. PDL teams do not represent the states/provinces they are located in, and tiny decorative flag images (many of which are unfamiliar to most readers) will not convey the geographical context you claim. I would say that a much better solution would be something like File:MLS map team locations.png. That would be an extremely obvious way to indicate the geographical area covered by each division. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:59, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

RankedMedalTable

Hi, Can you add a width option (for the Nations) to this template ?--Mohsen1248 (talk) 14:05, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Any thoughts?--Mohsen1248 (talk) 20:45, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Sorry! I missed your message while I was away for a few days. Try the new nation-width parameter. The value must have units (e.g. "20em" or "200px") and not just a numeric value. To scale for user-selectable font sizes etc., em-spacing is preferred. Hope this helps — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:18, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, It works well --Mohsen1248 (talk) 01:53, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

China flag templates

I notice you removed links to two "deprecated" templates in the {{CHN}} and {{PRC}} doc pages. If you think {{CHN-PRC}} and {{PRC-main}} should not be used, why not delete these templates rather than just remove links? I find no discussion anywhere as to why they should be avoided. --Lasunncty (talk) 09:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I had intended to nominate them for deletion, and will do so today. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:07, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

If I left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it.

I have replied, following your talk rules. You are still invited to respond. Please stop disregarding my talk rules. You have followed them before by leaving messages in my active archive but sometimes you seem to act forgetful.

Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 22:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I left a message on your talk page, as it is on my watchlist. You deleted it. I do not watch any of your archive pages. If you wish to immediately archive my message instead of responding to it, that is your prerogative, but it will certainly curtail ongoing discussion. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:29, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thecurran/Archive_2009&oldid=328851134, you left a message on my archive page. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thecurran/Archive_2009&oldid=329036389, I responded to it. You have not responded to it, despite being heavily active since. Please explain why your response at 2009-12-02T22:29 directly contradicts such recent, clear evidence.

Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 22:38, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

By the way, you seem to be the only person who repeatedly takes the extra effort required to forgo the links to my active discussion from my talk page, my signature, and anything that links to my talk page. Why do you keep doing this? Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 22:43, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I didn't see that edit. I have User talk:Thecurran on my watchlist, which is the norm if I select the "new section" edit for your talkpage. I will not edit archive pages (knowingly) because of standard convention (e.g. see Help:Archiving a talk page, and templates such as {{Talkarchive}}.) Now that I see what you've done with that bizarre redirect, I promise not to be fooled again, as I was in my first edit. You seem to presume that people will only reach your talkpage by your signature link etc. Not true. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:47, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Anyone that reached my talk page for more than 330 days by any link has been automatically redirected. Which method are you using that bypasses redirects? I am excited to learn how such a method operates. BTW, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thecurran&oldid=293808511 , this is not the first time you have done so. Why do you keep claiming things that are easily proven false? Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 22:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Should someone click to my talk page, they go to my active discussion, and when they select the "new section" edit, it links to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thecurran/Archive_2009&action=edit&section=new , which works exactly as I would expect. Most people trying to address an issue with my edits, click on the link provided by my edit summary, which also goes to my active discussion. Upon checking http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thecurran&action=history , it is clear you are the only person who has bypassed my redirect for plain speech instead of by an automatic notification and at twenty-three sections, my active discussion has averaged over two new sections per month. Please clarify how I am reaching inappropriate assumptions from these data, because they tend to suggest you follow the exception rather than the rule. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 23:11, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

When you have some time, please do check User talk:Thecurran/Archive 2009#Flag templates as well as User talk:Thecurran/Archive 2009#Flag templates 2.0 and consider if these conversations should be consolidated into a single discussion. BTW, in order to keep track of which pages you edit, it might be a good idea to change your preferences to automatically watch any pages you edit. This is an easy to keep your watchlist up-to-date without having to remember to check Watch this page each time. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 00:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Move the discussion here, if you wish, but I do not change archive pages. I have thousands of pages on my watchlist, and I know how that works, thanks. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:34, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Please stop creating useless redirects now. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:41, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Please remove the {{AfDM}} from List of country subdivisions or temporarily suspend Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of country subdivisions to remove the urgency of the situation so that we can cool down our differences.

Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 02:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

That is an unrelated issue. Please discuss the flag templates before creating any more of them. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 02:50, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I believe it would help our relationship considerably if you would try to temporarily remove that AfDM tag or temporarily suspend WP:Articles for deletion/List of country subdivisions. Please, consider this deeply. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 02:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

BTW, I have invited you to discuss the flag templates on both User talk:Thecurran/Archive 2009#Flag templates 2.0 and User talk:Thecurran/Archive 2009#Flag templates, as discussed in User talk:Thecurran/Archive 2009#Blocked. This invitation is still open. Please do not repeat I do not change archive pages as I have shown you have done so or I was in my first edit as I have shown you had come to my talk page before, while the link was up. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 03:01, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

We're not here to build relationships; we are here to build an encyclopedia. I think List of country subdivisions is a poor idea, for the reasons I listed in the AfD nomination. I think cryptic code aliases for subnational flag templates are also a bad idea, and I encourage you to read through the WP:WikiProject Flag Template archives to see that idea discussed and rejected. I will discuss this further here, or on your talk page (your choice), but not on an archive page. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 04:21, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I recently brought this issue up at Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests#Please help me learn how to converse with User:Andrwsc. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 05:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Flag templates

Please follow the conventions of Wikipedia:WikiProject Flag Template when creating new country data templates. The template name must match the value of the alias value, and we only have redirect aliases for ISO 3166-1 entries, not for ISO 3166-2. The formatting of country data templates is also important, since automated tools are used to maintain them. Thank you —Andrwsc (talk ·contribs) 18:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

1. Why is it ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 and not ISO 3166-1 alpha-2?
2. Why is it ISO 3166-1 and not ISO 3166-2?
3. Would you delete templates without linking to relevant discussion?
4. Would you protect the templates of European countries?
5. Would you delete the templates of developing countries?
6. Would you put an article up for deletion without discussing it on the talk page?
7. Would you speak of flag project conventions without pointing to any resolutions?

Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 14:31, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

1. About 4½ years ago, the original flag templates were created, with discussion about whether to use full names or abbreviations. The template system evolved from its original implementation, but alpha-2 codes were never created for the full set of countries, whereas alpha-3 codes (and IOC & FIFA codes) were used almost from day one. The current flag template system has been relatively stable for almost 3 years, and with millions of transclusions, alpha-2 codes have not been needed, so why create them now?

   That's a strong argument but I believe I pointed out the reason/need below in these threads. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran Let it off your chest the past 01:10, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

2. One of the core design goals of the flag template system is simple, easy to remember syntax. Obscure codes—especially for subnational entities—is contrary to that goal. Surely the wiki markup is clearer for editors to read and write as {{flag|Buenos Aires}} (for example) instead of {{flagcountry|AR-B}}?

   That is clearly not the case as you have just demonstrated again. You might want to try to stop confusing Buenos Aires with Buenos Aires Province as they are mutually exclusive divisions. If an expert like you cannot get it right, how can we expect regular people to do so. The ISO codes on the other hand are completely translingual so they make it easier to transwiki and to share on Commons. It's the different names for places like Florence and Moscow that are cryptic.Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 11:10, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

   Actually, I didn't confuse Buenos Aires with Buenos Aires Province; I confused AR-B with AR-C. And my inadvertant mistake demonstrates precisely what is wrong with your proposal. You want to force users to learn obscure codes, so that they have to use {{flagcountry|AR-B}} and {{flagcountry|AR-C}}in their wiki markup instead of {{flag|Buenos Aires Province}} and {{flag|Buenos Aires}}. It is significantly easier for editors when the name of the flag template matches the name of the linked article, but you alone do not see that. You want editors to use an "ISO decoder ring". As for your non sequitur comments, I have no idea what The ISO codes on the other hand are completely translingual so they make it easier to transwiki and to share on Commons means. I also have no idea what you are referring to with: It's the different names for places like Florence and Moscow that are cryptic. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:04, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

   The ISO codes are the same in every language. That makes them universal and translingual. This is quite helpful for people that transwiki or who try to make Commons accessible to non-native speakers of English. Florence can be called Firenze (native Italian), Fiorenza, Florentia, Florenz, Flurensa, Florenzia, Florensiya, Flyarentsyya, Firenca, Floryentsiya, Florència, Florencie, Fflorens, Floorentía, Fiuränza, Florencia, Florenco, Floréncia, Florentzia, or Flurans, etc. Moscow can be called Moskva (native Russian), Moskou, Moskau, Moscoƿ, Musku, Moscú, Moscou, Bo̍k-su-kho, Myoskyou, Gorad Maskva, Maskva, Mosku, Moskow, Mushkhavaa, or Muskav, etc. The other problem with memorizing the linked article name instead is not only that such names are prone to change in reality but also that such names are prone to change by disambiguation in Wikispace. I have pointed out your AR-B error before but you kept making it. That is not a problem on the code's part. BTW, all I am trying to do is add the redirects that you encouraged me to make last year. I am not advocating complete removal of the original templates. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran Let it off your chest the past 23:45, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

   What does Commons have to do with anything we're discussing? And when did I ever encourage you to create redirects like this? (please provide a diff) If anything, I have suggested you replace the few remaining code-based template names with something more readable. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

   Our mission is to make the sum total of human knowledge available to everyone. That involves translingualism through translation and universally appropriate file names on Commons. I related in User talk:Andrwsc#Flag templates 2.0 that you encouraged 3166-2 in your reply to my 2008-05-28T06:16 edit on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Flag_Template&diff=215550483&oldid=215444508 . Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran Let it off your chest the past 00:44, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

   Sorry, but I still have troubles trying to figure out what you are trying to do. When did file names on Commons enter the discussion? What are you trying to translate? As for the latter point, I'm looking at the diff and I don't see any encouragement whatsoever for 3166-2. In fact, I see the opposite—suggesting you replace and delete instances of {{AB}}, {{BE-BRU}}, etc. I also see my suggestion that you go elsewhere for discussion about your http://fr-CN-QC.wikipedia.org/ idea. After all these months of miscommunication between us, I have to ask: is English your native language? I'm assuming good faith and all, but you never seem to grasp what I am saying, or vice versa. One thing seems clear, you will never change your mind about these ideas you have, so perhaps it is best if this discussion comes to a conclusion. I don't think anything else needs to be said on this talkpage. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 01:14, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

   Asking questions while saying these are my last words on this in your edit summary seems quite antithetical as questions often prompt further conversation. Our flag image names in Commons are inconsistently written in different languages because the place names vary (sometimes drastically) from language to language; ISO codes would be clearer. I try to translate country and first-order subdivision geography from English into all five of the other official UN languages. It is not appropriate for me to respond to such ad hominem attacks (cf. WP:No personal attacks#What is considered to be a personal attack?) or to respond in kind. Though my user page is superlatively clear, my background is irrelevant. I must assume your 2007-08-24 deletions were a maverick usage of WP:BOLD and that they forewent prior consultation with others as you have not commented on User talk:Andrwsc#Flag templates 2.0 for almost a week despite being very active across Wikipedia including multiple replies to myself and others. Being bold is great and necessary but when you do such things without consultation, it is convoluted to claim those actions are per WP:CONSENSUS. You have not shown any third parties have ever discouraged ISO 3166-2 codes, I have shown that every move against them has been a solo contribution of yours, and I have shown evidence that encourages them. As such, I politely request that you undelete any and all Country data Templates that bear ISO 3166-2 codes, especially those that you yourself have deleted. Should you decide to apply WP:TfD to any of them, please advise me of each one on User talk:thecurran/Archive 2009 for any such action you do this month and on User talk:thecurran/Archive 2010-01/2010-06 for any such action you do in the first half of next year. These will be redirected to from User talk:thecurran as will any discussion after 2010-06. Despite your able edit, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thecurran/Archive_2009&diff=328851134&oldid=328794256 , you say that you have trouble with writing on those pages. I hope you will learn how to use them just like you learned how to automatically or manually Watch this page. Then, you will also be able to notice my replies (cf. User talk:Thecurran/Archive 2009#Flag templates). Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran Let it off your chest the past 03:05, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

3. I suppose I view the flag template system as something like a #switch statement with a couple of thousand entries, and it just happens to be implemented as thousands of individual templates. Creating or deleting country data templates is akin to editing lines in that virtual #switch statement, in my view. Until now, there has been little fuss to my maintenance actions like this, but I shall nominate them for deletion if you wish to see wider discussion.
4. I have no idea what you are referring to here. Many flag templates are protected because of the WP:High-risk templates guideline. Being European has nothing to do with it.
5. Again, I do not know what you are implying with this loaded question. What does a nation's economic status have to do with my flag template maintenance? I delete unused and/or malformed flag templates.
   • I am sorry to have offended you.
   • Please try to reconsider how other people might view some of the following examples. You quoted G6: Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup in deleting Template:Country data Río Negro, Uruguay" but it was controversial. Furthermore, you have deleted other current first-level subdivisions without even sending notices to the authors, wasting incredible amounts of time for series of editors to learn your template rules and to replicate their predecessors' pitfalls and triumphs just to have it deleted again and have the process restarted anyways until one of them decides to paranoically keep watch on a template that common sense would dictate should already exist in the first place and then decide to make a link before they re-write the template. In the future, if you find orphan Template:Country data *s that are not duplicates and that point to a current first-level country subdivisions, could you please notify the author so that they can not have those black marks placed against them and they can have a chance to make valid links, or could you put it into a category of orphaned templates, or could you notify me that you plan to delete them in a week's time so that I can fix them?
   • You have also done this to Sánchez Ramírez and a slew of provinces of the Dominican Republic, citing (T3: Unused, redundant template). I don't see the redundancy; where are the originals? You've done it to San Juan at least once a year for the past three years. You've done it to Salta quoting (T3: Unused template (duplicate/functionality provided by other template): WP:WPFT housekeeping). Where was the duplicate if you had to restore it? I'm really confused by you restoring CAT citing (2 revision(s) restored: per talk discussion), which redirects to Catalonia. The discussions are not on either talkpage. Besides, ES-CT is the international code for Catalonia. The single reference to CAT in the Catalonia article is to .cat, a 2005 ICANN TLD for the Catalan language and this is transnational not just for Catalonia.
   • What worries me the most is the second deletion of Azua, citing (G5: Creation by a banned user in violation of ban) despite the presence of File:Flag of the Province of Azua.JPG. It makes me wonder if you are preparing to ban me, too, which is why I'm writing. You may want to consider inserting links to such bans into your edit summaries. It's really hard to think there are WP:No angry mastodons when this kind of evidence keeps presenting itself. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 11:54, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

     If you are critical of my deletion of User:MRDU08's Dominican flag-related edits, then you should learn the whole story before making accusations. I do not know what "black marks placed against them" could possibly mean, for deletion of templates that have no usage whatsoever. Look at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Country data Río Negro, Uruguay and Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Country data Río Negro and then convince me we need multiple versions of this. If you wish me to undelete some of your useless templates, let me know which ones and I shall do so, but I will also nominate them at TfD. And since you seem to be perusing my logs from years ago, let me help your detective work with respect to the discussion about Template:Country data CAT. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:01, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

   Every time you delete someone's edits, that deletion stains their records. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 11:13, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

   If you truly believe this, then perhaps volunteering your time on Wikipedia is not an appropriate hobby. Do you really think that every idea you have, every comment you make, will be accepted as-is by the community? This is no different from free software projects, where code experiments are tried and abandoned regularly, nor is it much different from the publishing and software industries in general, where content is re-written, expanded, deleted, etc. towards the end goal of a better final product. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:04, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

   By stain I mean that I for example can look at http://toolserver.org/~soxred93/ec/thecurran & see many deleted edits and, although I cannot see them individually, I think quite a few may have been done by you instead of pursuing an alternative to deletion. I just wish I could understand your defence of your deletions more often. I have shown that the bases you supply for some deletions are not solid. You are a fantastic editor and an inspirational admin. Of course I WP:AGF when you make such little mistakes. When I make a mistake though, there is no need for me to comport myself like an WP:OGRE, destroying the work of others to make myself appear correct. We are all learning and growing here. I have learned incredible amounts from you and continue to remain open to learning more. I like to think this is not unidirectional. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran Let it off your chest the past 00:37, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

6. Yes. Specifically for List of country subdivisions, it is close to being an orphaned article, so I think you might possibly be the only editor to have it watchlisted. An AfD nomination is the best way to get additional discussion from the wider community.
7. I don't think you'll see any official "resolutions", but consensus can certainly be understood from past project discussions, and the stability of existing template structure and style.

— Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 07:52, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Flag templates 2.0

Again, please stop creating extraneous flag templates (ISO 3166-1 alpha 2 codes). The consensus (for about four years) is that we use the alpha 3 codes only. The extra "bloat" is not needed. —Andrwsc (talk ·contribs) 22:14, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Please point me to this WP:CONSENSUS you speak of. I will gladly digest it.

Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 22:46, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Now that the pertinent sections are here, could you please respond to my questions? Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 05:37, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Please point out the rules you were following when you deleted those template redirects. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 05:38, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I have checked the current Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template and both of its archives for the terms "3166-2" and "alpha-2" to work out previous decisions on both ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 and ISO 3166-2. I will provide relevant links for discussion soon. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 06:05, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

1. 2005-06-09T11:00 User:Gdr proposed 3166-2 usage.

   User:Tobias Conradi & User:SEWilco agreed.

2. 2008-05-24T09:43 I proposed 3166-2 usage to answer User:Jerem43 and yourself.

   No one disagreed with it.

   1. 2008-05-24T08:41 I mentioned 3166-2 usage again.

      No one disagreed with it.

   2. 2008-05-25T17:24 ditto
   3. 2008-05-28T06:16 I mentioned 3166-2 usage again.

      You encouraged it.

   4. 2008-05-30T04:19 I mentioned 3166-2 usage again.

      No one disagreed with it.

3. 2008-06-13T22:21 and again in the same thread you mentioned 3166-2 usage.

   I did not disagree with it but where to use it; I later caved in as to where.

Out of the three people that mentioned 3166-2 it since 2005, I do not find consensus against it but rather for it. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 13:33, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

1. 2005-04-01T21:50 User:Sharkford proposed alpha-3 and alpha-2 usage.

   User:Gdr preceded this by proposing both, User:Curps responded that alpha-3 had a history of consistent use, since-blocked User:Tobias Conradi noted that alpha-2 is more well-known but advocated alpha-3, User:Earl Andrew said, The smaller the said code the better, User:SEWilco tests out both, and User:Zscout370 proposed alpha-2 codes despite some that sound odd.

2. User:Mzajac proposed alpha-2 codes as they were more well-known.

   You replied, I suppose we could add all of them, but there has never been any demand for that in the 2-3 years that flag templates have been around.

3. 2008-05-24T09:43 I indirectly mentioned alpha-2 usage.

   No one disagreed with it.

   1. 2008-05-28T06:16 I proposed adding alpha-2 usage.

4. 2008-05-28T18:22 You directly addressed my alpha-2 usage proposal by suggesting I take it to the WP:Village pump (proposals).

Out of the four people that mentioned alpha-2 since 2005, I do not find consensus against it but not decidedly for it either. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 14:19, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Right, so we agree that in four years there has been no need for thousands of duplicate redirects to be created using ISO 3166-2 codes. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:42, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

We agree that the consensus has been not to prohibit them but rather to promote them and that there are people that like to raise the deleted page counts of others for reasons that may or may not be substantiated. By the way many templates have no redirects yet so I believe the redirects are not duplicates. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 11:01, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Furthermore, WP:WikiProject Flag Template/Archive1 shows that state codes were originally hyphenated on to country codes. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 11:26, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Where are the discussions or similar that inciprompted you on 2007-08-24 to delete the 3166-2-like templates of US states and CA provinces? Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 11:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

List of country subdivisions

Hello Thecurran, do you really think this article is a good idea? You are just getting started, with less than 100 entries in the table, and the article is already about 16,000 bytes long. There are over 3000 first-level administrative divisions in the world, so I don't think this approach is scalable. There is already the Table of administrative divisions by country page, which is the top of the hierarchy of all the per-nation articles on administrative divisions. I don't see a need to duplicate that information in a single list. Perhaps you should reconsider. What problem are you trying to solve? Thanks, — Andrwsc (talk ·contribs) 21:44, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I do think this article is a good idea. It allows side-by-side comparisons of subdivisions of different countries. Table of administrative divisions by country seems to count the number of subdivisions, without actually listing most of them. It is useful and concise but only a handful of provinces, etc. are on it. I did not create this page but I am trying to make it into a useful list. I think it would be useful to compare the population or size of Ontario to that of Illinois, to expand upon [[Category:Ranked lists of country subdivisions]], and to solve the problem of people consistently confusing AU-WA with US-WA, etc.. I think it would be particularly pertinent when applied to the European Union as constituencies that are represented alongside of each other in votes can often be in different countries like in UEFA. I do hope that it is not just a waste of space and I do have good intentions. I would feel disappointed if I had to revert all of it but I would be willing to do so if that is what you and some other admins want. I would not waste your time in an WP:AFD. --Thecurran (talk) 23:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

That is the way I felt six months ago. I have put a lot of work into it in the last two quarters, making flag templates and such. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 06:29, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I understand that you have put a lot of effort into this, which is why I tried to talk you out of it back in June. Unfortunately, I do not think your plan is feasible, and that is why I nominated it for deletion, before you spend even more effort on it. I have no doubt that all your work is done in good faith, but I think it would be better for the encyclopedia if that effort was spent on improvements elsewhere. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 08:05, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

What if I remove all of the flag template tags to avoid template limit and decrease byte counts, making it into only a list of subdivisions (linked) & codes & subdivision capitals (linked)? Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 04:18, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

It would still be a WP:Content fork of existing articles. My nomination would remain unchanged. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:10, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

List of political and geographic subdivisions by total area in excess of 1,000,000 km²‎

Aside from issues with non-free images (which I agree should be excluded), why remove non-flag images that are emblematic of the governing authority for a particular geographic territory? bd2412 T 22:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

WP:Manual of Style (icons) discourages the use of non-flag images (logos especially, but also coats-of-arms) as flag substitutes for icon usage. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:46, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I can see where that would make sense when applied to an article on a person, but these are just shorthand for territories. I see no reason not to use the coat of arms for the Grand Duchy of Moscow, for example, which is as close to a flag as exists for that entity. bd2412 T 23:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

But why is a miniature coat-of-arms even needed there? Isn't the link to Grand Duchy of Moscow wholly sufficient? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Because it looks nice, and presentation must count for something or we wouldn't have so many pictures in the encyclopedia! bd2412 T 23:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I disagree, with respect to 22 pixel icons. Detailed images (such as coats-of-arms, maps, and logos) do not "look nice" at all at that size. That is one reason why WP:Manual of Style (icons) was written as a guideline, addressing the topic of inline images of that size differently from normal images. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Good point. I could make simplified versions that would not look as fuzzy. bd2412 T 01:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Please explain how you would do this. I am quite keen to learn. Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran Let it off your chest the past 01:28, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I would only need to download the image, open it in Photoshop, resize it there and airbrush over any kinks. Since it would be a very small image for a very small use, it would not need to be scalable to a larger size. bd2412 T 03:49, 10 December 2009 (UTC)