User talk:Huw Powell/archive1

Welcome! Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself. The Five Pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial Picture tutorial How to write a great article Naming conventions Manual of Style Wikipedia Glossary If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also the Topical index. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the time stamp. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my Talk page. The Community Portal can also be very useful. Happy Wiki-ing! - Sango123 23:59, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

Re: comet article vandalism report...

I found you here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jesserich If you look at the history on the comet page, between this edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comet&oldid=114730362 and this one by Jesserich: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comet&oldid=114829467 the article seems to have "reproduced" itself multiple times. I would try to fix it but I'm a bit a noob about that sort of thing. So I am leaving you this note, thinking you can fix it quickly and properly. Feel free to drop me a note at my talk page if you think I could have figured how to do it myself! Thanks much, human 02:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for bringing this issue to my attention; it has now been resolved. The issue you encountered was most likely caused by vandalism – intentionally unconstructive edits to the article. If in future you wish to fix such problems yourself, you can 'revert' the article to an earlier version that hasn't been tampered with. See Help:Reverting#How_to_revert. Thanks – Qxz 02:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposing an article for deletion

Hi Huw (I actually wrote "Hugh" and then went back to get rid of my typo. Sorry, silly me!) - I saw your message at Talk:Pars Society. I quite agree that it looked like deletable material, so I nominated it for deletion. You can enter the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pars Society; if you ever want to nominate an article for deletion there are instructions at WP:AFD. Cheers, TheGrappler 16:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Grappler! I see the AFD nom resulted in deletion. I'll try to do it on my own next time! Huw Powell 20:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mpc logo.png

Hello, Huw Powell. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Mpc logo.png) was found at the following location: User:Huw Powell/Model Products Corporation. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 06:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Clumsy. Thanks for the "warning". Luckily I still have the image on my hard drive. This was a sandbox version of an article I am trying to write. Image should stay on WP for the future use. Why not just inform me not to "display" it on my WIP page? Huw Powell 21:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Linda McCartney

She's waiting for a GA review, but go for it if you want to. :) --andreasegde (talk) 06:05, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try to work gently, and only make the Article Gooder if I can! Huw Powell (talk) 20:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your work on Linda McCartney/wife-spouse of McCartney. I had hit a brick wall before your help. Muchos Gracias I think they say... --andreasegde (talk) 18:53, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you are so welcome, it was my pleasure to try to to help. It's a difficult "head space" to work in, since most of us "know of her" because she was married to Paul. And in Beatlesworld, "McCartney" is, of course, Paul. It felt weird endlessly referring to him as a mere marital appendage, but it probably made more sense. I think I didn't do the last section yet, though. Huw Powell (talk) 20:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

RWs on WP!

Woooo! Another RationalWikian on Wikipedia! --RA ^{talk stalk} 20:44, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

...Hey, how come you got a formal welcome to Wikipedia, while I just got a warning? --RA ^{talk stalk} 20:44, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Because I didn't make my only revertable edit (at Spinal Tap, as I recall, but it might have been at the IRS Comic Strip's "Bad News") until after I was welcomed! Huw Powell (talk) 20:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Hollywood values, you will be blocked from editing. Gwernol 04:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I did not vandalize, I merely tried to express an opinion. If I did it on the wrong page, I am sorry - I could not find a relative talk page link to follow. You are in error in your accusation of "vandalism", since you did not read what I wrote - are you a bot? I also note that you have not linked to whatever edit I made that you objected to. You are just a troll, in my opinion, since nobody can follow your links to find what I wrote and judge me --- for better or fo worse. Huw Powell (talk) 04:41, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

You created an article called "Hollywood Values" that read, in its entirety: "Aw, whine, why can't Andrew Schlafly's perspective be told here??? After all, he runs the Trusworthy Encyclopedia!!!</snark> Sorry, please don't block me." Would you care to explain exactly how that is an appropriate encyclopedia article? All administrators can read deleted pages, so it is very easy to get a second opinion about whether that was appropriate. If you thought it was appropriate, why did you write: "Please don't block me"? Stop acting like a troll yourself and at least have the self-respect to own up when you are caught vandalizing. Thanks, Gwernol 12:26, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

It was an accident - I was trying to comment on a deletion thing. I didn't mean to (re)create the article. Please note that my contributions, while just a trickle, are constructive, other than this accident. Huw Powell (talk) 15:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Expelled

Can you please explain this edit? What is your rationale for changing a direct quote? Guettarda (talk) 02:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

You mean this edit, I presume. I quote my edit comment: "remove redundant word; change allcaps to itals (approriate?))" - it was a matter of style, where I substituted italics for all capitals for the emphasized word - and I clearly asked in my edit comment whether this was appropriate or not. If it not deemed appropriate for stylistic or quotation reasons, then I hope it will already have been returned to the all caps version by now. If my edit caused any problems, please accept my apologies. Thanks! Huw Powell (talk) 21:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

m-derived filter/image impedance

I am in the process of writing a series of articles on filters designed by the image method. So I don't have to keep revisiting articles I have already written, I have been putting in red links to ones I know I am going to write. When people started deleting the red links, I turned them into temporary redirects to stop that happening. Except you won't stop - even though I wrote some text on the redirect page explaining why I had done this, which you clearly did not read. Ok I give up, too difficult to stop people deleting things they don't understand. SpinningSpark 16:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I understand the first part of what you said. I also remember removing a link that was a redirect back to the page it was on.

I don't understand how I could be expected to think that a redirect's talk page (is that where you left your note?) would tell me what you expected me to figure out.

"Except you won't stop" - I really don't understand what you mean by that.

"Ok I give up, too difficult to stop people deleting things they don't understand." I think your process is opaque. If people delete your red links, why not just create a stub placeholder at the target? Both of those practices are widespread, and transparent to other users. Creating a redirect loop is not a useful placeholder, since no one can tell why you have done it.

Thanks for explaining, at least, why there was a redirect loop in that article. It's always nice to get new messages :)

I forgot to sign the above response when I made it back in May. Huw Powell (talk) 01:01, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Metallic silhouettes

Short answer, yes, the pigs and chickens appear to be the same size when viewed from the proper range. I've included a detailed analysis at Talk:Metallic silhouette, and I've got some questions about how best to organize the article to get that information in there. scot (talk) 15:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

After giving it some thought, I added a scale to the drawings, showing the MOA measure for the NRA big bore rifle targets. I think that makes the point in a fairly clear manner. scot (talk) 14:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow, thanks... nice of you to go to all this trouble to explain this to some random guy on the internet (me)! Huw Powell (talk) 00:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem. After all, can you think of a better place for a know-it-all to hang out? :) scot (talk) 00:47, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely not. I only wish I'd found it six years ago, then I could have been a wikipedia-god. Haha, just kidding, of course. I would have epic phailed. Huw Powell (talk) 05:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Liar's Poker

I don't think you should have deleted the anecdote about the game b/w merriwether and gutfreund. This story richly illustrates the point of liar's poker, which is to bluff. I think this is much more interesting than mathematical formulaes which few people understand anyways.

~HQ 8.21.08

I guess I removed it because it wasn't encyclopedic? More likely because it was badly written and unclear? Of course, by now, I don't remember. Chances are, it was simply poorly written junk that needed to be removed. PS, the plural of "formula" is "formulae". No "s" needed if you're gonna play at Latin. But thanks for caring, perhaps you can add it back in in a more encyclopedic fashion? Huw Powell (talk) 08:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 07:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Happy St David's day

I'd have brought daffodils, but the goat ate them... Totnesmartin (talk) 20:03, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, thanks! Amusingly, yesterday I saw the first shoots of the daffodils over the septic tank (warmer ground, they run weeks ahead of the others). Huw Powell (talk) 00:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

We're just getting one or two out now here in Aylesbury. Totnesmartin (talk) 09:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Uncle Ed

Anyone who calls themselves 'Uncle' is one to be avoided, in my books. Czolgolz (talk) 05:51, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

April 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Wikipedia:Newbie club. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 22:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

To be fair, Uncle Ed is kind of creepy. Pirate^Argh!!1! 02:15, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, drunken pirate. Though they're right, WP is not the place to make the sort of comment I did there. There are plenty of other places to do so. I assume you frequent some of the same as myself? Huw Powell (talk) 00:12, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Liberapedia

You and other RationalWikians are free to post any reasonable comments about Conservapedia at Liberapedia while poor old RationalWiki is down. Remember at Liberapedia we're polite and considerate to fellow liberals and constructive editors, we're unpleasant only to vandals, Christian Conservatives other Conservatives etc. Proxima Centauri (talk) 14:59, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi PC, thanks for the invite! I'll try to spread the word around. Huw Powell (talk) 23:46, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

RW's down? That explains the "server not responding" messages I keep getting. I wish RationalWiki had an email group so I could be informed about this sort of thing, and not sit wondering if me or my ISP is borking things. Radioactive afikomen 08:16, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Tech blog, sir! Sure it's not as good as being notified immediately (although I suppose there's always RSS for that if you want it), but at least it stops us wondering what's happened in the mean time. :) Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 09:45, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

We've also set up a makeshift wikihome at Bob's wiki. Hi RA! Hi DW! Huw Powell (talk) 21:13, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

My RSS reader is stuffed as it is, thank you. This is really the exact sort of thing mailing lists were created for... Oh, and hi, Huw. Radioactive afikomen 05:40, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi again, Proxima. Why are you such a control freak, bad writer, and link spammer? I refer, of course, to your weird series of edits, protecting, and blocking at WikiIndex. I "retract" my thanks for your offer, and note that, in the end, no one really wanted to come hang out with you at LP. Huw Powell (talk) 05:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Huw, I look forward to things settling at WikiIndex - I appreciate your effort there. Best, MarkDilley (talk) 10:24, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mark, nice to see you here and thanks for stopping by to say "hi". I actually just created an article there on "audifans", which is a wiki spawned by a long-time mailing list. Huw Powell (talk) 22:21, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Brendan Hogan

A tag has been placed on Brendan Hogan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also 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. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:27, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion sure was speedy. Dang, my first "creation" didn't even last 8 hours... Huw Powell (talk) 18:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Note: article userfied to User:Huw Powell/Brendan Hogan if anyone wants to help improve it. Huw Powell (talk) 23:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Huw Powell. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Current_requests.
Message added 00:43, 2 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:43, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for doing that, and for alerting me here! Huw Powell (talk) 22:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Ron Harris (photographer)

Not speedy, a prod. You are OK, dude. Bearian (talk) 05:07, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that for me! I don't know my way around the myriad templates here so I just used one I was pretty sure existed. I appreciate you cleaning up after me. Huw Powell (talk) 23:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC)