User talk:Kudpung/Archive Aug 2009

Unsourced material

Thankyou for Informing me,Can you give me a link to the page which allows Writing sourceless material in articles --Notedgrant (talk) 20:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Many editors find this one, and this one very helpful.--Kudpung (talk) 02:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

thankyou i'll try to avoid mistakes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Notedgrant (talk • contribs) 02:58, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

AIV

Thank you for your report, however, the IP you reported has not committed enough vandalism for us to know if he is not becoming a reformed vandal. I'd like to notify you of this discussion, which I've transcluded below.

• 93.97.188.99 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) - On Feckenham;. Evidently a vandalism-only account. Kudpung (talk) 12:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

It last edited two days ago. Also, it's an IP, not an account. -- Mentifisto 12:54, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

The vandal hasn't edited in two days and also, the IP only vandalized three times, while five is usually the blocking amount. I removed your post to reduce clutter from future reports. Thank you, ceranthor 12:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

It's okay, and enthusiasm is much better than none at all. :) ceranthor 13:03, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

That would be a whole different venue, if you think that they are being used by the same user, this is the proper place to report it. ceranthor 13:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Pattaya

Thank you for your work on Pattaya. I have lived there much of the time for 16 years, and am fairly new to Wikipedia. I agree with you that edits should be restricted some way. So many articles are totally lacking in correct substance, and need cleaning up. I write for magazines, and for Bangkok Post and Nation--Thailand's English newspapers, and will help here as I have time. Best of luck. R/T-รัก-ไทย (talk) 16:20, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Mostly everyone who contributes to the Pattaya article, including the native Thai speakers, does so in good faith, but they do not always differentiate the special constraints of writing for an encyclopedia, from the tone and content on their local Internet forums or badly written tourism flyers - which most of them are used to. Writing in the dry, almost boring tones of an encyclopedia does not come easy to those who have little practice in writing academic papers or factual journalism. As long as the content is fairly reasonable however, and not direct vandalism, editors who write for leading newspapers or who are published authors, don't really mind digging in and cleaning the mess up. Thank you for your kind support, and do not hesitate for an instant to let me know if any of my edits have been inacurate or overzealous.--Kudpung (talk) 17:55, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

LeonigMig

Hi. Thanks for the tag thing. I contributed to Wikipedia quite a bit about the local history of North Worcestershire when I was looking for a job after graduating. So I went to the local libraries, ordered books out of the archives, photocopied out of copyright stuff and scanned it in- synthesised whole articles. I loved it (then I got a job lol). I'm one of those people who finds it natural to emulate styles of writing and some of the stuff I wrote was a little bit flowery, in the mode of some of the Victorian and turn of the century local history books- you know the kind of thing- fanciful suggestions and turns of phrase etc. It has its charm. Basically I'm not interesting in contributing to Wikipedia as a certain editor was a bit of a you know what and stamped on me repeatedly rather than being civil. The guy involved is a member of your group and was banned twice for over a year becuase of the way he behaved. I've now moved to another part of the county and am actively researching the local history of that area for my own benefit. However I will not be contributing to your project as I don't want to experience all that conflict all over again- "rm personal attack" etc. Good luck. 20:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi leonigMig. I'm sorry to hear about your negative experiences. We all get flak sometimes from unreasonable editors (and sometimes admins), I do myself although I consider myself to be a very careful editor, and there have been times I've wanted to give it all up. Looking back over your editing history and your talk page since 2005, some of the generic edit messages you received may have been justified, but not of course the abuse. A good thing to do if one is going to do a lot of regular editing and contributing to the encyclopedia, is to wade through some of the more important bureaucracy and be sure of the basic rules. A bad thing to do is fight fire with fire. The Worcestershire project is new and of course anyone can join it, but we have it well in control and won't allow any edit warring on the pages we look after. You'll see that the work we do is highly collaborative in the nicest sense. The project needs all the help it can get and we would welcome your contributions. We'll let you know you in the nicest way if they are not quite right.--Kudpung (talk) 01:08, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Sussex Downs College

Heya, I know you are good with school and college articles, so I offer you Sussex Downs College, I've just been through it and removed a hell of a lot of crap, most of which seemed to be copied and pasted directly from the prospectus, and wasn't relevant to an encyclopaedia at all, I was wondering if you fancied having a look at it? Jeni ^(talk) 12:45, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I'll have a go, but don't forget I'm flying to the UK newt week for a month.--Kudpung (talk) 15:48, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I've had a first hack at it - in fact you could have been a lot bolder. I have left a comment on the talk page. I would give it a week or so to see if some of the cn tags have been addressed, then start taking them out if not. The major contributors have probably added their stuff in good faith, but may not be fully aware of Wiki guidelines.--Kudpung (talk) 17:57, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

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

Wellingborough

I have added 5 refs but they are not that good see what you think, it's the hardist to find refs on the Geology section.Likelife (talk) 08:57, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Categories

Hello, regarding Côtes du Rhône AOC, please refer to Wikipedia:Categorization. An article should typically not be categorized in several categories above/below each other in the hierarchy. Tomas e (talk) 17:18, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

hi

Belated thanks for the welcome message thing. I read your user page.... you seem like a very interesting individual. I hope my life's just as eventful! Cheers (etc) Ελληνικά όρος ή φράση (talk) 22:42, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Use of {{hangon}} tags

Hi - in case you weren't aware, the {{hangon}} tag is designed for use where an article is nominated for speedy deletion - i.e. the article is in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. The motorway service stations you've tagged are only being nominated for normal deletion (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norton Canes services (2nd nomination)). Adding the hangon tags incorrectly places the articles into the speedy deletion category. If you believe the articles should be kept, you should leave a keep comment at the debate. I will remove the tags, as they may cause confusion. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 13:24, 5 September 2009 (UTC)