User talk:Charlesdrakew

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Misleading Writings regarding Science Studies

(NOTE: Sorry if I'm not using the talk page correctly. I've never used one before.)

To Charlesdrakew,

Being a big fan of science myself, I have found it a bit frustrating that people have started treating science as if it is some sort of religion and everything spoken by a scientist is fact.

The reason this frustrates me is due to the simple fact that the only reason science exists is because people had the ability to question the norm and not accept petty indoctrination.

When you undid my change to that one article, I was removing the term "scientific fact", which I wish I could remove from all of Wikipedia, because it portrays scientists and magical no-it-all leaders.

Everything in science always changes. We always discovered new things invalidating what we believed before. For example, Euler's first law, a physics law that we still teach in science class today, has been shown to not be completely accurate. We still teach it, because it's very close to accurate.

I fail to see how removing this term out of pages is not constructive. Examining pages like this, I feel that Wikipedia is giving off a subjective vibe rather than an objective one. The text written in the articles seems bias to what is actually true and using terms that are not even accepted by scientists themselves.

I also fail to see how linking to an article on "scientific fact" written on Wikipedia that is poorly constructed is, well, constructive to the page at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.93.184.63 (talk) 19:38, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Not interested.--Charles (talk) 20:20, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Fishbourne

Thanks for helpfully deleting my link to the friends of fishbourne. It could be interesting to some people, so "not needed" seems a bit harsh. Where would you suggest we put such a link? Scalloway (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Don't tempt me!

But seriously, if you think the link is compatible with our policy on external links you can propose on the article talk page that it be re-added.--Charles (talk) 22:07, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Bus Routes

Is my page List of bus routes in Soham notable? Englandtransport (talk) 21:33, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

It does not have any reliable secondary sources so no it is not notable.--Charles (talk) 21:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Is it at risk of deletion? Englandtransport (talk) 20:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

If you read WP:NOT, particularly WP:NOTDIR and WP:NOTTRAVEL you will see that Wikipedia does not want to be a travel guide. We have Wikivoyage for that. This is on top of the lack of secondary sources causing the article to fail WP:GNG. For these reasons any such list of non-notable routes is at risk of deletion. You may also like to have a look at UK Transport Wiki on Wikia where enthusiasts can make all the lists they like.--Charles (talk) 21:32, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I do see why list of bus routes are not notable. Blue Square Thing on the deletion notice said that, for example, Buses in Lowestoft are more notable than any lists. Do you believe that it is worth my time working on these types of pages as they are less likely to get deleted or changing over to trains? Sorry for asking so many questions but as you can see I fairly new and still have not quite got to grips with notability. By the way what is SPI as you believe I have one shown below. Is it because too many of my pages have been deleted. 20:58, 30 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Englandtransport (talk • contribs) I did place a signature here! This bot must have made an error.

There are some excellent articles on buses such as Routemaster and others I can not find right now. It all depends on the availability of published secondary sources of course. I am interested in karate but some of the finest karate masters I have trained with do not have Wikipedia articles because it is mostly a word of mouth tradition and published books and newspaper or magazine articles are scarce. A year or two ago lists of bus routes usually survived AfD because of failure to reach consensus. Now it seems that consensus has swung against keeping such lists and it looks likely they will all go in time. Whether they will move to WikiVoyage or just disappear altogether I do not yet know. I think you will find that trains are more tightly controlled for notability and encyclopedic value than buses have been in the past.--Charles (talk) 23:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

So good to see commonsense prevail. A good place to point bus spotters to, away from Wikipedia is the UK Transport Wiki at Wikia. They can wikifiddle away to their hearts content there without the pesky rules that we have here. --Bob Re-born (talk) 23:31, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Englandtransport (talk) 19:57, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Great Walstead School

Hello Charlesdrakew I am the "vandal" who recently twice edited a section in the Great Walstead entry Would you be willing to enter into an email correspondence with the Headmaster at GreatWalstead? If so, could you kindly let me have your email address kind regards

• email address removed - thank you*

80.189.50.216 (talk) 10:06, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Whitewashing an entry in Wikipedia simply does not happen. I am placing this here in case the IP user sees it. Since he may also look here, I think he needs to be aware that individual wikipedia editors do not tend to engage in email correspondence about articles. Tough as it may be to see this in the article, and I have reverted similar removals (which is why I am commenting here), the facts are cited in reliable sources. An approach to take might be to ask Maggie Dennis to talk to him as the liaison person? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I have just left a talkback message on the IP talk page to notify that there is a reply here. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:59, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I have raised this on Maggie's talk page Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:39, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I have left a note on the talk page of the IP pointing to OTRS. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 18:45, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Timtrent. I was going to point out that I do have e-mail enabled but if they have anything to say they can say it here. The headmaster of the school obviously has a strong conflict of interest and should stick to using the article talkpage to request any changes to the article.--Charles (talk) 18:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

In view of your comments, the IP editor's actions and my thoughts I have set up a discussion about the controversy section on the school's talk page. It seems to me that a consensus might be built proactively for the retention or removal of that section. I have done my best to notify them, and now I am making sure you know as well. My own interest in the article is peripheral. I am neutral over the section and incident as a part of the school's history and article. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:29, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Up Marden

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

A bus spotter speaks

Hi, not sure how to message here on wiki at all, but you queried my Countryliner edit. I should know on Monday 28/1/13 the status of bus 41 with sources. I think it was indeed Fleet Buzz from last Monday but ordinary Stagecoach buses have been in use for this first week.

Route 479:- Surrey CC still show the operator to be Sunray Travel and a photo I took this week, posted to flickr confirms this also. The operator has no web site or facebook page.

Ray 02:56, 26 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Click58away (talk • contribs)

Before I reply, note that I moved your comments to the bottom of Charle's talk page per the normal convention.

I suggest that you read WP:OR, which deals with original research - something that is forbidden on Wikipedia. Personal knowledge is original research. The truth can also be original research if it is not supported by reliable sources (WP:RS). --Bob Re-born (talk) 08:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Apart from what Bob says, which is very true, Wikipedia is just not interested in what bus was on route 479 last week. It is not notable or what Wikipedia is intended for.--Charles (talk) 10:33, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

List of Bus Routes in York (sigh!).... Best. --GuillaumeTell 18:48, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. I have reverted for now and will have to report it to SPI yet again if it continues. Consensus at AfD is now very much for deleting this type of list so it may go anyway before long.--Charles (talk) 19:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Charles, not sure if this is related, but I've just rolled back 3 edits since I could find no SPI case against the user upon whose page those edits were made. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:03, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

There is now. The sock puppetry is obvious and one more of many. Where does this guy keep finding new IPs?--Charles (talk) 21:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Ah. I see what you mean. No Englandtransport is not a sockpuppet I think.--Charles (talk) 21:36, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

valley of flowers

Dear sir, The link i Put on [[1]]was of a good site. there is other link in references indiaguide.trailofview.com/trail/Valley_of_Flowers kindly remove this redirect. This takes nowhere to a user. Kindly clean Wikipedia do not spoil it. Please try not to be against all external links. If wiki feels that all links are spam than why do they allow a link at all.

All together now - Spam spam glorious spam!--Charles (talk) 18:08, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Please allow this link. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.172.191.20 (talk) 18:55, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Re: Deletion

I saw nearly anything wrong with that article, so that's why I took it away, you can put the deletion back if you want. --BouncyGlow (talk) 13:50, 5 February 2013 (UTC)BouncyGlow

Old Windsor article

Hi Charles,

I received a message from you saying that you undid one or more of my recent contributions to Old Windsor because it appeared to be promotional. I assure you it wasn't, since I have zero business interest in the area, but if it seemed biased, then thank you. Could you please tell me what it was you undid, since I can't find anything missing.

Thanks,

Scott ScottRanceJohnson (talk) 18:23, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Seven

Check out the Teahouse Genie Badge, awarded for solving issues on the Teahouse Wishlist.

Hello again! We have some neat updates about the Teahouse:

• We’ve added badges! Teahouse awards is a pilot project to learn how acknowledgement impacts engagement and retention in Teahouse and Wikipedia.

• We’ve got a new WikiLove Badge script that makes giving badges quick and easy. Add it here. You can give out badges to thank helpful hosts, welcome guests, acknowledge great questions and more.

• Come join the experiment and let us know what you think!

• And...for all of your great work and all of the progress that you've helped the Teahouse make, we hereby award you the Host Badge:

	Teahouse Host Badge
	Awarded to hosts at the Wikipedia Teahouse. Experienced editors with this badge have committed to welcoming guests, helping new editors, and upholding the standards of the Teahouse by giving friendly and patient guidance—at least for a time. Hosts illuminate the path for new Wikipedians, like Tōrō in a Teahouse garden. Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here

Thanks again! Ocaasi 01:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Removing an !vote from an AfD discussion

Can you please explain this? --Oakshade (talk) 06:32, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Not really. Absolutely unintentional I assure you and apologies that it happened. I was away from home for a few days and using a borrowed tablet to catch up. I must have misclicked while the text was jumping around I suspect. Have you undone the change or do I need to put it back?--Charles (talk) 19:57, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

I restored my contribution. Thank you. I might delete the entire article content and replace it with a stub that editors can start with.--Oakshade (talk) 20:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

East York Town Centre

I was wondering why do you have to remove some of the content in East York Town Centre? Does it violate the terms of Wikipedia? --BouncyGlow (talk) 15:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)BouncyGlow

It has no sources. It fails verifiability for certain and probably WP:NOTDIR. The subject of the article may well fail notability. All facts added to Wikipedia must have a reliable source and should be supported by inline citations.--Charles (talk) 18:10, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Teach the Controversy

Hi, I gave a valid reason for their removal if you had bothered to read the edit summary, the linked page or my talk page. Thanks, 86.44.163.139 (talk) 09:51, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Charles: there is a large scale transfer of interwiki links. See WP:WDATA Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I'll also ask if you could kindly remove the links again. I have checked that they are all on Wikidata. 86.44.163.139 (talk) 09:56, 18 February 2013 (UTC)