Jump to content

User talk:David Biddulph

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Matitao (talk | contribs) at 19:37, 11 October 2018 (→morandi bridge). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The Bugle: Issue CXLVII, July 2018

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:12, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for you TH response to my question. Somehow my e-mail is set correctly to a recent e-mail. I may be getting old (definitely) and demented (hope not). Nicodemus (talk) 15:04, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Query

About this. I mean why? Didn't I provide my rationale? Was RULES ARE RULES your only motivation to do that? I see that you are taking care of Teahouse and doing amazing job for a long time but shouldn't things be more editor friendly? Harsh Rathod Poke me! 04:38, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Catello Amarante) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Catello Amarante, David Biddulph!

Wikipedia editor Abishe just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for creating this to avoid unnecessary confusions.

To reply, leave a comment on Abishe's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Abishe (talk) 10:12, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Miller Moss

I see you've added it to the list of Nuttalls! I didn't think it was notable enough for its own article but have made a section, with sources, at Knott#Miller Moss. Good to see UK hills being well looked after in Wikipedia. Do you know what happened to (or which was) Nuttall 445, if this one raised the total from 444 to 446 as claimed? Happy editing, and walking! PamD 15:11, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But where did you get the grid ref from? It doesn't look like a summit. I can't find a definite answer as to where it is, and whether Little Lingy Hill exists or is a synonym - see this and the comment posted at bottom of this.
No, I was getting Great and Little LH muddled: LLH is clearly a synonym, and it's that larger contour line to the north, as in the WalkLakes database.PamD 15:37, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The grid ref came from Streetmap but I agree that the point highlighted doesn't look like a summit. I wonder whether it is the 609m point marked as "Pile of stones" when zooming in a notch. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:51, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed the GR to the one in WalkLakes, which looks much more plausible. And spent half the afternoon rummaging around the Nuttalls' own database etc and upgraded the account at Lists_of_mountains_and_hills_in_the_British_Isles#Nuttalls, and left a note at Talk:List_of_Hewitts_and_Nuttalls_in_England#Updates_needed about more which need to be added. PamD 17:11, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXLVIII, August 2018

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:35, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Just wanted to drop by and say thank you for the heads up on my talk page! I'm very new to Wikipedia editing so I appreciate any pointers and apologies if I messed anything up! Droshis (talk) 17:49, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Please don't restore that. Check the rationale. It wasn't supposed to be there. I realize you meant well, but please don't do put it back again. DS (talk) 18:00, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you gave an explanation for the second deletion. You made no mention of IRC on your first removal. David Biddulph (talk) 18:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I guess "as per request on -help" was too terse. "As per request of panicked user on IRC channel #wikipedia-en-help" was what I meant. DS (talk) 18:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, a lot clearer the second time around. I guess we all fall victim to over-abbreviating things when we know what we mean. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:42, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
'Tis the curse of knowledge. DS (talk) 12:51, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Expertscape

Just updated the submission for Expertscape. Any feedback or suggestions for improvement would be much appreciated. B4chex11 (talk) 21:51, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your attempted submission failed. It was malformatted because it was preceded by 2 unterminated ref tags. I cured that submission problem by this edit, but your draft is still garbled, as (for example) it now includes 2 reference sections and it includes misplaced external links within the article text. I see that half of the references are to the subject's own website rather than to independent sources. You might want to sort it out before a reviewer gets round to looking at it. I've added a section heading before your message here, as it didn't relate to the section in which it was placed. --David Biddulph (talk) 23:27, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New article

Hey! I am a german wikiauthor and I have qublished my first article in english now (EDU ... a medical univertsity). I need a „higher“ author to check my article, because the article is not out. Can you help me or say how I have to contact? Greetings Eleonorexoxo Eleonorexoxo (talk) 06:10, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A message on your user talk page explains why your edit was reverted. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I had wondered about helping this editor by copying their article, with attribution, to a new title - but the more I look at it the more dubious the article appears - possibility of paid editing or other COI, Malta-based online medical degree mill perhaps? And they've done the same thing at German Wikipedia but my knowledge of German isn't quite up to confidently rolling back their edits there. PamD 11:32, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXLIX, September 2018

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:19, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit in Draft:Jungkook

Hello, I wanted to thank you. I think you fixed I mistake I made. Somehow the info about the second submission declined wasn't appearing anymore in draft:Jungkook and I didn't know how to bring it back. I actually wasn't the one that did the second submission so I was confused if i accidentally deleted it. Because I was waiting to collect more information I think that second submission saved the draft from being deleted. Have a nice day. leigiraldo (talk) 20:31, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The edit in question was this one. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:59, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC) Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.[reply]

Apology

I apologise for what I have done.It was not my intentions.Please do not block me.I am here to make useful contributions.I am really sorry.Kigagan (talk) 16:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

KLASK article

Dear David Biddulph,

You made a comment on my KLASK draft that the external sources are misplaced - and that there are no citations. I have tried to figure out how to do it differently but would like to hear more precisely what I have done wrong.

I have simply linked to the external sources where the information in the paragraph or sentence was found, and from what I can read this is how it should be done? Or am I mistaken? Should I simply remove the in-text references and only keep references at the end of the article?

Correct, there are no citations. But I guess that is not a requirement?

Hope you will take your time and reply. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:14BA:8F6:9600:68D3:24B0:69E0:9FE7 (talk) 08:17, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Each of the 3 reviews gave you a link to WP:REFB (labelled as "technical help" in their reviews), & I gave you a link there too. That's what you need to read. In this edit I've changed one of the misplaced external links to a reference as an example for you as to how it's done. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:51, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you! It was just the kind of guidance that I needed. I believe to have changed it now, so it cites the sources below :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:14BA:8F6:9600:1DF:17AB:EAD4:9886 (talk) 12:53, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's making progress. Now you need to get rid of the rest of the external links in the text, turning them into references if appropriate, and delete the "references" that you've listed at the foot of the article, particularly if you've already used them properly as references from within the text. You should also remove the bold formatting from section headings; Wikipedia applies appropriate heading formats automatically. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear David,

I want to thank you for your helpful feedback. It was to the point, which I appreciate! I believe to have corrected the errors and have resubmitted the article for a future review. Hopefully this can go online within a month or two.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:14BA:8F6:9600:E52E:F45E:C806:ACD (talk) 10:17, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's gradually improving, but you've still got a fistful of misplaced external links within the text. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:21, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is it okay to keep external links within the text if it refers to other wiki-pages in foreign languages? Or wikitravel? It cannot find them as internal links, unfortunately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:14BA:8F6:9600:E52E:F45E:C806:ACD (talk) 10:49, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You already have wikilinks to a number of Wikipedia pages in other languages. Alternatively you can use Template:Interlanguage link. The Wikitravel links do not look constructive; another WMF project is Wikivoyage, to which you could link using Template:Wikivoyage, or use the prefix voy: (so <nowiki>voy:Copenhagen</nowki> renders as voy:Copenhagen, or can be piped as for any other wikilink), but I don't see any need to do that, we're not trying to provide a travel guide. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:11, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and I can totally see how this editing along the way has cleaned up the article. Thanks! I managed to change the external location links to internal links. Not sure the interlanguage template is within my editing abilities :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:14BA:8F6:9600:E52E:F45E:C806:ACD (talk) 11:44, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you are the one who's been in doing your magic with those interlanguage links, then I just want to say thank you again :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:14BA:8F6:9600:E52E:F45E:C806:ACD (talk) 13:33, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

House of Este

dear @DavidBiddulph I eliminated the shouting part; However it would be also helpful ( to avoid frustrations) if wikipedia had some policy against anonymous people writing false allegations and keep these visible without removing them...Do you understand that this person has titled this section Orioles Hoax? When it is clear that it is not.

You are suggesting me to ask for a third opinion or dispute resolution to understand if a judiciary Pronouncement of an EU State Tribunal exist? I provided the direct link; it is sufficient to get google translator and check. The person for some reason?? is not doing it.

Surely Wikipedia has some duty of care to avoid defamatory claim?I get the rule of not threating defamation proceedings but how can people defend themselves for being tainted without any accountability?

Araldico69 (talk) 17:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I didn't make it clear, or perhaps you struggle to understand English? You say one thing & he says something else. If you want it resolved you need to go to WP:3O or WP:DR. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:12, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you

File:Teahouse Barnstar Hires.png CC BY-SA 3.0 Heather Walls Teahouse Barnstar
This is for your valuable contributions related to teahouse. PATH SLOPU (Talk) 13:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Randall Foil

David you removed the inclusion of this type of oar and have claimed that it is soap boxing. It is a current oar design. It has been approved by FISA. It is being used in competition. It has been tested by an authority in the sport. Please reinstate section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian Randall (talk • contribs) 00:29, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was blatant advertising of your product, contrary to the guidance on conflict of interest and the mandatory requirements on declaration of paid editing. The article does not, and should not, discuss each make of oar. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:50, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

please help me

I had my information for the 2020 Summer Olympics taken off . but the fact is that the information is real and if you don't believe me then I have proof

here are the article that are REAL:

https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/interest/2017-02-07/anime-characters-for-tokyo-olympic-merchandise-revealed/.111762

https://soranews24.com/2017/02/02/2020-tokyo-olympics-introduces-its-official-ambassadors-in-new-video-anime-fans-rejoice/

pleas help me and if you do . let my information be on there - thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anime bob (talk • contribs) 14:52, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You would need to format your edit correctly, and include the reference with the text to which it refers. I guess you need to learn more about editing Wikipedia, so I have posted some useful links in a welcome message on your user talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:59, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

could you tell me what was the problem with my information — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anime bob (talk • contribs) 16:37 , 24 September 2018 (UTC)

My revert of the IP

It was because of their other edits today. Granted, I could have checked this one better before reverting, but that's usually not an issue. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 14:14, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Easy trap to fall into, & I guess I have done similar myself in the past. Thanks for the reply. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:29, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled granted

Hi David Biddulph, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Schwede66 18:36, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have your say!

Hi everyone, just a quick reminder that voting for the WikiProject Military history coordinator election closes soon. You only have a day or so left to have your say about who should make up the coordination team for the next year. If you have already voted, thanks for participating! If you haven't and would like to, vote here before 23:59 UTC on 28 September. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fossil date range template

Hi, the display of date ranges for fossils has been wrong for at least a year now; for instance Gigantoraptor has a Cretaceous age but the arrow points into the Jurassic. Maybe you know who might be able to fix this. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:22, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Does this change help? The syntax is shown at {{fossilrange}}. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:53, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Thanks for catching my error on John Cunliffe (author). I was misled by by the information on Google, which has conflated to two Johns [1] Auric talk 18:18, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"(m. 1941–1948)" would have meant that the period of the marriage was from when he was aged 8 until he was 15. :-) --David Biddulph (talk) 18:26, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link, tips, and edit!

Your help was much appreciated. And yes, I struggled with the links for a bit but I believe that all of the links now function as they ought to. Again, thank you! AnthonyTF (talk) 19:33, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert

[2] Everybody was responding to the OP's message of 14:12 UTC; first I did, then Roxy, then you, then AntiCompositeNumber. All of us. Normally all these replies to the OP would come in chronological order, and would all be indented one step. Why you think your response is exceptional and needs to be top-posted escapes me, but obviously it's not worth arguing about. Bishonen | talk 16:18, 5 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Part of the confusion was caused because part of the OP's message of 14:12 UTC was indented one notch and another part wasn't. I indented my reply 2 notches. When you moved my reply to below yours (which was indented one notch), it made it appear that I was replying to you, which I wasn't. But, as you say, it's not worth arguing about. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:34, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Araldico69

Hi thank you so adding or erasing is not minor; what shall i do when I add or erase parts to improve, clarify or make the text more readable?

Also if I find my page has been vandalised what shall I do? I have to say I am very skeptical of wikipedia you still do not erase the sections titled Hoax (talk page) of House of Este and Ercole III even if I showed all the links to prove they are not and I challenged the person to demonstrate that was a hoax ( obviously ths person disappeared as cannot do so); is it fair ( not to me as i am anonymous) but to leave the Este Orioles family to be defamed publically without doing anything? It seems to me you are very keen in teaching me the rules of Wikipedia but you do not do anything to address unfair situations

Araldico69 (talk) 19:03, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mark as minor.
Wikipedia has a very specific definition of vandalism. You are involved in a content dispute; if you can't resolve it you need to read about WP:dispute resolution. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:30, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
irrelevant diatribe
In the matter of the content dispute, if Araldico69 has lately been encouraged to create House of Este Orioles, how is that not a case of POVFORK from the House of Este article, in light of relevant discussion on the talk page of the latter? FactStraight (talk) 09:41, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

dear factright; I am not sure about your definition of point of view. I have always thought that point of view are not necessarily based on hard fact. you use a specific term in the House of Este and Ercole III ; you use the term Hoax. I asked you several times to produce proofs that my writing was a hoax. You failed to do so.

I wrote the House of Este Orioles page to further clarify about my writing. Now as by profession I assess Human behaviour.. in relation to your continue pestering ( borderline virtual bullying) without bringing any proofs + failing to check the links provided I assess your behaviour in two different ways

1) you are in bad faith and you have an agenda

2) you are a person frankly silly because you deny the evidence; Wikipedia should be based on provable Facts- not on the opinion of @Factright whoever is-; in the House of Este Orioles there are all the supports needed for a person in good faith to just apologise (perhaps remaining of the opinion that you disagree with the Italian state Judge etc..) as the term hoax which it is still used is highly offensive; unfounded and hence defamatory because public.

If the rules in Wikipedia are the same for everyone else; any attempt to vandalise (yes I read the wikipedia definition; you erased 3 times the section on both pages -House of Este/Ercole III without even informing) the Este Orioles page using the term Hoax should be sanctioned. As it is factless and frankly malicious.

So I invite you once again

As you have titled the sections HOAX; the proof to demonstrate this is on you. The admins of wikipedia have read all the talk and I hope they have understood that this is not a hoax and for some reason not sure why you continue having this bizarre behaviour.

you should demonstrate to me; wikipedia and the readers that:

1) the Ercole III provvedimento di giustizia is forged (this check was done in the legal process and you know the result, which I understand you do not like; you do not have any expertise to do so); 2) the judicial pronouncement is a fake document and was not issued by an Italian Tribunale (city of Lecce 2017). Contact them and ask for a copy

3) after having translated the judicial pronouncement what I wrote in Italics is not true.


THE ABOVE 3 POINTS ARE YOUR ALLEGATIONS SINCE THE BEGINNING


Araldico69 (talk) 11:02, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Dear factright (you should really consider to change nickname; seriously) I have just waived my anonymity and sent the 3 links pages to Wikipedia foundation to several Executives -explaining the situation- including the legal Counsel executive. I will bring any further proofs to them not to you (as you are an anonymous). I have stressed your offensive use of the term Hoax and explained that is unfounded and defamatory; with my face and credibility I asked to be judged on this; my name on it; are you able to do so? Accusing a person and family publicly of hoax is NOT a point of view and must for fairness being proved. You have not apologised nor have changed the title of the section from Hoax to disagreement on the Italian judicial pronouncement. I find this unacceptable and beyond the boundaries of a civil and of a constructive exchange of ideas. Araldico69 (talk) 11:39, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I came back from a day away to find this ridiculous diatribe continuing on my talk page. It has no place here. You are both aware that if you can't resolve your content dispute you need read about WP:dispute resolution. The dispute resolution process does not include pointless haranguing on another editor's user talk page. Go away, both of you! --David Biddulph (talk) 00:49, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear David , I sincerely apologise for this ; I take part of the ownership for this; please just consider that it was not my idea to spam your page ( as you can see above) I have not started this. Said that sorry again and I will not reply to him anymore as now anyway the things are dealt in another setting. Kind regards A
Araldico69 (talk) 11:42, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CL, October 2018

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:00, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tarun Kumar(cricketer) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tarun Kumar(cricketer). Since you had some involvement with the Tarun Kumar(cricketer) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 19:05, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

morandi bridge

as already talked with another user, your restore is WRONG. The supposed "sourced text" you restored is a TOTALLY WRONG translation from Italian, and FALSE information. So please stop to restore this, and let user with direct and local knowledge of facts and situations fix errors. Thanks. --Matitao (talk) 19:06, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The place to discuss your proposed changes is on the article talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:20, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is pure crazy. Do you know Italian? Have you read the source? Is totally different from the text. If you pretend to maintain a false wrong translation and "discuss" about a text you cant' read, I stop here and now. The article now is a mountain of shit, but if this is good for you, ok, bye. Thanks for hospitality --Matitao (talk) 19:37, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:David_Biddulph&oldid=863594963"