m →The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011: new section |
|||
Line 133: | Line 133: | ||
<span style="font-size: 85%;"><center> |
<span style="font-size: 85%;"><center> |
||
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/News and editorials|newsroom]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 23:40, 4 June 2011 (UTC)</span></center> |
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/News and editorials|newsroom]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 23:40, 4 June 2011 (UTC)</span></center> |
||
== {{diff|User talk:Born2cycle|433438976|432931436|This}} == |
|||
[[WP:npa|Don't]]. [[User:Pablo X|<tt>pablo</tt>]] 20:54, 9 June 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:54, 9 June 2011
Welcome to the Military history WikiProject!
The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011
|
Incident
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Dicklyon (talk) 05:57, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Hyphens
Toddy, while the use of the hyphen in article titles has been a little controversial of late, the use of hyphens in article prose is not (at least not at the moment). WP:HYPHEN (use 3) explains about compound modifiers and Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ships/Guidelines#Ship_class_articles requires the use of a hyphen "when using the name of a class as an adjective". I've reverted the textual changes you made to a number of articles, and User:Sturmvogel 66 got there before me at Admiral class battlecruiser. Yours, Shem (talk) 00:05, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- I am not going to edit war over this. However in the article on the Halifax class frigate my original edit not only got rid of the needless hyphens, but also corrected the capitalisation of some of the titles of citations. I have therefore reverted your revert on that article.--Toddy1 (talk) 04:27, 4 May 2011 (UTC) - see also my posting of 08:24
- With Barracuda class submarine and Narwhal class submarine, since the articles linked to do not have hyphens in the article names, it is not appropriate to have hyphens in a list page. The list page functions in many ways as a disambiguation page (though it is not exactly the same).--Toddy1 (talk) 07:23, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- I have checked the following article you reverted me on. Since the hyphen before the word "class" is used acceptably, I am content to let things stand. In my personal opinion, the hyphen is not necessary. But the hyphen is not wrong.
- Gato class submarine
- Pennsylvania class battleship
- Lexington class battlecruiser
- USCG Defender class boat
- French Barracuda class submarine
- Wickes class destroyer
- United States Porpoise class submarine
- USCG Bay class icebreaking tug
- Crater class cargo ship
- Indiana class battleship
- Passaic class monitor
- River class torpedo-boat destroyer
- To be conciliatory and avoid edit wars that are of no value, I have gone through the article on the Halifax class frigate and restored hyphens in the places where Halifax-class was used as an adjective. There were many places where it was not, where no hyphen is correct. I have also inserted inverted commas in the many places that are missing.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you Toddy. Regardless of your personal opinion, the guidelines are against you here. I personally do not agree that the titles should be hyphen-less, but unlike Kwami, I am not about to go moving articles without consensus, because the guidelines are against me, so I suppose we agree at least on the primacy of consensus! I have however restored the hyphens to Barracuda class submarine and Narwhal class submarine; they are not DAB pages, but set index pages, for which other rules apply, and this is precisely the use for which hyphens are required - is that a French-Narval class submarine, a French Narval-class submarine, or a French Narval class-submarine? It leads the reader's eye to interpret the relationship between adjacent adjectives. Shem (talk) 16:20, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- I believe it was I who moved it, based on what appeared to be consensus to use the hyphen in that context. Where is this guideline of which you speak that suggests otherwise? Dicklyon (talk) 07:31, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Regarding having a hyphen between "Halifax" and "class" in the name of the article, please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships#Bot request. Another user asked for permission to do mass moves of articles from the existing XXXX class format to the XXXX-class format. There was no consensus for this, but he started making the moves anyway. He was asked to stop; agreed; but continued doing it anyway - see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive684#User:Kwamikagami moving_ship class articles from XXXX class format to XXX-class format reported by Toddy1 .28Result:.29. It really would be in the interests of harmony if you reverted your move of the article back to Halifax class frigate. Please consider doing so--Toddy1 (talk) 06:56, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
- I'm going to stay out of this mess. I thought that when you and the other guy both added hyphens in the article in appropriate-looking places the matter was settled, and the move was the next logical step, so I did it. I don't understand the alleged technical issues you pointed to, and I didn't do any mass or contentious moves; but if it needs to be fixed, go for it. Dicklyon (talk) 07:06, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
- Regarding having a hyphen between "Halifax" and "class" in the name of the article, please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships#Bot request. Another user asked for permission to do mass moves of articles from the existing XXXX class format to the XXXX-class format. There was no consensus for this, but he started making the moves anyway. He was asked to stop; agreed; but continued doing it anyway - see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive684#User:Kwamikagami moving_ship class articles from XXXX class format to XXX-class format reported by Toddy1 .28Result:.29. It really would be in the interests of harmony if you reverted your move of the article back to Halifax class frigate. Please consider doing so--Toddy1 (talk) 06:56, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
- I believe it was I who moved it, based on what appeared to be consensus to use the hyphen in that context. Where is this guideline of which you speak that suggests otherwise? Dicklyon (talk) 07:31, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you Toddy. Regardless of your personal opinion, the guidelines are against you here. I personally do not agree that the titles should be hyphen-less, but unlike Kwami, I am not about to go moving articles without consensus, because the guidelines are against me, so I suppose we agree at least on the primacy of consensus! I have however restored the hyphens to Barracuda class submarine and Narwhal class submarine; they are not DAB pages, but set index pages, for which other rules apply, and this is precisely the use for which hyphens are required - is that a French-Narval class submarine, a French Narval-class submarine, or a French Narval class-submarine? It leads the reader's eye to interpret the relationship between adjacent adjectives. Shem (talk) 16:20, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Днепропетровск
Какая причина удаления информации на странице "Днепропетровск"? Зачем добавили рекламные ссылки ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by VASDU (talk • contribs) 12:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- See Comparison of versions of 08:50 28 April 2011 and 07:36 6 May 2011
- You will see that the data you added about the 2011 population is there - complete with a citation to a source that your provided, which contains the information
- Other than that, the page is pretty much the same as it was on 28 April 2011.
- See Comparison of versions of 00:00 6 May 2011 and 07:36 6 May 2011
- You will see that I reverted your deletion of the citation for who was mayor. Wikipedia has a policy that citations for information are a good thing.
- As mentioned above the population figure has been changed to the 2011 value.
- Ah - I forgot to update the population density - my mistake - so I did it at 14:28 6 May 2011
- I preserved the original order of the Russian and Ukrainian language names for Yekaterinoslav. Petty changing them round causes nothing but annoyance. Please do not do it.
- I did not include your updated figure for the population of the Dnipropetrovsk Metropolitan area because the source did not quote that figure. If your contention is that by adding the numbers up, you arrived at your figure, then you need to explicitly state in the citation which data you added up to arrive at the figure.
- I added the 2011 city population figure mentioned above to the population table complete with citation.
- Your additions on railways, the "overstreet cableway" and trams were uncited. If you think that they belong in the article, by all means add them back - but do so citing sources. Incidentally, what you call an "overstreet cableway" is normally called in English "cable-cars"; what you wrote about them is misleading. We both know that Monastery Island is very close to the right bank of the Dnieper. People reading what you wrote would probably imagine that the cable-cars would take the across the Dnieper to the left bank.
- One of your preferred photos is of a road going through open countryside outside the city. It is not relevant to an article on the city.
- The other of your preferred photos is a composite photo - it lacks licensing information so will probably be deleted soon. The composite photo makes perfect sense to you and I, because we have both used the station. However two separate photos with different captions would be a lot easier to understand for the readers of English language Wikipedia.
- Please write in English on English language Wikipedia. Spasibo.--Toddy1 (talk) 13:21, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello
I see you deleted the Summary sections; just to let you know I’ve added an explanation of the summary deletion, here, to keep it above board. Keep smiling, Xyl 54 (talk) 23:31, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011
|
The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011
|