User talk:Xn4: Difference between revisions

To leave me a message, please click here.

Archives
1) August 2006 – August 2007 2) September and October 2007 3) November and December 2007 4) January and February 2008 5) March and April 2008 6) May and June 2008 7) July and August 2008

Did you know?
Introduction and rules
Introduction	WP:DYK
General discussion	WT:DYK
Guidelines	WP:DYKCRIT
Reviewer instructions	WP:DYKRI
Nominations
Nominate an article	WP:DYKCNN
Awaiting approval	WP:DYKN
Approved	WP:DYKNA
April 1 hooks	WP:DYKAPRIL
Holding area	WP:SOHA
Preparation
Preps and queues	T:DYK/Q
Prepper instructions	WP:DYKPBI
Admin instructions	WP:DYKAI
Main Page errors	WP:ERRORS
History
Statistics	WP:DYKSTATS
Archived sets	WP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wraps	WP:DYKW
Awards	WP:DYKAWARDS
Userboxes	WP:DYKUBX
Hall of Fame	WP:DYK/HoF
List of users ...
... by nominations	WP:DYKNC
... by promotions	WP:DYKPC
Administrative
Scripts and bots	WP:DYKSB
On the Main Page	T:DYK
Main Page errors	WP:ERRORS
To ping the DYK admins	{{DYK admins}}

Iole

Your input would be appreciated on this article. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC) The article was nominated for GA. There was a review and I have done several improvements to the article based on the suggestions. Perhaps you have some additional ideas. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Iole is up for a second review as a GA. It is currently on hold for 7 days for the issues mentioned. I have tried to address the issues and copyedited accordingly. If you have time, could you look it over to see if you can make additional improvements. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks/British India

Thanks for correcting the misplaced DYK tag!

Please also reply to Philip Baird Shearer's latest post (21:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)) on the Talk:British Raj page. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

British Raj/British India

Hello Xn4, I noticed you have been editing and have had quite a lot of debate on British India and British Raj. I have not really taken part in that. You will have noticed that Fowler has a long and credible history in WP:India, even though he allowes his emotions to seep through a lot of times. I wanted to say, first of all qudos for keeping your cool, and secondly, without asking you to take it lying down, if you can please do allow for some leeway. Nonetheless, although I am not sure what the arguments either of you are basing your work on, allow me to say keep up the good work.[[::User: rueben_lys| rueben_lys]] ([[::User talk: rueben_lys|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/ rueben_lys|contribs]]) 22:18, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, also well done on keeping your cool, and I've reverted British India to the article you were working on. While I agree the article is justified, please see my comments about the need for more well-sourced material there. Clearly, the editors at British Raj fear it will merely duplicate their own work, and I think they would be glad to see it standing more on its own two feet. Strawless (talk) 15:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Response by user Valentine Stockdale

Hi there,

Thanks for your message. I should confirm firstly that I am Valentine Stockdale.

I have read the page you suggested outlining conflicts of interest but am unsure as to whether there is a conflict here.

Please let me know what you would like to do.

I hope very much however that you decide to keep the page.

ValentineStockdale (talk) 12:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Valentine, I wanted to draw your attention to Wikipedia:Autobiography. The question of whether to keep Valentine Stockdale is a matter for WP:Notability, and I don't see a problem with it myself, but if I were you I should let other editors improve the article in mainspace, and your user page might be better not mirroring that.

I'm still puzzled by "...the grandson of Sir Edmund Villiers Minshull Stockdale, 1st Battalion", which I've corrected at Valentine Stockdale (but not at User:ValentineStockdale) to "...1st Baronet". It seemed to me that if the writer didn't know what "1st Bt" stood for after a name, it looked very like someone trying to write what seemed to be an autobiography, but actually wasn't, if you see what I mean. Xn4 (talk) 21:38, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for your message. I have removed the content of my user page as you suggested. I have also read the autobiography article and fully understand it. I'm pretty sure the article conforms appropriately with the autobiography guidelines as all the information contained in it is accurate and verifiable, and the article contains none of the potentially unbalanced content outlined in the guidelines such as aspirations, opinions and so forth. I would be very happy to submit the document to the department you suggested for editing but am unsure about how to go about it. Lastly Battalion-Baronet was my mistake and thank you for setting the record straight! All the best, Valentine.

ValentineStockdale (talk) 12:13, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Ted Peate

Thanks for your recent edits to the article on the man whom Frederick Spofforth, Billy Murdoch and I regard as the greatest left-arm spinner of all-time. At any rate, he deserves far more attention than history has accorded. How, may I ask, did you come to take an interest in him? Best, Crusoe (talk) 22:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Crusoe. Oh, that's easy to answer. I started an article on The Sporting Times and worked up a section of it on the 1882 reports of the death of English cricket. After linking Peate in "ITS END WAS PEATE", I thought a little more at Ted Peate was justified. Regards, Xn4 (talk) 22:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

British Raj

I really don't know how to help you for British India. Fowler and Fowler seems to have no other useful work other than typing massive one-sided arguments for Wikipedia. I was appallingly shocked by the length of his arguments. I think it was very wrong of him to create dob page for British India and redirect contents to somewhere else, without seeking scholarly opinion or majority opinion. I strongly believe his deletions and edits should be reverted. But as I am in traineeship now, I have very little time for WP. Cygnus_hansa (talk) 15:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

You are taking my comment out of context. I do not think that User:Fowler&fowler is threatening anyone, as we need to resolve this issue, when he suggests going to formal Wikipedia mediation. A valid reason for not wanting to use the formal Wikipedia mediation is that it is time consuming.

The best way to win an argument on Wikipedia is to present one that fulfils the requirements of the three content policies (WP:NOR WP:NPOV WP:V. To date IMHO you have not produced sources that back up your assertion that British India is sufficiently different from British Raj to justify another article. As there have been three Requested moves that rejected the move of British Raj to British India, I think it is up to you to justify a move away from the status quo. To date you have gingered up the debate so that the majority of editors do not think that British India is a synonym for British Raj, but that it is also used in some reliable sources to mean company rule (hence the argument for a disambiguation page). For example you made the statement "That's quite a complicated edit, which I stand by. Calcutta became the capital of British India and also of the Indian Empire." what are your sources that clearly differentiate between British India and the Indian Empire? It has clearly been shown by F&f using sources that the term can mean rule by the British in India, the territory and the British (lifestyle) in India. If you think that the predominant use of the term "British India" means territory under direct British rule, then why not suggest that the article Provinces of India be moved to British India?

You do not need to answer these questions directly, but they are meant to be an indicator of the sort of arguments you need to present in the RfC if you are going to persuade people who follow RfC debates and probably until they read the debate do not know that there were regions in India that were never under direct British rule, that a separate article on British India should exist.

From the statements that F&f has made it is clear the (s)he is frustrated by your predilection to make bold edits even after (s)he made it clear that (s)he wished to discuss them with you and others. That you made bold edits rather than discussing them and gaining consensus on the talk pages first was understandable before a comment was placed on the talk page, but from the moment F&f placed this comment on the talk page of the British Raj article at 18:11 on 19 August 2008, you should have discussed the changes on the talk pages that involved his/her concerns and gain a consensus before making them. This is described in WP:CONSENSUS and because you have not been following the spirit of this policy with edits such as that you made to the Delhi article on 25 August 2008. For this reason I am willing to give F&f the some slack in the way (s)he presents his arguments but if in my judgement (s)he stray too far into a breach of WP:CIVIL I will reprimand F&f because we are meant to be working towards a consensus which is made more difficult if the parties to discussion feel intimidated or that the other is editing articles in bad faith. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 10:10, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The Huntarian Society

Hi there. I have looked at the article and I can't for the life of me remember the page, but you're right, it isn't a copyright violation. It may have been at the time it was deleted, but it isn't now, so I'll restore it right away. Sorry for any misunderstanding, and for not replying to your original message. I've been offline since Thursday, with only a few sporadic edits here and there and I didn't see it. Again, my apologies. Happy editing, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Please be aware though that User:CorenSearchBot may tag it again because there are a few similarities to http://www.hunteriansociety.org.uk Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

King's School, Ely

Hi there,

The page King's School, Ely has been up for Good article nomination for a while. You are welcome to take a look, recommend or make any changes, or review the nomination. Many thanks! rocketman89 (talk) 17:38, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

TGB

Where have you disappeared to? I'm struggling with some details on Thomas Graham Brown and your help would be – as ever – invaluable ... Regards, Ericoides (talk) 10:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry to be so absent, Ericoides, but I'm travelling in France with only limited internet access. However, I should be back at my desk by mid-November. regards, Xn4 (talk) 13:17, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah. Well, I trust you are having a rewarding tour. Regards, Ericoides (talk) 17:30, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lord Williams de Thame.jpg

Did you take this photo yourself or did it come from another website?Geni 04:39, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Alumni Oxon

Further to our previous discussion, see here for the 1500-1714 version. Hooray! (Well, partial hooray: vol 4 only, S-Z...) Bencherlite^Talk 15:44, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Nichalp's comments

Would you like to comment here? Thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:10, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Alumni/ pupils

Problems with rather surreptitiously emptying Category:Alumni of Wath Comprehensive School and moving its contents to Category:Former pupils of Wath Comprehensive School are (a) it looks like you are bypassing cfd; (b) secondary school pupils are called students these days; (c) nearly all the non-UK categories use alumni, as do all the UK university cats. (A major problem with using cfd is that the cat would probably be deleted rather than renamed.) Occuli (talk) 02:15, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Not exactly surreptitious, Occuli! But thanks for your message. You may be right that 'pupils' is old-fashioned, but these UK school categories face repeated (and unsuccessful) efforts from outside the UK to impose the word alumni on them, which is hardly used at all by UK schools, although it is now used by UK universities. We need to find some consistency, and most of the recent new cats which are not on the Old Erewhonians principle have used 'Former pupils of...'. Xn4 (talk) 02:26, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Louisa Maria Teresa Stuart

I sent BD to RfD and I thought I had stooped by bot but... I hadn't and in some articles it substituted the template including the RfD tag. :) Everything is ok now. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:25, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah, now I understand. Many thanks for your reply, which reassures me! Xn4 (talk) 23:29, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

George Whitehead

Well done and thankyou.

Can you help me? I feel a bit thick; that's why I ask. Clifton College have an Old Cliftonians page- different from the one you edited. How on earth do I add names in their alphebetical order. What's your connection with Whitehead?81.158.54.27 (talk) 02:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Answer is on your page. Xn4 (talk) 02:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

OC list

What's your connection with Clifton? None? There are at least 30 0r 40 OC's in Wiki without who aren't in the Categories section. Sir John May Bourne-Arton MP Basil Allen etc.

Following your advice, I am going to try to place them in the Categories page. Thanks for all your help. By the way I was at the School and have gleaned much of his info from Obituaries in the Old Cliftonian chronicle.81.158.54.27 (talk) 02:57, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to add them! Not quite 'none', but I was at another school myself. Xn4 (talk) 02:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

William Hayter

Thanks for your help. Millbanks (talk) 07:17, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Fairfield Grammar School

On 29 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fairfield Grammar School, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 18:26, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Reply

It appears to be a malfunction; please report it to User:Ameliorate!, the creator of the bot. --BorgQueen (talk) 02:04, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Wilco. Xn4 (talk) 02:04, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News

Thanks. This article was overdue, I think. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:00, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Not at all! It's prompted by Today's featured picture on the Main Page. Xn4 (talk) 22:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I answered on my talk page. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK - How about this: "...that in 1883, a dozen years before his conviction for Gross Indecency, the Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News published a cartoon showing Oscar Wilde in convict dress?" -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

That's good. I'll see if I can find an online ref. to add. Xn4 (talk) 23:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, I put it on the DYK page. Feel free to modify or add an image if you think it helpful. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks! Xn4 (talk) 01:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

An editor questioned the submission for Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News at the Did You Know nominations page. Please review the comment(s) underneath the nomination's entry. Make sure that I responded correctly, as I had to modify something that you wrote. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:00, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

David Henry Friston

The Friston DYK hook is OK with me, thanks. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for David Henry Friston

On 10 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article David Henry Friston, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

–Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 06:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

India

I have left some comments in the present discussion at Talk:British India which you may wish to look at. Strawless ^(talk) 18:18, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for letting me know. Impressed by your efforts, it's a very difficult scene. Xn4 (talk) 03:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News

On 12 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 05:56, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for updating me. Xn4 (talk) 03:53, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Home from the hill

Hi Xn4 and thanks for the greeting. I too am busy at the mo and can't dedicate too much time here, but perhaps in the New Year we could try for a 5x expansion on T. Graham Brown for DYK. I have a fair bit of material and he looks like an interesting chap with his notorious prickliness. Ericoides (talk) 10:53, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for Comment

I would be very grateful if you would come and comment about Former Schools sections of Navigation Templates. -- Flutefluteflute ^{Talk Contributions} 18:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

British India

Hi Xn4, I did take a look, but felt I could add no authority. These subjects rightly work up a lot of heat (both sides did some pretty evil things) and I admire your efforts in debating these issues. Thanks for the invite, but I don't think I can help as I have no new information. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 17:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Grasshopper-crest.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Grasshopper-crest.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 08:36, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem, this was superseded by File:Grasshopper-crest.GIF. Xn4 (talk) 08:07, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Best Wishes

File:Mars celebrations.jpg

Best wishes and a great new year Victuallers (talk) 16:10, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Buckeye gasoline buggy

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year Xn4. Haven't talked to you for some time. Take a look at this recent new article I have been working on from a 9-article DYK hook. Would it be a potential Good Article candidate? Can one self nominate for GA? Tweak, if you have time. Thanks! --Doug Coldwell ^talk 14:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

new WP:RDREG userbox

This user is a Reference desk regular.

The box to the right is the newly created userbox for all RefDesk regulars. Since you are an RD regular, you are receiving this notice to remind you to put this box on your userpage! (but when you do, don't include the |no. Just say {{WP:RD regulars/box}} ) This adds you to Category:RD regulars, which is a must. So please, add it. Don't worry, no more spam after this - just check WP:RDREG for updates, news, etc. flaminglawyer^c 07:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Charles H. Black

On January 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Charles H. Black, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 11:27, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks for letting me know, Dravecky! Xn4 (talk) 18:47, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Geoffrey Shaw

On January 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Geoffrey Shaw, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 18:30, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again! Xn4 (talk) 18:47, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Castle of Otranto

So true. Is there a template for that reply? ---Sluzzelin talk 09:43, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

It would be too sad to make one. Xn4 (talk) 09:45, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Happy Xn4's Day!

Xn4 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Xn4's day! For your great work at the RefDesk and English history articles, enjoy being the Star of the day, Xn4! Cheers, bibliomaniac15 00:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Golly. Thank you very much, bibliomaniac! Xn4 (talk) 00:09, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Honours

What a pleasant surprise! Thank you very much. And congratulations on having your own day, too! Bencherlite^Talk 06:41, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure! Xn4 (talk) 22:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Funny thing

Thanks for the link; nice page. Given that the paintings exhibited in the AC were portraits rather than landscapes, do you know – aside from his family connection – why the Club let him hang them in their premises? Were any of them of AC luminaries? Ericoides (talk) 09:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

No, I can't fathom that. The best clues may be in the names of the two sitters for portraits which are given. "The Lady Kinross", because of the word 'The', must be the wife of John Balfour, 1st Baron Kinross, whom I can't trace as an alpinist. The only Russell Bryde I can find is an American from Williamson, Illinois. It clearly wasn't a commercial exhibition, in the usual sense of the pictures being for sale. The Club seems an odd choice for an exhibition of portraits, except that I suppose Douglas may have been after more work and saw the members as a hopeful target group. He was, after all, a sportsman himself. Xn4 (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I see that Peter Tillemans has an entry in the ODNB.[1] Would greatly appreciate if you could add anything of interest (there's an East Angliangle here!). Regards, Ericoides (talk) 09:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks for the anon. ODNB additions! Ericoides (talk) 19:54, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I wondered whether you'd resist the charms of a red-linked London club and concluded that you wouldn't... Thanks for the additional info and the link. Just a quick query; it struck me as odd that he died on 17 Nov. (the date given at the Tate website) and was buried on 7 Dec. Noakes gives his d.o.d. as 5 Dec., which seems much more reasonable and is the one I've used. What does ODNB say on this? Thanks. Ericoides (talk) 08:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

The ODNB agrees. It says "In 1733 Tillemans retired to Richmond, Surrey, and died on 5 December 1734 while staying at Little Haugh Hall. He was buried on 7 December at Stowlangtoft church, Suffolk." Xn4 (talk) 12:15, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks. Ericoides (talk) 12:16, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

No trouble. Xn4 (talk) 12:17, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for your help on this one. Ericoides (talk) 18:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

For the barnstar, was a nice surprize when I logged in this morning. Mjroots (talk) 17:42, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Richly deserved! Xn4 (talk) 21:59, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

16 article hook DYK

Your input would be appreciated at Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 18:54, 26 January 2009 (UTC)‎

No trouble, I've left some thoughts there. Xn4 (talk) 02:29, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 12:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

5 p.m. EST. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:31, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

		The Surreal Barnstar
		For having formulated a successful sixteen article hook in one DYK, I award you this Barnstar for the help you have provided in accomplishing this achievement. --Doug Coldwell talk 22:31, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Doug. Thank you for that, though my effort was quite small. Xn4 (talk) 02:45, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the DYK to the Hall of Fame Xn4. Even now, there is a discussion for deleting articles.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 12:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

No trouble in the update, Doug. Yes, I saw that discussion. There are some complicated issues there. Regards, Xn4 (talk) 12:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Pierre Abraham Lorillard

Xn4, Just in case I forgot to let you know, this is the letter I received from the Church of Saint Peter in New York.

I have searched our records extensively and have not found any information concerning Peter Lorillard or his son Pierre Lorillard II. I have tried to locate this person for you by checking other St. Peter's Parishes but had no luck. No one seemed to know anything about a tombstone shaped as a snuffbox either. Sorry for the delay getting back to you. If in the future we can be of assistance to you, please don't hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, signed Patricia Ruggiero

She left her church address and an email address for follow up.-Doug Coldwell ^talk 16:03, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations, Doug, on following the story up, though the news is puzzling, isn't it? It was good of Patricia Ruggiero to go to so much trouble. The most likely interpretation is probably that the snuffbox-tombstone was a complete invention (or an idea which never happened) but which someone gave credence to until it was printed as a fact. In those days, a tombstone shaped like a snuffbox would, I think, have seemed whimsical to the point of being irreligious. People did do stranger things, but solid tradesmen rarely. If such a stone was ever there, some later Lorillard (or minister) might have replaced it, but (failing any kind of reliable source) as it seems even the grave isn't where it's said to be I think the tombstone should be treated as a fable.

Of course, as Lorillard has failed to turn up in that church's records at all, he must be somewhere else, so it's just possible that such a tomb is merely in another place. In any event, it might be worth asking the Lorillard company (which in the past has published various historical leaflets) if the family knows where he's buried. One guesses they do, as to lose such an ancestor would be careless. Xn4 (talk) 04:01, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Sholto Johnstone Douglas

On January 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sholto Johnstone Douglas, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 08:48, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks for this. Xn4 (talk) 02:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Battle of Ethandun

Impressed. Thanks, Dzw49 (talk) 02:25, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Gresham

I just had a quick look and it doesn't appear to be a 5x-expansion. Are you sure you excluded the quotes in your count? --BorgQueen (talk) 03:42, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh my, do you ever read the DYK discussion page? The quotation thing has been controversial but you might want to check with Gatoclass if there has been any change of the rules on that. I've been inactive on DYK for a while now. --BorgQueen (talk) 03:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

It would be best to add it back on the 27th, yes. Wizardman 04:07, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh my, I don't look at the DYK discussion page very much, but thanks to you both for your help. Xn4 (talk) 09:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Re

Thanks for notifying me. Mario1987 09:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

• If you look at my monobook.js page you will see a code. Make yourself a similar page and paste the code, and in the left part of the page at "Toolbox" you will have a "Page size" button. Click on that and look at the "Prose text" and you will see what i'm talking about. Mario1987 17:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Gresham, Norfolk

On February 6, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gresham, Norfolk, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 08:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Dravecky! Xn4 (talk) 15:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Maxwell Ayrton

On February 13, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Maxwell Ayrton, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 21:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again, Dravecky! Xn4 (talk) 15:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Clio the Muse

Greetings, Xn4:

Do you have any news of the great one that you are permitted to share? Every time I open the page for Ref Dek/Humanities, there is a small bit of me that expects to see her name at the bottom of a thorough and interesting response. My late-night reading has so little of new knowledge in it since Clio left us. As you can tell, I still miss her. ៛ BL ៛ (talk) 22:22, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Alas, no news to pass on, Bielle. But Clio quondam Clioque futura? We live in hope. Xn4 (talk) 15:03, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Xn4. ៛ BL ៛ (talk) 16:07, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Conclusion of the American Civil War

Your input would be appreciated on the above article to improve its grammer and style. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 14:12, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I'll look at its grammar (and spelling!) Xn4 (talk) 14:18, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Wow! Great improvements, thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 17:11, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

No trouble. Xn4 (talk) 19:59, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I've expanded the article and submitted for G.A.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Removed your name from credit. Wanted to show you how much appreciation I have for the work you put in on the article. Receiving additional Alt hooks, which hopefully one will be agreed upon and chosen. Working on making improvements for G.A. User talk:Doug Coldwell#Conclusion of the American Civil War based on excellent suggestions from User:Hlj. Really appreciate everyone's input. Thanks much!!--Doug Coldwell ^talk 15:32, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Anne Jane Thornton

On February 16, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Anne Jane Thornton, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Nice article! Gatoclass (talk) 11:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks, Gatoclass! Xn4 (talk) 12:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xn4

Hi Xn4. Based upon conclusive CheckUser evidence located at the above sockpuppet case you have been found to have been operating multiple abusive sockpuppets. As such, all of your puppets have been indef blocked and if you continue to do so this account will be too. Consider this your only and last warning. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 01:49, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Topic ban on British India and other similar articles

see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xn4/Archive and Category: Wikipedia sockpuppets of Xn4

Your use of a sockpuppet farm has created a false consensus on the British India page, and you used sockpuppet User:Strawless to break you word to me.[2][3][4].

Since that deception, with that sock puppet and others you have relentlessly pressed for British India to be a page much larger than others agreed to, both on the talk pages, and in active edits. You have wasted a lot of time of several editors in particular User:Fowler&fowler through your bad faith editing and gaming the system.

It seems to me that through the use of sockpuppets to enforce your views on the British India and British Raj articles you have shown obsessive behaviour, so I am placing a three month ban on you editing the British India, and the British Raj pages and their talk pages. This ban also includes any article, and its talk page, which is is linked via a {{main}} template from either of those two articles.

At the end of three months you may resume editing in this area but for a further month the WP:1RR rule applies to you.

So that the dates are clear: the initial ban lasts up to and including the last day in May 2009, the 1RR lasts throughout June 2009.

Because of your use of sockpuppets, during the next four months you are not to encourage others to edit any of these articles or post to the talk pages of these articles, as editors who edit these pages in good faith after you have made such a request, are in danger of being seen as sockpuppet accounts.

You may appeal to WP:ANI if you wish, or as this issue is also covered by Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Disruption by placing {{unblock|Your reason here}} on this page. If other administrators consider that I have been harsh or unreasonable then I will consider their points of view and review this decision. If you make such an appeal then please inform me on my talk page. However I must warn you that some administrators may consider my ban a light one and impose further sanctions if you appeal my decision. --PBS (talk) 13:55, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

This is all quite wrong. Anyone who looks at File:Strawless and Xn4.png will see that Strawless and I have several times been editing at the same time. As I look at it, the chart shows nothing like "tag team editing" and while I agree that "they rarely edit at the same time", I do not know what significance there is in that. More important, there was a period of more than a month in 2008 when I was in France and Strawless (presumably) was not. Other users may have more to say. Xn4 (talk) 19:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

The basis for the blocks was not solely from that graph, but from the checkuser evidence that confirmed your connection to more than one account. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:28, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Peter. Yes, I understand that, but I have a shared IP address which is part of a large network. Once before, I and several other editors were identified as sockpuppets of a problem user, but after a short argument this was undone (see Unblock request at User talk:Xn4/Archive 2). Xn4 (talk) 23:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I see that this is merely a ban on my editing particular pages for a short time, which seems very odd. I am not suspended, merely removed from a particular discussion. How very convenient to PBS, who is on the other side of the argument! In any event, it seems that while I am accused of sockpuppetry and banned from two pages, others on the same network as me are banned permanently from Wikipedia as suspected sockpuppets. I expect some of them will have their own objections to this. Xn4 (talk) 23:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC)