User talk:Hamilton365

List of capital cities by importance

A tag has been placed on List of capital cities by importance, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Dougie WII 13:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome

Like I say, don't let this stop you from writing. I've been at this only since about May, and I got booed off the stage for what I thought was a pretty original concept for an article (it was about the prevalence of the phrase "Let's get out of here" in 3 out of every 4 films). Looking back on it, the article had its problems, but it didn't merit mean comments like "Oh dear God!" and the like. Once I realized that the jerks who were making the nasty comments weren't entitled to any greater treatment on Wikipedia than I, I started jumping in on the Articles for Deletion forum every day. Sad to say, however, I sometimes end up being just as much of a jerk. Anyway, thanks for accepting my apology, and don't let the boo-birds get to you. Mandsford 23:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Flags

Hi, and thanks for your contributions. However, using flag icons like this in infoboxes is deprecated as it is believed that our readers prefer reading items like nationality over seeing a little icon. The danger is that it can oversimplify nationality, be distracting, and can lead to sterile edit wars. See also WP:MOSFLAG. Garion96 (talk) 18:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Rosy Byrne

The article Rosy Byrne has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tikiwont (talk) 13:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Flags

Hello. Could I just repeat what has been said above regarding flags. In addition, when editing infoboxes there is no need to link the spouses, as they are normally not notable and will never need an article. Links also don't need to be created for fictional characters. The opening line should not have the the place of birth/death in brackets. For UK people you should also use "df=yes" for birth/death date if using templates. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies). Thanks. --UpDown (talk) 18:25, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Please read this again. You have ignored some of it on Penelope Keith.--UpDown (talk) 18:42, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

If you wish to continue on Wikipedia can I please advise you take note of the above. You are continuing to add place of birth to opening bracket, contrary to MoS. And for your information, Penelope Keith is not a comedian, she is an actress who has appeared in comedy programmes. She is also not a presenter, nor to my knowledge is June Brown and other people you claim are. In addition, when linking actress please link like this "actor|actress", to avoid a redirect. The phrase "award winning" should also be avoided. It's POV and unnecessary, and very misleading. --UpDown (talk) 18:46, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

This will be my final warning before asking for further action. You are continuing to ignore MoS guidelines, and also continue to add "best known" for many people, when in fact they are not "best known" for what you claim. Please stop these edits and read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies).--UpDown (talk) 13:56, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

--Yamla (talk) 17:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

"best known for"

Please be aware that adding "best known for playing <character>" is applicable to only a small fraction of actor/actress articles. While in some cases an actor with a long career will come to be associated with particular roles (a debate raged at the Harrison Ford article for a long time over his "best known" roles), usually on Wikipedia "best known for" translates as "this is all I have seen him/her playing". Brad (talk) 22:10, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Infobox

Thanks for your comment. The infobox for Cranford is good, but I've made a few changes [1], notably taking the flag out. I would like to add the main cast to the infobox, but it would make it very long, so I'm leaving it empty at the moment.--UpDown (talk) 17:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

January 2008

Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Meerkat Manor worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Your changes to the Meerkat Manor infobox have been reverted. The changes were highly inappropriate as they contained incorrect information, removed verified information and removed the show logo. Collectonian (talk) 17:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Za majikku awâ

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Za majikku awâ, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Za majikku awâ. RichardΩ612 19:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Traffic Crossing Leeds Bridge

Hiya - re the new article you created about this short film, there seems to be more detail on it in Louis Le Prince#Leeds Bridge (LPCCP Type-1 MkII) - would you consider changing your new page into a redirect to that article instead - unless, of course, you know where more information can be found... ? CultureDrone (talk) 23:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok - thanks. I've changed the article. CultureDrone (talk) 17:27, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Oisin Dickie

I have nominated Oisin Dickie, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oisin Dickie. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. JD554 (talk) 13:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Economy of Tokelau table

A tag has been placed on Template:Economy of Tokelau table requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of John Dagleish

A tag has been placed on John Dagleish requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. скоморохъ 11:49, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, it would be worse if you had written a long article and had your work destroyed - at least now you know that some articles are likely deletion candidates. Regards, скоморохъ 11:54, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Disruption

I am still very concerned about your edits. The ones for the Felicity Kendal and Celia Imrie articles were both seriously anti-MoS. As you have been told before, be very careful for putting "best known for" - Kendal is not best known for Solo, and to claim such is quite riduclous. Putting in the opening line that they have won/nominated for obsecure awards is also not needed and POV. On Imrie's article you inserted "Impy" is the other names field. This field should only be used for widely used names, this clearly is not. In addition, a comedy actor/actress is not a comedian/comedienne. They are very different things, and Kendal is not a comedienne. Although I do believe your edits are in good faith, if they continue I will ask for admin help and possible block, and your edits are now becoming disruptive.--UpDown (talk) 13:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I am very sorry, but that also had to be reverted. There is no reference her name is Bragg, lone years should not be linked and obsecure awards not mentioned in lead. The fact she got an award for it does not mean it is her most well known, because its simply not. To also say she has finished acting ("Years active 1965-2007) is unreferenced and most likely wrong. Kendal is also more than a "Television actress". Lead's should also be paragraphs, not a series of one-word lines. I am actually preparing a complete rewrite for the article, and when finished will publish it (for the draft see User:UpDown/Misc). Thanks.--UpDown (talk) 17:47, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Please listen. Lone years should not be linked, obsecure awards not mentioned. In addition, on Kendal's page, mentioning her The Good Life co-stars in the lead is completly unecessary. It is also not needed to mention The Good Life when its mentioned in the next paragraph. For John Nettles, to say "Joyce Nettles" as his spouse is misleading, as thats her married name.--UpDown (talk) 18:39, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Beverley

Hi, I noticed your change again in the 2001 census figure for the Beverley built up area, which I reverted yesterday. Please can you supply a reference for the figure that you have supplied? I did make a comment on the talk page that I could not find a reference for either figure and ask if any one has a reference for either of the figures. May be if there is no reference then we should pull that from the article and just go with the parish figure which is verifiable though the reference is not actually quoted in the article.

Keith D (talk) 12:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Allweston

A tag has been placed on Allweston requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. From-cary (talk) 11:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Template:North Yorkshire

I have reverted your changes to this template as you appear to have added duplicate entries and also added some East Riding of Yorkshire entries to the template. Keith D (talk) 22:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Port of London

Hi, you've recently added the following:

"The port can handle cargo ships carrying petroleum, other liquid bulk, dry bulk, general cargo, containers and ro-ro. Shipbuilding and repairing is the major industry of the port as there is a dry dock and there is an airport within 100 km and a Lloyd's agent."

I have one or two issues with this, as lead paragraphs obviously need to be accurate:

• List of things handled leaves out the major grain and paper facilities and cruise terminal
• Shipbuilding on any serious scale is long dead and is certainly not the major industry
• There are numerous airports within 100km (and for that matter several ten pin bowling alleys) - so what?
• I'm pretty sure there are quite a lot of Lloyd's agents in London.

Pterre (talk) 11:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Ethnicities

Hey, I see you're adding to a lot of actors' / presenters' articles that they are "of x descent". Could you try to provide some references for these? I mean, for example, on Anthony Hopkins' article, there is nothing already there to suggest he is of English descent; if anything he might be Irish, seeing as it mentions that he's related to Yeats. Thanks. --Schcambo^{aon scéal?} 17:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

All of these don't belong in the intro of the article anyway (see WP:MOSBIO). When sourced, they should be in the appropriate section, usually "early life". All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 18:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Can I just suggest that the addition of an Edit summary is help full to other editors to see at a glance what has been changed and to give an idea of why, especially when making edits to important info sections. I reverted your change to Renault info box as it linked to a non existent template (or incorrectly named one). The Renault article needs major work but is subject to random non constructive edits, and spam link additions. -BulldozerD11 (talk) 11:15, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Royal Horseguards Hotel

The article The Royal Horseguards Hotel has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Generic spam for a totally non-notable hotel of no architectural or historic significance. This one doesn't have any sources whatsoever.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  – iridescent 14:39, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Opting in to VisualEditor

As you may know, VisualEditor ("Edit ^beta") is currently available on the English Wikipedia only for registered editors who choose to enable it. Since you have made 50 or more edits with VisualEditor this year, I want to make sure that you know that you can enable VisualEditor (if you haven't already done so) by going to your preferences and choosing the item, "MediaWiki:Visualeditor-preference-enable". This will give you the option of using VisualEditor on articles and userpages when you want to, and give you the opportunity to spot changes in the interface and suggest improvements. We value your feedback, whether positive or negative, about using VisualEditor, at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:22, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:37, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Hamilton365. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Above the Line (TV series) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Above the Line (TV series) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Above the Line (TV series) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 20:20, 28 August 2018 (UTC)