User talk:Stan Shebs/archive 7

More Stamps

Central African Federation Quote>The federation issued its first postage stamps in 1954, all with a portrait of Queen Elizabeth II in three kinds of designs, and inscribed "RHODESIA & NYASALAND". The first to appear was the 2 1/2p, on 15 February, with the remainder, 15 values ranging from 1/2p to one pound, coming out on 1 July. <Unquote

• • I'm sure I have a Rhodesia stamp somewhere. I think it was a 2 1/2p stamp. Erebus555↔TALK

Are you saying that they had decimalized sterling before the United Kingdom? Sure the stamp denominations should be 2 1/2 d and 1/2 d or better still (for clarity) call them 2 1/2 pence and 1/2 penny. "p" as an abbreviation for pence or penny only applies to the new penny/pence after 1971 which is 100th of a pound. Previously it would have been Pounds, shillings (20 to a pound) and pence (12 to a shilling) i.e. £,s,d or L,s,d. I have not ammended this in case I am to be told something different in the context of the CAF or Rhodesia. Dainamo 16:02, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

600 Ship Navy

I expanded on the 600-ship Navy article, but I discussed Vietnam as part of it. Could you check to make sure my POV be N? I would apreciate it. TomStar81 01:17, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Lake Albert

(from User talk:ScottDavis - I'm still trying to work out whether to reply under a comment, or on the talk page of the poster)

Stan, I've created a short article for Lake Albert, South Australia, and thought I'd made a disambiguation page for Lake Albert referring to them both after renaming it to Lake Albert, Africa. I definitely typed up the page as it's in my browser history. I was in the process of finding the links that pointed to the original Lake Albert and fixing them to point to Lake Albert, Africa. I have for the moment stopped doing that. What advice do you have now? --ScottDavis 07:56, 2005 Jan 9 (UTC)

Central African Federation rewrite/expansion

Greetings, Stan. I hope you are doing well. I am writing to you because I am currently in the process of significantly expanding the above article (yes, Stamps section has been retained!), and I would appreciate any attention you could give my addition.

Best Regards,

El_C 06:24, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Possible Page for Deletion

It seems that all the Cosmic Era ship class pages have a tag that says that they should be merged into a page called "Cosmic Era vessels". I have two problems with that move, though:

1. The ship pages are fine the way they are, and condensing them onto one page would be like listing the entire history of every active US Ship on the same page: way to long and way to combersome.
2. "Cosmic Era Vessles" sounds more like a subcatagory for the catagory "Gundam Space Vessles".

I bring this to your attention because you're and admin, and if you agree that "Cosmic Era Vessles" would be better off a subcatagory than its own page you have the power to put the page up for deletion.

Unfortunatly, though I wrote most of the Universal Century ship class pages, I know very little about the Cosmic Era. I would recommend talking with Iceberg3k for more information on this topic. TomStar81 22:13, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• I think we have the begining of an edit war here. I reverted the cosmic era pages, carful to leave the prudent information in place and only reverted the edits that placed merge tags on the articles. I also nominated the cosimc era vessels page for deletion. Sometime between last night and right now, the user returned and redirected all the pages. This is a problem for two reasons: 1) We agreed the articles could stand by themselves, and 2) So far the votes have all been for delete. Iceberg3k is getting the announcement, scince most of these pages were created and maintained by him. I think it best for you and he to handle things from here, as I don't no anything about the Cosmic Era and the anon aparently does. This is his talk page TomStar81 23:59, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • The Anon seems far more interested in enforcing his personal opinion of which anime are worthy of note and which ones are not than in enhancing Wikipedia. Iceberg3k 23:39, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

It's been five days since the page was proposed for deletion. The result of the voting was delete. I unlived the voting page; its up to an admin to delete the page now. PS-Thanks for the help. I'm sure you must be tired of consistantly having to help me out. TomStar81 04:36, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

On 20 February 2005 User:Rossami deleted the Cosmic Era vessels page. Thank you for your help. TomStar81

New Guinea

How about "Indonesia conducted the widely criticized Act of Free Choice"? I note that Act of Free Choice,

Oh fair enough, fixed. How about "questioned", is that acceptable ? Otherwise would you like to suggest something that still alerts the reader that there is different to that subject than it's name implies.

which I would expect to amplify on what "widely criticized" is supposed to mean (2 critics? 200? 20,000? 2 million?), but I see it's kind of vague on that point.

Using Google with the quoted phase "act of free choice"

results in 9,060 English page results - scanning these reveals every page from #1 to #50 criticizes the 1969 act

which does suggest the majority of people ?

many call for action, others question the morals of having allowed the UN to note it without objection, and so forth. #51 seems to be an Israeli page talking about a different subject; and #52 was this Wikipedia article.

So I flipped to #131 which was a song against the 1969 act, #132 is another objection to it in the UK Parliament. I submit that over 9000 web pages have been written about a 30 year old act in another country that never got any media coverage... from people in Ireland to Denmark to Australia to America; and that well over 90% of them are critial of it.

The word lone "criticized" seems rather mild in comparison; and is only used to indicate to the reader that there is probably more to that subject if the wish to know.

Also, we have later "Frank expression of views is complicated by the delicate and troubled relationship many nations have with Indonesia.", followed by the lengthy quote from US govt

Which frankly should just say "colonial government" instead of dancing around the subject & describing in detail how the government in areas such as western New Guinea work. But then again, many people would reminder of the conditions of a colony and why many countries fought against it before attaining their nationhood.

The US government just like everyone else has to use pillow talk with Indonesia or when talking about it in public. Both Indonesia & Maylasia share this problem; they are both hyper-sensitive to anything reporters say, let alone governments. Both have had their Ambassadors appear on national television to demand the Government apologise for something a journalist has written about their country. That is the reality which the western world knows, even the US Sec. of State.

which should have been a link to an article on Indonesia's government.

that's another article, I agree that it may be suffiently relevent for such an article; though I will mention that few people would dare take on that task because of the catch-22 language problem.

And the ecology section is out of place if this is to become an article about a historical region rather than a present-day province. I think the fundamental problem with this article is that it's attempting to be an imitation country article, but despite all the wishful thinking, the region is not its own country,

I think you are getting over rout about this. For all I know maybe someone tried to wind you up on this. Please sit down, relax, have a ice cold drink or something. A Country is a region, nothing to do with government. Western Papua is a country, it is not a nation. When people want to know about the region, they probably do not care about the finer points of Indonesian government levels; and if they want to know what some West Papuan is talking about, they probably do not want the information limited in accord to Indonesian issues.

and the cause would be better served by more careful and neutral writing spread across multiple articles treating various aspects of the issue. Most readers won't even get to the end of this article, and those that do are not going to be convinced by the relentless anti-Indonesia slant on things

It is an Encycopedia, not a soap box. We state the facts, as either known or reasonably known; if there is a major issue of fact which is up in the air, we present both cases - but on the whole an Encyclopedia presents what it understands to be the one set of facts (even if later it may be proved to have been mistaken).

- first-world readers tend to think of Indonesia as the oppressed, not the oppressor. Stan 23:35, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Your problem is not with neutrality but that the facts do not fit the travel brouche. You are acting like a person who has read Legge & is determined that that one reference has all the truth in it; yet, if you read more references such as Pender and Damhn you will discover that important information was omitted (accident or not does not matter). If you listern to Indonesia, they are a united and proud people who are working with aid workers to help their brothers of Aceh.

But if you also keep you ears open, you would have heard them two three days ago admit that they had during the cease-fire shot 120 Acehnese as suspected independence supporters ; in the middle of the tsunami effort, they are still shooting surivors. Was this on your news program? But if you look you will find that it was indeed included on the news in some other countries.

Have you never heard the term, "The devil is in the detail".

Yes the Indonesian government elite says it is honorable and morally superior; but the details tell another story -- their publicly claim version is only a tiny part of the whole reality. Whether you wish to read the whole article or not, is besides the point.Daeron 03:33, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Need comment

I have been added huge content onto Classical definition of republic and I would like your criticism and/or suggestions. I don't know, without some oversight, what looks good or not, and I would enjoy some constructive criticism, suggestions, ideas. I am still working on it and I need some feedback. Strange, that nobody has gone in and changed anything. Can I get some help please.WHEELER 15:14, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

And how about starting a Wikipedian Classicist club? I need someoversight just like the students in graduate schools have. I want to make the "Classical definition of republic" the best thing out there, thorough, complete and easy to read with lots of concepts. I would like your input.WHEELER 15:14, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Another thing, the club would bring together the people who have expertise in the area and an easy way to stay in touch and communicate with each other. I would like that soooo much.WHEELER 15:16, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

2nd need for comment

I have added to the post Romanitas in conjuction with a new article titled Culture defines politics. Can you comment on it for me or do you have any information for pertinent to the new article.WHEELER 01:02, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

US-geo-stub

Hi Stan - I notice a few US geography items that you've added the geo-stub template to (e.g., Cahuenga Pass). Thought I'd point out there is a separate US-geo-stub template, which makes these stubs easier to find for people wanting to work on them further. Grutness|^hello? 01:29, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Heh, still getting used to the (good) idea of per-country geo-stubs... Stan'

fair enough... it'll take a while, and the parent category still works. The more people who use the separate categories, the less often the main one will need purging, that's all :). Grutness|^hello? 22:42, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

List of oil fields

Could you please revert possible vandalism to List of oil fields by User:83.71.96.143 to last change by User:203.155.120.31? It's too long to do piecemeal. I picked your name off of the list of admins because this looked like an article you initiated. Thank you. 12.74.168.15 02:42, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Done. Easy BTW - if you bring up history and click on one of the dates, you get that version of the article. "Edit" then "save", and article is back to its previous state. (One of the secret weapons against vandals - we can always fix faster than they can mess things up.) Stan 04:11, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. It does look easy once you've said how to do it. 12.74.169.71 15:04, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Districts and cities

Hi Stan, I noticed that you created the redirects Skrapar, Përmet, and Kolonjë. They are the names of the cities, as well as of the district. We currently have separate articles on districts and cities (i.e. District of Durrës and Durrës), so I will be listing them for deletion. Dori | Talk 05:09, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

I don't know any sites off the top of my head. I suppose eventually I will get to writing something about them. I just want to make sure that in principle city and district articles are separate. Here's one link I found through google: [1]. Dori | Talk 03:37, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tusk shell, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Herman's Head, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

New ship table template

I've spent the last few days working on a new ship table template to enable us to centralise the editing of things like weapons outfits for a particular class of ships in one template (so with the Fletchers or Gearings or other big classes you only have to edit in one place to alter a mistake rather than in dozens or hundreds). Please have a look at the WikiProject Ships page's talk section and see what you think. I haven't written the instructions for using it yet, and I want to see whether there are any table cells people would like me to include that aren't present yet. There are two example tables, one with all the optional cells present, and the other with some excluded. David Newton 14:03, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

As you're probably aware, I've now taken the table template live. I've added a couple more things to it, including an endurance variable so that things like submarine patrol lengths can be included, and a country variable so that more indication than the naval ensigns can be given for the countries a ship served.

As part of that process I first converted the Nimitz-class aircraft carriers to the new format. I've now been extending it to a few new articles that I have created, including a number of seaplane tenders, an oiler and a destroyer tender. Two of those are USS Curtiss (AV-4) and USS Albemarle (AV-5). They're the first practical examples of a class template and then modifications to an individual ship to take account of its circumstances. Albemarle underwent a very extensive conversion in the 1960s which made it a great deal different from Curtiss. That is reflected in the weapons fit and the crew complements at the very least. I've used the template structure of the table format to create class templates for the common things and then the individual ship variables to fill in the extra things needed for Albemarle. It seems to work which is an encouraging sign. I think I can say that the concept I had when I first began the template based table has been vindicated. David Newton 16:28, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

1911EB scrubbing

OK, no problem. I agree with you. Searching Wikipedia articles by Google is terrible. By the way, do you think i should candidate for an admin in future? I mean, do you think I would have support from other users? Darwinek 15:41, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Pic of the day

Hi Stan,

Just to let you know that your picture Image:Zermatt and Matterhorn.jpg is up for reuse as Pic of the Day tomorrow. I've used the same caption as last time, but you can make any improvements or changes at Wikipedia:Picture of the day/February 13, 2005. -- Solipsist 05:57, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

VFD: List of other countries battleships

List of other countries battleships is listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of other countries battleships. It appears to be a duplicate of List of Minor navies battleships linked through a redirect to Battleship. The lists are not quite identical so someone familiar with the project might want to see what, if anything, need to be merged. Oh, I got your name from the list of participants at the Wikipedia Ships project. DialUp 16:18, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Adminship

I decided to try my strength. Can you nominate me for admin? Darwinek 15:41, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Old Sisal edit

When you created the taxobox at Sisal (Agave) about a year ago, you put the word Perrine after its binomial name. Since then, the article at Perrine has been made as a redirect to East Perrine, Florida, which I'm pretty sure has nothing to do with Sisal. What was it supposed to mean, if you remember? And could you turn Perrine into something informative about that use, with a link to the East Perrine, Florida article? --John Owens (talk) 01:56, 2005 Feb 21 (UTC)

Postage stamps and postal history of Austria

I found some little mistakes in your article, bur my English is too bad to correct them.

1. Issues between 1883 and 1890 didn't use a profile of Emperor Franz Josef
2. Change of monetary system in 1899: 100 Kreuzer = 1 Gulden -> 100 Heller = 1 Krone
3. Varnish bars: only from 1901 to 1905, but there were some attemps with older stamps in 1899
4. The assassinated chancellor Engelbert Dollfuss was commemorated in 1934, 1935 and 1936.

Mayby you can correct them. Grüße aus Wien -- 62.47.156.93 16:33, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) / Peterwuttke

Having trouble

I am having trouble with a simonP. I edit Arete (virtue) and he immediately reverts the edits. Him and his friends have deleted [Classical definition of republic] and after the many facts and the quoting of material they will not acknowledge they won't even let an external link and the talk is ongoing at Talk:Republic. This man doesn't know what he is doing. I ask that someone step in and stop this please. This man has no expertise in the classical field. He is an anonymous user. WHEELER 16:56, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Need Help

Since Wikipedia is a democracy, I have to farm for votes. Two articles are up for deletion: one is specific for Classical studies, Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Vanavsos and the other is Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Family/State_paradigm. Can I ask for you help in these matters. Thanks.WHEELER 15:08, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ship article renamings

Hi Stan. I don't know if you've noticed, but User:Nautical has amended Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships) without any discussion and proceeded to rename a large number of ship articles to match his new format. I only noticed when he renamed Italian battleship Giulio Cesare which is on my watchlist, and he'd been at it for several hours by then. -- Arwel 03:13, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

About your changes

Please stop reverting the examples until you consider my points on the talk page. The changes and articles were meant as the focal point of the discussion for the problems with existing exclusionary standards. Nautical 04:30, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee case opening

I am having trouble with classical works and definitions. It seems that User:Snowspinner is out to get me and destroy all classical works. What is going on is that "Classicism" is going to be destroyed here at Wikipedia. It looks like they are going after Classical definition of effeminacy and other such things.

The Arbitration Committee has accepted the request for arbitration against you. Please bring evidence to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/WHEELER/Evidence. Thank you. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 20:19, 2005 Mar 9 (UTC)

Can I get your help in this regard?WHEELER 14:32, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Classics link

There is a page classicists can link up on and it is here at: Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by fields of interest C-D#Classics. I invite you to place your name so that Classicists can find each other and corroborate on things together. Thank you for your time.WHEELER 18:31, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

A message to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Rivers participants

Would you, please, consider participation in the discussion about the naming of the articles on rivers? Certain users suggested that the word "River" should be omitted from the title. Currently the discussion is held at User talk:Markussep#River naming, but it will hopefully be moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers soon. Thank you for your attention.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 21:08, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

Lua programming language

I just noticed that it was you who moved Lua programming language to Lua. Was there a special reason for that? Lua apparently has a lot of different meanings, and disambiguation is accumulating on top of the article. I think it would be better to move the programming language article back to Lua programming language, and properly disambiguate Lua. Would that make sense to you? -Nikai 09:24, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I am in the process of doing so. I was told that the convention would be to move it to Lua Programming Language, which is what I did. Apparently the "convention" is somewhat less than universal... I have made (remade?) Lua a disambig page in the process. For more, see the talk page at Lua Programming Language. -t TShilo12 07:07, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

OK, I'm changing all the links to Lua_programming_language which is currently a redirect to the misnamed Lua_Programming_Language. I will have to contact an admin to get it moved to Lua_programming_language, since it won't overwrite that redirect w/ the contents of Lua_Programming_Language. TShilo12 00:38, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Looks great. Thanks. -t Tomer 01:26, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

Ship Names

I have an idea I want to float on you: While going over the destroyer pages the other day I noticed that most, if not all, are named after a person; yet the ship articles almost never mention that person. I was womdering if a slot in the ships table (under the heading "ship's career") could be made to reflect a ships namesake. What do you think? TomStar81 20:54, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Provinces of Italy

is one of the rare cases that uses "Province of X" instead of "X Province", see:Wikipedia:WikiProject_Subnational_entities/Naming maybe you can have a look at Talk:Provinces of Italy. Tobias Conradi 22:06, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Check it out

We have an unmitigated disaster on our hands. Please check out republic. And I don't know what I am talking about.WHEELER 16:28, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)