User talk:David Kernow/Archive 15

Country

Hi Instantnood,

What do you make of the examples here as a means for these types of templates to be named "Countries of..." but also include areas that are not described as countries...?  If you approve, I'll format the templates accordingly (and rename those still called "Countries and territories of..."). Regards, David Kernow (talk) 00:18, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

They should be listed in the same way, with no discrimination. Although some of them are not sovereign states, they are all countries. Happy new year. :-) — Instantnood 00:25, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I reckon we should find out whether or not there's any consensus to support this (fortunately straightforward!) view; maybe a survey thrown open via the Village Pump in which folk are asked to identify which of a small, selected number of places they'd identify as countries, or maybe which of a number of groups of places included places that aren't countries... (Any ideas...?)  Thinking ahead, if, given a decent response (20+?), the survey indicated no consensus, would you accept the inclusion of places such as Hong Kong, Macau, Christmas Island etc etc in these "Countries of" templates but identified as "special administrative regions", "territories", "dependencies" etc etc...?  Have to go now, but will follow-up later; thanks in advance for your thoughts. David (talk) 01:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

PS Re new year: I hope it will be happier for everyone!

I thought you might be interested in the fact that I've listed the page at WP:RFC/HIST. Hope that works for you. :D -Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 09:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message; I've added a suggestion to the Solidify the Template and the talk page? thread you started on the (yes, currently misnamed) talk page. Yours, David Kernow (talk) 01:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Acknowledged your suggestion at the talk page.. Let's see where it takes us. -Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 03:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

2007

We need an admin to update {{cfd}} and {{cfr}} ... I've already done {{cfm}} -- ProveIt ^(talk) 01:33, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Done – correctly, I hope... I'm around for a few mins more, so if you spot something amiss...  Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 01:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank You! -- ProveIt ^(talk) 01:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

(CfD close)

Are you able to close the last CFD from Dec 17th? This one's been hanging around for a while and as I've made some alternative proposals I can't close it myself. Timrollpickering 03:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Done; have left some notes there indicating the variations from a simple rename all per nom. Happy New Arbitrary Time-Point, David (talk) 10:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

(cough cough)

Thought you might like to know, and would be rather interested in your experience, including pointers about CfD closures. Though I would like to think I'm decently well-versed in the processes, I'm fairly sure that I'm likely not as well-knowledgable as I may think I am (and if you figured that sentence out, I'll have to increase the population of a certain small village by one : ) - jc37 12:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Glad to hear the Good News – reminds that I should keep WP:RfA on my watchlist even if I don't recognize most of the names that pass by... Re CfD closing, my experience is neither that lengthy nor particularly profound; if/when there is a contentious discussion to close, there's usually enough dissent to render "no consensus" (!)  I guess it sounds trite, but just bring the same level head to closures as you do to discussions – and, if you've been involved in starting or contributing to a disucussion, feel free to ask someone else to close it; I've recently done so myself. Best wishes, David (talk) 16:07, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate your insights : )

Also, though you sidestepped the interesting sentence above, you did manage to use a word (that was not a scientific term) which I had not heard of, compelling me to look it up - which is not often done : ) - jc37 09:39, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Chuckle – I had a sore throat at the time I responded to your message, so the word was on my mind. Re the sentence, I think I worked it out, so yes, should've said so – meantime, I've that new grizzly friend to feed, so better move him into that small village – thank you for your continued generosity!  Yours, David (talk) 12:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

FYI

The infobox at Turkish people is all screwed up now...do you know how to fix it? Khoikhoi 06:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Sigh... It's becoming ever more evident to me that {{Infobox Ethnic group}}'s layout and formatting needs a major overhaul if not rewrite... Unfortunately User:Estavisti reverted my latest efforts without indicating the problem/s he encountered (cf here) so two possibilities re Turkish people jump to mind: either unrevert Estavisti's reversion, or undo (revert) my attempt to tabulate the population information in Turkish people. Please implement whichever action you believe is least likely to fail (!)

There seems to be two types of template shoe-horned into the one current {{Infobox Ethnic group}}: those carrying detailed breakdowns of populations (for which I'd say the current {{Infobox Ethnic group}} is unsuited) and those without (i.e. each parameter only one or two lines in length, without tabular information). At present, I'd say {{Infobox Ethnic group}} caters for the latter before the (more complex) former, whereas it ought to cater for the more complex first, in which the latter then becomes a simple instantiation. (Hope all that makes some sense...)  Therefore, crazy thought I must be, I volunteer (with deep breath!) to try redesigning {{Infobox Ethnic group}}...

Yours straightjacketly, David (talk) 07:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it appears to be working now. I have seen your efforts on the template and I thank you for that. Hopefully Estavisti can give you some suggestions on how to improve it, but I have another suggestion: you come up with different designs for the infobox, and then post them on the talk page. The version that gets the most support can then be implemented. What do you think? Khoikhoi 04:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your encouragement – see what you make of this!  Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 12:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Category:Fictional wardens

I have not participated in CfD and don't know protocol so I'm commenting here. You closed Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_5#Fictional_Her_Majesty.27s_Prison_Service_employees. Category:Fictional wardens pointed and still points to the same CfD debate. There is also a Category:Fictional correctional officers which should perhaps be merged with the others. PrimeHunter 11:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting this oversight; Fictional wardens is now slated to be merged with Fictional prison officers and governors. I've also tagged Fictional correctional officers as a {{categoryredirect}} to Fictional prison officers and governors, so this too should soon be emptied. Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 12:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Move help

Hello, could you help me? I would like to move [[Category:Territories with military occupation forces]] [1], a category I`ve just made, to [[Category:Territories under military ocupation]]. You were the first admin I came arround, so can you do that? Thanks! Varag 04:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

As you may already know, normally this would require a visit to WP:CfD, but since you created and populated the category, I've speedied the process by creating Territories under military occupation and recategorising the articles accordingly. The new category needs categorising itself, though!

Incidentally, here's a little trick you may not've discovered yet: to link to a category, use this syntax...

[[:Category:Name of category]]</nowiki>

e.g. Category:Territories under military occupation

Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 11:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

PS Welcome to Wikipedia!

Another CFD issue

Can you take a look at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 4#State ship-related categories? It's basically a reopening of Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 December 27#Category:US State Related Ships which I recently closed as no consensus and arguments about the nom are breaking out. As the one who closed the previous debate I'd rather not step into this fray. Timrollpickering 21:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

...Have taken a look at (and left a suggestion/request) the above and agree that (faulty syntax notwithstanding) it's a fray that's probably best avoided (unless, I suppose, the topic is close to heart). If noone else has already done so, I'll happily try closing it when the time arrives; by all means give me a prod if I seem to've overlooked it. Yours, David Kernow (talk) 23:22, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Template:National space programmes

Hi Dude. Just dropping a few quick lines to discuss the "National space programmes" template. I see your point regarding "Flag congestion". But now it looks well weird with too much room inside the template. All things considered, I think we should revert back to old style - or think of a style that doesn't take up so much space! I didn't want to change it back without discussing with you first. What do you think?? - Ash sul 09:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your contact. I've just tried compacting the template; how does it look to you now...?  I'm not entirely convinced and wonder if the template might not work better without the flags, attractive though they may be... Sometimes simpler is better, in this case a return to:

Yours, David Kernow (talk) 10:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

• Hi David. Your new changes actually look pretty good. I also see the point you make about the old "non-flag" template. But I quite like the way you have improvised to make this template look pretty cool! So, in my opinion, we should keep your changes. Cheers dude! - Ash sul 10:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

  Thanks – if anyone isn't keen on it, I guess we'll soon hear/see!  Best wishes, David (talk) 10:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Heads up!

Congrats for this! NikoSilver 14:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Glad somebody likes – thanks!  I wonder how long it will last...  Best wishes, David (talk) 20:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

FL nom

Hi, David! If you have a few minutes of spare time, I would appreciate your comments here. Please bring your critical attitude with you :) Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Just to acknowledge your message and say I'm looking forward to scanning the article and candidate-related comments – on first sight it looks "the business" (Tompw notwithstanding, though I've yet to read his/her concerns properly). I'll make some time to look at it soon, maybe a little later... one change might need to be the size of the first image, the administrative map; I just tried viewing the page in a smaller window and it began to overlap the Contents box... More later, David (talk) 21:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem, whenever you have time. The nomination is going to be up for a while; it's just the first day today. Thanks much!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 21:04, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

When you finish in Navigation templates

Can you jump on this dropped ball. There's probably a short and sweet fix and Omegatron's not answering the phone so to speak. In the meantime, there's the text garbage-fied on the cat page. Sigh. Need to work on my HTML skills and general know how. Thanks // FrankB 23:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I copyedited what I think you intended; at least, I now have the error message appearing in red on a yellow background here when you view the template's page. Is that correct...?  If not, maybe you can now work out what you need... I'm on and off the computer for a while now, so might not be able to respond quickly; hopefully, though, problem solved. Yours, David (talk) 00:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

A close miss that... I'd had that earlier... read on.

Belated thankyou for your attempt on this. I referred the matter to Conrad Dunkerson, as you were experiencing the same code expansion flaw I was getting... the message looks fine in preview, but the cached page blows up. See Category:Categories for deletion to see how I used it after he traced down what was happening... an equals sign per his summary at Template:NestTextColors(edit talk links history). The talk and template usage are fixed up some now too.
  Has some association... You may want to chime in on WP:AN and that nomination for renaming or 'whatever' the heck (<G>) it is now (see Fabartus#Thanks_for_your_notification.) with link back to same message on WP:AN. Best regards // FrankB 00:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Dravidian Wiki Project

Hello David,

I saw the Dravidian (South Indian) template you created. It came as a pleasant surprise to me since I am planning on forming a Dravidian Wiki Project. Would you be interested in participating? To tell you the truth, not much is really covered on the Dravidian people page. As a matter of fact, there have been some vandals on that page whom have posted a lot of POVs on there so much so, it barely talks about the Dravidian ethnic groups and their cultures.

Your template you created looks like an outline of the topics covered by Dravidian Wiki Project. So far I have managed to create a page for Dravidian Martial Arts. My next step would be to create a page for all the Dravidian dances, Dravidian architecture, and Dravidian medicine.

Furthermore, this wiki project group will also include the Dravidians outside of India in Sri Lanka (Tamils), Bangaldesh (Brahui), and Bangladesh (Malto). Since you have an interest in this topic would you like to join me in the quest for a Dravidian Wiki Project? Much Regards.

Wiki Raja 10:38, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Helo again,

I didn't know that you were an administrator. Anyways, I guess you would be the one I would go for advise on how to go about forming a Dravidian Wiki Project. Regards.

Wiki Raja 10:45, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your intriguing message. I'm not {{Dravidian topics}}' creator – the history indicates User:Madhava 1947 – so there's another person to try contacting (as they as well as yourself will know far more about Dravidian topics than me!)  As you may've seen already, I've also tried another and hopefully more effective format for the template. The image you found is definitely an improvement; I wonder if there's a version with lighter colors...?

Re creating (and maintaining) a WikiProject: I confess I have no experience here!  My instincts, however, led me here, where the links in the #Creating and maintaining section look like the place to start.

I haven't visited southern India (yet) and only spent a day in Sri Lanka between flights (but a fascinating day!) so my experience of native Dravidian life and culture is also tiny, but if/when you or anyone else in the WikiProject needs non-native help, I'll try to help.

Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 17:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello David,

Both native and non-native help will be needed:) Not everybody knows about the Dravidian family of ethnicities and languages. Unfortunately, we pretty much hear one sided stories from those who are in the habit of revising history and culture. But, I think that is not new to the rest of the globe. Anyway, since you are an administrator, it will even be of bigger help to the Dravidian Wiki Project since you have more knowledge on how to go about forming a Project on wikipedia and more. Also, another thing is that on Dravidian people and Talk:Dravidian people there have been some vandals and other users changing the info and inserting their POVs on the page. So much so, the Dravidian people page tends to talk more about another family group of ethnicities called the Indo-Arayas. It is sad, why people would do this, also that page has been turned into a propogand page discrediting the Dravidian people's existence. I have added a map and some pictures of indigenous Dravidian Veddas and Australian aboriginals to show the similarities of the two. On the talk page, I have been accused of being an Afro-Centric? My pics were taken off. Instead, someone put a pic of a totally different culture not related to the Dravidian topic with a statement of an ancient Indo-Arya Swastika. Anyways, your help would be of merit. Regards.

Wiki Raja 22:53, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Something you might try is to present your ideas on a page of your own (User:Wiki Raja/Name of page here) and invite people to visit it via a link on the talk page or talk pages concerned; I reckon there'd then be far stronger grounds to censure anyone who came along and messed about with it (the page itself, I mean, not its own talk page) as it'd be in your userspace. Meanwhile, if it's well-referenced/cited elsewhere that "Indo-Arayans" aren't the same as Dravidians, or that there's a contentious theory that "Indo-Arayans" and Dravidians are "the same", then add and use these references in the article and/or talk page...

Template:Dravidian topics

Hi,

I just added a dance section to the list. Also, one more pic has been added. Please let me know if you think that this would be too many picutres, or should we just stick with two pics. Perhaps one pic as an icon? Regards.

Wiki Raja 01:14, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

...I reckon two larger-sized pictures (as with the Meenakshi temple and Dravidian map) or four smaller-sized pictures, so long as their combined height isn't greater than the text beside them. At present, the combined height of the temple and dancer pics does look more than the text here (even with the extra string of dance-related links; good addition!) so I'd try reducing the pics' size (and adding a fourth one of similar shape) or, if they start looking too small, return to a two-picture format. Four smaller pics might also make the template look cluttered and/or draw too much attention away from the links – but perhaps not... Since the third picture is already in place, I guess you could find and add a fourth, then consider the result... Yours, David (talk) 02:35, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello again,

I have just added martial arts to the list of Dravidian topics on the template. Do you think that this would be too much to have for a template already? Regards.

Wiki Raja 04:10, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks like another good addition to me. I also see you've returned to the two-picture format; now that there's another line of links, I wonder if there might be a more effective layout... I need to work away from the computer for a while now, but when I return I'll look at it again and see what my first thought is!  Thanks for your work, David (talk) 04:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

PS Earlier, I wandered past the Carnatic music article and noticed it didn't include a "listen to" link to an excerpt; plenty seem to be available via the external links, but I don't know who/what might be a good, representative example for a Wikipedia excerpt... Any ideas?  (Is there a Carnatic "Mozart" or "Beethoven"...?)

Template:Civil2 proposed for deletion

I noticed that you have previously worked on Template:Civil2. I thought you should know that it is currently proposed for deletion. Please consider adding your comments at templates for deletion. -- Aylahs ^(talk) 16:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the trouble to inform me. My edit was an attempt to solve a formatting problem I encountered – whether or not it's a good idea to keep or delete the template, I don't know!  The TfD discussion, though, suggests not. Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 11:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD

You did some nice formatting on this, and I wanted to let you know... Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people who have walked on the Moon. Thanks, Jenolen ^{speak it!} 22:14, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the trouble to inform me and glad you like the formatting (it was just a few tweaks to what was already there). I also noted that there was a list, category and template for these astronauts, but figured that was no great problem. Looks like the AfD consensus will be the same. Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 11:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Dravidian Civilizations

Hi,

I have just created this link. Please let me know if I did this correctly or not. Thanks.

User:Wiki Raja/WikiProject Dravidian Civilizations

Wiki Raja 06:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The link and the page look fine; I've added my name to the member list. Since Wikipedia tends to use sentence-casing (see WP:MoS), I suggest the project's name becomes "WikiProject Dravidian civilizations" – or maybe "WikiProject Dravidian civilization", unless there will be distinctions made and kept between various civilizations. (Or have there been two or more distinct Dravidian civilizations separated in time...?)

Yours, David (talk) 12:15, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk archiving

Hi David, I notice that you had archived the talk on Copernicus by Copy&Paste once, rather than by a move which preserves the history. You do the same with your archives. Is that an intentional choice of yours? I think that moving is the preferred method among most editors, even though the policy gives several options. -- Matthead ^discuß!     O       08:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

It is intentional – and I hope it does preserve the history; the version in the talk page history just before the transfer of material to an archive page should carry that material. I'm not sure how moving a page would work, as the whole page would need to be moved; this would mean the most recent messages would most likely be archived too quickly (unless none had been posted in the few days or weeks before moving the page). However, I hope I haven't overlooked or misunderstood the process!  Thanks for your message, David Kernow (talk) 00:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I had forgotten to mention Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. Just in case you missed it, it gets shown as a suggestion when a talk page is considerd long. -- Matthead ^discuß!     O       11:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I hadn't looked at this page in a long time and see it is now more sophisticated; thanks for prompting me to do so!  Best wishes, David (talk) 18:21, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Inappropriate behavior from user Asian2duracell

Hi David,

Long time no chat. By the way, things are going from bad to worse on the Talk:Tamil people and most definitely on the Talk:Dravidian people. Sadly there is a sense of Indian nationalistic propaganda going on here. This is where others cannot put legitimate facts which counter some of the revisioned history by some people. I noticed that Asian2duracell has been harassing people quite a bit for posting information on Dravidian people which is contrary to some of the ridiculous information on there which does not talk about Dravidian people in general. Today, I got a harassing message which sounds very much like Asian2duracell:

==hey==
Buddy much respect, but ur not Tamil. Ur definitely African. We dont want ur Afrocentrism in our Community. If u admire us so 
much, u can watch Tamil Movies, but stop making us looking Black. We are not Black. Ur POV is not wished.

This was posted on talk:Wiki Raja today. Also, users User:144.136.100.93 and User:Vandh have posted similar toned messages on Talk:Tamil people. As soon as one of us mentions the fact that there are connections between Dravidians, Aboriginals, and East Africans, I get accused of being Afrocentric. There seems to be some kind of resentment towards people of African descent amongst a few individuals which needs to stop.

I have tried discussing this issue with them logically, but this has not worked. Therefore, I respectfully report to you this situation which I have diplomatically handled without retaliating. Further advice on this matter would be much appreciated There is a lot of work to be done on Dravidian people.

Regards.

Wiki Raja 00:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Adygea

Hi, David! Thanks for looking at administrative divisions of Adygea and for trying to improve it. I much appreciate it!

My pleasure, as always!

I do, however, have a few questions/concerns:

• Could we remove the new infobox from the article until its quirks (see below) are polished? I understand that you are probably not done with this template,

Indeed; I began working on the first couple of points you listed, then realized these can wait.

• but since the list is now on FLC (and heading to FL status, I hope), it's probably not the best place for experiments, especially considering that the template prominently displays at the very top. You are welcome to try it out in any other list of the series though :)
• That said, thank you for developing a template for this infobox! It was my intention to use a template there from the very start, but there were a few minor things I wasn't sure how to address. Now that you volunteered for the task, I fully expect you to fix them for me :)) Here they are:

• the template needs a "capital_type" (or similarly called) field, because only republics have capitals; all other federal subjects have administrative centers
• a separate "type" field probably wouldn't hurt for all lines. Selsoviets are called differently in many federal subjects; we need to consider that at the very least.
• can some lines be made optional? The reason I'm asking is the federal cities of Moscow and St. Petersburg, let the damnation be upon them. Just take a look at the current infoboxes in administrative divisions of Moscow and St. Petersburg to see what I mean.
• the flag in the infobox is not level with the text. In both Opera and IE the flag is to the right and above the "Republic of Adygea, Russia" line.

Yes, I see this here with Firefox as well. It's the best I'm presently able to conjure without further complicating the table structure or using something inelegant such as relative positioning. Maybe, though, one these methods will need to be used... Meanwhile, I can try seeking counsel from one or other of the CSS/HTML experts I've met here.

• any way the separating lines between the fields can be made invisible or very thin? Kind of like in the original template?

Here the original table is displayed with lines between fields, so I duplicated that in the template; however, I think a "toccolours" or similar class table should provide.

• can the numbers be right-aligned?

Sure.

• finally, the biggest problem is that I might need to modify the template in near future. For Adygea, for example, I have a more recent statistics on the number of rural settlements, but I still want to retain the 2002 Census data. Anyway, we can deal with that when time comes.

Yes, as above, I too realized this need not stall the nomination.

• My other concern is about the map. The reason why it was bigger than now was because the map labels are hard to read when the map is reduced in size. As a matter of fact, people complained about the map being unreadable at its previous size, so making it even smaller is just asking for more trouble. I asked the map's author to increase the font, but he'll be working with the original size in mind. So, I'm not sure what to do about it. Your suggestions, if you have any, are, of course, welcome.

Understood. Unfortunately, however, at 450px the map here presently overlaps the edge of the Contents box, in an area equivalent to a 1024 by 768 screen. If being able to read the annotations without enlarging the map is the priority, however, then I'd suggest trying to reduce the peripheral area included in the map rather than try squeezing the Contents box or

other elements. For instance, there's area to the left and right (west and east) of the republic that seems croppable; doing so might yield an image that retains its legibility when resized to avoid overlaps. Or, to use a nutshell, thin the image!

David, please forgive me if my demands sound like those of a petulant child with a broken toy (well, I can be like that sometimes, too) :) I very much appreciate your help (including standardizing the navbox at the bottom). I just feel the template needs a lot more work if we are going to make it uniform across the whole series. I could probably fix most of the things named above myself, but I am sure you can do it faster and more efficiently than me, because from what I see you work with this kind of templates a lot. In any case, if I can be of any help (besides wining and complaining that is), let me know. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 23:15, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

No pardon necessary, as your "demands" sound like useful feedback here – of which any regarding the rephrasings in the first two sections of this version of the page will hopefully benefit us both. (You might also spot some layout experimentation in the first district listed (Giaginsky) and, should you look at the page's code, the beginnings of an alternate layout for the "Administrative division structure" section, currently commented-out.)  Best wishes, David (talk) 03:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

David, thank you for looking into this once again. Regarding the map, trimming it on left and right, in addition to increasing the font, is precisely what the author of the image promised to do. Hopefully that'll be fixed soon.

I also reviewed the draft in your userspace, and liked it quite a bit. The prose reads so much better now! I'll add my comments to the draft's talk page in the next few days, addressing the parts where you had the question marks/inaccuracies. For now, I just want to tell you not to worry about the layout of the "administrative divisions structure" section. During the FL review, several people suggested that the difference between the types of rural settlements be explained, and, luckily, I found a wonderful source describing precisely that. I am planning to restructure that section and add more information as soon as I am done processing the source. I wish I found it before I submitted the nomination, but what's done is done. Anyway, once I add the types of settlements detail, I will welcome your suggestions regarding that section's layout. If you think of anything else meanwhile, you are always welcome on my talk page! Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:53, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info about the Administrative divisions structure section; hope it won't be too "dry" to process. I have Administrative divisions of Adygea on my watchlist, so should see as/when you develop it.

One thought, though, that's occurred to me is whether the article might be at risk of outstaying its Featured list candidacy (sp?), now that its candidature has attracted attention and contributions...  I'll guess I should consult WP:FLC. Yours, David (talk) 23:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about the list staying there longer than it's supposed to. After all, I am in no particular hurry, and if outstaying leads to a few more comments, I'm all for it. I'd let the admins maintaining FLC worry about that.

As for the administrative structure update, I'll take care of it soon after I am done compiling this kind of statistics for all districts. So far I still have three to go plus Maykop (for which I don't have a source yet).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

{{Infobox Ethnic group}}

David, I want to thank you for making that infobox look so much nicer. :-) BTW, the Kurdish Jews article got screwed up—would you mind fixing it? Thanks, Khoikhoi 07:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Same for Kazakhs. Khoikhoi 10:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your generous comment!  I'm glad I finally seem to've found a way to organize this template. I was expecting one or two pages' infoboxes might go awry, so I'll attend to the two you've found now. Hopefully you won't find too many more!  Thanks again, David Kernow (talk) 00:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

There might be a few others, but if I see them, I'll let you know. :-) Cheers, Khoikhoi 00:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Kurdish Jews and Kazakhs now fixed (after a few distractions). David (talk) 04:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow, that is some excellent work indeed. Thanks again, Khoikhoi 04:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

BTW, could you please make the Pashtun people article look nice? Khoikhoi 22:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Done, via an edit conflict I hope I've resolved correctly. Yours, David (talk) 23:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again. Khoikhoi 04:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hope I'm not bothering you, but it looks like Azerbaijani people could do some fixin'-upin'... Khoikhoi 05:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Should be clearer now. I reckon there are a fair few infoboxes out there whose population breakdowns will need some attention, so keep adding them as/when you see them (or even try reformatting them!)  Yours, David (talk) 23:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for copyediting all these articles as well. I've got two more: Assyrian people and Gagauz people. Ciao, Khoikhoi 23:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for improving the ethnic group template, it looks much better now :) --Hadžija 22:52, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Carnatic Music

Hi, even though I haven't really touched up on Carnatic music I have found a few singers from List of Carnatic singers.

• K. J. Yesudas
• Ariyakudi Ramanuja Iyengar
• D. K. Pattammal
• G. N. Balasubramaniam
• Kalpakam Swaminathan
• M. L. Vasanthakumari
• M. S. Subbulakshmi
• Maharajapuram Viswanatha Iyer

I hope this helps. If not, I can do a little research.

Wiki Raja 10:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

God

Ahha! It was you who removed the headings in Argentina's ==External links==. Just letting you know, WP:MOS dictates headings to leveled, not bolded; hopefully all those other edits regarding this issue, you will fix.100110100 00:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I've converted such subheadings here (and elsewhere, I'm afraid) so that these articles' Contents boxes aren't too long. I wasn't aware, though, that the MoS dictated their use...?  Yours, David Kernow (talk) 00:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes it does; it says if it's a heading, it must be used with ==, etc.. That was an arbitary argument; the reason for == is functionality. If the TOC is too long, then so be it. We use the TOC to jump to places, how could we jump to the ==External links== catagories if we wanted to edit them? Also, if one person says that a TOC is too long, another person will come along and say it's not (not excluding me). Hope this was insightful. Thanks, I'll talk to you later.100110100 00:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Is this still the case, though, with third-level headings (===) and beyond...?  Alternatively, I suppose one person's heading is another person's bold text... Thanks for your thoughts, now and later. Best wishes, David (talk) 00:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Well, your argument saying that it would make the TOC too long, is way to weak/unjustifiable to replace the wikiheadings with bold. TOC's are good, we should include as much as we can in them. They help for navigation, & userfriendlyness, productivity, effiencency, you name it.100110100 01:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure about including as much as we can, but don't feel that strongly about it; during my next Wikipedia session, I'll start converting those I may've replaced (all in country articles) into official headings. (If memory serves, many were bold text before I passed by; I merely tried to simplify the formatting by using the semicolon syntax.)  Hope that's okay, David (talk) 01:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's not ok; it's either a yes or no. Actually, I don't see how it could simplify formatting; in any case, the important thing is making them ==, etc. headings. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 100110100 (talk) 19:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

I meant using [ ; text ] rather than ['''text''']. The country articles I've reviewed thus far used the latter rather than "===" subheadings, so I guess Argentina may be an exception. If you want to start replacing [ ; text ] or [ '''text''' ] with "===" subheadings, I won't stand in your way. Best wishes, David (talk) 23:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Could you list or direct me to those articles? Thanks.100110100 00:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, starting with the first continent listed in Category:Countries by continent, i.e. Category:African countries:

• Algeria: currently uses bold text, appears to've done so for some time;
• Angola: Previously used third-level headings;
• Benin: currently uses third-level headings, appears to've done so for some time;
• Botswana: peviously used third-level headings;
• Burkina Faso: Currently uses third-level headings, appears to've done so for some time;
• ...and so on. My guess is that this mixture of bold formatting, semicolon formatting or (third-level) headings across each continent's countries would continue. Regards, David (talk) 04:27, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Template:Protected template

Hey, there -- thought you might want to have a look at Template talk:Protected template#Width, where Warrens seems to be referring to this edit. Luna Santin 03:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Ahh, cool. Seemed like a good point, but figured I should hear your side before doing anything. :p Cheers! Luna Santin 08:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Football biography

Hi Daemonic,

(Restore Apps (goals))

Here the heading "Apps (goals)" is considerably wider than most of the numbers I've seen below it, causing the table's column widths to appear unbalanced. If you're not keen on "A (G)*" plus explanatory footnote as a solution, does anything else come to mind...?  (Just seems a pity to have a good template compromised by a single factor...)  Regards, David Kernow (talk) 18:37, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I can see what you are trying to achieve and the other changes you made definitely improved the appearance of the infobox. My problem with A (G) is that I have an aversion to abbreviations, but also the change hasn't really made the problem go away. The A/Apps is in the same vertical column as the first digit of the appearances (caps) and the (G)/(goals) follows straight after - this means that the (G)/(goals) is not centred over any particular column.

I hadn't realized that was the intention, but...

Both solutions seem to have the same difficulty in that the header is fixed whereas the data is of variable width. Ideally there should be separate headers & columns for appearances and for goals, but this would mean that every single player article incorporating the template would need to be amended to fit the new layout.

Yes... I imagine it's a task that could be given to a bot in lieu of a simpler alternative...

I personally think that having Apps (Goals) looks neater and is a better compromise than A (G). At present I have reverted the template back to your last version. Perhaps we should ask the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Football for their opinion. I'm not sure how you could compare one against the other though - this would probably mean creating a dummy template and adopting it on a few players articles just to see what it would look like.
Best wishes. Daemonic Kangaroo 19:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I set up a couple of pages for this purpose – User:David Kernow/Test template and User:David Kernow/Test page – so will now copy the previous version and a few examples there. Feel free to tinker if you wish and/or provide a link for the WikiProject. Thanks for your reply, David (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

---

See: David Kernow (commons, Low Pri.) // FrankB 00:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Ping yourself -- see email // FrankB 05:52, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Syriac Christianity

Hi Chaldean,

Sorry you weren't keen on the alternative {{Syriac Christianity}} format; would you mind, though, if I replaced the vertical-line separators ("|") with dots ({{·}})...?  They're more effective on the two different screens I have here (see {{·}}'s page for more).

It occurred to me that the {{Assyrian tribes}} and {{Assyrian communities}} templates could be merged, i.e. something like: ...

...What do you think...?  Yours, David Kernow (talk) 05:52, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

PS Thanks for the recent Assyrian people corrections.

David, I apologize for not consulting you before rving yoru edit to the template. The "dots" replacing the "l" is not a problem at all (go ahead and do it.) But it kinda didn't look right because the content wasn't centered. I know it sounds wierd, but making it centered gives it more of a "holy" look to it, since this particular template is about religion. I like the other two template mergers you've done - very nice job. If you have another idea for the Syriac Christianity templte, then by all means try it. Chaldean 05:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry; I was bold in transforming it!  Have now replaced the vertical-lines. While doing so, I wondered how the template would look with larger images:

What do you think...?

David on a second thought, I forgot actually I was looking to delete the assyrain tribes template, because it serves no perpose at all. The links in the template are going to the actual villages and non of the links have their own pages in terms of talking about the tribe. And it doesn't make sense either, because their are 100 different Assyrian tribes. But you are more then welcome to modify the Assyrian community template. Cheers. Chaldean 06:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I can quite easily remove the Assyrian tribes template from the articles including it (without deleting the template itself; I guess that should go via WP:TfD with your rationale above). Would you like me to do so...?

Yours, David (talk) 12:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

David, the syriac christianity template looks great now! Very well done. As for the tribe one, yes go ahead, and remove it. Chaldean 15:07, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Glad you liked it!  A moment ago, though, I belatedly went to update the template and see it now features only one image and a (large) gap where the other had been; this looks slightly odd here. However, is this what you prefer...?  Filling the gap with text would be straightforward, but the template would no longer be centered in the way you described above...  Yours,
you've already done so; sorry not to've reached it earlier. Something strange, though, is occurring here when the template is displayed; the Velázquez Christo image isn't shown (leaving a gap on the left-hand side) and Wikipedia reports that it doesn't exist, although I'm still able to locate it as a separate image!  I think some fault may've developed as it uses "á" in its name, although this should pose no difficulty... Do you also see it missing now...?  Puzzled, David (talk) 04:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

PS About to decommission the tribes template.

---

Edit conflict:

ok David, I will go back to the other way, stretching the words. Cheers. Chaldean 04:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

David, why don't you fix it? :) I can't seem to get it right. Chaldean 04:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Sorry about changing my previous message as soon as I'd sent it; it was only then I thought there might be something odd occurring. There's still a problem here, but I'm pretty sure now it's something involving Wikipedia, not our editing. If you too now don't see the Velázquez Christo, I suggest we do nothing for a while to see if the problem is temporary. Yours, David (talk) 05:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

RE: Dravidian topics template

Hi,

I have just added Kollywood to the list. Kollywood is the Tamil film industry. Also, I was wondering if it would be possible to add a new topic to the list Film. There is also a Mollywood (Malayalam film industry), and Tollywood (Telugu film industry). Please let me know what you think. Regards.

Wiki Raja 17:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Seems another good idea to me, as there's more than just one link. I guess there's two possibilities:

1. Create a new Film line as you suggest and add the three links there;
2. Maybe add them to the end of one of the shorter lines, e.g.

A new Film line with the links is probably easier to read, but makes the template taller; however, a taller template makes it more possible to place four rather than two reasonably sized pictures in the template (if that's something you'd still like to do). Alternatively, adding the links to the end of a shorter line (such as the Literature line) might be more involved, but it doesn't increase the template's proportions. Perhaps, though, there's a good possibility more Literature and/or Cinema links would be added, making the single line too long...?  Whichever approach you prefer, I'm happy to help.

Thanks for the Carnatic music links; I must make some time to read them. Best wishes, David (talk) 05:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

PS If/when you're happy with the WikiProject Dravidian civilizations page, move it from your userspace into Wikipedia: space where the other WikiProjects exist, i.e. rename it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Dravidian civilizations, to make it "official".

Discussion at Template:Infobox_country

Some users are engaged in an ever so avid discussion about introducing some new entries to the infobox. One would be the Gini index, the other, a link to Wikitravel. Please join the discussion and help us reach a consensus. Danielsavoiu 18:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out; I've just left a couple of comments. Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 05:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Dravidian update

Thank you so much for your help. I think that we can put the Kollywood, Mollywood, and Tollywood on one line in the "Related Topics" section. In that way the template would not be taller and we would not mix "ancient" topics with "modern".

• That's a good point;

Also, in regards to moving the Wiki Raja: Wikiproject Dravidian Civilizations to the actual location for projects, is there a required number of people who must be part of the project?

• I don't think so; good to see some other folk have signed up. David (talk) 06:02, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Raja 05:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Moon groups of Jupiter template

Hi again RandomCritic,

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Moon groups of Jupiter

Templationist is suggesting {{Moons of Jupiter}} makes this template redundant; was there a specific/good reason for it...?  I can't remember...

The history is that it started out as a "Jupiter's natural satellites" navigation box, and then as it got too large somebody simplified it into a plain "Jupiter" which just contained links to main groups of satellites. Then you came along and gave it a more descriptive name. As the collapsing boxes deal with the space issue, it seems to me that it is indeed redundant. I don't recall if it's possible to redirect templates, but it seems like it would be desirable in this case. RandomCritic 08:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder; it does look as if Templationist has identified a redundancy. If necessary, I'll add my support to the nomination, but I'm guessing that won't be necessary. Best wishes, David (talk) 08:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Star Alliance and SkyTeam templates

Why would you make the edits you made. They are harder to read and comprehend, and they are more difficult to edit. They are fine the way they are.--Golich17 22:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry you're not keen on the amendments. The intention was to use a standard template format, align the subheadings and use less obtrusive separator characters. If nothing else, I'd at least recommend the latter, as on the desktop and laptop screens here the current separator characters (the bullets) draw more attention than the links between them. As to their being more difficult to edit, I guess that's a matter of familiarity. Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 00:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Table of administrative country subdivisions by country

WOW! I think you are my new hero. :) --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 05:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow here too – you must be omniscient (or a word like that; not sure)...!

This table has been sitting in my userspace for months now (see history) and I've finally got round to launching it. I know it already needs some updating, but first I'm going to add a few links to it elsewhere and also give it one or two categories. I think I'll also start the talk page with a post recognizing that it's long and so might benefit from splitting (A-K, L-Z, etc). Any recommendations/ideas gratefully received.

Thanks for the instant acknowledgement!

Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 05:48, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

New page patroller here. :) Yeah that's a very very much needed table. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 05:51, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Ahh, of course... I guess I'm not thinking sufficiently Wikipedia-ly. Maybe time for a glass of... Yours chuckling, David Kernow (talk) 06:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not great with tables and such but if you need any assistance with the links or anything like that, let me know. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 06:09, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks; will do. I reckon (hope) it'll mostly be a case of what I've overlooked... Yours, David (talk) 06:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

just kibitzing

A stray thought before taking my browser page elsewhere...
   I'd have to look that table up again somewhere myself, and the last I heard, you were uncertain on the title and redirections and such. Why not add the link above in context for those of us snooping by. T'was most excellent work indeed, and others should be given access to properly appreciate your excellence! // FrankB 21:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Dravidian Civilizations Box

Hi,

Was wondering if it would be ok that I change the name Dravidian topics to WikiProject Dravidian Civilizations?

Wiki Raja 09:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't recommend it, as (1) it's not a template about a WikiProject; and (2) I think I'd expect a template called "X civilizations" to distinguish between and link to articles about different X civilizations and their respective elements, topics, etc – something like:

So, I think I'd keep "Dravidian topics"... See, though, what the other folk you know to be interested say. Yours, David (talk) 10:16, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks mighty thanks

re: this defense
   I don't know what to say, save a hearty thanks. Your suggestion is just along the lines of what I have in mind, and the time it must have taken to knock that together is far beyond the call...

My pleasure; it didn't take as long as you might've thought, as it was adapted from elsewhere ({{World War II}}).

...and very much appreciated. A heartfelt thanks. (Did you anticipate my intent to consult your HTML skills in phase III??? <G>)
  I haven't looked at how you coded that suggestion, having come here first, but did have something much like that in mind as a goal. Moreover, would you agree that such should be adaptable to a positional display alternation by #if tests...

Sure; that's the kind of code I'm imagining in place of the {{{links}}} placeholders. Something more elegant may also possible... Yours, David (talk) 12:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

...such that if a name collision on a site XXX is present, by leaving off or altering the positional trigger string (say 'Y' and 'N') that site can be bypassed in the stack, effectively shortening it. That is another need in Phase III, as it happens. In practice many page examination tools have limited utility to such sites as Wikinews, Wiktionary, and probably Wikiversity. Again, grateful thanks. // FrankB 11:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

PING Yourself!!! Your input needed soonest. // FrankB 15:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Ping#2 and FYI --
    A) http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump#Railroad.2FRailway
   B) Need a hand big time hand here, some IP editor is attacking weeks of work! (See this too) — I could get something done if people would just mind their own damn business! Or at least ask first! Pissed to say the least! I was planning of cleaning up the category tagging templates today!
    C) Who would know or is responsible for settling the fate of 'interwikitmp-grp'? Shouldn't that be resolved by now?
   D) Did you see this!!! (by anom 82.212.68.183) Discussion seems to not be on their agenda, or the commonsense to ask a question. This negates a lot of GF edits by myself. And danged if I can understand why someone that active wouldn't have an account. If I loose this, I'm likely to give up all these wiki's--there is no reason to constantly defend this crap over minor diffs of opinion over content and style! How in the hell does a one line template expansion matter on a page hardly ever looked at? It's certainly not affecting server loads--these things are all cached aggressively according to Brion Viber. And if he doesn't know, then no one does! // FrankB 21:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi David (Template:History of Iran)

I have heard that you're a template expert, do you think you can tidy up Template:Greater_Iran? Cheers. --Mardavich 23:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Have a modified format for the header and list of dynasties, but see the template is currently in a state of flux; will hold back, therefore, until it becomes quieter. Hope that's okay. Yours, David Kernow (talk) 10:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

PS Not an expert, just accumulating a bag of tricks!

Can you upload your format now? The template is kind of stable now. I am sure we can modify it later, if there was any problems. Could you also make a drop-down menu for the individual countries to decrease the size? --Mardavich 17:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a look a little later on. Regards, David (talk) 17:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! --Mardavich 20:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Have now tinkered with the template. I (and I reckon other folk) would prefer the previous line-spacing, but, since the template now uses a table to format the dates, I'm not sure how or whether this is possible. I've noticed before that trying to set a line-spacing below 100% always seems to produce the same result; see the current User:David Kernow/Template:History of Iran for an example. I'll see if any of the properly-technical folk I've met here can enlighten me.
Meanwhile, you may've already noticed that I've also left an observation on the template's talkpage; to paraphrase it a little more frankly, I have the feeling that those people who know something about the subject and have been contributing to the template may've lost sight of Wikipedia's role as a general encyclopedia...
Best wishes, David (talk) 10:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
PS I'm also inclined to agree with E104421's comment above; the template would shrink if the dates were removed as the current line-spacing situation would no longer pertain and more than one link could appear per line.

Blaeu

Hello David, I just wanted to let you know that I added some more maps in Blaeu. Yet, the country categories for old maps are not specified but the rest of the tagging seems to be ok. -- Simplicius 14:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I've recently begun visiting the Commons again, after a few months away; the old maps is where I think I'll resume sorting!  Yours, David Kernow (talk) 11:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

OH thou wikimarkup sagacious one

Heh, heh, heh... (re: this)
Note the text behavior between the 1st and 2nd picture. On Firefox 2.0 my browser is showing improper wrapping in the vicinity of the nearby Para break, causing miscellaneous words to be masked and chopped short in a couple of lines... So, is there a way to stack images in an array of wonderous wrap free effects. I know there's something for user boxes. T'would be a good template, even with numbered suffixes from oh, say 2-5 images successively. This one would need three. // FrankB 19:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

No apparent problem here, also on Firefox 2.0(.0.1) – but probably with different screen size/resolution...

I've just moved the images' anchor points; any improvement...?  Otherwise my next thought is to try tabulating them...

Will soon have to go for a while, David (talk) 19:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

PS re other outstanding matters, cf here

Thuringia ca 1645

• Thanks, and I doana-knooooo! [Yeah, still an issue, just checked b4 saving out of preview--I'm in a midsize font, I'll move them around some. That usually fixes such issues.]
    Sorry... I got to snooping after the Maps note above, and was parking a note to this. How's your German? <g> And on yer going soon... How would I know!?? But thanks for the speed too. Sigh, back to tibet! Ooops! I'll see to that 'this' in your sandbox first! Go well, however hard it gets to go! <G> // FrankB 20:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

PingYourThis. Needs your mofications to my interjections, or whatever. TLC need: Clarify and destroy ambiguity. re: 'Showing' // FrankB 20:29, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Need to park this find here (!!! and Oceana too! LOL), else I'll be making an edit conflict for myself There! Ping again! 1 // FrankB 04:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Re your latest

Hi again Frank,
Can't fall asleep, so am editing again until tiredness does prevail. About to look at your latest. Re Commons:Category scheme Maps, I enjoyed your fleshing-out – but am suddenly hit by this thought: the Commons is multilingual, so I reckon we need to keep the prose short, sharp and straightforward (i.e. no long sentences with subclauses, etc). I'm only too aware that I can slip into lengthy English, as I guess that previous sentence demonstrates...!  Yours, David (talk) 05:11, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

• Continued at User talk:Fabartus#Re your latest

Template:Provinces and territories of Canada

Hi Tompw,

(formatting, layout.... no need for {{navbox generic with image}})

Sorry you weren't keen on my input. I hoped it would:

1. simplify the code;
2. align the flag image;
3. make the separators between links (the bullets) less conspicuous;
4. adopt a standard look widely used and accepted elsewhere in the encyclopedia.

I guess none of these are needed – but, then again, neither is the status quo. Did any of the above contribute to your decision to revert...?  Regards, David Kernow (talk) 12:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

In order

1. The code was already pretty simple and straighforward. Even it wasn't, it is not like this nav-box covers a rapidly changing subject which requires ease of editing.
2. As far as I can tell, using {{navbox generic with image}} does not change the placement of the image - it's still floating on the right.
3. Fair point - I've replaced • with ·
4. Yes, the {{navbox generic}} look is widely used... but so is the look of the exsisting one. More generally, {{navbox generic}} *has* to be full width, which is not needed in this case. (The current format is three lines, and takes up around half the space). Further, the words "provinces" and "territories" would have to appear in a sepearte column, which isn't needed for the nav-box to be easy to use.

In short, I feel that in this case, using {{navbox generic with image}} does nothing to improve the nav-box, and arguably makes it worse. I'd like to poitn out that I have no objection to the generic nav-box in general - it's just in this case I feel it is not the right thing to use. Tompw (talk) 11:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I suppose it's all a matter of opinion, as I agree there's nothing dysfunctional or "wrong" about the template. The observation re the flag image was about its vertical alignment; sorry not to've made that clear. Thanks, though, for changing the separators; I've found bullets appear overly conspicuous on screen (especially laptop screens) and when printed. Best wishes, David (talk) 12:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Jupiters

Template:Moons of Jupiter has now superseded all other Jupiter satellite templates. To clean things up, it would be good to delete all of the following templates:

• Template: Moon groups of Jupiter

  TfD closed and this template now slated for deletion;

• Template: Jupiter

  Keep as redirect...?

• Template: Jupiter Full Footer

RandomCritic 04:24, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Converted to redirect. Keep...?

Satellite template

Can you do something with Template:Moons of Earth, Mars and the Asteroids so that there is a link to the article Mars' natural satellites? Thanks.RandomCritic 04:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Have amended so that titlebar links lead to the main bodies (Earth, Mars, Asteroids) and headings within the template link to the natural satellites/moons articles (Mars' natural satellites, Asteroid moon). Hope this okay, David Kernow (talk) 09:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

PS Perhaps you might contribute to – ideally, close – the "Satellites of Pluto" TfD...?  Regards, David (talk) 09:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Also...

Have just thought that, for the sake of consistency, {{Mars}} should be replaced by {{Moons of Earth, Mars and the Asteroids}}...?  Plus, suggest {{Solar System}} made full width (and renamed simply {{Solar System}}); and whither {{Small Solar System bodies}} and {{SolarSatellites Footer}} (cf Asteroid moon)...?  Thanks for your thoughts, David (talk) 09:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you do this

Need Template:Commonscat1(edit talk links history) and Template:Commonscat1R(edit talk links history) swapped to fix a brain fart. The first one is a redirect I created, I just tagged with a {{db-author}}, if that helps. Post me a talk when & if you do it. Thanks. // FrankB 23:49, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Oh- the links will be fine // FrankB 23:49, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Does that mean there's now nothing you'd like done with these templates...?  Yours, David (talk) 00:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Delete '1' and either of us can move '1R' to '1'. That puts the redirect in the right place, and professionalizes the names. Sorry for the delay--had to pick up a kid from practice. //FrankB 00:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Done!  David (talk) 01:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

If you have a minute this century sometime

Hot off the presses... Low priority, but maybe you can see or explain to me why this is only working in the first test. A more generalize functionality would be better I think. No hurry at all. // FrankB 18:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[Awaiting]

PING, soon. // FrankB 23:00, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Must confess I didn't realize this category in combination with Historical Period Templates overlapped your work. I think I prefer "History of" templates as more straightforward than "History-related templates"; I offered the latter as an alternative. Since Historical Period Templates isn't just some kind of fork, shall I close the discussion (as "no consensus", for the sake of expediency)...?  Yours, David (talk) 23:18, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Works for me. The name is awkward, but makes sense in context. You may want to wait a decent interval, I just pinged both the nom and Xiner...

Understood; have the CfD page on my watchlist, so hopefully can close reasonably quickly following any new input from Xiner or Chris (unless, I suppose, they raise another issue), otherwise please ping again if I seem to've missed it.

...RU an admin on the commons too? // FrankB 23:21, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

No, although I guess it would be convenient if I and/or you were... My recent absence, though, plus near non-participation in the Commons' equivalents of CfD etc etc probably mean I wouldn't qualify. Might you...?  David (talk) 23:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

xposted

Sigh. I've philosophical differences with foundation premises that I should probably grow out of. I've told Jimbo in a number of emails he'd have to pay me WELL to take the job... so far as I can see, the foundation boards shits all over the Admins as a group with the open editing policy and not requiring a verified email. Period. Would totally eliminate a lot of problems. So 'that' is my fight--policy change like that. Besides, I'm slow and absent minded. I only get there if I take enough time, and most of you guys make me feel very unproductive indeed! I'm still trying to close out three browser windows from a couple days ago! // FrankB 23:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd say (not particularly originally) that there's productivity in the short term, mid term and longer term; yours is looking toward the longer term, which means more commitment and the like. Not a quickfix edit scenario!  Re open editing, verified email, etc etc, that's a higher layer I'm glad that I don't at present feel the need to address – mostly thanks to the vandal-fighters, I suppose. If I did, I'd probably begin questioning whether it's worth my giving time to the project... Yours, David (talk) 00:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Redirect Remover

Glad I could help. Mike Dillon 15:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:AfricanAmericans1.png

Thanks for uploading Image:AfricanAmericans1.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Alex Spade 20:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks as though this hinges on the now-deleted Image:Rosaparks.jpg, so I guess this picture also needs deleting. Thanks for the message. Yours, David Kernow (talk) 12:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Characters who can ressurect themselves

Hi. I noticed that you were the one who deleted Category:Fictional characters with the power to ressurect themselves. Believe it or not, there actually is a character like that. Garlic Jr., and I think Alucard from Hellsing also if memory serves right. Can you please undelete that category? Thanks! Power level (Dragon Ball) 04:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Um, can you answer me if you're available? Power level (Dragon Ball) 20:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry not to respond to your message more quickly.

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 24#Fictional characters with the power to ressurect themselves

The category was speedily deleted because a user identified it as a recreation of a category previously deleted via the Categories for discussion page linked above. Other users also provided other reasons for its deletion.

If, however, you don't think it's a recreation, you could create and start populating the category Fictional characters who can resurrect themselves (note spelling!). Be prepared, though, for it to be confirmed as a recreated category, meaning it would be deleted and probably blocked from recreation.

Instead, you could create a List of fictional characters who can resurrect themselves and link it to the relevant articles – this is what I'd do. Hope this helps, David Kernow (talk) 11:34, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I would create a Category:List of fictional characters who can resurrect themselves, but the fact is that it may still be up for deletion or just be deleted and protected from recreation. Can you create it for me? I mean, you are an administrator, and the administrator who deleted it. Besides, I don't wanna be warned or anything for doing it. So, can you create that category and put a blurb or comment on the talk page or something? Much thanks! Power level (Dragon Ball) 16:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

If I create it, I'll probably get warned – being an administrator doesn't mean immunity!  Create the List of fictional characters who can resurrect themselves; it's more likely to survive and later you may feel it'll receive support for conversion into a category. Alternatively, you could try to make it a Featured list!  Enjoy, David (talk) 16:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I did it. I created a new category and re-added Garlic Jr. back to it. Could you see if there's anything else I'm missing there? ...

If you mean other characters, that's up to you plus anyone else interested in Dragon Ball Z and this category that you can find; maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga might help. Othwerwise nothing seems amiss. Just be prepared for someone to nominate it for deletion!

...Also, could you make it a "Featured list!" since I don't even know what you meant. Power level (Dragon Ball) 17:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

This is what I meant, if you were going to create and work on a List of characters who can resurrect themselves. Yours, David (talk) 17:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Templates on List of adjectival forms of place names

Hello. I have listed templates included on List of adjectival forms of place names on Templates for Deletion. Please see the nomination at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 January 28. Your input would be welcome. Thank you. Mike Peel 00:07, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the trouble to inform me; have just left a note at TfD. Regards, David Kernow (talk) 11:44, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

• By what "maggoty-brained" chain of reasoning (<G> literary--a servant speaking to his (pantheistic) god, no less! ...and he didn't even get vaporized!) and which nebulous deletion requirements (Those need an enema--CBD and I have been discussing that by email) did you decide to endorse this decision? We've got to start putting the brakes on changing the status quo ante—if it works, don't fix it— agreeing with such, only encourages more such. Modular coding is a really good idea for maintenance. This kind of nomination is a backwards step. Need to politic on such deletion nominations and discourage... just wasting others time. Take a look back and reconsider. Best! // FrankB 16:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for pulling me over; I guess I must've been fuzzed up at the time. I've "tempered" my TfD post and implied that modularity outweights editing convenience. Don't make a wet-noodle award, make a (light-hearted) wet-noodle template to post on talkpages, then give it its debut here. Yours with chopsticks, David (talk) 16:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

re: Don't make a wet-noodle award, make a (light-hearted) wet-noodle template to post on talkpages, then give it its debut here.

Yeeeeeaaaaahhhh--But! Once in a while, someone's got to speak plainly around here. Half, at least of the Tfd nominations I've been seeing are essentially disrespectful make-work sorts of 'Hey look how important I am--I found this 'secretive' thingy. If it's not broken, not affecting things adversely, let people do things their own way for pete's sake...
  Back to edits... you may want to see my invite at Remember_the_dot#How.27d_you_like_to_solve_an_issue.3F and lend your encouragement... we need to start recruiting other talent for Maps between all the things we're both involved in. // FrankB 18:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Whatever happened to simplicity and ease of use? Is it too much to ask for things to be done logically? Or even for templates to be useful? I don't think that just because something isn't broken, and isn't breaking something else, is enough to justify it being kept.

Also, "modularity outweights editing convenience" seems nonsensical. Why would you make it modular except to make editing more convenient? Mike Peel 18:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry not to've acknowledged the above more promptly; I sense, though, it may've been directed more toward Fabartus. Anyway, just to let you know (1) I've added "Edit this table" links to the templates; and (2) I was suddenly reminded of the other motivation I'd had to create them, when I recently visited some country-related categories: there had been a fair amount of discussion at WP:CfD as to how such categories could/should be named consistently (e.g. whether or not adjectivals were used), so I'd intended to suggest that (some of) these templates could be included on relevant category pages – but only once I'd learned how to make them collapsed by default. I realise now that I lost sight of this idea, thus leaving them used in one place only. Since then I've become aware of a few ways to achieve this hiding/collapsing, so what do you reckon to the idea of including them on category pages...?  Yours, David (talk) 01:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Stuck here N there

• If you're working tonight or morning ping me.

Sorry not to reply more promptly, nor to've finished catching up with your observations/requests.

Can't find the glyphs for '<' and '>' in {{ASCII}} and I need a hand. See Template:Category header catlst(edit talk links history) and have a few others things, perhaps. Also wondering if you could (easily) modify the color blocks [Figured that out too] used in {{ASCII}} so they shade differently in 16 group chunks... hex/binary wrap points, per usual defs. Finding some stuff is easier in that mode of display. NBD, def. low priority [I guess that's why I did some of such fixups ALREADY... danged links had me looking past '<', '=', and '>', for me tired ole eyes were reading 'less than or equal to', 'is deined as', and 'greater than or equal to' respectively. LOL!]

All okay, then, with the above...?

Yeah, no reason for you to do the 16 block colorations... just grunt work, and I remember bg-color... yet another side effect of taking time away I fear... the ole 'If you don't use it, you loose it! Great job on interwikitmp-grp! Thanks. AND DON'T apologize for not being faster... you got a family and hopefully a life too!
At least I hope so!!! <G> Cheers! // FrankB 14:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

My niece (7 yrs old) paid us a visit, so the weekend was more action-packed than usual...

I've been peeking into Commons sandbox now and again... looking up. I started to organize it a different way, but haven't gotten far for other priorities. Better to play when your closing in on completion.
  On the redundancy note with respect to subcontinents, et.al., I'd say yes one should go. Make it a subcontinental region per note on South Asia. commons:Category talk:Maps

I'll check out the Commons next. Glad you spotted my most recent effort to make the maps scheme no more complicated than needed, but yes, decisions/input still needed as to what subcategories best populate Category:Maps (and therefore, I guess, Category:Old maps).

...I reckon the sandbox version is close to what I have in mind; unless you think I've overlooked something/s, maybe it's time to copy it to Category talk:Maps...?

(PING) LOL-Damn! Not saved yet! (I even had emails exchanged with CBDunkerson on a problem with that! Yikes. Watch for it. Coming attractions, however anticlimactic it may be! // FrankB 04:15, 29 January 2007 (UTC) 23:23/Check me here?

Big favor

Can you take a look and see if you can modify {{Interwikitmp-grp}} so that it floats right properly like {{commonscat}}... particularly good test would be in {{Cat_see_also}} whre ideally the text would wrap around the template. I can stick the commonscat templates virtually anywhere w/o problems. Oh-note the call in the latter is through {{interwikitmp-grp2}}, but the display is the first link. Thanks! I haven't a clue with XHTML. // FrankB 08:00, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I think I've fixed it; if so, you'd only forgotten/deleted an end-comment marker by mistake. Yours, David (talk) 12:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll see the diff. I was stepping carefully around the HTML, but someone's been altering the commons flavor. At the moment about half are old versions needing an update. And I still haven't closed my leftmost two browsers... nor close that post on the commons 'Maps' talk. Thanks again! // FrankB 14:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure - was glad it was something simple!  Until later, David (talk) 15:17, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Dang! My coffee break was too short... the system didn't go into stand-by. This is a PING-- See email. Turns out this is the right section... one of the above issues still. Just email me if you get anywhere--the audible is a good alert! Best! // FrankB 12:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

User deleting items from Dravidian topics template

Hello,

Recently there has been a user who has been engaged in deleting topics from the Dravidian topics template. These topics he has been deleting were created or edited by me. I do not know what is going on. Whether it could be a personal issue or what. Is there any way that {{Dravidian topics}} can be protected or locked from further editing? Regards. Wiki Raja 04:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I've protected the template in its current state for a week and left a note on the talkpage; I hope you and Sarvagnya can reach some agreement during that time. If not and Sarvagnya starts removing material again, I'd say file a Request for comment (see {{Dispute-resolution}}). You (or I, if you prefer) could also ask for third opinions. Yours, David (talk) 12:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Adygea update

Hi, David! I don't know if you overlooked it, or simply don't have time for this, but in either case I thought I'd let you know on your talk page as well. I have significantly expanded "administrative divisions of Adygea", and the draft is currently in my userspace. I would certainly appreciate it if you could polish it and incorporate edits from the version in your userspace when you have time. The only thing left to be added to the list is the number of rural localities in each rural okrug, and the reason why I haven't done it yet is because I am waiting for Michael's feedback on the overall layout. That should have no effect on the rest of the list's structure, however.

While I naturally would like to be done with this list sooner than later, I don't want you to feel that I'm trying to push you into working on this :) If you have more pressing engagements elsewhere, I perfectly understand and will wait. I'm just hesitant to move the new version out of my userspace to the main location without having your (very valuable!) input first. Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry not to've acknowledged your message more quickly; I seem to've found myself involved in a few more threads than I'd imagined. I'm looking forward, though, to paying a visit in the next day or so. Hope all well, David (talk) 00:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

David, this is absolutely not a problem. I can well see that you had/have your hands quite full with other things. Since I am not going anywhere any time soon, I can afford to wait no problem :) Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Ëzhiki. I've now combined the previous version of User:David Kernow/Administrative divisions of Adygea with the new material from your version of the page and made some amendments to / suggestions within it. You'll also see I've tried experimenting a little with the layout, which, if you're not keen on it, I understand – I'm not sure whether or not I am!  If nothing else, however, I reckon the article ought to avoid using first-level headings (i.e. = Heading =) as I believe these are meant to be reserved for articles' titles (WP:MoS...?)

If any of the alterations/notes within the text don't seem to make sense, please enquire; I hope they will make sense to me when I read them again!  Yours, David (talk) 01:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, David! You can expect my comments later this week. As you predicted, I am not sure about the new layout, but I guess it's nothing surprising considering that the choice of a layout has been a problem since day one. I am yet to see one I truly like and think will work. Not to discourage you from trying new ideas, no, sir! :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I am now done with the comments. Please let me know if I missed anything or if you have any questions about anything I said. Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:19, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Solar System footers thoughts

Have just thought that, for the sake of consistency,

{{Mars Footer}}

should be replaced by

{{Moons of Earth, Mars and the Asteroids}}

I think it would look a little odd on, say, the Mars page -- without the context of the larger template, it would be unclear why Earth's Moon and asteroid moons were included.

Yes, on second thoughts I too came to the same conclusion;

Plus, suggest

{{Footer SolarSystem}}

made full width (and renamed simply {{Solar System}});

That can be discussed at Template_talk:Solar System, but as that template has relatively recently gone through some major changes and much discussion, the interested people may not be ready for more major changes to the template.

Thanks for this advice; I'll happily hold back for a while. I'm not convinced that resizing the template wouldn't compromise its currently well-proportioned and fine-looking appearance, so I'd want to copy it and experiment – and perhaps decide it's best kept as is.

and whither

{{MinorPlanets Footer}}

{{SolarSatellites Footer}}

I think that both of these templates have a role to play, separate from the larger natural satellites template. The latter is intended as a very small navigation guide that allows you to hop from one planet's satellite system to another without any difficulty. RandomCritic 05:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Understood. As I guess you've already seen, {{MinorPlanets Footer}} is now {{Small Solar System bodies}}; hope this is okay. Re {{SolarSatellites Footer}} (now {{Natural satellites of the Solar System (compact)}}, a longer but complementary name), I agree that there's a significant amount of whitespace; your centering and formatting of the links is a neat solution, but before I'd spotted it I'd wondered whether there might be an appropriate image to fill some of the space (e.g. via {{Navbox generic with image}}). What do you think – and, if you like the idea, do any images come to mind...?  Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 05:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I looked at a number of moon images, and I think this one - may be suitable. Rhea is very "mainstream" among the round moons, neither too large or too small, and without a lot of very distinctive surface markings -- which makes it capable of standing in as an "anymoon". RandomCritic 17:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks – it looks ideal. (At full-size, I could easily have been persuaded it was the far side of the Moon, illumination notwithstanding.)  Have now installed it within {{Natural satellites of the Solar System (compact)}} per the above. Yours, David (talk) 00:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)