User talk:Evil Eye

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AzaBot (talk | contribs) at 01:36, 28 February 2007 (You helped choose this week's WP:ACID winner). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome!

Hello, Evil Eye, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Sincerely, Ryan 00:55, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Athletics world championship reformating efforts

Thanks for all your help Evil Eye. It's more fun when someone else is working beside you. I'm not editing anymore today, so you don't have to worry about us working redundantly on the same page. From now on, if I have time, I'll work from 1999 down. That way we won't duplicate effort. Again, thanks for the help. David D. 17:54, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I can see there is a lot of work invloved in doing all the pages and I was looking for something to do, so seen as I have the results all on my computer I thought I might as well. Also, that link you ound containing the bit of history looks useful. I might have a good at incorporating some of the data etc into the article if I get the time. Also, I might try to add results like these to other Championships as I think I have the results for others too. Evil Eye 15:39, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Metric versus Imperial re: Olympic games

You wrote above "Also, I might try to add results like these to other Championships", so you should read the following discussion: Wikipedia:Measurements_Debate#A_succinct_solution

It turns out that the Olympics are not as easy to correct with regard to the results since someone has been adding the imperial results. I am loathed to delete them, so I have left them, but included metric too. I suppose our American friends really do have a problem understanding the metric results if they take that much effort to convert them. David D. 15:58, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That is interesting. It hadn't occurred to me yet that there might be different people wanting results in different units. I'd tend to the point of view that (in athletics anyway) that as everything seems to be measured in metric units in the events themselves, that is what should bhe used here. But thanks for making me aware of this. I've just read some more of that article and will try to read some of the dicussion when I get the chance. Evil Eye 16:10, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Since you're intending to go into teaching you'll love this. In the US they still teach in feet, inches etc. Obviously this is one of the major reasons they can't switch because even the younger generation don't get metric. Even more strange is that in high school they don't run the 1500 m. You'd think they would substitute for the mile right? Wrong, they run the 1600 m. Does that make any sense at all?
With regard to the imperial units, my policy has been to incorporate them into the results if someone has taken the effort to do that. However, I am not willing to do the conversions, especially since they are not literal conversions, there are official tables. For example, the official height of 5.00 m in the pole vault is converted to 16' 4 3/4" where as the exact conversion is 16' 4.85". I assume they round down to the nearest quarter. Since everything is actually measured in metric I see no logical or useful reason to convert anything to imperial. David D. 16:32, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Country name or abbreviation?

I have to admit that I have been using the three letter abbreviations for the WC tables since my source for the results had that formatt. In contrast, when I started the euro championships pages I used the full country names. I am leaning to full country names since some of the abbreviations are too cryptic. I also notice that the wikipedia country pages do not reference the three letter abbreviations typically used at sporting events. Which do you think is better since it would be good to come to a consensus sooner rather than later? David D. 17:59, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I've just seen that I've been using the full names and that you have been placing the abbreviations. I was using the full names as they were already in the table. I also think they are better as they are the only indication of country and we need something which would be unambiguous, but, as you say, the abbreviations can be cryptic. So I suggest we use the names. Evil Eye 18:08, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is just too easy. Aren't we supposed to argue about things like that? We had better get them changed quick before someone disagrees ;-) David D. 18:10, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Aye OK. I'll start and do 1999 and 2001 if you want.Evil Eye 18:14, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I finished 2003. Note this recent edit on one of the olympic pages . This is the same user that is adding all the flags. In retrospect s/he probably got the flag idea from the olympic pages. David D. 19:04, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative formats

Check out the Athletics at the 2004 Summer Olympics page. I had never really taken much notice of it before. If you click the event on the left in the table it takes you to the details results. Although with all that effort you'd think they'd have the reaction times and wind readings too. David D. 19:52, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm astounded by the effort gone into that. It would be great if that could be done for the World Championships, but it would take some serious work and a lot of info gathering. Perhaps we should try something like that for the upcoming world Championships...it could pretty much be set up beforehand, like the page you've already done. The format could be copied from the Olympic one (though perhaps a table for each race would look bettwe/be easier to follow than the way it is on that page). I'd be able to have a go at starting the pages for some events tomorrow if you like. Evil Eye 20:11, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Personally that seems like a massive amount of work and I'm not sure it is worth the trouble. I have been to that page quite a few times and never thought to click on the links for full results. I think a better strategy would be to link to the IAAF pages that will document each event in a huge amount of detail ( IAAF W100 mH heptathlon ) including photofinish pictures. A link at the bottom of the page (ideally this link) may actually be more efficient than linking to all the heats and finals. It will also be a hard copy record. Remember these wikipedia pages get vandalised all the time. In summary, the more pages you make the more difficult they are to navigate and the harder they are to maintain. David D. 20:22, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Another good reason to link to the IAAF site is that if there are DQ's due to drugs they update the results accordingly. It was interesting to note that Dwain Chambers was stripped from the results in 2003, even his heats and semi final results! David D. 20:49, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IDRIVE

subst:

You helped choose {{subst:IDRIVEtopic article}} as this week's WP:ACID winner

 Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive.
This week {{subst:IDRIVEtopic article}} was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help.

Troi

Scouring some non-canon fiction. If I find any ideas on I. A. Troi's birth name I will let you know. Have you ever tried the Moroccan Mint in your namesake? Matthew Platts 22:29, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

schools

Hi again Evil Eye, I noticed your comments on the Chepstow_School deletion page. I’m not sure if you noticed but what really happens on these nominations is that total garbage is nominated and then a devoted band of “keep at all costs” members from school watch come in and write it properly. I think it is great that they do this but there are two problems:

  • Rewritten school articles are probably not monitored that carefully, so there could be an increase in sophisticated vandalism. It would not be hard to change (pseudo update) these school articles with bogus information.
  • Garbage school articles that are not nominated do not get cleaned up. It seems that the schoolwatch characters use the deletion nomination as a heads up for starting to improve the article.

Personally, I am surprised they are not more aggressive at cleaning these articles up before they are nominated for deletion, that would be more constructive. I suspect they might enjoy waiting for the deletion nomination before starting the clean up process since it allows them to score points with regard to how many schools are kept vs deleted after they are nominated for deletion. They do seem to keep score and are quite vocal about it. David D. (Talk) 18:13, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Evil Eye. I came across your list of schools in England page, and gave it a good geography lesson. (Everywhere had gone into one region by mistake!) Good work on it, areas other than Yorkshire need a bit of work, perhaps you could give it proper article so people can find it... Good work. Mdcollins1984 12:45, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I actually got the list from the main space to work on splitting it up into 9 regional articles. Those 9 articles are now in the main wikipedia space (for example List of schools in Yorkshire and the Humber). I've added a few more schools to some regions, listed the schools by LEA and then by state/independent schools and type of school. I've also tried to incoded brief details about the schools, well for Barsnley in the Yorkshire region I have anayway. Hopefully such information can be included for all schools in all regions eventually. Evil Eye 13:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Junior Common Room Committees

Hi Evil Eye, it seems that I fielded the then-stub Junior Common Room Committees incorrectly. I should have redirected it to Junior Common Room, which I didn't know existed. You've already done some good work, so how would you like to merge A into B? Melchoir 04:25, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I too wasn't aware of the Junior Common Room article, so when I saw the Junior Common Room Committees article has ac couple of improvement tags placed on it, I thought he subject was worth while so had a go at improving the article. Personally I don't see anything wrong with leaving the articles as they are for the time being to see if the either develops and more. But if you think the committees article should be merged into the other why not have a go. Evil Eye 21:39, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, those tags were my fault. As for merging or not, I'm feeling indecisive and lazy, so I think I'll just slap on a couple of See also links. Cheers! Melchoir 21:47, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Students' Union / Association sabs list

Thanks for letting me know....as it happens, I was actually already reading what you mention above before I read your message here :) Evil Eye 15:55, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheffield pubs

Hi! Following your comments on this article I decided that perhaps this article can be saved, so I have had a go at cleaning it up. Please have a look at it and see if you can help further. Thanks, JeremyA 03:29, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Vek Page

Hi, sorry about that, will try and do that, i'm new to this so still learnimg, thanks for the advice, much appreciated. Normsky 18:29, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm not sure if you know how to do it, but I'm not sure how to go about creating a page with the discogrpahy info on, and then deleting the others. Normsky 18:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing of East Ukraine

Your editing of East Ukraine is absurd and ignorant.

Thank you for bring lots of point of view and unbacked up facts into this. All I am doing is making use of other wikipedia articles and other web sites to back up what I right. I have chosen one or two websites to show the usage of 'East Ukraine' has been used to talk about the areas to the east and west of the country, which I stated in the article. I gave a source which mentioned that parts of the Ukraine were in/conected Poland/Austria Hungary. These sames parts were also at another time in Russia/USSR, but that the rest of the Ukraine not connected to Austria-Hungary was either always part of Russia/USSR or else has ben independent.
Finally I have never used on map in particular, but have used at least two different web-pages with map on them to show the splitting up of the country by the 2004 election results. Sen as both the fraudulent election and the non-fraudulent election both resulted in the splitting up of the country in the same way and that at least one of the pages I use has map showing the results of both elections, I do not see your point here.
Just get over the fact that some people feel that this article should exist and let the wikipedia deletion process run it's course to see whether the article can stay or not. If your are unhappy with the sources I have used to back up what I wrote (which were mostly wikipedia, the BBC and the Guardian), please proivde us with other ources to back up your counter-claims. Evil Eye 18:09, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amanda Vale

Thanks for your message. Sorry it was a typo. Amanda Vale made her first appearance two days before Leah's wedding to Dan in episode 3994. I will correct it now.Englishrose 15:03, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, glad it's sorted. I'm not really a big fan of H&A, but I just remembered reading that she was the newest character or something when I was sorting out the combined character page the other day. Evil Eye 15:20, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion

Hello! I noticed that you have identified yourself as an Anglican, and so I thought that you may be interested in checking out a new WikiProject - WikiProject Anglicanism. Please consider signing up and participating in this collaborative effort to improve and expand articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion! Cheers! Fishhead64 23:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of schools in the East of England

You have recently created the article List of schools in the East of England. This was deleted in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policies. Please do not recreate the article: if you disagree with the article's deletion, you may ask for a review at Wikipedia:Deletion review. TigerShark 22:15, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of schools

Hi Evil Eye. I was just clearing through this category and this category when I came across a lot of lists of schools in your user space. I'd like to edit these lists in order to remove the duplicated articles from the main article categories (eg User:Evil Eye/List of schools in the West Midlands and List of schools in the West Midlands), but also to get your other lists ready to go in (eg East of England). I saw the AfD about the list of schools in the East (a very unfortunate title), I agree with your analysis, and I think it should be possible to recreate the deleted article at some point - once other editors can see the wider context. First thing would be to sort out the category and the other lists. I'll just carry on - drop me a line if you wish to discuss this further. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:53, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thanks for noticing the categories on the pages in my user space. I never thought of them being there when I copied the pages so I could try and work on them (not much work being done sadly on some of them). However, I will still try to add to them and move stuff over to the main sapce when I can...which won't be much now for the next month due to limited internet access. Hopefully soon, the East article will be able to be created again soon...since the article was nominated for deletion, I did put a lot more work into it, yet it appeared no one who voted for it;s deletion even bothered to look at the improved article. Never mind. If I can get somewhere near a compelted article before it';s recreated, then that should be OK. Thanks Evil Eye 15:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again Evil Eye. Despite me removing the lists in your userspace from the main article categories, there are still editors updating them. This is duplicating or wasting a lot of effort, since all the articles now exist in the main article space, and need to be expanded there. I wonder if we could either delete, or blank, or add a warning to the articles in your userspace to avoid this duplication. -- zzuuzz (talk) 15:55, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers! The lists are coming along quite nicely btw. -- zzuuzz (talk) 22:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Series of Unfortunate Events

Project Logo Hello, Evil Eye and thank you for your contributions on articles related to A Series of Unfortunate Events. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject A Series of Unfortunate Events, a WikiProject aiming to improve coverage of A Series of Unfortunate Events and related articles on Wikipedia.

If you would like to help out and participate, please visit the project page for more information. Thanks! <3Clamster 20:35, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You helped choose Universe as this week's WP:AID winner

 Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive.
This week Universe was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help.

AzaBot 21:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You helped choose Black hole as this week's WP:ACID winner

 Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive.
This week Black hole was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help.

AzaBot 01:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Evil_Eye&oldid=111474020"