Misplaced Pages

User talk:NE2/Archive 19: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:NE2 Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 09:34, 11 September 2009 editTimberWolf Railz (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers992 edits Talkback: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 10:10, 12 September 2009 edit undoTimberWolf Railz (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers992 edits September 2009: new sectionNext edit →
Line 47: Line 47:
{{Talkback|TimberWolf Railz}} {{Talkback|TimberWolf Railz}}
] (]) 09:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC) ] (]) 09:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

== September 2009 ==

] You currently appear to be engaged in an ''']'''{{#if:|&#32; according to the reverts you have made on ]}}. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the ]. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to ] to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek ], and in some cases it may be appropriate to request ]. Please stop the disruption, otherwise '''you may be ] from editing'''. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ] (]) 10:10, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:10, 12 September 2009

Archives: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Pageviews

 :) (although I undid mine, not knowing you'd added yours, thinking mine not that funny, perhaps I should re-revert myself and then block myself for edit warring?... but I digress) That is a very odd page indeed... we actually have page titles that start with http:// ??? and whats more, that page gets views? ++Lar: t/c 18:54, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm actually responsible for some (all?) of its views. I have my browser set up so I can type an article name in the URL box and hit ctrl-enter to go to the Misplaced Pages article. Now if I open a new window it gives me Google's main page, and if I hit ctrl-enter without typing anything it takes the URL that's already there and so goes to http://en.wikipedia.org/Http://www.google.com/. It's actually a deleted redirect that's now on the blacklist :) --NE2 19:01, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Pranknet

Per the BLP discussion, would you mind editing this article yourself? NTK (talk) 20:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm a hit-and-run guy :| --NE2 20:36, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

New York & Ottawa Railway

Good day, I am the one who originally created the expanded New York & Ottawa Railway entry because others in the past put in misinformation, myths, etc. I have studied the line, had family worked it, grew up beside its abandoned r-o-w, created a web site solely about it and wrote a manuscript that is awaiting publication about the history of the entire railway from Tupper Lake to Ottawa which will include brief histories of the independant company lines that linked to it (ie - Brooklyn Cooperge Company). I watch the Wiki page often, ensuring that the entry remains correct in all ways and if something is added, I refer to my materials and fellow researchers to either see if we had missed something, which does happen, or if the new entry is false. I am writing you because I strongly disagree with your removal of the Defunct Rys of Ontario Category. The Ontario Pacific Railway and Ottawa & New York Railway were Ontario companies and later owned by the NY&O, which is why they are in the NY&O entry and not their own. I believe it would be better to keep the category with the NY&O entry because many don't go to the O&NY redirect entry, not knowing that was even an existing company. Bonfire34 (talk) 20:28, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that then Category:Defunct Ontario railways includes the NY&O, which is incorrect. Would a "see also" link to List of defunct Ontario railways satisfy your objections? --NE2 20:34, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
A "see also" link would be a good compromise. -- Bonfire34 (talk) 13:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Pages linking to New Hyde Park (unincorporated), New York

I notice that you redirected the page New Hyde Park (unincorporated), New York to New Hyde Park (Village), New York#Greater New Hyde Park. This is a very sensible solution. Note, though, that there are dozens of pages that link to the former page. It would be helpful (though not strictly necessary) to link those pages directly to the target of the redirect. I'll start work on some of these, but if you're inclined to help out, you can see the list by going to New Hyde Park (unincorporated), New York and clicking "What links here". Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 15:58, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually it would not be helpful at all. Please read WP:R2D. --NE2 16:00, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Central Vermont Railway

If the Central Vermont Railway was standard gauge then there was, until 1873, a break-of-gauge with the Grand Trunk Railway at the Canadian border. The latter owned the former so such a break of gauge would be unlikely. See Indian Gauge#Canada. Peter Horn User talk 01:21, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

See also
1879 map

NE2, old chap, Please read the Grand Trunk Railway article which states that "The GTR had three important subsidiaries during its lifetime:". The break of gauge, prior to 1973, would have been between Saint Armand, QC and Swanton, VT. Peter Horn User talk 01:46, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

In that case both Central Vermont Railway and Grand Trunk Railway should be revised to show the date that the GT gained control, if the info is not already in those articles. I was acting in good faith and not "playing". Prior to 1873 the GT was 66 if the CV was standard gauge, so where was the break of gauge? Peter Horn User talk 02:07, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
The GT bought the bankrupt CV on March 20 1896, see Central Vermont#History. The break of gauge would more likely be at Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu rather than at Saint-Lambert. Peter Horn User talk 02:28, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Great Northern Railway

I withdrew the speedy requests to rename the Great Northern Railway categories after your reasonable objection. I have opened a full discussion here. Tassedethe (talk) 10:07, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Templates for deletion nomination of Template:2ft

Template:2ft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 16:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, NE2. You have new messages at TimberWolf Railz's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TimberWolf Railz (talk) 09:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

September 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. TimberWolf Railz (talk) 10:10, 12 September 2009 (UTC)