User talk:Mammal4

Wear it as a badge; somewhere some moron is sulking because you have upset them - probably by being a better human being than them! It also means you are a real wikipedian, I have had to rewrite my own userpage in a vain attempt to attract 'em. Oh well. I suppose "Gulval" is just a ruse - have family there who could ask questions (j/k about the questions, but I do have family there.)

Never mind. I hope it hasn't soured your view of Wikipedia. LessHeard vanU 20:01, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mammal4, hope you are well, just to let you know that I've created Cornwall stubs and added a lot(!) af articles to it. I'd welcome you taking a look at some of them when you get the chance, as you are someone with a good knowledge of the area. Use {{Cornwall-stub}} to mark an article as a Cornwall stub. DuncanHill 18:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Directly (pronounced 'drekkly'), Cornish term, similar in meaning to the Spanish 'mañana, but without the sense of urgency. :) DuncanHill 12:35, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome pack Mammal4. It will come in very useful! So far I have been making it up as I go along. I intend to do bits and bobs where needed or when I find things I am interested in. Have a week off from work at the moment so if you have any jobs for me let me know! Thanks again Adek21 17:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The database slaves have been lagging, and sometimes return content already changed on the master. Thus the odd behaviour today. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 16:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that you are one of the more relaxed individuals around, and am sad that Wikipedia may lose you. There is a little template which announces that you are on a wikibreak - but it does imply that you are intending to return. I suggest that you do have a break, get some enthusiasm back and perhaps return at some date to topics without the controversy. Hope to see you around. LessHeard vanU 22:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want the (controversial) station usage documents for the UK, Here is:

• Stat usage for 2002-2003
• Stat usage for 2004-2005

At least a start. I'm not sure on other countries. Simply south 14:55, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you've been reverting some of the recent vandalism to Cornish pages. The vandal seems to be making single edits, then changing IP address - but they all start 172. Any idea if we can get the range of IP addresses blocked? DuncanHill 15:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!DuncanHill 22:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mammal - I was about to start tinkering with Penzance article - However I notice that you are busy on it today - To avoid edit conflicts I will keep my paws off until later!! Reedgunner 11:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching my oops on User talk:Degen-17! -- JHunterJ 18:14, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody has taken exception to the Penwith Projects policy of using both England and UK in the lead paragraph in articles. This time it is the smaller political unit being removed by an IP address. Doncha just love zealots (any persuasion)? LessHeard vanU 21:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mammal4, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:SkinnersLogo.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Mammal4/sandbox/Cuisine of Cornwall. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 18:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it is okay, i am going to put up merge tags of Wikipedia:WikiProject geography of Penwith, Cornwall with Wikipedia:WikiProject Cornwall. Simply south 22:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back from your break (of sorts). I've tagged them now and if nobody objects i'll see what i can do. Simply south (talk) 17:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you are a member of the Penwith Wikiproject. A proposal has been made to merge it with the Cornwall Wikiproject. You can join in the debate here. Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 12:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC) (I know you already know about this, I'm just making sure all Penwith participants get a link to the debate.)[reply]

We miss you! DuncanHill (talk) 15:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great work on the St Buryan article. Teapotgeorge (talk) 21:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Template:Article edit guidelines requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I just wanted to share with you that this was not a minor edit, nor was the edit summary accurate - it was a total rollback of my work.

Alot of the changes I made brought the article more inline with the global and national layout recommendations, as well as removing tiers of formatting to the images that would be a barrier to GA and FA promotion.

I'm not going to revert this, but would ask that you not tag such changes as "Minor" in future and be a little more honest about the change being made. I also think that those kind of changes are symptomatic of why the article has not been promoted to a recognised standard, and consistently so. -- Jza84 · (talk) 03:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, and thanks for the contact.

I'm struggling for time to respond in full (sorry), but in short appreciate the response and think there are still ways to take some of the issues forwards. With regards to the infobox, have you considered using Template:Infobox England and Wales civil parish? Using tables as infoboxes is depreciated. Other things like say the has close ties to, I'd change to: "with which it has close commercial/geographic/cultural/ecclesiastic ties with", as appropriate. This defines the claim much more tightly and makes it clear what is meant (surely all parishes contiguous with a single place would have close ties, it just needs that distinction).

I was a little concerned about the comment on the talk page about "consistency nazis", but as the manual of style says "consistency promotes professionalism, simplicity and greater cohesion in Wikipedia articles. An overriding principle is that style and formatting should be applied consistently throughout, unless there is a good reason to do otherwise." I'd be more inclined to at least order the sections according to WP:UKCITIES; this guideline has proven to be very effective in achieving promotions when applied. I hope that helps for now. I would be interested in helping this article. -- Jza84 · (talk) 13:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would also add, regarding "this is a detailed article about a small village in Cornwall, it isn't going to have reams of referencable material available online or even in local libraries. By necessity it contains a great deal of local knowledge, which is what I thought wikipedia was supposed to encourage", that every statement should be attributed to a reliable source. Personal experience and local knowledge is certainly not permissable I'm afraid. Wormshill and Neilston (small villages) obtained WP:FA, and both have pretty much every statement sourced - it is possible. -- Jza84 · (talk) 13:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lamornagardens.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Millennium Garden at Lamorna.jpg. Commons is a repository of free media that can be used on all MediaWiki wiki's. The image(s) will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Millennium Garden at Lamorna.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I was looking around and saw your nice picture of Lamorna cove in Cornwall. I intend to go there soon for a fishing trip but haven't been there yet. I saw it on Google Earth software and noticed the link to your photo.

You could email me at paulmgillard (at) btinternet.com if you like.

Cheers Paul

http://www.paulgillard.com

--PMGillard (talk) 15:03, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Hi Mammal4, User:DuncanHill put me on to you. I recently 'blued' all the redlinked parishes in the Caradon and North Cornwall nav boxes and Duncan and I were thinking about adding maps showing the parishes. I've done a few maps recently (see Transport in Cornwall or Geology of Cornwall for examples) and I was hoping you could point me towards some sources and also provide a high-res copy of the Penwith and/or Kerrier maps to guide me. Any help would be much appreciate. There's a section on my talk page if you want to reply Very best wishes, Andy F (talk) 14:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:St Loy Cove.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:St Loy Cove.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:St Loy Cove.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:17, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your upload of File:Cattlepenwith.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:21, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Another one of your uploads, File:ChapelCarnBreaview.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Another one of your uploads, File:ChapelCarnBreaplaque.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Another one of your uploads, File:ChapelcarnBrearemains.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:23, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Another one of your uploads, File:CoastlinePenwith.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:54, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 10:02, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mammal4,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Suggested Article edit guidelines has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]