User talk:Nick Boulevard/Archive 1

Angela's Welcome

Hello Nick, welcome to Wikipedia. It's great to see you've got a username at last. If you haven't already found the Wikipedia tutorial, you might pick up some useful tips from it. You can also regularly find new tips on the Community Portal. Wikipedia:user page has some advice on what to add to your user page.

If you have any questions, just ask at the help desk or on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian. Good luck with the Birmingham issues. Angela . 00:15, May 19, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks Angela, i didn't actually think i'd managed to register but seems it worked. =)

User page reverts

Hi Nick, I'm sorry your introduction to Wikipedia has been like this. Andy has caused problems in the past, so you're not the only one to be annoyed by him. I don't know what to suggest other than you try mediation, or perhaps just focus on other areas for a while until the Birmingham issues calm down.

He has no right to be reverting your user page. If you want it blanked, feel free to do so. If he continues to reinsert the text, it can be protected, though this would mean you couldn't edit it either. I'm sorry you find Wikipedia elitist. It really isn't, but sometimes actions can be misconstrued as vandalism, particularly if you are removing large parts of text without explanation. Please try not to get frustrated with this. There are problem users on Wikipedia, and we haven't yet found an ideal way of dealing with them, but our processes for doing this are improving slowly. I hope you will stay and contribute. Your edits to Birmingham and other articles are very much wanted, by everyone but Andy I expect.

Angela . 20:50, May 26, 2004 (UTC)

"He has no right to be reverting your user page" Your evidence for this, please? Andy Mabbett 00:18, 27 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, look on my user page history...

10:42, 26 May 2004 . . Pigsonthewing (revert "All contributions to Wikipedia are released under the GNU Free Documentation License")

Thanks Nick.

"Your edits to Birmingham and other articles are very much wanted, by everyone but Andy I expect" Have you seen them? Have you seen how many are copyright violations, or reverts, removing corrections to spelling and grammar? Andy Mabbett 00:32, 27 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

(I openly admitted that i did make errors when i first started to work on Wikipedia as do many people i expect re: copy 'n' paste then thinking it was ok by editing the work myself, i soon realised it was wrong and now i only submit my own work which is quite extensive on the page.) Nick

I agree with all of what Angela wrote. Don't worry too much about the present conflict with Andy, find something else to work on for a bit, and you'll se that this really can be fun. I don't know why you're getting "blocked" messages. --rbrwr ˆ 21:54, 26 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick I've looked through the ip block list [1] and cant find you on it anywhere. So I dont know why you've been getting access denied messages.

As the others have said, dont be put off by Andy Mabbet you've been doing good work here which is much appreciated. I too have had conflicts with Andy in the past as have several other people, he can be a pain to deal with but thankfully not everyone round here is like that. Cheers G-Man 22:03, 26 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys, i tried to write a reply before i went out tonight but a thunder and lightening storm killed the power mid conversation, if i had the time i could work out which IP address was blocked, i still can guess but it doen't matter. I have enjoyed writing here and the silly thing is that i didn't even realise that anyone else wrote stuff here for weeks because i was so engrosed in adding things i didn't realise that you could discuss the page or that editors existed or even had their own talk pages, it was like some strange dream that i just kept revisiting to add more each night but then i guess... like everything, reallity strikes and it's back to confrontation, dissagreement and my own silly pride! Thanks for your comments, i AM a human being and your words ARE appreciated. I hope that Andy and myself can reach an amicable agreement just so long as i am not suddenly blocked, i am not as 'net savvy' as i should be considering my last job (my boss would laugh) my brain just wants to shut down at the end of the day which is not good seeing as i have much music to write.. i write too much! (sorry)

User:Nick Boulevard

Hi Nick, I've been here for a long time, and in my experience the sort of dispute like the one at Birmingham tends to get sorted out eventually by some means or other so dont give up. A lot of people here are sympathetic to you and your treatment by Andy. Cheers G-Man 23:10, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

What "treatment" would this be? Andy Mabbett 23:13, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Well let me see Andy, there's your unexplained and high-handed deletion of much of Nick's work, which you refuse to discuss in any sensible manner. Then there's your turning a content dispute into a petty personal grudge. Then there's your refusal to compromise with anyone and insisting on getting your own way at practically everything.

I must tell you this Andy your recent antics have made you come across as somewhat immature to say the least.

Honestly Andy no-one wants to fall out with you, you have done much good work here, but you are difficult to work with sometimes. You must learn to let things go and move on sometimes. I'm really not trying to get at you you know. G-Man 23:30, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks G-man, i have come accross people like Andy before and it is obviously some sort of grudge, why i don't know or really care too much but i will continue to try and get on, i think personally it's either jelousy of content that he wanted to write or an insecurity of some kind but i am a tolerant person. User:Nick Boulevard

By-the-way I thought you might be interested in Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit. Basically if you put your name and your ip number down there, you can have all your previous anonymous edits attributed to you. Cheers G-Man 19:45, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, that is a weekend job i think.

Thanks for your help and if anyone is reading this then i can asure you that G-Man is a real asset to Wikipedia, as are all of the people that have taken the time to post positive comments here.

There just aren't enough hours in my day at present, but i would lke to become more active in Wikipedia if i can.

User:Nick Boulevard

A tip

By-the-way you can sign your comments much more easilly by typing in this ~~~~ (SHIFT + the # button) at the end of your comments. If you do that it will automatically sign and date your comment and avoid having to do it manually. Cheers G-Man 23:07, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Cheers G-man, i may appear slightly docile at times but i think my brain is working on too many things at once at present hence i often spread myself too thinly as i suspect to be the case for many people here. I'm not logged in at mo but will practice your advice on this post.

Cheers Nick

Nick Boulevard 22:20, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hey... thats cool man, thanks for that G-man, Nick Boulevard 22:21, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hi, thanks to you, Andy Mabbett and G- man i am still here on Wikipedia and it gets more intriguing by the week, people are strange when your a stranger as Jim Morrison sang and Wikipedia is a perfect example.

Hi Nick, it's great your early experiences on Wikipedia did not put you off.

So one question, obviously your photo is there to see for one n all and it possibly only enhances your port folio here if most of your wiki admirers were to be honest

Thanks

but... do you actually read all your questions on here

Yes I do. I've had over 1000 messages on my talk page and read every single one. Even the quickly reverted vandalism ones!

and do you work full time

Not any more. I'm doing less stressful and less time consuming temp jobs in order to spend more time on Wikimedia. Had I not won the election, I would be working full time as I was until fairly recently.

are you angling for a position on Wikipedia

I have one. I'm on the Board of Trustees. :)

Angela . 23:07, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hey, well you totally deserve that as you have helped me when really you could have quite easily ignored a non-registered user, i just feel bad now as i din't vote for you (especially when i could have done so several times with my many confusing i.p. addresses??? whats that all about... thanks Nick Boulevard 23:39, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

---Andy Mabbett---

I hope that Andy doesn't tke any of my disc page to heart as i think the majority of his work IS excellent, he may be a little stuborn though i can think of worse trtes! i am a little bit stubborn also, you are'nt the villain you make yourself out to be Andy, i think you're a valuble asset to wikipedia if truth be told! :)

User:Nick Boulevard 09:59, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Please don't always add information to the top of articles.

Articles are supposed to begin with an introductory sentence and paragraph and then get into more trivial information. You changed windscreen wiper to start with the first patented version, but this isn't Wikipedia style; we tell people what they are, then go into details about e.g. invention.

Your claim on steering wheel that a certain Mr Lanchester invented them in 1907 is inaccurate. Steering wheels existed way before 1907; I've driven a 1902 car with one, and it was hardly the first. It's hard to find a post-1900 car still using a tiller. Besides, the steering wheel is not a million miles away from a ship's wheel, which precedes it significantly. Please check your facts better or get your dates right. —Morven 04:21, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

In fact, I note, you've been adding the same bollocks to a bunch of articles. Knock it off. —Morven 04:23, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Morven,

1. erm sorry to correct you but what you refer to as "bollocks" is actually taken from an article on Wikipedia and not plucked from my imagination, it is factual and i would apreciate you NOT reverting unless it is genuinely incorrect which may well be the case in the steering wheel but again, i only took it from fred lanchester and anyway i didnt say he invented the steering wheel i said he experimented with it on cars?

2. I see your point on not adding facts to the top of the page, point taken :)

3. Would you mind not using such childish language on my talk page as well, thanks!

Nick Boulevard 12:29, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Birmingham and Galton

I'm sure you have the best of intentions, but I really think that Francis Galton's place of birth is not relevant on a page about the history of eugenics. Unless you can explain some very concrete way in which it matters specifically with concern to eugenics, please stop re-adding it. Unless there is some reason for it to be specifically in there, it is just trivia. A good way to think of it might be to ask, Would it have mattered if Galton was born in London? Probably not, as I understand it (you're welcome to correct me, though). Compare this with another fact: Would it have mattered if Galton was not Darwin's cousin? Yes, probably, since Darwin had a good deal of influence on Galton's educational choices (it was Darwin who told him to pursue mathematics), and Darwin's familial proximity also made sure that Galton read Darwin and Darwin read Galton (and they influenced each others works considerably). See the difference between these two types of facts? That's what I'm talking about when I distinguish one as trivia, and I think we should try to keep the trivia low in articles like that. --Fastfission 00:32, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the info to Galton on the Birmingham page. i DO believe it is relevant to have Galtons place of origin on the Eugenics page, the point is that Galton was one of the main players in this area and he was born into one of the most important industrial cities in the world where the Lunar Society mingled and where invention and new thought ran wild, gas lighting, first petrol car, steam power, literature and so on... this surely gave Galton a superb background of thinking outside the box in a busy, fast developing city and country. Birmingham, England. Please could we just include this small fact seing as he was such a major component of the article. Nick Boulevard 15:19, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism

If someone "deleted loads of text without good reason or discussion", it sounds like simple vandalism so should be reverted. Be careful of the WP:3RR though. You may want to ask others to help at WP:VIP if you think it is vandalism, or at WP:ANI otherwise. Angela . 05:29, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Angela, I am at a bit of a loss for ideas at the moment. Cheers for the reply Nick Boulevard 23:38, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nick, sorry I didn't reply to you earlier. Frankly I'm very tired of all this Birmingham malarkey and I honestly dont know what to do about it all. I have tried raising it at the Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board but havn't had much response. G-Man 23:33, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi guys, I will try and raise my game, as we speak I have not ventured back to the main page but I am about to do so! I will guess at AB many deletions, I do actually have a little trick up my sleeve with a wiki member. :) Nick Boulevard 23:38, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Tips

Nick just some advice, which I hope is helpful:

It might be a good idea to cite your references when you add things to the wikipedia to avoid endless disputes, see Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Cite your sources rather than reverting. Then you would have a much stronger position.

It is best to avoid using language that sounds like it is promoting Birmingham rather than giving out facts.

I'm afraid I have a few critical words. I'm sorry to say this, but I would agree with some other people that you get too attached to your own work. I can understand why you get annoyed, but It's best not to get too attached to things on wikipedia as anyone can change things. Reverting things because you added them is not very helpful, as I have said, if you can verify everything you add you'll be in a much stronger position.

I'm trying to be helpful so I hope this helps. G-Man 00:36, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks G-Man, I do become quite passionate about my work and I honestly don't mind it being edited but I am afraid that Andy Mabbett has deleted much of my work and he is adding those snide slants on Brum articles again Nick Boulevard 11:27, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Seconded. Nick: you would find things would run far more smoothly if you followed the Wikipedia procedures G-Man mentions. Content on Wikipedia isn't decided by who debates it most energetically; it's about showing that what you write can be verified by some reliable source. Every edit page says it at the foot: please Cite your sources so others can check your work.

If you say red sprockets were first invented in Birmingham in 1910, you need to show where that fact came from. If you don't, and someone finds a paper showing they were invented in Sheffield in 1890, don't take it as an insult. That's how the editing process here works: refining and correcting detail to make the text better and better.

Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms are also important. Nobody has anything against you personally or against Birmingham. It's just that there's a style - not being slanted pro- or anti- anything - that encyclopaedias have to follow. People alter your work simply because it doesn't follow that style, and they'd do the same with anyone.

That's also why they all edit it in a similar way. It doesn't mean they're sock puppets for the same person. They're just following the same Wikipedia rules on style and standards of proof.

I know your first reaction will be to write a page arguing why I'm wrong and why I'm probably Andy Mabbett in disguise - but check out those guidelines instead. RayGirvan 01:39, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hey thanks for takin the time to visit my talk page, Ray, I think you will find that Andy Mabbett has a history of craftily deleting (not just editing) my work to suit himself, he always adds a negative slant also which if anything seems to severely un-balance the article, and the fact that he has discovered the virtues of deleting under many different user names has obviously fooled you :)

I actually enjoy other people editing what I have written but I will not tolerate it being removed when it is true, if sections of my work are not accurate then fine, research it and if proven I would be foolish and naive to stand in the way of truth, the real problem here is that I have added so much to Birmingham related pages and much of it has been from my research on the net, well if my source is not 100% correct then the article I write may come out the same, the fact is that once the articles are there they can evolve. I am not irrational unless it comes to Andy Mabbett and even thats a bit of a laugh ;) Nick Boulevard 11:24, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)